RE: New electrified straight-six for Range Rover Sport
Discussion
JP.Racing said:
I never really understand the "I used to have an old [insert car/engine here] and it used to do [insert higher mpg here]" posts... So what? It also doesn't meet the modern emissions regs and never would, so surely it's only relevant comparing against other modern equivalents?
Glad somebody said it!anonymous said:
[redacted]
Amen - The article is clearly making quite some noise about this interesting new powertrain from JLR and they way it moves thing on, when in fact as Tonker says, what has it really achieved...? f
k all...A whole decade after my RRS was built, a PETROL engine with start/stop, in a Aluminium RRS, with Battery-electric assistance manages just a 30g of CO2 improvement over the satanic diesel variant I owned.
I'd wager that if you couple the hybrid tech from this new car with start stop into the old Steel / diesel RRS you'd see comparable CO2 figure, which means that 10 years on, it's really not achieved much at all.
That's the point of mentioning "what my old car was capable of" ? - to give context to the purported "progress" of more accurately lack of it....
Edited by NicoG on Wednesday 13th February 10:44
Would someone message me once we've reached 500 posts of how JLR should be doing things differently and why their PH ideas of how to run the company are so much better and guaranteed to be successful. It'll be so much easier to read the thread in one go.
Obviously you can contact me sooner should "Defender" or "core values" be mentioned as that's always funny.
Obviously you can contact me sooner should "Defender" or "core values" be mentioned as that's always funny.
"All in, the new HST costs £81,250..."
Range Rover pricing really is mental.
If I was in the market for a new petrol SUV at that price point then the BMW X3M or Alfa Stelvio QV would get my money (even though they're admittedly not as gargantuan as the RRS). They offer way more performance for the money.
Range Rover pricing really is mental.
If I was in the market for a new petrol SUV at that price point then the BMW X3M or Alfa Stelvio QV would get my money (even though they're admittedly not as gargantuan as the RRS). They offer way more performance for the money.
NDA said:
To the uninitiated (me) could someone explain the 48 volt thing?
If I go back to my GCSE days, Watts = Amps x VoltsSo if you have a high wattage motor on a 12v you need a lot of amps which means cables as thick as your arm.
Increase the volts, and the amps can fall, which just makes things easier.
Its why trucks are 24v to accommodate more demanding starter motors. My mate had an old Nissan Patrol years ago and that was 24v.
In 2020 the 12v system, which must date back half a century(?), is woefully outdated.
Modern hybrids run a 12v base system alongside its HV stuff.
What this Range Rover does I don't know and i'd love to read the tech training package.
Edited by jay-kay-em on Wednesday 13th February 10:10
Cold said:
Would someone message me once we've reached 500 posts of how JLR should be doing things differently and why their PH ideas of how to run the company are so much better and guaranteed to be successful. It'll be so much easier to read the thread in one go.
Obviously you can contact me sooner should "Defender" or "core values" be mentioned as that's always funny.
This....Obviously you can contact me sooner should "Defender" or "core values" be mentioned as that's always funny.
It amazes me how quick some folks are to try and trample on anything JLR do - it is almost like they -want- a major technical employer in the UK to fail
anonymous said:
[redacted]
You must have driven like a granny to average 26mpg though. Hardly worth having that engine tbh. And slap that same engine in a 4wd which is heavier and less aerodynamic and mpg will be significantly worse. A quick Google suggest the X5 isn’t more like 18-20mpg.
Gojira said:
Cold said:
Would someone message me once we've reached 500 posts of how JLR should be doing things differently and why their PH ideas of how to run the company are so much better and guaranteed to be successful. It'll be so much easier to read the thread in one go.
Obviously you can contact me sooner should "Defender" or "core values" be mentioned as that's always funny.
This....Obviously you can contact me sooner should "Defender" or "core values" be mentioned as that's always funny.
It amazes me how quick some folks are to try and trample on anything JLR do - it is almost like they -want- a major technical employer in the UK to fail
I’m all for cheer leading U.K. industry but the electrification seems to largely relate to the supercharger. With some alleged mild ability to assist in pull away. So “electrified” is a bit tenuous.
My wife’s GLC43 has a 3 litre turbo petrol unit and chucks out 199 grams of Satan’s soot so objectively I’m not sure that this moves things on. Subjectively it obviously does.
Onwards JLR
My wife’s GLC43 has a 3 litre turbo petrol unit and chucks out 199 grams of Satan’s soot so objectively I’m not sure that this moves things on. Subjectively it obviously does.
Onwards JLR
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Amen - The article is clearly making quite some noise about this interesting new powertrain from JLR and the way it moves thing on, when in fact as Tonker says, what has it really achieved...? fk all ...A whole decade after my RRS was built, a PETROL engine with start/stop, in a Aluminium RRS, with Battery-electric assistance manages just a 30g of CO2 improvement over the satanic diesel variant I owned.
I'd wager that if you couple the hybrid tech from this new car with start stop into the old Steel / diesel RRS you'd see comparable CO2 figure, which means that 10 years on, it's really not achieved much at all.
That's the point of mentioning "what my old car was capable of" ? - to give context to the purported "progress" of more accurately lack of it....
Edited by NicoG on Wednesday 13th February 10:43
30mpg. How can they call that progress?!? I wonder how it compares to the politically unpopular diesel four pot. More electrics in this new HST. Great news for buyers in 5 to 10 years time as Land Rover have a great reputation when it comes reliability!
LR need to raise their game on almost all areas. The new Defender certainly won't be the saviour of LR. My gut feel it will be out of date by the time its launched!
LR need to raise their game on almost all areas. The new Defender certainly won't be the saviour of LR. My gut feel it will be out of date by the time its launched!
Diesel is problematic because it's inherently filthy and increasingly expensive to clean up enough to meet regulations. Petrol is problematic because while it is cleaner, it is inefficient and thus releases more CO2. This is an attempt to make a sufficiently powerful, clean, petrol engine fuel efficient enough to be an alternative to a big diesel. There's no point saying "it's still less economical than the diesel" when the reality is that diesels are ceasing to be viable.
I think a three litre, 400bhp, supercharged petrol six giving those economy figures in a 2.5 ton SUV is pretty impressive, though I think the powertrain which questions the relevance of this is not any of the diesels but the 400bhp 2.0 litre petrol plug in hybrid they currently offer.
I think a three litre, 400bhp, supercharged petrol six giving those economy figures in a 2.5 ton SUV is pretty impressive, though I think the powertrain which questions the relevance of this is not any of the diesels but the 400bhp 2.0 litre petrol plug in hybrid they currently offer.
NicoG said:
Amen - The article is clearly making quite some noise about this interesting new powertrain from JLR and the way it moves thing on, when in fact as Tonker says, what has it really achieved...? fk all ...
A whole decade after my RRS was built, a PETROL engine with start/stop, in a Aluminium RRS, with Battery-electric assistance manages just a 30g of CO2 improvement over the satanic diesel variant I owned.
I'd wager that if you couple the hybrid tech from this new car with start stop into the old Steel / diesel RRS you'd see comparable CO2 figure, which means that 10 years on, it's really not achieved much at all.
That's the point of mentioning "what my old car was capable of" ? - to give context to the purported "progress" of more accurately lack of it....
And how much soot and NoX would the diesel be belching out?k all ...A whole decade after my RRS was built, a PETROL engine with start/stop, in a Aluminium RRS, with Battery-electric assistance manages just a 30g of CO2 improvement over the satanic diesel variant I owned.
I'd wager that if you couple the hybrid tech from this new car with start stop into the old Steel / diesel RRS you'd see comparable CO2 figure, which means that 10 years on, it's really not achieved much at all.
That's the point of mentioning "what my old car was capable of" ? - to give context to the purported "progress" of more accurately lack of it....
Edited by NicoG on Wednesday 13th February 10:43
Triumph Man said:
Nice to see the resurgence of the straight 6, what with Mercedes developing a new one and now JLR. I hope that with the drive to make them more efficient they will filter down into lower trim levels - ie available in not just the performance models.
I love the idea of these new straight sixes with electrical assistance.Although the MB version sound a lot more sophisticated - ie a proper hybrid. I'd happily trundle round town on batteries and still have a turbo'd IL6 for the open road.
Whilst diesels are lower emitters of CO2 for a given output/application, they also emit other substances that are increasingly getting legislated against, NOX and particulates. So whilst the CO2 figure doesn't seem so great, the progress lies in the vast reduction in the other pollutants this drivetrain could/should deliver.
Think of the progress as not a measure against a static goal post, but the chasing a moving legislative goal post and then the fact that the vehicle is safer, better equipped at least as equally fast takes on a different perspective.
Think of the progress as not a measure against a static goal post, but the chasing a moving legislative goal post and then the fact that the vehicle is safer, better equipped at least as equally fast takes on a different perspective.
Paracetamol said:
This is great news. Nothing beats the smoothness of an inline six! I am excited...Volvo..please learn!
Unfortunately I have an X5 hybrid and the four cylinder engine whilst ok on power is woeful in refinenment. Volvo are the same, I drove their T6 and the engine which is the same in the T8 sounded awful.Some kind person recently sent my X5 to the members who gave me an F Pace S with a V6 diesel and my life is transformed. I never thought I’d prefer a 6er diesel over an I4 petrol.
This is good news except isn’t a plug in and therefore doesn’t get the advantages (in company car tax only) that a plug in does!!!
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff