1999 Land Rover Range Rover 4.6hse on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Jaguar Land Rover calling in 100k vehicles in three separate campaigns

Jaguar Land Rover is recalling an estimated 104,114 vehicles in three separate campaigns in cooperation with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The largest of them affects Range Rovers made between April 15, 2005, and September 4, 2012, covering 74,648 units in America from the 2006 to 2012 model years. In those affected vehicles, the front brake hose could rupture, leaking brake fluid and decreasing the capability of the brakes to, you know... stop the vehicle. In a similar but separate recall, subsequent Range Rovers from the 2013 and 2014 model years (manufactured between August 16, 2012, and January 8, 2014) are also being recalled for a brake issue – this time due to the incorrect routing of the brake vacuum hose. The issue could wear down the hose and disable the power assist, again impeding the brakes from properly functioning. This second recall also affects the 2014 Range Rover Sport (specifically those manufactured between May 7, 2013, and January 8, 2014), affecting 24,679 units between both models across the United States. A third smaller recall concerns the 2012-2015 Jaguar XK – namely those built between March 4, 2011, and March 20, 2014. This campaign involves the front side parking lamps, which might switch off after about five minutes, in contravention of federal standards. As such, an estimated 4,787 units are being called in. In all three cases, owners of the affected vehicles can expect to hear from their local dealer to arrange to bring in their wayward British luxury vehicles to have the relevant issue fixed. RECALL Subject : Front Brake Hose(s) may Rupture Report Receipt Date: JAN 27, 2015 NHTSA Campaign Number: 15V039000 Component(s): SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC Potential Number of Units Affected: 74,648 Manufacturer: Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC SUMMARY: Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC (Land Rover) is recalling certain model year 2006-2012 Land Rover Range Rover vehicles manufactured April 15, 2005, to September 4, 2012. One or both of the flexible front brake hoses may rupture causing loss of brake fluid. CONSEQUENCE: If one or both of the flexible brake hoses fails, the vehicle may require a longer distance to stop, increasing the risk of a crash. REMEDY: Land Rover will notify owners, and dealers will replace the left and right front brake hoses, free of charge. The recall is expected to begin March 13, 2015. Owners may contact Land Rover customer service at 1-800-637-6837.

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 Land Rover and Cambridge have developed a touchless touchscreen

Jaguar Land Rover and the University of Cambridge are working on new touchscreen technology that eliminates the need to touch the screen. Counterintuitive, right? It’s called “predictive touch” for now, in part because the system is able to predict what you might be aiming for on the screen.  The video at the top of this post is the best way to understand how users will interact with the tech, but weÂ’ll do some more explaining here. You simply reach out with your finger pointing toward the item on screen that you want to select. ItÂ’ll highlight the item and then select it. HereÂ’s how it works, according to the University of Cambridge: “The technology uses machine intelligence to determine the item the user intends to select on the screen early in the pointing task, speeding up the interaction. It uses a gesture tracker, including vision-based or radio frequency-based sensors, which are increasingly common in consumer electronics; contextual information such as user profile, interface design, environmental conditions; and data available from other sensors, such as an eye-gaze tracker, to infer the userÂ’s intent in real time.” Cambridge claims that lab tests showed a 50 percent reduction in both effort and time by the driver in using the screen, which would theoretically translate to more time looking at the road and less time jabbing away at the screen. If the prediction and machine learning tech is good enough, we could see this resulting in a reduced number of accidental inputs. However, on a certain level it almost sounds more difficult to point at a screen while moving than it does to actually touch a section of that screen. Without using the tech and its supposedly great predictive abilities, we canÂ’t come to any grand conclusions. One comparison you may already be thinking of is BMWÂ’s Gesture Controls. ItÂ’s already been addressed with a subtle diss from Cambridge: “Our technology has numerous advantages over more basic mid-air interaction techniques or conventional gesture recognition, because it supports intuitive interactions with legacy interface designs and doesnÂ’t require any learning on the part of the user,” said Dr Bashar Ahmad of the University of Cambridge. Of course, this tech can be used for much more than just vehicle touchscreen control. Cambridge says it could be integrated into ATMs, airport check-in kiosks, grocery store self checkouts and more.