The lastest...perhaps the precursor to the "mini-Rover" we've been hearing about for years.
http://www.leftlanenews.com/land-rover-lrx-concept.html
My God.
http://www.leftlanenews.com/land-rover-lrx-concept.html
My God.
LRX Concept
- Thread starter dormobiledisco
- Start date
My God is right. People will buy it too. I would rather have the BMWX6
I am NEVER getting rid of my disco.
________
Weed bubblers
I am NEVER getting rid of my disco.
________
Weed bubblers
Last edited:
From Land Rover LRX unveiled, courtesy of Auto Motor und Sport
- LRX is 12cm lower and 1.55m shorter than the Freelander
- Based on Focus platform
Land Rover downsizes with the LRX while Mini grows with Clubman, Mmmmm
- LRX is 12cm lower and 1.55m shorter than the Freelander
- Based on Focus platform
Land Rover downsizes with the LRX while Mini grows with Clubman, Mmmmm
D
D Chapman
Guest
Instead of slanting the roof-line down in the rear, if it were straight, it may not look half bad. But, I think it needs to be longer, higher stance, and offer a 400hp engine
The concepts are always crazy...remember Range Stormer? But the RRSport turned out okay, in my opinion.
Honestly, for a fun mountain-road carver and daily driver...I might actually like this one if the production model isn't as wild looking!
Honestly, for a fun mountain-road carver and daily driver...I might actually like this one if the production model isn't as wild looking!
It's like this. I don't see a problem with it if they keep creating the Defender and Disco, even the RR to be for off-road use. If you are comparing this to the Disco or to Series rigs -- well ya, that's like saying a marathon runner, being an excellent athlete, should be able to play in the NFL.
Nothing against Land Rover, ALL new cars SUCK. WAY too much plastic. WAY too big of rear ends. WAY to big of C-pillars (no visibility in ANYTHING anymore). Just ugly ugly ugly. They all suck. I think 2002 is the last year you could get a 'decent' car. Now, its just like a freakin crap shoot. I dont even look forward to buying a new car. Damn.
Totally F*U*G*L*Y!
If I wanted the "Japanese" look, I'd buy a Japanese car.
Another usless clonemobile.
If I wanted the "Japanese" look, I'd buy a Japanese car.
Another usless clonemobile.
deeker said:
it looks like a two-door, fastback edge. it's such a shame that a company so devoted to making trucks for so long is making cars (at least they aren't sedans), just like those crappy compasses and patriots. oh well
I think that the nicest thing I can say is I love the leather.
Doesn't deserve a LR badge though, maybe something along the lines or Lexus or Lincoln.
Doesn't deserve a LR badge though, maybe something along the lines or Lexus or Lincoln.
It honestly looks like a Murano/Edge/MKX/Saab...almost every other Crossover out there combination.
But I still kind of like it...provided I can keep my Disco and RRC forever!
But I still kind of like it...provided I can keep my Disco and RRC forever!
The LRX is smaller than the LR2/Freelander. With the move to increase CAFE I bet we see more small Land Rovers. I wonder how this will play into the sale of Land Rover / Jaguar? Currently they fall under the Ford CAFE rating. By themselves both Land Rover and Jaguar are going to need small light fuel efficient products along the line of the BMW 1 Series and Mini.
Give me a damn electric Rover then. I dont care. Put an electric engine in a D1 if they want fuel economic vehicles. Why do they have to suck in all the other design aspects?
Can an electric D1 NOT do trails? Of course it could. And would kick ass for MPG. But no, they package this technology in POS vehicles that cant even take a damn gravel road before falling apart. Freelander was a JOKE. And they want to try it again? Who the hell wants a small SUV/off-road vehicle. I guess dumb people who only haul three snow boards to the mountains twice a year but 'hey I have terrain response. Neato, lets put it in snoooow mode and drive 80mph.' Meanwhile the people who actually use them need to carry much more than that for a trip.
Whatever.
Can an electric D1 NOT do trails? Of course it could. And would kick ass for MPG. But no, they package this technology in POS vehicles that cant even take a damn gravel road before falling apart. Freelander was a JOKE. And they want to try it again? Who the hell wants a small SUV/off-road vehicle. I guess dumb people who only haul three snow boards to the mountains twice a year but 'hey I have terrain response. Neato, lets put it in snoooow mode and drive 80mph.' Meanwhile the people who actually use them need to carry much more than that for a trip.
Whatever.