2000 Land Rover Discovery No Reserve on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Land Rover Defender V8 vs. Jeep Wrangler Rubicon 392 | V8 4x4s square off on paper

Land Rover pulled the sheet off its 2022 Defender on Wednesday, introducing another high-performance V8 to the off-road segment. This time, it's a 5.0-liter, supercharged V8 boasting 518 horsepower. It will be available in both the Defender 90 and 110 models. In the former, Land Rover says it can crack off a 0-60 run in just 4.9 seconds on its way to a top speed of 149 mph. The long-wheelbase 110 will be a bit slower, but "slow" probably isn't the right adjective to use here at all.  But Land Rover isn't the only automaker offering a high-performance variant of its off-road SUV. While Jeep may have been sneered at for presenting the 2021 Wrangler Rubicon 392 on the heels of the 2021 Ford Bronco's introduction, it starts to make a lot more sense in this context. There's reportedly a high-output Bronco on the way, too, so call Jeep the dinosaur of the group all you want, but you can't put a price on being first. Well, you can, actually, but that's not the point.  Thankfully, both Land Rover and Jeep have provided enough specs for us to rough out a comparison chart. Since the Rubicon 392 is offered only in four-door guise, we're looking at the long-wheelbase Defender 110 as its direct competitor here. Have a look: There are a few caveats to mention off the top. For starters, we don't have an official curb weight for the V8-powered Defender yet, as Land Rover has not finalized its U.S. specs. We used the European figures (as provided by a spokesperson), which we expect to be accurate within about 50 pounds. The 0-60 time provided by Land Rover was for the Defender 90, which is smaller and somewhat lighter than the 110. When equipped with the inline-6, the Defender 110 is about a tenth of a second slower to 60 than the Defender 90, so we figure it should be roughly the same for the V8.  While the Defender has nearly 50 horsepower on the Wrangler, that advantage disappears thanks to the Land Rover V8's monster weight penalty, which will fall somewhere between 600 and 700 pounds depending on equipment. Yikes. On the flip side, however, the Land Rover has the edge in top speed, and it's not even close. Chalk that up to the tires, we suspect. We know for a fact that the Rubicon 392's all-terrains dictate its speed limiter; Jeep's own engineers told us as much. This could make for a (hypothetically) interesting drag race, as the Jeep's advantage off the line may evaporate once triple digits come into play.

Jaguar crossover won't be based on Evoque or have off-road chops

Jaguar's long-rumored crossover won't be built on the same platform as the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque, says the Australian site Car Advice. The future of the new CUV remains uncertain, but if Jaguar does dip its toes into the SUV/crossover pool, though, the new vehicle will likely be a car-based soft roader, lacking (or perhaps more appropriately, not needing) the off-road-engineered chops inherent in Land Rover's small CUV platform.
Jaguar product planner Steven De Ploey explained to Car Advice, "There's many groups around the world [platform sharing] - obviously Volkswagen Group is doing it all the time - but I think we have to be careful. He added, "Jaguar is something quite different... It's about capability, but very much on-road focused capability." That seems to gel with our suspicions that the XQ, as it's expected to be called, will share its platform with an upcoming small Jaguar sedan, the oft-rumored X-Type successor.
Still, we'd recommend taking any mention of a Jaguar crossover with a grain of salt. Based on many of the (quite compelling) statements made by De Ploey against a Jag crossover and previous statements made by Jag's design boss, Ian Callum, the case against a leaper-bearing crossover seems strong. If a high-rider were to arrive from Jaguar, though, the article insinuates that it'd be more in line with the BMW X6 or upcoming X4 - sort of a coupe-based crossover. Like we said, grain of salt. If a Jag crossover is going to arrive soon, the upcoming Frankfurt Motor Show is the most likely locale for its debut. We'll find out in a few weeks.

NHTSA is investigating FCA shifters for roll-away accidents again, this time the rotary units

It seems FCA's shifter troubles aren't over yet. Now, just a few months after issuing a recall to resolve user-related issues with its monostable shifters, the company is again under investigation by NHTSA. The issue is related to the potential for cars to roll away when the rotary-style shifter is not properly placed in park. Two FCA models are the subject of this investigation: the 2013–2016 Ram 1500 and the 2014–2016 Dodge Durango. NHTSA estimates about 1,000,000 vehicles would be affected if a recall is issued. The investigation was started following 43 complaints of vehicles rolling away while supposedly being in "park." Among the complaints were reports of 25 crashes and 9 injuries. NHTSA does point out that in every incident, the parking brake was not engaged. A representative from FCA also gave us an official statement regarding the investigation: "FCA US is cooperating fully with NHTSA's investigation, the scope of which is limited. Other vehicles equipped with rotary shifters are not included. In accordance with prudent practice, the Company joins NHTSA in urging all drivers to use their vehicles' parking brakes." View 35 Photos As mentioned above, other Chrysler products with rotary shifters, such as the Pacifica minivan and 200 sedan, are not involved in this investigation. One of the key differences, as the representative told us, is that these vehicles have electronic parking brakes that automatically engage if the driver does not select park and then opens the door with the seatbelt unbuckled. The Ram 1500 and Durango feature mechanical, manually operated parking brakes and therefore cannot activate the brake automatically. Because this is currently an investigation, an exact cause for the incidents has yet to be determined, and none of the vehicles have been recalled. It's possible there could be a mechanical defect. However, the issue could be a confusing interface causing user error, as was the case with FCA's monostable shifters, where drivers think they've put the car in park but actually haven't. Something that indicates it could be a case of confused users is that NHTSA also opened an investigation into 2012–2014 Jaguar XF and Land Rover Range Rover Evoques for similar issues. Both vehicles use a rotary shifter and have had roll-away complaints levied as well. Even if it is a case of user error, FCA and Jaguar Land Rover may still have to recall their vehicles.