RE: New Defender Concept From Land Rover

[A.J.M]

I think LR know exactly what the Defender Halo does for the company.

It is the original, the one model that is recognised around the world for what it is capable of.

I would say imo, that LR need to look at the Hilux and see how they make it reliable, but also a good all rounder for being a daily driver, but a load lugger and off roader.
Or the Wrangler for a off road tool, plenty of them are kitted out in the dealers for off road use so LR should be doing the same.

The current platform is outdated, it's been around since the early 80s, and hasn't kept pace with the market it is sold in.

It really needs a new range of engines, manual and auto gearboxes, a range of bodystyles but a properly packaged interior with better sound proofing to make it an easier motorway driver.

I think the problem is, they have left it too late to change it. Everyone knows the Defender, it's now one of those British Cliches that people are familiar with.

The concepts to change it have been pretty much slated as it doesn't go with the cliche of the current model.
So do you do a Mini, make a new one, but make it look like the current, but a bit bigger in each direction with the new engines etc?

Or start with a clean slate and hope it works..

[DonkeyApple]

Krikkit said:

DonkeyApple said:

CraigyMc said:

Quite - anything's possible.

I just can't see the JLR design guys in Whitley building anything that looks like an offroader which cannot offroad (although a road-baised thing along the lines of an X5 is probably what they should be shooting for, I can't see them taking it to that extreme and ending up with something that can't mudplug)

C

It's an interesting debate. Porsche and others take no real credence for any kind of off-roading and this kind of shows Jaguar one way in which they can move. I would have thought that any Jaguar SUV will be 100% fast road and luxury orientated as that is what the brand is about. It would make perfect sense to take RR's chassis and much of the running gear but I would have thought it logical to strip out all the actual serious offroad gizmos and just run the 4x4 system.

I even suspect if the SUV does happen there will be a 2wd version.

IMO they might do the opposite - ditch the low-range box and simplify the drivetrain etc, but stick with clever suspension that might appear on the Disco/FFRR, giving it a more road-orientated bias. That way you've at least got the potential to have the car do well when presented with unruly terrain, but sacrifice ultimate mud-plugging ability for reduced weight to give it a bit more sportyness.

Yup. I certainly see it as probable that they will strip out a chunk of the 1off-road1 element to keep it more focussed as a Jaguar than as a rebadged Range Rover product.

In reality I would think that the logical commercial first step would be to try and Jaguarfy the Evoque as this mid sized car sector is a weakness for Jaguar and then an XJ SUV.

[NomduJour]

300bhp/ton said:

The LR Defender is not just a work vehicle - in fact all intents show a trend away from this and more to a lifestyle & recreation vehicle. So it is perfectly valid to expect it to perform.

Also there are many many different types of off roading - even when used as works vehicles

Chase the Wrangler market in the States by all means, but don't pretend the average buyer - business or leisure - knows or cares what rock-crawling is.

300bhp/ton said:

So what today are you comparing too? I have no delusions that a Jap Navara or L200 is like Rolls inside. They too are crude vehicles by comparison. The LR does no worse

We used to have an Isuzu Rodeo twin-cab as a runabout. Not particularly good or likeable, but you could chuck a load of crap in the back, set the cruise at 90, turn on the radio and the air con and get out an hour later not feeling much worse for the experience. A far, far more comfortable and relaxed experience than trying to do the same in our last Defender (there's a reason they're limited to 82 mph).

300bhp/ton said:

Which are totally different vehicles for a totally different market and purpose to what a Defender is aimed at. Comparing the ride quality of the two is pretty much insanity. And at the very least totally missing the point of the vehicles

Where was a ride quality comparison mentioned? You are grasping at straws.

300bhp/ton said:

What point are you making?? A good Defender has better brakes than my Impreza does. There is nothing wrong with them. Seriously please describe in detail that is wrong with the brakes on a Defender

I didn't say there was anything particularly wrong with the brakes, you focused on that - pedal feel isn't the best but not really an issue in a vehicle like this. Plenty wrong with the rest of how it drives though.

300bhp/ton said:

I believe they are the best solution for Defender, it's intended use and market placement - in whatever guise the Defender may come.

I would rather sacrifice the almost undetectable steering difference IFS would offer and accept far better off road ability. On tall 85 profile tyres IFS vs live is a pointless debate, I doubt even the driving greats could really tell the difference on otherwise equally setup vehicles.

But as said, I don't object to the clever cross linked air suspension - but this will cost and adds an unneeded complexity to a vehicle that really doesn't need it

What form the suspension takes is irrelevant so long as off-road performance is retained and the on-road experience is massively improved.

Again, if "driving greats" can't tell the difference (and why would the benefit be felt via the steering?), why do manufacturers fit more expensive independent suspension? I suspect your understanding of the benefits of independent suspension is very limited.

300bhp/ton said:

It's not even worth my effort to reply tbh. You are blinkered and won't change your mind, yet all you do is blame something that isn't actually the cause

Comedy gold!

300bhp/ton said:

Great insult, do you talk your friends and family like this too, or only when hiding behind a keyboard?

Funnily enough, my friends and family aren't complete idiots. If you're like this in real life I'd be more than happy to tell you in person.

300bhp/ton said:

Oh and please give me a list of these "modern standards" you talk about. I'd love to know...

Although I still don't understand how a live axle has anything to do with interior space - which seems to be your rather odd point.

How could it possibly have anything to do with interior space? A Defender is massively out-of-date in every aspect. It's good off-road, but objectively that's about it. Likeable, but objectively not competitive. What part of this can you not understand?

300bhp/ton said:

And basically you seem to want something Discovery sized, Range Rover plush, with Ferrari brakes, luxury car interior and no off road ability.

The only thing I can be certain of at this point, is that you evidently have no clue what a Land Rover Defender is. I can provide a picture if it would help as a reference guide?

People want a utility vehicle which is more comfortable, more refined, more spacious, better-performing. This is plainly demonstrated by the fact that the Defender's core customers are now all driving Japanese pick ups, despite their worse off-road performance in extremis and lower towing weights.

The Defender is out-of-date, isn't capable of being upgraded to modern standards and so must be replaced. End of story.

[unrepentant]

300bhp/ton said:

For those on a more modest budget I think the Defender is still the LR icon. Even in the USA were it wasn't really sold. I know this as I have a friend who exports early Ninety's to the US as the guys over there will pay 3 or 4 times their UK market value for them.

The tiny number of people here who want the Defender and are prepared to pay big bucks usually want the numbered, US spec ones.

Most US customers have no idea of what a Defender is, the company was launched in the states as "Range Rover" and many people still refer to the brand as that. The few people who are interested in the Defender are interested in it because of the look, they have little idea about how it actually feels and would be horrified if they actually travelled in one. The new Defender will have the look (and will be every bit as capable as is required) and will sell well.

JLR have just launched the replacement for the E-Type. It took nearly 40 years and it's fantastic. It conjures up memories of the E-Type but it's infinitely better and it's modern and fast and beautiful. The new Range Rover has all the DNA of Spen King's original but it's moved the game on light years from the 1970 original. The new Defender is long overdue and will do the same and it will be commercially successful on a global basis.

[NomduJour]

unrepentant said:

the company was launched in the states as "Range Rover"

Land Rovers were first sold in the States in 1949.

[300bhp/ton]

A.J.M said:

I think LR know exactly what the Defender Halo does for the company.

It is the original, the one model that is recognised around the world for what it is capable of.

I would say imo, that LR need to look at the Hilux and see how they make it reliable, but also a good all rounder for being a daily driver, but a load lugger and off roader.
Or the Wrangler for a off road tool, plenty of them are kitted out in the dealers for off road use so LR should be doing the same.

The current platform is outdated, it's been around since the early 80s, and hasn't kept pace with the market it is sold in.

It really needs a new range of engines, manual and auto gearboxes, a range of bodystyles but a properly packaged interior with better sound proofing to make it an easier motorway driver.

I think the problem is, they have left it too late to change it. Everyone knows the Defender, it's now one of those British Cliches that people are familiar with.

The concepts to change it have been pretty much slated as it doesn't go with the cliche of the current model.
So do you do a Mini, make a new one, but make it look like the current, but a bit bigger in each direction with the new engines etc?

Or start with a clean slate and hope it works..

Personally I like the DC100 concept. I'd just like it a little less fat and with live axles and bumpers that look less likely to ripped off while off roading.


But I really wish LR built this:









Personally I like the way it looks - it still looks like a Defender. Just a modern smoother take on it.

But it should have much better NVH due to it's construction and probably a better ride too. Yet it still has all the Defender attributes.

[NomduJour]

LCV would have been a much better use of funds than the Rover 75 ...

Not the first attempt at updating:

[CraigyMc]

NomduJour said:

unrepentant said:

the company was launched in the states as "Range Rover"

Land Rovers were first sold in the States in 1949.

Original series landies from 1949-1974, then a gap, then the range rover from 1987 onwards.

The defender itself was sold again in the US from 1993-1997.

C

[A.J.M]

300, you may have liked it, i did as well.

However, the general reception of it was poor, so LR canned it.

That red one would have been a nice tweak for the TD5 era of the defender.

What are people's want's for the new one?

Will it end up being a jack of all trades and master of none?

[DonkeyApple]

A.J.M said:

300, you may have liked it, i did as well.

However, the general reception of it was poor, so LR canned it.

That red one would have been a nice tweak for the TD5 era of the defender.

What are people's want's for the new one?

Will it end up being a jack of all trades and master of none?

I suspect it will be the man's Evoque and sell in fantastic numbers, especially if it does contain a series of cunning features that allow simple changes of use.

[Twincam16]

NomduJour said:

LCV would have been a much better use of funds than the Rover 75 ...

Not the first attempt at updating:

I love that sort of thing. A runabout for a post-apocalyptic Survivors-style world, for patrolling '70s Doctor Who-set wastelands and Nissen huts after all order has broken down following some socio-economic meltdown.

[CraigyMc]

Twincam16 said:

A runabout for a post-apocalyptic Survivors-style world, for patrolling '70s Doctor Who-set wastelands and Nissen huts after all order has broken down following some socio-economic meltdown.

Ironically that's how some marketers try to market any SUV, including soft things like the Kuga and that ilk.

It's like selling this to new mothers on the basis of "security".

[unrepentant]

CraigyMc said:

NomduJour said:

unrepentant said:

the company was launched in the states as "Range Rover"

Land Rovers were first sold in the States in 1949.

Original series landies from 1949-1974, then a gap, then the range rover from 1987 onwards.

The defender itself was sold again in the US from 1993-1997.

C

LR sold a tiny number, only 13,500 cars, in the USA in the 25 years from 1949-1974.

LR North America was launched in 1987 and sold only the Range Rover initially. The image of Land Rover in the USA is the Range Rover and that is the halo car.

[DonkeyApple]

unrepentant said:

LR sold a tiny number, only 13,500 cars, in the USA in the 25 years from 1949-1974.

LR North America was launched in 1987 and sold only the Range Rover initially. The image of Land Rover in the USA is the Range Rover and that is the halo car.

And I'm sure it's the same in China and other essential 21c countries.

Sadly, it is only us duffer Brits and a few deranged Colonials who value the original Landy and its true heritage.

[CraigyMc]

unrepentant said:

CraigyMc said:

NomduJour said:

unrepentant said:

the company was launched in the states as "Range Rover"

Land Rovers were first sold in the States in 1949.

Original series landies from 1949-1974, then a gap, then the range rover from 1987 onwards.
The defender itself was sold again in the US from 1993-1997.
C

LR sold a tiny number, only 13,500 cars, in the USA in the 25 years from 1949-1974.
LR North America was launched in 1987 and sold only the Range Rover initially.

According to this it was more like 20,000 http://www.lrfaq.org/FAQ.3.LR_sales_US.html but that's missing the point.

If you want to keep believing that Land Rover wasn't launched in the US until the Range Rover in 1987, feel free.
That particular point of view isn't supported by the the several thousand sales that predate 1987.

I'd be interested to know if you consider those to be "pre-launch cars".

C

[Krikkit]

I would be very surprised if the Defender replacement is a lifestyle vehicle rather than a proper workhorse - the Evoque is already cornering that market nicely, why do you need another one to confuse the brand?

I wonder if they've considered a composite leaf-spring arrangement like the 'vette - light, gives good clearance under the chassis, can be formed in quite a few shapes to suit.

[Tuvra]

300bhp/ton said:

Tuvra said:

1. I was stating that Suspension REALLY doesn't have to be that extreme, in fact you can avoid situations like that photo by using common fking sense!!

Very narrow minded... sometimes you can't avoid certain terrain. And at the end of the day, if it's a 4x4 and sold as a lifestyle pleasure vehicle, why should you have to avoid off road situations???

Kind of misses the point in off roading....

Tuvra said:

2. Who the fk crashes about an abandoned quarry or a swamp trying to get stuck in shiny new £25k 4x4's be it a Defender or Wrangler.

So are you telling me I won't find a single picture of new LR or Jeep being used off road for fun and recreation? Do you really want to take me up on this wager????

Tuvra said:

3. If farmers have to drive to any extreme location, they would use an ATV or more commonly a Tractor.

I grew up on a farm and my uncle still runs the farm today. I can categorically say that you are completely wrong. The farm doesn't even have an ATV, well it does - it's called a Land Rover.

Tuvra said:

4. Drive over a tree stump/fallen tree? I assume your talking about Forestry work? The Forestry Commission have moved to Ford Maverick's down these parts and the harvesting boys are in L200's. On contracts where I have to maintain roads and pathways, I usually have to cut up and remove the fallen tree or "dispose" of the nasty stumps for H&S reasons, driving over it would be a) Stupid b)Dangerous c) Leaving the problem for the next person/vehicle. You would have to be a mong to drive over a tree rather than remove it.

So where you live and work represents the entire world market, all countries and every use then?

1. I meant "normal" off road situations not climbing over ridiculous stones or going up crazy inclines. I would say 0.1% of 4x4's sold are required to carry out "extreme off roading" for purpose rather than pleasure. If you want to play about in the mud, buy an old classic and ruin them, that's what them guys do right? *cough* Range Rover Bobcat *cough*

2. You will find plenty, mostly PR shots or people on driving days etc i.e. driving someone else's.

3. Your uncle is like you then, a mong, why would you "waste" white diesel carrying out farm duties? Go on say it, he has to use a road to get to parts

4. No, where I live and work represents a large proportion of normal people and their needs/desires, not internet mongs making up stupid scenarios so they can play silly buggers driving over stupid obstacles when in fact its easier to go round or in fact remove said obstacle.

I don't mean to abuse you but by fk your annoying mate, you don't put valid points forward you just keep rabbiting until you think your right, this is the picture I have in my head of you stating the Defender is an acceptable "on roader" in 2013:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqs9DYisSsg

I thought you were annoying with your st "what car" suggestions but your fan boy, rose tinted glasses view of the Defender takes you to a whole new level

[DonkeyApple]

Krikkit said:

I would be very surprised if the Defender replacement is a lifestyle vehicle rather than a proper workhorse - the Evoque is already cornering that market nicely, why do you need another one to confuse the brand?

I wonder if they've considered a composite leaf-spring arrangement like the 'vette - light, gives good clearance under the chassis, can be formed in quite a few shapes to suit.

I think they've already committed to it using an existing floorpan etc and conceding the 'ultimate' go anywhere ability. They admitted that they haven't the resources to try and break back in against the competition.

I believe it will be a vehicle that has the modern style of the newer cars but retain multi use functionality.

It seems to have been painted as a man's version of the Evoque to do more manly things in.

But I agree with others that not having composite, remove able outer panels would be a huge shame. It would really make a big difference.

[unrepentant]

CraigyMc said:

According to this it was more like 20,000 http://www.lrfaq.org/FAQ.3.LR_sales_US.html but that's missing the point.

If you want to keep believing that Land Rover wasn't launched in the US until the Range Rover in 1987, feel free.

The figure of 13,500 is direct from LR NA.

LR NA was launched in 1987. A trickle of cars came in before that up to '74 then nothing until the launch of the company 13 years later. The new company launched with one product, Range Rover.

The reality is, whatever you may think, that most American customers see Range Rover as the brand. I'm sure the same goes for China where LR are growing at a huge rate. The heritage is tremendously important in explaining where the brand came from which is why any sales person in a LR dealership in NA should be able to wax lyrical about the Wilks brothers, the Willys Jeep, Spen King etc.. The new Defender is part of the future, a future that is looking very rosy for LR.

[Twincam16]

DonkeyApple said:

I think they've already committed to it using an existing floorpan etc and conceding the 'ultimate' go anywhere ability. They admitted that they haven't the resources to try and break back in against the competition.

I believe it will be a vehicle that has the modern style of the newer cars but retain multi use functionality.

It seems to have been painted as a man's version of the Evoque to do more manly things in.

But I agree with others that not having composite, remove able outer panels would be a huge shame. It would really make a big difference.

From what I gather from a recent Autocar, it looks like they're on the verge of ditching the Freelander, given that the Evoque does everything it does just as well and people seem to prefer it.

If the Defender and the Freelander are both dropped, then that leaves the Discovery as the most rugged and off-road-capable car in the range - and it is capable, just look at that hill Clarkson got it up in Scotland.

So, IMO it'd make sense to base a future Defender replacement on that. Maybe a crewcab pickup-style setup, aimed at the Mitsubishi L200, with the more easily broken extremities of the Discovery replaced with deformable bolt-on rubber, or nothing if they're not necessary.

And trim the interior in easily wiped-down plastics, rubbers and wetsuit-style cloth.

That way, it retains the Discovery's on-road manners, while acknowledging that it's a bloody good off-roader, and the 'Defenderised' makeover would only enhance that.

Also, with regard to making hardcore off-roaders in small numbers for the people who use them, has everyone forgotten that JLR own a significant stake in these guys?: