Tested: 2016 Land Rover Range Rover

The days of requiring a V8 engine to lug your typical luxury SUV are waning. So says Land Rover, at any rate. The company now offers its ever-graceful Range Rover with a supercharged 3.0-liter V6 engine as the base powerplant. The British brand was good enough to loan us just such a vehicle for a test, and we found that, in the main, the 340-horsepower six doesn’t do anything to sully a magnificent driving experience.

Pros:

• The supercharged V6 is remarkably good. We have been firm fans of the 5.0-liter V8 that Land Rover used in so many applications, for so many years, but this smaller mill gives up nothing in terms of performance. The engine makes 332 pound-feet of torque to go with the 340 horses, with all of that twist available at an accessible 3,500 rpm. Combined with an excellent eight-speed automatic transmission, that translates to smooth power delivery and laid-back speed.
• Range Rovers have always offered decked-out interiors, but the 2016 iteration of the cabin is downright decadent. Pale leather swathed my test car’s innards; something so light wouldn’t be my first choice, but the application is stunning. Every control or surface that I encountered felt hand-crafted and looked remarkably stylish. Rubber mats with white leather seats… that’s something you can only get away with in a Range Rover. Oh, and if you’re a music fan at all, the 825-watt, $1,850 Meridian sound system is highly recommended.
• Ride quality is good in that “floating over the Earth” sort of way. I pushed the big-bodied Rangie on a few curvy roads, finding expected softness in the suspension and a dearth steering feel. No big thing; driven as a large SUV should be, the Range Rover whooshes its occupants to their destinations with a feeling of rich, good-smelling confidence.

Cons:

• At six-feet, five-inches tall, I’d expect something as large as a Range Rover to provide me with often-missed space behind the wheel. This is the car rookie NBA players buy, right? The truth is that I fit, but without quite as much legroom as I’d hope for an SUV in this class. Long-wheelbase Range Rovers may have ample rear-seat room for guys my size, but the standard-length version that I drove can be cramped for the XL set.
• You’ve got to pay through the nose for the privilege of driving this British brute. The most basic version asks more than $85,000, or close to $10,000 more than Cadillac wants for an all-wheel-drive Escalade, for instance. A Mercedes-Benz GL450 – with a similar forced-induction 3.0-liter V6 – starts out at just about $67,000. Sure, the Range Rover is a far superior off-roading vehicle than just about anything in the large lux SUV class, but how often do you plan on churning through the mud and ruts?

Competitors:

• Cadillac Escalade
• Infiniti QX80
• Lexus LX
• Mercedes-Benz GL-Class

Check out more Land Rover reviews on Motor1.com