• Apr 8, 2010
It's no secret that in recent years Land Rover has been itching to reduce the mass of its products. Even before Ford sold the brand to Tata it had been working on a variety of lighter weight concepts. It looks like the next generation Range Rover will be the first benefactor of those efforts when it debuts in 2012.

The new flagship SUV is expected to cast a similar shadow to the current model, but the roof won't be nearly as tall. This should significantly reduce the frontal area and create less overall aerodynamic drag. Mass will be reduced by using a riveted aluminum chassis with the same type of construction as the Jaguar XJ. Land Rover is apparently targeting a cut of 450 kilograms (992 pounds), with composite materials in the body panels helping to achieve that goal.

The 3.0-liter turbodiesel V6 now available in the Jaguar XF and XJ should bring CO2 emissions down from the the current 300+ grams / kilometer to under 200 g/km along with fuel economy of 33 mpg (U.S.) A diesel-hybrid is also expected in the lineup a couple of years after launch.

[Source: Autocar]


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 30 Comments
      • 4 Years Ago
      wow impressive, i got about 12 mpg city in a 4.0 range rover. 4 speed auto wasn't helping either.
      • 4 Years Ago
      Wow! Cut nearly 1,000 lbs from the curb side weight! Way to go! :D
        • 4 Years Ago
        1000 lbs is like a bus in car terms
        • 4 Years Ago
        I couldn't agree more, jonnybimmer. :)
        • 4 Years Ago
        So long as it retains it's 4WD abilities, this has WIN written all over it.
        • 4 Years Ago
        holy crap
        • 4 Years Ago
        Considering the starting point, it's not much of an achievement. Overweight POS.
      • 4 Years Ago
      Note to other carmakers: See? You can be fuel-efficient with off-road SUVs too. In fact, if you use a high-efficiency turbodiesel and next-gen technologies, you can break 30 mpg on the highway, which is better than all but the most fuel-efficient gas-powered crossovers.

      I get that crossovers are great for some people, but the auto industry is taking them too far, even going so far as to kill every truck-based vehicle in their lineup just to make it *look* like they're being kind to the environment. This is great. The next time someone tells me Ford and GM had to kill all their compact trucks and SUVs to raise fuel mileage I can just point to little stories like this and go, "Uh-huh..."
        • 4 Years Ago
        I'm all for diesels... but let's wait until they sell one before we act like they decoded some ancient mystery.

        GM was all set to launch a diesel for their light trucks and crushing emissions rules stopped it.

        There's also the cost factor... it's a lot easier to bury that diesel cost in a 6 figure SUV than in a $29,000 crossover.
        • 4 Years Ago
        Not that I disagree with you, but don't get too carried away now.

        This thing wouldn't be rated at 30+mpg using the EPA's testing prcedures. The 33mpg figure they tout here is converted from the estimated 40mpg UK into US gallons. It's well known that the US testing procedures will result in lower figures as well, not even counting the gallon size difference.

        Consider for instance, the VW Touareg TDI. In the UK, the 240PS 3.0L TDI is rated at 35.8mpg in the extra-urban cycle. The very same model in the US is rated at 25mpg hwy. Certainly not bad figures, but not dramatically above what other large, gas-powered crossovers like the Ford Flex or Chevy Traverse are rated at (comparing AWD to AWD).

        Like I said though, I still want to see more diesel options here in the US, especially in this segment where they are the most useful, but I'm not expecting outrageous economy out of them. They will certainly be better than the gas versions though.
      • 4 Years Ago
      33mpg RangeRover? The futrue is now.
      • 4 Years Ago
      Wait, what?! A Range Rover that's not 3 tons and gets terrible gas mileage?! Wow. Impressive.
      • 4 Years Ago
      That's awesome, around 20% reduction from the current model. It makes me giddy to think what my STI would be like if Subaru could cut 20% off the curb weight.
        • 4 Years Ago
        could being the operative phrase. the RR was one heavy, fairly ancient beast, even after bmw took over. scubie's doing a decent job with their products, if you're already pretty lean, 20% is MUCH more difficult and expensive to come by
      • 4 Years Ago
      I'm going to be pedantic: I think you meant beneficiary, rather than benefactor.
      • 4 Years Ago
      The Q7 with the 3.0 TDI and the 8 speed auto (covered yesterday) already accomplishes those numbers, it emits only 195 grams of C02. The current Q7 V6 TDI is rated 17/25 on the EPA test, the new one is supposed to get 19% better fuel economy. Possibly around 19/27 EPA.
      • 4 Years Ago
      Wait, didn't you already post this? Or did i fall into some kind of temporal loop? Geordie better think of something, fast.
        • 4 Years Ago
        That was Autoblog Green.
      • 4 Years Ago
      I hope it will retain its off-road ability.
      • 4 Years Ago
      That is impressive if they do that! I wonder if some of the luxury ideas will go away seeing as you might have less sound damping or some of the heavier technologies are removed.

      Lighter is always better. But it will no longer be available as a tax credit towards small businesses!
      • 4 Years Ago
      there probably doing this to save the sport variant
      any way they should do this now give a 33mpg
      LR4 and were good...
    • Load More Comments