News : Range Rover Westminster

Carole Nash Classic Insurance Specialists

Keith Adams

To celebrate the tenth anniverary of the launch of the Range Rover L322, the company has unveiled three anniversary editions… one of which is named named after a certain borough in London.  The Westminster, the Autobiography and the Supercharged Autobiography. Given a new Range Rover is due to be launched later this year, they’re probably also acting as run-out models.

The Range Rover Westminster Edition replaces the 4.4-litre TDV8 Vogue and the Vogue SE models, and it’s expected to go on sale starting from next month, March, with a price tag of £69,995. The Range Rover Westminster Edition comes with five special  interior trims, and seven exterior colours.

The Autobiography is powered by the 4.4-litre TDV8 engine. Land Rover says that the Autobiography and Supercharged Autobiography are coming with the same features, except the second one is powered by a 5.0 V8 engine. The two models get the Range Rover Design Pack as standard, which is coming with new bumpers, a Titan theme to the front grille and large 20 inch alloy wheels, finished in Shadow Chrome.

In the cabin, the Range Rover Autobiography and Supercharged Autobiography get the Range Rover Seat Style pack as standard, which includes heated and cooled seats. The TDV8 version has a starting price of £84,295 and the Supercharged Autobiography will cost £86,895.

 

Keith Adams

Keith Adams

Editor and creator AROnline at AROnline
Created www.austin-rover.co.uk in 2001 and built it up to become the world's foremost reference source for all things BMC, Leyland and Rover Group, before renaming it AROnline in 2007.

Is the Editor of the Parkers website and price guide, formerly editor of Classic Car Weekly, and launch editor/creator of Modern Classics magazine. Has contributed to various motoring titles including Octane, Practical Classics, Evo, Honest John, CAR magazine, Autocar, Pistonheads, Diesel Car, Practical Performance Car, Performance French Car, Car Mechanics, Jaguar World Monthly, MG Enthusiast, Modern MINI, Practical Classics, Fifth Gear Website, Radio 4, and the the Motoring Independent...

Likes 'conditionally challenged' motors and taking them on unfeasible adventures all across Europe.
Keith Adams

Latest posts by Keith Adams (see all)

30 Comments

  1. How did BMW miss out on this one!

    I had a search for the brilliant list of who owned what names, and it says that the brand ‘Westminster’ (as in Austin Westminster presumably) is owned by SAIC! I wonder if Land Rover asked permission…

  2. “the brand ‘Westminster’ (as in Austin Westminster presumably) is owned by SAIC! I wonder if Land Rover asked permission…”

    While you can register the name of a place as a trademark. I ‘think’ when it comes down to something like this the right to use the name “Westminster” resides with Westminster City Council. So while SAIC may be able to claim from LR for using it, LR could go to WCC and get a licence to use it.

  3. This news just shows what a fantastic vehicle the L322 generation Range Rover was when it went on sale in March 2002, and still is today. I love it and still see it as the chosen new car choice for my six winning numbers!

    Regarding the use of the Westminster name, it was first used by Land Rover Ltd in 2001 on one of three runout editions based on the second generation 38A Range Rover. The name returned in early 2009 for a special edition based on the ‘old’ 2009 Model Year Range Rover before the extensively revised model (new headlamps, front bumper, grille treatments, 5-litre V8 petrol engines…)was announced. With this level of use I am wondering whether Land Rover Ltd actually need to ask SAIC for permission?

    Sorry to sound pernicky, but I am personally saddened that the Westminster is a replacement for the Vogue and Vogue SE derivative names on the runout phase of L322. Both names have commanded a high level of desirability over the years (31 years if you count the first ‘In Vogue’ limited edition, and 24 years since the Vogue SE was first announced)and pushed the Range Rover’s level of luxury refinements (and price) to even higher levels across three generations. Hopefully they will return on the new fourth generation model – fingers crossed.

    Perhaps an article is order on the influence of these derivative names. Shall I write one, Keith?

  4. @ Adrian:

    No. There were three special edition derivatives of the Rover 100 Series for the UK market offered between 1995 and 1997 in the form of Kensington, Knightsbridge and Ascot.

  5. Westminster does sound like a naff choice of name. LR don’t always thoroughly check before announcing an LE name, eg the Discovery Goodwood some years ago caused a bit of a kerfuffle before it was changed.

    I wonder if anyone has the old “Road Rover” moniker registered – might have suited the Evoque.

  6. Still a stunning looking thing and a worthy successor to the original Classic Range Rover. Not even the face lift was able to mess it up.

    Okay, the new one will need to slash the emissions and fuel consumption, but how will they ever improve on the looks? Tough job!

  7. I really don’t get this. JLR are bucking the trend and selling loads of cars. Why mess around with, frankly, rather limp name ad ons. Less is so much more.

  8. I would imagine that ‘Vogue’ could be a good way to identify the next flagship Range-Rover model, differentiating it from the Sport etc. so maybe the name is being kept dormant until the launch of the new model.

  9. E I G H T Y – S E V E N – G R A N D . . . . . . . .

    Sorry if I’m being naive, I have never shopped at this end of the market but that figure still seems staggering. I honestly cannot understand why anyone would want to spend that sum of money on what is effectively a posh Land Rover. I’m sure others will no doubt explain to me what value it represents, but surely once the novelty wears off and the first year’s depreciation kicks in some of the people who have bought these will be thinking “What the —- have I done??”.

    Don’t get me wrong – I really liked the original Range Rover, especially the ones the traffic police used around here in the 70’s and early 80’s. However when you look at the new Freelanders and Discoverys they are really just different spec’d versions of the same car – in my eyes anyway.

    Good luck to them, though, if they are selling they are keeping British workers employed. And if folk are prepared to pay those prices, it proves that there are still people with money to spend in this country… even if it not being particularly well spent.

  10. #John, “how will they ever improve on the looks”
    I don’t think they will, from the cartoon images on AE and Autocar, it’ll looked like a pumped up Evoque. If it does, it’ll lose the classic lines of the RR, and have the current “on trend” design of the wedge rising waist line. Shame.

  11. @Ken Strachan, according to http://www.ipo.gov.uk BMW has made an application to register Triumph and the laurel logo as recently as October 2011 (?)

    @ Ric, the ‘on trend’ wedge rising waist line started of course with The Firm itself back in the Princess and TR7 days. I guess even brick-like off roaders are not immune to this trend. I saw a custom off-roader consisting of Range Rover chassis with TR7 body on top at an AWDC event many years ago. Strange Rover I think it was called…

  12. “E I G H T Y – S E V E N – G R A N D . . . . . . . .
    Sorry if I’m being naive, I have never shopped at this end of the market but that figure still seems staggering. I honestly cannot understand why anyone would want to spend that sum of money on what is effectively a posh Land Rover.”

    It might well be made by Land-Rover, but it’s hardly a Defender with some leather seat covers is it? I mean you could also argue that it’s just a posh TATA.

    It’s a similar sort of price to a Mercedes GL class. Mercedes are taxis in most parts of the world. Why pay £80k for a german Taxi?

    The Range-Rover has always been a high end product, when BMW took over they decided Rover weren’t really aiming high enough with it. Judging by the sales since 2002 they were right.

  13. @ Dennis

    The price difference between the ‘old’ and ‘new’ generation Range Rovers built under different ownerships was not that different. For example, in 1994 when the first generation model (called the Classic from September 1994) was still in production, it cost from approxmately £27,000 for the Vogue Tdi to £42,000 for the 4.2 Vogue LSE. When the second generation (38A) model was launched in September 1994, it cost from £29,000 for the 2.5 DT to £44,000 for the 4.6 HSE.

    By March 2002 when the last unsold 38A models were still on sale, the 2.5 DT County and special edition Bordeaux were £38,000 and the flagship 4.6 Vogue £53,000. More expensive limited edition derivatives available in the final year of the 38A’s production (such as the 30th Anniversary LE, Holland & Holland and Vogue SE) cost from £57,000 up to £68,000 (with the extra equipment option packs) and even £100,000 for the ultra rare Linley.

    When the current (L322) third generation went on sale in March 2002, the entry level model was approximately £39,000 and the top-of-the range 4.4 Vogue model £60,000.

    All owners of Land Rover Ltd have long recognised the importance (and ability) of giving the Range Rover an onwards and upwards approach in the marketplace. Even Rover Group when part of British Aerospace and BMW, and more recently Land Rover Group under the guidance of Ford and Tata.

  14. @ Dennis

    I wasn’t decrying the car – it is obviously a quality product and there is a market for it at the price it sells for.

    I was really trying to say that for me it would never be desireable enough to spend that amount of money on one. I see the Range Rover, Discovery & Freelander having morphed into not-too-dissimilar vehicles EXTERNALLY in terms of design and style however do agree that the RR is a completely different animal from the other two.

    I think the ‘posh TATA’ comment was a bit off & unnecessary, as none of these cars in current or previous form bore the TATA badge so don’t even merit comparison to anything in their range. You could go back over the history of Land Rover ownership and also say it has been a posh Ford during its lifetime, but it would be an irrelevant statement for the same reasons.

  15. “I think the ‘posh TATA’ comment was a bit off & unnecessary, as none of these cars in current or previous form bore the TATA badge so don’t even merit comparison to anything in their range. You could go back over the history of Land Rover ownership and also say it has been a posh Ford during its lifetime, but it would be an irrelevant statement for the same reasons.”

    Well sorry you took offence at it, but you asked what justified an 80k price tag and called it nothing but a “posh land-rover” which kind implies Land-Rover’s aren’t much good. I didn’t post the comment with any sort of malice, but if you’re going to look at any premium product as simply a ‘posh’ version of the same companies cheapest products, then you’re never going to understand the price point.

    The badge they wear has nothing to do with who builds it. I mean the current Rolls-Royce IS a BMW, just like the current Mini, but neither have ever worn a BMW badge. The Range-Rover is never the less a TATA product, as it was once a Ford product and before that a BMW product, it was originally a Leyland Product. There’s nothing wrong with it being owned by Tata.

    I suppose what’s really relevant though is do you have £80k to spend on a car? If you do would you choose a 4×4 and if so which one? I don’t have anything like 80k to spend on a car, i would imagine if i were an investment banker then i suspect i might be in more of a position to question the value for money of the car. At that sort of price point though, most of the value is in the image that ownership of it projects rather than the actual car.

  16. @ Dennis

    I didn’t take offence, and I certainly don’t think Land Rover products are any good – quite the opposite in fact. When I think of Land Rover/Range Rover, I don’t ever give any thought to who owns them. I think the ownership thing is so muddled these days it is easy to lose track. In saying that, when I think of the MINI I think of BMW, probably because I am a classic Mini owner and enthusist so BMW’s name is often mentioned in these circles, for good or bad reasons.

    I still find it hard to reconcile the fact that Rolls Royce and Bentley have different owners, despite having built cars with the same shell but different trim & grilles yet that seems to be the nature of the beast these days.

    Not sure if I would spend £80k if I had it on a 4×4. Maybe because I have always thought of 4×4’s as being meant for off-road, which very few of them would cope with these days.

    On a lighter note, I wonder what folks opinions would be on the RRover image if you put the top of the range model next to an Indica and tried to convince a novice they were built by the same company…..

  17. “Not sure if I would spend £80k if I had it on a 4×4. Maybe because I have always thought of 4×4′s as being meant for off-road, which very few of them would cope with these days.”

    The Range-Rover is one of the few. Although you would have to be ‘seriously’ minted to actually risk an 80k one down some rutted muddy forest track.

    “On a lighter note, I wonder what folks opinions would be on the RRover image if you put the top of the range model next to an Indica and tried to convince a novice they were built by the same company…..”

    Or a Tetley tea bag…. Yes they’re part of Tata too. But then that’s why Tata don’t go out of their way to advertise the Range-Rover as one of theirs.

  18. @ Dennis

    Tetley tea bags?? Never knew that one!

    Mind you, Daewoo were a manufacturer of fairly diverse products so I suppose it should be no surprise that there are other companies doing the same.

  19. Hyundai are another big conglomerate.

    I only notice the Tetley tea thing when i got a pack out of the cupboard once and noticed the TATA logo on the end of it. Tata international Beverages or something.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tata_Group

    They’ve got their fingers in an awful lot of pies. Apparently the family firm was founded in 1868, so that’s 22 years before Daimler started his car firm..

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*