The new 2018 Land Rover Discovery (née LR4) is not the automatically handsome successor to the Discovery 4 you assumed it would be.
The front end is visually softened. Viewed from the side, there’s enough bodywork between the windowline and wheelwell to empty the paint shop. The need to maintain a traditional Discovery shape was compromised in part by aero demands, and the result is flat rather than boxy. The C-pillar leaning far forward is more reminiscent of a Lexus RX than a Discovery Series I.
But it’s around the back where Land Rover’s own design boss, Gerry McGovern, has his own problem. “Overall, I like the design of the back of the Discovery for its asymmetry,” McGovern tells Auto Express, “because it’s tipping its hat to the Discoveries of the past.”
The problem then, Mr. McGovern? License plates. Yes. License plates.
As always, apply your standard style-is-subjective qualifier. But then search “new Discovery ugly” on Twitter and be astounded at the wide array of results, of which we’ve only selected a tiny fraction.
The Diagnosis
Sorry LR but your new interpretation of the discovery is plain ugly. It looks as if all the airbags went off at once and puffed up! Shame
— Snakey (@oilandtoil) August 22, 2017
The Critique
Not sure who designed or OK’ed the design of the rear of the new @LandRover Discovery but the words pig ugly spring to mind. 😮 #landrover
— Martin Baldwin (@marti_b) April 5, 2017
The Angle
Nope not for me, the back is ugly on the new discovery 😝 pic.twitter.com/AB2mUY9faH
— Aidan Chiselle (@AidanChiselle) May 2, 2017
The Comparison
Oh dear. The New Discovery is ugly. What a shame – reminds me of the Ssangyong Rodius 😬 What’s with the back window? #fugly #discovery pic.twitter.com/4lToxGQCoM
— Will O’Hara (@willohara) February 11, 2017
The Joined-Twitter-Just-For-This
@LandRover_UK Sorry, but that new LandRover Discovery is one seriously ugly vehicle, particularly at the rear. Very disappointed…..
— Mark (@sasnalinkai) September 28, 2016
The Verdict
Just drove past the new @LandRover Discovery. It’s so ugly, someone needs firing.
— Christian (@christiandavvy) June 20, 2017
Land Rover’s design chief, however, believes too many UK dealers are slapping on taller-than-ideal number plates. McGovern feels the Discovery’s new rear end was designed for slimmer license plates. Of course, that theory flies out the window on this side of the Atlantic, where all new Discoverys will wear taller plates. McGovern doesn’t believe the Discovery is in need of a design rethink. “I don’t want to change that asymmetry,” he says.
“But we do need to do something about the number plates.”
Given Land Rover’s recent global success, it’s easy to believe the brand could design very nearly anything and still sell it so long as the vehicle wears the green and white oval. But Land Rover’s clearly not under that impression, otherwise McGovern wouldn’t feel the need to so vehemently defend the new Discovery.
Earlier this year, for instance, McGovern was asked about criticism of the new Discovery. “I’m a professional designer and they’re not,” McGovern said of the critics. “I think it hangs together really well,” he told Motoring. Indeed, McGovern continued by criticising the previous model, saying it featured “a design that didn’t resonate with a lot of people. It was very polarising.”
Regardless, McGovern feels now that proper license plates will cure all ills. Twitterer Mark Smyth? He has a different view.
In related news, the DVLA set to release a statement saying the rear design of new Discovery makes their number plates look ugly. https://t.co/fo5RUky1k8
— Mark Smyth (@Motorscribe) September 19, 2017
[Images: Land Rover]
Timothy Cain is a contributing analyst at The Truth About Cars and Autofocus.ca and the founder and former editor of GoodCarBadCar.net. Follow on Twitter @timcaincars and Instagram.
On the road, it lacks presence and appears as if someone drew my description to them of what a Ford Explorer looks like over the phone.
At one time, Mazda copied Jaguar designs. Now, Jaguar crossovers look just like a Mazda.
At one time, Ford copied Land Rover designs. Now, Land Rover crossovers look like Fords.
It’s almost as if all those companies you mention were once owned in full or in part by Ford!
Yep, it’s like the “Artist’s Rendition” that would circulate with an Amber Alert for an Explorer. Or a sketch of the Unabomer if you just add a hoodie and some sunglasses.
Everything ok down there in Tampa?
I see one every day and I think it looks super cool. The one I see is in black.
Eh, even a Toyota Yaris looks semi-cool in black. black paint is like the automotive equivalent of airbrushing in photography.
It has a certain Ssangyong Rodius ‘quality’ about it. Especially seen from aside. http://st.motortrend.com/uploads/sites/5/2016/09/2017-Land-Rover-Discovery-side-profile.jpg
Oh Dear!
It really is an atrocious design. People go into debt for these? Shocking.
“I think it hangs together really well,”
What a ringing endorsement.
I have never, ever heard a designer say that to defend their work and I’ve heard it all.
“I’m a professional designer and they’re not,”
Love it. We all have a little superiority complex but when a designer says this it’s a guarantee they come up with very pedestrian design.
Maybe in my lifetime someone/company will have the guts to break out of this current formulaic design language. Maybe.
If anything sells purely because of style over substance, it is the products of Land Rover. Blaming license plates isn’t going to sell ugly shopping trolleys that also happen to be built like Fiats. I’ve always laughed at talentless designers who blame front license plates for ruining their designs. It’s not like they were introduced during the development cycle. If you’re worthy of getting paid to scribble, you should be able to make a car that is attractive while complying with vehicle codes in all of your major markets. Otherwise you’re just a delusional hack. That goes double for someone who can’t incorporate a rear number plate.
Whatever, I’m just happy to see Saab is back and making wagons again.
I’ve seen several already here in Oklahoma City, and I do like the overall shape. I don’t mind the non-traditional side profile, either. I think the only thing that throws it off is that it’s still very tall and narrow-looking, especially versus the Range Rover line. That worked when you had the boxy shapes of the Series 4 and previous, but it’s a little more awkward on something with curved sheetmetal.
And I dig the asymmetrical plate recess.
Just a little point of order for our American friends.
They are not “license plates” (as in US and Canada) … they are “registration plates.”
Although the terms “license plate” and “registration plate” seem interchangeable in British English, they’re not the same thing. That’s because the plate is associated with the vehicle, not the owner (and will remain with it when there is a change of ownership). It is evidence of the car’s registration, not the driver’s license.
Thank you for tolerating this interlude of anal retentiveness.
Huh? They work the exact same way in the US. Plates show a car’s registration and have nothing to do with a driver’s license.
And in some states they stay with the car, not the owner, just like in the UK.
And in about half the states, they call them “tags” anyway.
I thought the Brits preferred the German-derived “number plate”
BUT IT HAS LETTERS ON IT TOO!
And talking of anal retentiveness, what’s up with the stupid headline of this article? ‘Thickness’ of a license plate, which would be the gauge of the metal plate, has nothing to so with anything.
The problem here, if there even is one, is the relative large width and height of a British license plate compared to those of many other countries.
The LR4 was about an 8 on the 0-10 ugly scale so its replacement is keeping it in good company.
I saw one on the road a few days ago and figured it was an unfinished test mule but yikes it’s an actual car for sale (and a pretty expensive one at that).
Mr. McGovern appears to be a graduate of the Chris Bangle I’m a Genius But People Are Too Stupid to Recognize My Brilliance School of Design.
Well, lemme see; Tim Cain used twitter quotes exclusively from men. Most of the comments will be from men, with the internet bonus of most of them never having bought or leased an LR. No one asked upper-middle class to rich women; to who this vehicle has vast cachet. They’ll just turn in their old LR when the lease is up and lease a new LR. Oh, Tata’s made them F-150/Silverado reliable.
That’s a good point, actually. What the menfolk find visually atrocious, the womenfolk might find perfectly pleasant or “cute.”
boom! your work is done here, el scotto.
As the proud owner of an early US-spec Discovery Series I, I think this thing is a sad joke. Which is pretty much my opinion of every Land Rover product newer than the P38 Range Rover. Shopping trolleys about sums it up, despite the fact that fitted with proper tires they are actually pretty capable offroad.
I do like the look of the Discovery Sport, but I can’t get over the fact that it is a $50K+ Ford Escape in tailored clothing.
“I do like the look of the Discovery Sport, but I can’t get over the fact that it is a $50K+ Ford Escape in tailored clothing.”
Not really. The Discovery Sport’s D8 platform (also used by the Range Rover Evoque and upcoming E-PACE) has its distant roots in the EUCD platform, based on the documentation I’ve read. Moreover, the Escape was never on that platform. The previous Mondeo, previous S-Max, previous XC60 and current V60 /S60 are on the EUCD platform, though. But like I said, the roots are pretty distant. It’s just like how the Ford D3 / D4 platform that supports my MKS is a distant cousin of the old Volvo P2 platform.
Now, if your qualm is about spending $50K on anything transverse-engined, I’d have to agree with you. I would need to step up to the F-PACE, Discovery or Range Rover Velar.
D8-E-PACE-S-MAX-XC60-V60/S60-EUCD-D#/D4-MKS-P2-$50K-F-PACE.
I found the Russian sleeper agent.
All this negativity is pretty perplexing. It didn’t strike me as ugly. I put 400 miles on a new Disco in metallic black. My first thought is that it was such a vast improvement over the LR4, which seemed unnecessarily utilitarian, not to mention clumsy. But this new Discovery was fine in the twisties (not one of the hunkered-down ultra sporty hot shots but good enough). It made freeway miles glide by. The seats were swank and comfy. I don’t know. It all worked well. I’m not a fan of SUVs but this one was very sweet.
Land Rover usually design attractive vehicles but this new Discovery could come from Chevrolet or Acura. It the opposite i f being attractive that for sure!
Hideous POS!
A $22,000 Mazda CX-5 looks 3x better than this and will be 10x as reliable/durable!
Right idea, poor execution?
And for god’s sake make sure the rear quarters provide maximum blind spots, because we surely don’t want to be able to see out!
I’m not mad on the tail gate but the rest of it looks good. Also it’s a practical car first which is something that appeals more to me tha. The style
Thickness? Did you mean height? All the difference in the world…