RE: Land Rover revives the V8 Defender
Discussion
Would love one, but not at that price! I am sure they could have priced this at just under the psychological £100k and still made a chunky profit, so this is just lumping on a fat £50k staight to the bottom line over and above what they should be making. That's beyond taking the piss.
jet_noise said:
Will sell, good marketing.
But 400hp and 106mph. Is that a record?
It must have a limiter. My 300hp Defender V8 will pull the speedo onto the stop. Just.But 400hp and 106mph. Is that a record?
I bought a 50th Anniversary model for £12k, spent £5k having the engine rebuilt at V8 Developments. Given the choice of either, I'd keep mine.
The most expensive delivery mileage Defender on Autotrader tops out at circa £80k - which is in itself crazy.
So £150k for one of these? Is there really even a market at nearly twice the price of cars that are already being advertised at twice their original RRP.
And are people actually paying £80k anyway?
I'm curious
So £150k for one of these? Is there really even a market at nearly twice the price of cars that are already being advertised at twice their original RRP.
And are people actually paying £80k anyway?
I'm curious
Why am I still surprised at the number of people on here who don't grasp that:
1. Car companies want to make as much profit as possible
2. If you are lucky enough to be a desirable brand, then the price you can charge is set by how much you think people are willing to pay, rather than how much the car costs to develop and make.
3. This is generally a good thing, as profits mean car companies can survive and develop ever better cars (refer to Porsche pre- and post-Cayenne for example).
4. Nobody is forcing you to buy the car, if you think the price is taking the mickey.
1. Car companies want to make as much profit as possible
2. If you are lucky enough to be a desirable brand, then the price you can charge is set by how much you think people are willing to pay, rather than how much the car costs to develop and make.
3. This is generally a good thing, as profits mean car companies can survive and develop ever better cars (refer to Porsche pre- and post-Cayenne for example).
4. Nobody is forcing you to buy the car, if you think the price is taking the mickey.
chris333 said:
Why am I still surprised at the number of people on here who don't grasp that:
1. Car companies want to make as much profit as possible
2. If you are lucky enough to be a desirable brand, then the price you can charge is set by how much you think people are willing to pay, rather than how much the car costs to develop and make.
3. This is generally a good thing, as profits mean car companies can survive and develop ever better cars (refer to Porsche pre- and post-Cayenne for example).
4. Nobody is forcing you to buy the car, if you think the price is taking the mickey.
I think no one is denying they need to make a "profit". Just more how much profit is considered "excessive". I mean I mentioned the Project 8 being cheaper, what of this vehicle has represented an "engineering challenge" as large as the XE having a V8 installed by SVO?1. Car companies want to make as much profit as possible
2. If you are lucky enough to be a desirable brand, then the price you can charge is set by how much you think people are willing to pay, rather than how much the car costs to develop and make.
3. This is generally a good thing, as profits mean car companies can survive and develop ever better cars (refer to Porsche pre- and post-Cayenne for example).
4. Nobody is forcing you to buy the car, if you think the price is taking the mickey.
Desirable brand? Hmm, I am not sure how Land Rover is seen in that light, maybe the Range Rover logo yes.
Ultimately the market will decide, the other bigger issue here of course is theft of/from defenders....
Don't get me wrong, I love the Defender but what a way to piss all over it's legacy. The only people who will buy this will be collectors. Anyone who wants a proper Land Rover for what they were designed for - a mucky rural workhorse - will buy a used TD5 or similar. Nobody will be spending £150k on one to then take it offroad for risk of scratching the paint and "affecting future value", while at the same time the new price bar set at £150k will help mask the rise of existing Defenders to the point that £90k for an almost new, run-of-the-mill XS with black alloys, tinted windows and a small steering wheel will appear "good value".
I remember when you could walk into a Land Rover dealer and buy a new 90, £17k.
I remember when you could walk into a Land Rover dealer and buy a new 90, £17k.
Points to note.
I'm fairly sure that engine and gearbox combo will feature in the new Defender when it arrives. So this vehicle has been used to develop and test that set up. Probably also feature the supercharged version. But limited to death to keep fools safe.
Fairly sure this is igniting brand interest prior to new Defender launch.
Sticks 2 fingers up to Merc & Jeep (Finger each?)
Makes money, why else would you sell it? If left wing "labourites" had their way it would be sold at a loss and bankrupt the company. Think BL for those old enough to remember.
Seems to have been a well kept secret. Did nobody spot 150 Defenders hanging around for 2 years?
Think it should have included the new Defender steering wheel though!!!
I'm fairly sure that engine and gearbox combo will feature in the new Defender when it arrives. So this vehicle has been used to develop and test that set up. Probably also feature the supercharged version. But limited to death to keep fools safe.
Fairly sure this is igniting brand interest prior to new Defender launch.
Sticks 2 fingers up to Merc & Jeep (Finger each?)
Makes money, why else would you sell it? If left wing "labourites" had their way it would be sold at a loss and bankrupt the company. Think BL for those old enough to remember.
Seems to have been a well kept secret. Did nobody spot 150 Defenders hanging around for 2 years?
Think it should have included the new Defender steering wheel though!!!
Ninja59 said:
chris333 said:
Why am I still surprised at the number of people on here who don't grasp that:
1. Car companies want to make as much profit as possible
2. If you are lucky enough to be a desirable brand, then the price you can charge is set by how much you think people are willing to pay, rather than how much the car costs to develop and make.
3. This is generally a good thing, as profits mean car companies can survive and develop ever better cars (refer to Porsche pre- and post-Cayenne for example).
4. Nobody is forcing you to buy the car, if you think the price is taking the mickey.
I think no one is denying they need to make a "profit". Just more how much profit is considered "excessive". I mean I mentioned the Project 8 being cheaper, what of this vehicle has represented an "engineering challenge" as large as the XE having a V8 installed by SVO?1. Car companies want to make as much profit as possible
2. If you are lucky enough to be a desirable brand, then the price you can charge is set by how much you think people are willing to pay, rather than how much the car costs to develop and make.
3. This is generally a good thing, as profits mean car companies can survive and develop ever better cars (refer to Porsche pre- and post-Cayenne for example).
4. Nobody is forcing you to buy the car, if you think the price is taking the mickey.
Desirable brand? Hmm, I am not sure how Land Rover is seen in that light, maybe the Range Rover logo yes.
Ultimately the market will decide, the other bigger issue here of course is theft of/from defenders....
This is just the engine and trans from the L322 NA rangie shoved into a Defender. It's a good idea because they have a warehouse full of the N/A AJ133 engines left over because pretty much everyone bought the supercharged RR not the weedy N/A one!
Even with the strongest diffs available i bet you a lot of money they have massively limited the torque output in low range!
Even with the strongest diffs available i bet you a lot of money they have massively limited the torque output in low range!
In the light of the newly released G-Class, I find it pretty unimpressive. I hope they will preserve as much of the styling as possible for a new model, but to me this package is not very desirable. It's also no extraordinary end of life cycle special like a 4x4² could be considered.
It really doesn't matter, they will probably sell all of them at that price, but that doesn't necessarily mean you can't criticize the approach or the product.
People here share an opinion about the car, irrelevant to that is the success of it.
chris333 said:
Why am I still surprised at the number of people on here who don't grasp that:
1. Car companies want to make as much profit as possible
2. If you are lucky enough to be a desirable brand, then the price you can charge is set by how much you think people are willing to pay, rather than how much the car costs to develop and make.
3. This is generally a good thing, as profits mean car companies can survive and develop ever better cars (refer to Porsche pre- and post-Cayenne for example).
4. Nobody is forcing you to buy the car, if you think the price is taking the mickey.
That they can command 150k for it, is due to the current speculator market, but if they will be desirable or hold their value in 5 or 10 years begs the question. 1. Car companies want to make as much profit as possible
2. If you are lucky enough to be a desirable brand, then the price you can charge is set by how much you think people are willing to pay, rather than how much the car costs to develop and make.
3. This is generally a good thing, as profits mean car companies can survive and develop ever better cars (refer to Porsche pre- and post-Cayenne for example).
4. Nobody is forcing you to buy the car, if you think the price is taking the mickey.
It really doesn't matter, they will probably sell all of them at that price, but that doesn't necessarily mean you can't criticize the approach or the product.
People here share an opinion about the car, irrelevant to that is the success of it.
Article said:
Land Rover having removed the supercharger from its current 5.0-litre engine to provide us with that rare thing: a naturally-aspirated V8.
We'd venture that this is better suited to the Defender than its extremely spirited forced induction sibling, although it still delivers 380lb ft of torque (at 5,000rpm)
Lamborghini: "It was necessary to break with tradition and use forced induction for the Urus because it needs low-down torque to perform effectively offroad."We'd venture that this is better suited to the Defender than its extremely spirited forced induction sibling, although it still delivers 380lb ft of torque (at 5,000rpm)
Land Rover: "You're new to this, aren't you?"
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff