I keep trying to convince myself that Land Rovers "aren't like they used to be" (which would be a good thing, btw). I tell myself, "They've been owned by Ford long enough to not have incessant mechanical gremlins and train-wreck ergonomics anymore, right?" Tonight I drove home a 2006 Land Rover Range Rover HSE. On the tight turns along Old Topanga Road (PCH was having traffic issues) I noted that on hard left-hand turns the axles were binding. It wasn't in low-range and all other settings were in "normal" mode but it still shuttered and groaned on hard lefts (the problem didn't exist on hard rights). I tried to distract myself from this trait by tuning in my favorite talk radio station. Problem was, my station is on the AM band and the audio system was set to FM (cue ominous "Bumm!-Bumm!-Bumm!" music). Because the buttons surrounding the LCD screen are decorated with bizarre pictograms that tell you NOTHING
, and because most of the audio system must be controlled through the touch screen, I found it nearly impossible to switch bands. There are additional audio controls on the steering wheel, but these buttons -- while large and taking up a lot space -- can only adjust volume and frequency (I think...).
I started hitting random buttons and after about 10 minutes I'd found the LCD screen that controls the radio, which had a small button that said "BAND" on it. And yes, I know that owners will of course read the instruction manual and (probably) get quite adept at speaking the Range Rover's language -- but that doesn't change a basic rule of thumb I came up with several years ago: if you have to read an instruction manual to change basic radio settings, somebody on the design team screwed up.
By rsholland
on April 7, 2006
06:42 AM
I have long ago concluded that the Europeans have long been surpassed by the Japanese when it comes to ergonomics. Being the owner of numerous Japanese and several European cars over the years, I'm almost always appalled when I get in a European car, and try to use the controls and switches.
One hot-button item for me is VW (and others too) use of tiny fuel and temp gauges. They're hard to see and read, or at least "harder" to see and read than those found in Hondas, et al.
By 210delray
on April 7, 2006
07:43 PM
Land Rover: Why?
The most useless nameplate on the American road. Unreliable, complicated, expensive, gas-guzzling, don't get me started.
I mean, all these fancy gizmos for going off road (terrain control or whatever it's called, hill descent control, locking diffs), when no one is going to take their leather-lined, carpeted luxomobile onto anything rougher than a gravel driveway.
Ford ought to ditch it, along with Mercury and Lincoln (and sadly, maybe Jaguar too).
By rsholland
on April 8, 2006
06:12 AM
Gotta keep in mind that Land Rovers are sold worldwide. While they may be rarely used off road here in the USA, that's not the case in other markets.
By 210delray
on April 8, 2006
01:07 PM
But the ones sold in other countries, in Africa for instance, are they as luxuriously equipped?
Seems like you'd need something more basic and "honest," the way they used to be made. (I'm thinking of the Defender's ancestor with the spare tire on the hood.)
By rsholland
on April 8, 2006
06:40 PM
I believe so. They may have some different content, but a Range Rover is a luxury SUV no matter where it's sold.
By lou888
on April 9, 2006
02:14 AM
I drive a 03 Range Rover HSE that has been bogged up to the axles in mud, stuck in the middle of a creek (running) and been places I would not care to walk. When you buy the best 4WD in the world, you should use it to the max.
Pick up a RR Sport for my wife tomorrow and can't wait to get it alone on a dirt track.
I have done 90,000 trouble free km in 3 years in my RR and the diesel (BMW) has not missed a beat.
Love it and can't wait for the V8 diesel coming out soon.
By tryan
on April 10, 2006
03:13 AM
rsholland - If you've been "appalled" at the ergonomics everytime you get into a European car, one would have to ask why you have owned "several"? Not a slight here, more of a curious question.
Personally, I have had no problem becoming acclimated to most European vehicles, whether they be Audi's, VW's, Volvo's, BMW's, etc. I find VW's (and Audi as well) ergonomics to be some of the best, at least in most of their offerings. The Japanese do a wonderful job most of the time as well, but they do have their slip-ups as well. In short, nobody is perfect.
However, in the case of Land Rover, I put it in the same category overall as Hummer. A niche use vehicle that most people buy for the visual impact, not necessarilly for their excellent capability. Land Rovers have been used for decades as serious off-road vehicles, but they tend to be stripped down examples, devoid of many fragile luxury features.
In this sense, Land Rover makes some excellent off-road vehicles, though most of your North American buyers never even let their expensive Rovers get dirty, let alone climb up a muddy, 30 degree, rutted trail. In addition, I was taken aback by the materials quality and fit & finish in an $80,000 HSE. A $35k Lexus would have blown it away in that department.
By rsholland
on April 10, 2006
06:28 AM
tryan, I guess I'm a slow learner. ;) There are no Euro-rides in my current garage, and there haven't been any for some time.