RE: All-new Range Rover Sport revealed
Discussion
Seemingly an impossible design. Both bold and understated at the same time. As SUV's go....prtty good. Like the uniform roof and windows deisng they do.
But the big question, how many coffee holders and is there space for the Wag's bag and my football boots?
Thought this was funny....as if.
But the big question, how many coffee holders and is there space for the Wag's bag and my football boots?
Thought this was funny....as if.
smilo996 said:
Seemingly an impossible design. Both bold and understated at the same time. As SUV's go....prtty good. Like the uniform roof and windows deisng they do.
But the big question, how many coffee holders and is there space for the Wag's bag and my football boots?
The cupholders question is very important - the ones in my Disco Sport are absolutely shocking! Quite how you could get cupholders wrong in 2019 is beyond me, but they managed it...But the big question, how many coffee holders and is there space for the Wag's bag and my football boots?
I must be getting old as I really want to see what the boot looks like.
Firebobby said:
Reliability won't bother 90% if buyers as they'll all be on PCP. No one would actually hand over "real" money for one of these!!
You would be very surprised. Not that it should really matter. I reckon reliability is important irrespective of how you pay for the depreciation. Wills2 said:
No it's just a car, I'd go see someone about that chip on your shoulder.
The definition of having a chip on one's shoulder is broadly that of having "an angry or unpleasant attitude or way of behaving caused by a belief that one has been treated unfairly in the past" (source: Mirriam-Webster). I would suggest that my pointing out the extant issue of global pollution and linking that to overweight cars doesn't really suggest I have a chip on my shoulder. I'm concerned at overweight cars and the lack of personal responsibility, not angry about it.
Just saying.
Ray_Aber said:
The definition of having a chip on one's shoulder is broadly that of having "an angry or unpleasant attitude or way of behaving caused by a belief that one has been treated unfairly in the past" (source: Mirriam-Webster).
I would suggest that my pointing out the extant issue of global pollution and linking that to overweight cars doesn't really suggest I have a chip on my shoulder. I'm concerned at overweight cars and the lack of personal responsibility, not angry about it.
Just saying.
Lead by example then... get rid of that old polluting 2.4 litre alpha and get into a nice little 1.0l ecoboost fiesta and save the planet... I would suggest that my pointing out the extant issue of global pollution and linking that to overweight cars doesn't really suggest I have a chip on my shoulder. I'm concerned at overweight cars and the lack of personal responsibility, not angry about it.
Just saying.
WY86 said:
So what is worse someone who owns 1 range rover sport or someone who owns 1 estate car and 1 sports/ fun car?
the thing that attracts me to an SUV is it does so many things, be it long drives, going to the tip or going to Costco. I would also think it is a dangerous game your playing wanting the government to get tighter on emissions and pollution because say once the big evil SUV'S are gone, they will look at maybe old cars which do not have OPF filters or other such emission containing devices fitted. They could also look at big powerful estate cars/super cars/grand tourers.
and once they get rid of ICE cars they will then move on to looking at EV's and guess what there will be a problem with them that was unforeseen at the time of adoption...
It depends. Are the two cars new, lightweight, diesel, BEV? I'd personally get a new or second hand sporty estate, and a second hand sports car. the thing that attracts me to an SUV is it does so many things, be it long drives, going to the tip or going to Costco. I would also think it is a dangerous game your playing wanting the government to get tighter on emissions and pollution because say once the big evil SUV'S are gone, they will look at maybe old cars which do not have OPF filters or other such emission containing devices fitted. They could also look at big powerful estate cars/super cars/grand tourers.
and once they get rid of ICE cars they will then move on to looking at EV's and guess what there will be a problem with them that was unforeseen at the time of adoption...
You are suggesting I want to get rid of SUVs. Incorrect. I want SUVs to get lighter, and if they don't, I want the owners of said cars to pay compensation for the damage their car is doing to the environment, including manufacturing pollution, extractive costs, road wear and tear etc. That also applies to big V8 sports cars. Doesn't stop me wanting the latter, but I accept that there is a price to pay. That's being responsible.
Old cars? For the most part, it's better keeping them on the road rather than scrapping them any buying a new one. Keeping old diesels out of towns does make sense though.
So using language like "getting rid of" misses the mark. Choice is good - but we have to be responsible for the choices we make - and that means taxes like VED, aviation taxes etc to reflect that responsibility.
WY86 said:
Lead by example then... get rid of that old polluting 2.4 litre alpha and get into a nice little 1.0l ecoboost fiesta and save the planet...
See my recent comment. Buying a new car is worse than running an old one. Anyway, my mileage on the old Brera is quite low now, so I am doing my part ;-)PS it's an Alfa.
dt95aac said:
Nobody needs a 3 ton 600 horsepower car that can wade in 1 meter of water, no matter how impressive this might be technically.
Nobody ”needs“ a mattress instead of sleeping on the floor, but it’s nice to have - the idea that mankind’s avaricious decline is going to be halted by driving cars that weigh a bit less seems rather silly. The alternative appears to be a 3 tonne 600 horsepower EV that can’t wade 1 metre of water (but does leave a very big hole in the floor from all the rare earth metals its construction has consumed).
Ray_Aber said:
It depends. Are the two cars new, lightweight, diesel, BEV? I'd personally get a new or second hand sporty estate, and a second hand sports car.
You are suggesting I want to get rid of SUVs. Incorrect. I want SUVs to get lighter, and if they don't, I want the owners of said cars to pay compensation for the damage their car is doing to the environment, including manufacturing pollution, extractive costs, road wear and tear etc. That also applies to big V8 sports cars. Doesn't stop me wanting the latter, but I accept that there is a price to pay. That's being responsible.
Old cars? For the most part, it's better keeping them on the road rather than scrapping them any buying a new one. Keeping old diesels out of towns does make sense though.
So using language like "getting rid of" misses the mark. Choice is good - but we have to be responsible for the choices we make - and that means taxes like VED, aviation taxes etc to reflect that responsibility.
Didn't Volvo come out that producing EV's was more environmentally costly that producing and running a ICE car and the break even point was once the ICE car had covered 75,000 miles.You are suggesting I want to get rid of SUVs. Incorrect. I want SUVs to get lighter, and if they don't, I want the owners of said cars to pay compensation for the damage their car is doing to the environment, including manufacturing pollution, extractive costs, road wear and tear etc. That also applies to big V8 sports cars. Doesn't stop me wanting the latter, but I accept that there is a price to pay. That's being responsible.
Old cars? For the most part, it's better keeping them on the road rather than scrapping them any buying a new one. Keeping old diesels out of towns does make sense though.
So using language like "getting rid of" misses the mark. Choice is good - but we have to be responsible for the choices we make - and that means taxes like VED, aviation taxes etc to reflect that responsibility.
i would argue a sporty estate is no less polluting than an SUV and owning two cars is just pure filthy consumerism!!! Someone remove this persons socialist card!!!
Superflow said:
Up and down the land the nations gym owners and MMA enthusiasts rejoice as the latest incarnation of their drug fuelled narcissism arrives in all it’s vulgar glory!
Go forth young men with your white gym socks, and seek out the last disabled space ,for it is your destiny.
You're just bitter because you're not young. Go forth young men with your white gym socks, and seek out the last disabled space ,for it is your destiny.
It's a miss for me. Design wise anyway, I'd never be able to afford a new one!
I think it looks like they've stretched it from top to bottom. Like they've made it much shorter, thought it looked a bit weird and sandwiched in an extra piece. The details look like they belong to a smaller vehicle. I think the Big Mac front grilles highlight it best.
I think it looks like they've stretched it from top to bottom. Like they've made it much shorter, thought it looked a bit weird and sandwiched in an extra piece. The details look like they belong to a smaller vehicle. I think the Big Mac front grilles highlight it best.
nickfrog said:
Superflow said:
Up and down the land the nations gym owners and MMA enthusiasts rejoice as the latest incarnation of their drug fuelled narcissism arrives in all it’s vulgar glory!
Go forth young men with your white gym socks, and seek out the last disabled space ,for it is your destiny.
You're just bitter because you're not young. Go forth young men with your white gym socks, and seek out the last disabled space ,for it is your destiny.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff