RE: All-new Range Rover Sport SV revealed with 635hp
RE: All-new Range Rover Sport SV revealed with 635hp
Wednesday 31st May 2023

All-new Range Rover Sport SV revealed with 635hp

Replacing the SVR was a potentially thorny issue for Land Rover. It has engineered quite the solution...


How to solve a problem like SVR? The original model, launched back in 2015, was Land Rover at its niche-filling, tongue-in-cheek best. Knowing that the raucous concept was likely to rub some of the tweed-wearing faithful up the wrong way, it drove the car so deep into the Halfords’ accessory aisle that no one could possibly mistake it for a core product. Consequently, its status as a shouty outlier provided the perfect cover: any criticism of its garishness could be deflected with a cheesy grin and a knowing shrug. The car was its own thing, from a new division. And its buyers liked cheese. 

The problem, if indeed we can call it that, was that Land Rover did its job a little too well. The SVR sold like fondue at a stale bread convention. It went exactly how it looked: loud. And proud, too. JLR’s venerable 5.0-litre V8 has found many homes over the years, but rarely has it been so well matched with its setting. Moreover, freed by the SVO billing, Land Rover turned up the fun factor just as fast SUV demand threatened to hit fever pitch. On the zeitgeist dartboard, three years ahead of brazenly silly stuff like the Lamborghini Urus, the SVR was a bullseye. 

At the time, of course, this was all well and good. But eight years later, and the sticking plaster covering up the SVR’s out-there reputation has clearly fallen off. Land Rover, alongside Jaguar, is in the process of moving even further upmarket than it was a decade ago, and (according to the line being trumpeted at the preview event) there’s no longer any room in its tidied-up range for such a maverick halo model. Instead, the manufacturer wants something that, in form and function, blends seamlessly into the new groove established by the latest Range Rover Sport, more a derivative of its namesake than ever before. The shiny new SV is the product of that thought process. 

Accordingly, several things have disappeared along with the letter ‘R’. One is the addenda-happy styling. Land Rover likes to talk a lot about ‘reductive design’ these days as a fundamental point of difference, but the relative conservatism of the SV is undeniable evidence of the principle in action. No one could accuse a car sporting carbon fibre-tipped quad tailpipes of being shy and retiring, yet clearly the bodykitted appearance of its predecessor has been replaced with something a bit more cohesive. Whether or not you prefer the more assertive, airflow-friendly front end and reprofiled flanks to what went before is going to have much to do with how much you like the current Range Rover Sport in the first place (this goes double for the interior, where much of the architecture is carried over - save for some new trim choices, a nattier steering wheel and much lovelier sports seats). 

If some of the bung-a-spoiler-on-it flair has gone, the underlying sense of fast SUV menace has not. The new model rides 10mm lower than standard by default, but can sink by as much as 25mm depending on the drive mode you’re in. Moreover, Land Rover has (optionally) filled the arches with 23-inch carbon fibre wheels - claimed as a world first, and saving nearly 9kg per corner compared to standard - and wrapped them in ginormous 285 (front) and 305 (rear) section all-season tyres. So not only is the SV drawn downwards onto the striking new rims, they also appear pushed out to meet the bodywork in a way that could politely be called ‘phat’. Factor a raft of other easter egg styling details - including the (optional) return of the bespoke carbon fibre bonnet and colossal (optional, and a first for a Range Rover) carbon ceramic brakes with eight-piston calipers - and the car earns its performance flagship status in the flesh. 

This is handy because the SV is not necessarily going to shout about it when running. At least not in the same way as its predecessor did. As expected, the SVR’s supercharged motor is the second feature cast aside, replaced by the BMW-supplied, twin-turbocharged 4.4-litre V8 and eight-speed auto. The new model will not want for power, outputting as it does 635hp - a 60hp upgrade - with peak torque now cresting at a loftier 553lb ft. Or an overboosted 590lb ft, if you’re in Launch Mode, which is probably what you’ll need to engage if you want to replicate the claimed 3.6-second-to-60 mph sprint time. At the same time, the mild-hybrid status of the new engine means that combined emissions have fallen by around 15 per cent. 

Unabashed throatiness will have decreased, too. BMW has often coaxed a wonderful exhaust note from the same unit, but no Land Rover engineer we spoke to was prepared to place it on the pedestal next to the outgoing V8. No great loss if you weren’t a fan of the first-generation SVR’s look-at-me flatulence, yet the exuberant V8 soundtrack was indisputably part of the fun-first mindset that distinguished the car from many direct rivals. Again, all the better for aligning the new SV with the hybridised Range Rover Sport variants that sit beneath it in the lineup - and almost certainly more efficient and better refined - but potentially more persuasive on paper than to-die-for in the real world. 

Likely sensing this experiential shortfall, Land Rover has sought an alternative must-have: the chassis. The SVR achieved remarkable gains with precious few hardware changes, highlighting the impressive bandwidth permitted by the L494’s air suspension. But this time round, the manufacturer has gone all-in by fitting a hugely sophisticated new system dubbed ‘6D Dynamics’. The combination of hydraulically interlinked dampers, height-adjustable air springs and pitch control is said to be another world first, and has not only dispensed with the requirement for conventional anti-roll bars (an 8kg saving), but also provided the SV with ‘a near-level stance during extreme acceleration, braking and cornering’. 

Clearly, the decision to develop and fit cross-linked dampers - a feature only made familiar by McLaren’s long-term association with the technology - was not made lightly; not just because it requires the additional complexity of a third ‘control’ chamber for each damper and clever management of the kinetic pressure to feed them, but also because there’s the small matter of incorporating up to 25 metres of hydraulic pipework under 35bar of pressure (climbing to as much as 140bar under heavy cornering loads). But the proof, Land Rover claims, is in the pudding: not only has roll resistance dramatically increased over and above the capabilities of active anti-roll bars - think 2,300nm of torque compared with 1,500nm - but the sense of here-we-go pitch that characterised the SVR’s standing starts has now been emphatically counteracted by as much as 4,000nm thanks to front-to-back interlinking. 

To what end? Well, infinitely superior handling for one thing, but also the kind of comfort that comes from being able to better control each individual wheel. Land Rover says it targeted lateral acceleration in excess of 1G on its standard-fit Michelin Pilot Sport All Season tyres - and achieved 1.1G in testing, a 22 per cent improvement over the SVR on summers. It went to the trouble of developing a new rear subframe and suspension links to help it get there (the car is treated to increased wheel camber, front and back) and applied bespoke SV settings to the all-wheel drive system, the all-wheel steering and the active locking rear diff. The new EPAS rack is said to have the fastest ratio of any Range Rover to date. And a new SV Mode, accessed via a button on the steering wheel, earns you that additional 15mm of lower ride height (among many other things) to ‘deliver the most dynamic and visceral experience possible’. 

Yet from speaking to the engineers, there’s a sense that much effort has been expended retaining (indeed, enhancing) the essential capabilities that make the SV an appropriate Range Rover Sport flagship. For all its V8-based derring do, the SVR did a laudable job of playing the comfortable, capable off-roader when required; evidently, the SV has been designed and built to dramatically exceed those benchmarks without resorting to excess. And while some of its new features contribute to additional weight gain even as they toil against the side effects (the 2,560kg unladen EU kerbweight easily outstrips its predecessor), there seems little question that Land Rover is targeting class-leading status for its sleeker, steelier follow-up. 

Certainly, it is being marketed that way. Not only has Land Rover restricted the first year of production to ‘select clients’ via invitation - a surefire way of combating the perceived lack of exclusivity that some argued blighted the SVR - it has kicked off with a highfalutin SV Edition One specification that starts at £169,900 (rising to as much as £190k with all the weight-saving carbon fibre components added). This means that anyone lucky enough to qualify for a phone call almost certainly had the option of seeking out a Bentley Bentayga or Aston Martin DBX, which sets a remarkably high bar for the near term, especially in the wake of the sold-out first run. Meeting it would be a foolproof way of putting the old SVR firmly in the rear-view mirror - and go a long way to establishing precisely the kind of performance dynasty that Land Rover thinks befitting of its future. 


Author
Discussion

GreatScott2016

Original Poster:

2,540 posts

118 months

Wednesday 31st May 2023
quotequote all
I’m not usually a fan of these, but that actually looks great.

swisstoni

24,063 posts

309 months

Wednesday 31st May 2023
quotequote all
Bit surprised BMW were persuaded to supply an engine to a direct competitor.

blue al

1,441 posts

189 months

Wednesday 31st May 2023
quotequote all
Any money or time spent by the engineers making it harder to nick, or easier to recover?

Preferably both…..

Cold

16,724 posts

120 months

Wednesday 31st May 2023
quotequote all
PH said:
it drove the car so deep into the Halfords’ accessory aisle
Given that this can only mean a collection of 12v cool boxes, dashcams or bicycle parts and has done for many years, why do so many continue to use this trope? It might be time to retire the use of this cliché.

The car looks great and will no doubt drive even better, but I'm not convinced by the price nor by the invitation only buying process.

ChocolateFrog

34,954 posts

203 months

Wednesday 31st May 2023
quotequote all
That's going to be the bravest brave pill in the world when it's 15 years old.

anonymous-user

84 months

Wednesday 31st May 2023
quotequote all
Cold said:
PH said:
it drove the car so deep into the Halfords’ accessory aisle
Given that this can only mean a collection of 12v cool boxes, dashcams or bicycle parts and has done for many years, why do so many continue to use this trope? It might be time to retire the use of this cliché.

The car looks great and will no doubt drive even better, but I'm not convinced by the price nor by the invitation only buying process.
Well yes there's that and there's also the fact that it's complete bo11ocks...


GianiCakes

699 posts

103 months

Wednesday 31st May 2023
quotequote all
Invitation only made me laugh as LR are incapable of producing and delivering the cars they already have in their line up. And they’ve removed the physical buttons on this one as well by the look of it.
Why they insist on such changes so soon in the life of a new model, presumably requiring further supplier and production line changes, when it’s clear they should focus entirely on production efficiency is beyond me. They can clearly sell more Range Rover and Defenders than they can make at the moment. Mine, on order since July 2021, was even made more than 2 months ago but still not delivered because of “missing parts”. The cash flow implications on that across the company are mind blowing.
The business is so badly run it makes me fear for their future, even with a desirable product line.

pb8g09

3,247 posts

99 months

Wednesday 31st May 2023
quotequote all
swisstoni said:
Bit surprised BMW were persuaded to supply an engine to a direct competitor.
I guess if you know there are many that will buy it regardless who supplied the engine, you may as well make money from everyone who does buy your competition.

WY86

1,555 posts

57 months

Wednesday 31st May 2023
quotequote all
Looks a little bland for the SVR/SV model, also invitation only sounds way to pretentious for a RRS.

Pflanzgarten

7,628 posts

55 months

Wednesday 31st May 2023
quotequote all
Strange they’re leaving the likes of Urban so much to do when they could be doing it themselves.

AKjr

654 posts

41 months

Wednesday 31st May 2023
quotequote all
ChocolateFrog said:
That's going to be the bravest brave pill in the world when it's 15 years old.
I doubt there's any need to wait 15 years before making that declaration, given JLR build quality and reliability.....

fantheman80

2,650 posts

79 months

Wednesday 31st May 2023
quotequote all
Couldn't they have used the flash in the photos....oh its photoshop you say.....that will explain the spacers OEMs always seem to add in to give it stance...

Bobupndown

2,974 posts

73 months

Wednesday 31st May 2023
quotequote all
I'll hardly be getting a "select invitation" but I do like that. Not in drab gold mind you. Firenze red would look pretty good on it. A set of front discs and pads for that probably cost about the same as a decent 2nd hand runabout though eek

Mackofthejungle

1,231 posts

225 months

Wednesday 31st May 2023
quotequote all
I'm not sure what the point is. It'd look good if it came up to your shoulder height. Sadly it'll just dwarf you.

And the interior - just fk off. NONE of it will work in 5 years time. What a load of rubbish - imagination free design, by idiots. Why is a £5 Chinese screen suddenly luxury?!

Land Rovers always leave the same impression - a great car mechanically, over-complicated with badly designed suspension systems, poor engine choices and budget interiors covered in leather. The Discovery Sport is the only modern LR product which had integrity in its design - sadly ruined by terrible quality control. I should want an Evoque, but I won't go near one!

ettore

5,110 posts

282 months

Wednesday 31st May 2023
quotequote all
GianiCakes said:
Invitation only made me laugh as LR are incapable of producing and delivering the cars they already have in their line up. And they’ve removed the physical buttons on this one as well by the look of it.
Why they insist on such changes so soon in the life of a new model, presumably requiring further supplier and production line changes, when it’s clear they should focus entirely on production efficiency is beyond me. They can clearly sell more Range Rover and Defenders than they can make at the moment. Mine, on order since July 2021, was even made more than 2 months ago but still not delivered because of “missing parts”. The cash flow implications on that across the company are mind blowing.
The business is so badly run it makes me fear for their future, even with a desirable product line.
Production pretty much up and running apparently now, I have a build slot at the end of the month and the enormous backorder of RR, RRS and Defender (apparently 200K+) will provide very strong cashflow this year and next I would have thought!

I even read in Autocar that warranty claims are down by a third...

Wab1974uk

1,410 posts

57 months

Wednesday 31st May 2023
quotequote all
ettore said:
GianiCakes said:
Invitation only made me laugh as LR are incapable of producing and delivering the cars they already have in their line up. And they’ve removed the physical buttons on this one as well by the look of it.
Why they insist on such changes so soon in the life of a new model, presumably requiring further supplier and production line changes, when it’s clear they should focus entirely on production efficiency is beyond me. They can clearly sell more Range Rover and Defenders than they can make at the moment. Mine, on order since July 2021, was even made more than 2 months ago but still not delivered because of “missing parts”. The cash flow implications on that across the company are mind blowing.
The business is so badly run it makes me fear for their future, even with a desirable product line.
Production pretty much up and running apparently now, I have a build slot at the end of the month and the enormous backorder of RR, RRS and Defender (apparently 200K+) will provide very strong cashflow this year and next I would have thought!

I even read in Autocar that warranty claims are down by a third...
Yeah, probably due to lack of deliveries.

£170k for one of these. Blimey.

ArnageWRC

2,341 posts

189 months

Wednesday 31st May 2023
quotequote all
Hideous; too big, too heavy and too expensive. So, they'll sell well.....Fools and their money are easily parted.

andy43

13,233 posts

284 months

Wednesday 31st May 2023
quotequote all
blue al said:
Any money or time spent by the engineers making it harder to nick, or easier to recover?

Preferably both…..
Yeah, I’d be getting an insurance quote before even test driving one.

HertsBiker

6,443 posts

301 months

Wednesday 31st May 2023
quotequote all
How good is it off-road?
If it's lost that ability, would be sad.
Wonder how long before second hand prices will be affordable for ordinary people?
Wonder if fuel will be available before it gets there. When it drops to the say, £20k mark, what's the reliability going to be like?

rassi

2,517 posts

281 months

Wednesday 31st May 2023
quotequote all
What engine is this? S68 from the M60i/XM turned up to 635 bhp (including MHT)?