2011 Range Rover Sport Gt*low Miles*warranty*clean* on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Jaguar Land Rover launches Pivotal subscription service

Two years ago, Jaguar Land Rover launched a subscription service in the UK dubbed Carpe. The program was effectively a 12-month lease with no deposit and no mileage limit, and an all-inclusive monthly payment covering insurance, tax, service, and repairs. For GBP910 ($1,134 U.S.) plus the cost of fuel every month, a subscriber could secure a Jaguar E-Pace at the bottom end, a payment of GBP2,200 ($2,741 U.S.) per month opening the doors to a Range Rover Sport. In between, the Range Rover Evoque cost GBP980, the Jaguar XE GBP1,200, the Range Rover Velar GBP1,255, and Land Rover Discovery GBP1,550. The numbers and customer feedback have encouraged JLR to turn Carpe into Pivotal, with new lease levels, terms, and restrictions. Instead of keeping a vehicle for 12 months, Pivotal subscribers pay GBP550 to join, then swap out every six months. Changing cars early incurs a GBP250 fee, or customers can request to stick with the vehicle they have beyond six months, but JLR reserves the right to switch out cars when necessary. Pivotal keeps tabs to the odometer, too — instead of unlimited driving, the program caps fee-free travel at 1,500 miles per month, 20 pence per mile after that. However, the FAQ section explains that "mileage is accumulative so do not worry if you do not use your full mileage allowance, the first month can be carried on into the next within a given vehicle."  Carpe's six levels have been reduced to four Pivotal tiers. Blue costs GBP750 ($934 U.S.) per month and offers access to the Jaguar F-Pace, Land Rover Discovery Sport, or Range Rover Evoque, clearly a much better deal than GBP910 for an E-Pace (and we like the E-Pace). Indigo runs GBP1,150 ($1,433 U.S.) for the choice of a Jaguar I-Pace, Range Rover Velar, or Land Rover Discovery. Violet, costing GBP1,350 ($1,682 U.S.), comes with just one vehicle for now, the Range Rover Sport. Same goes for Ultraviolet at GBP1,600 ($1,993 U.S.), which gets the Range Rover. The brand already has plans to expand the fleet with the new Defender, and plug-in hybrid versions of the Discovery Sport and Range Rover Evoque The only noted repair item not covered is windshield replacement, which carries a GBP150 deductible. The splashy rework in England comes shortly after Mercedes-Benz shuttered its Collection service here in the U.S. On trial for two years in Nashville, Philadelphia, and Atlanta, Collection couldn't get the traction Mercedes wanted.

BMW X6 M said to lap the 'Ring in 8:20

Bimmer Today reports that the German rag Auto Zeitung ran an Audi RS3 and a BMW X6 M around the Nurburgring together, and the hotted-up sports activity vehicle came in just five seconds behind the white-hot hatch. Driven by 'Ring regular Horst von Saurma, the RS3 ran its lap in 8 minutes, 15 seconds, and the X6 M ran an 8:20. If those times are accurate, that makes the X6 M the second fastest production SUV on the lap-time list according to Wikipedia: ahead of it is the 550-hp Range Rover Sport SVR, which ran a time of 8:14. That time puts BMW's 575-horsepower, 5,200-pound SUV four seconds ahead of the time registered by the last-gen, 555-hp X6 M, and well ahead of the Porsche Cayenne Turbo S that Sport Auto clocked an 8:34 with. It would not, however, match the predictions that X6 M project manager Herbert Bayerl made for it in an interview with Sport Auto earlier this year. Bayerl said "The new BMW X6 M moves at the level of M3," speaking of the E92 BMW M3 that Sport Auto ran around the 'Ring in 8:05. It is, though, two seconds faster than the E46 M3, which lapped in 8:22. Bayerl called out the Range Rover Sport SVR directly, saying, "We have been traveling much faster in testing and have undercut the time of Range Rover several times," and "We don't need any special attachments to go faster." Auto Zeitung's report on the lap is only for subscribers so we'll have to wait for more official news. For the apples-to-apples comparison we'll be looking forward to Sport Auto's hot lap, then we'll know if the Range Rover has anything to fear. Related Video:

Lexus tops JD Power Vehicle Dependability Study again, Buick bests Toyota

It shouldn't surprise anyone, but Lexus has once again taken the top spot in JD Power's Vehicle Dependability Study. That'd be the Japanese luxury brand's fourth straight year at the top of table. The big news, though, is the rise of Buick. General Motor's near-premium brand beat out Toyota to take second place, with 110 problems per 100 vehicles compared to Toyota's 111 problems. Lexus owners only reported 89 problems per 100 vehicles. Besides Buick's three-position jump, Scion enjoyed a major improvement, jumping 13 positions from 2014. Ram and Mitsubishi made big gains, as well, moving up 11 and 10 positions, respectively. In terms of individual segments, GM and Toyota both excelled, taking home seven segment awards each. The study wasn't good news for all involved, though. A number of popular automakers finished below the industry average of 147 problems per 100 vehicles, including Subaru, (157PP100), Volkswagen (165PP100), Ford/Hyundai (188PP100 each) and Mini (193PP100). The biggest losers (by a tremendous margin, we might add) were Land Rover and Fiat, recording 258 and 273 problems per 100 vehicles. The next closest brand was Jeep, with 197PP100. While the Vehicle Dependability Study uses the same measurement system as the Initial Quality Survey, the two metrics analyze very different things. The VDS looks at problems experienced by original owners of model year 2012 vehicles over the past 12 months, while the oft-quoted IQS focuses on problems in the first 90 days of new-vehicle ownership. Like the IQS, though, the VDS has a rather broad definition of what a problem is. Because of that, a low score from JD Power is no guarantee of extreme unreliability, so much as just poor design. In this most recent study, the two most reported problems focused on Bluetooth connectivity and the voice-command systems. The former leaves plenty of room for user error due to poor design (particularly true of the Bluetooth systems on the low-scoring Fords, Volkswagens and Subarus), while the second is something JD Power has already confirmed as being universally terrible. That makes means that while these studies are important, they shouldn't be taken as gospel when it comes to automotive reliability. News Source: JD PowerImage Credit: Copyright 2015 Jeremy Korzeniewski / AOL Buick Fiat Ford GM Hyundai Jeep Land Rover Lexus MINI Mitsubishi RAM Scion Subaru Toyota Volkswagen Auto Repair Ownership study