2013 Land Rover LR2

2013 Land Rover LR2 Prices
Blue Book® Suggested Retail Value
2013 Land Rover LR2 Fuel Economy
Fuel Economy (city/hwy)
Tell us what you think...
The community thinks...
  • Styling8.5
  • Performance9.0
  • Interior8.5
  • Quality6.5
  • Recommendation4.5
See reviews by
Test Drivers
Sort by
1 - 2 of 2 reviews
  • Styling10
  • Performance10
  • Interior10
  • Quality10
  • Recommendation8.0
offroad fun by ML, Scottsdale on 06/20/2014. Trim: 2013 Land Rover LR2 Base, Owned 1 year.
Pros: I am very happy with this car. Amazing handling and makes nice tight turns in the city. I have taken it of road absolutely flawless. The visibility is beyond belief, another great feature when driving on the freeway or the city. There are no blind spots.The bluetooth phone feature and synched music feature are very easy to operate. My personal favorite feature are the sun screens on the sun roofs, perfection. I bought it for style and to access Arizona hiking trails. Driving off road to the trails is more fun than the hike.
Cons: The fuel economy is not what is posted. I am getting 15.2 miles per gallon city. A combination city/highway is coming in at 16.8
Overall review: I am very happy that I followed my heart and got the Land Rover, it won't be my last.
Review ID: #585745 Is this review offensive?
  • Styling7.0
  • Performance8.0
  • Interior7.0
  • Quality3.0
  • Recommendation1.0
2013 Lemon LR2 by Fozzy325 on 04/07/2014. Trim: 2013 Land Rover LR2, Owned 1 year.
Pros: New LED and ZEON lights. Great power from the Engine
Cons: Stereo doesn't work correctly after -15 terrible engine noise in the cold. Poor fuel economy
Overall review: I have the LR2 2013 2 Ltr. I had a LR2 2102 3.2ltr i was coming to the end of my lease and I wanted to buy and upgrade. I was told i would get better fuel economy. However this is not true. I am getting 1/3 less distance on a tank of fuel between the two. After the upgrade, I am getting 15.681 MPG Highway and 7.841 MPG City. Land Rover are saying this is normal. Land Rover have also tested the vehicle and say it is normal. Don't believe the efficiency it is actually worse than the 3.2Ltr 2012 model
Review ID: #583559 Is this review offensive?
1 - 2 of 2 reviews
Information or opinions expressed in these reviews are not endorsed by Microsoft Corporation nor MSN Autos. Have comments about MSN Autos' User Reviews? Send us an email.

Search local listings

powered by:

Recently Viewed Cars

View favorites
BB01 - 7/29/2014 3:02:02 AM