New Defender stops production

[swisstoni]

With the prices of these things, they are virtually in the Range Rover class.
It is vehicle for glamping whereas a Bronco is for camping.

[warch]

I don’t think they can sell the Ford Bronco in the U.K. if they do it is unlikely to any cheaper than the comparable Defender model.

[swisstoni]

warch said:

I don’t think they can sell the Ford Bronco in the U.K. if they do it is unlikely to any cheaper than the comparable Defender model.

I was talking about the US market.

[300bhp/ton]

Andeh1 said:

You are wrong. JLR can't make a cheap basic car, as they are simply not big enough to achieve scales of economy sufficient to sell cheap & sell lots. They are 1/5th the size of the BMW, 1/15th the size of VW (IIRC). They have to stick with premium to achieve higher profit margins per unit. Nothing to do with it being "beneath them".

While I'm not directly arguing this point. It does make me wonder how they managed to be in the this market previously? Surely the company isn't any smaller today?

Or indeed how how other companies manage to build non premium vehicles. I believe Subaru is of very similar size to JLR.

[warch]

300bhp/ton said:

While I'm not directly arguing this point. It does make me wonder how they managed to be in the this market previously? Surely the company isn't any smaller today?

Or indeed how how other companies manage to build non premium vehicles. I believe Subaru is of very similar size to JLR.

Land Rovers were probably state of the art in terms of manufacturing speed during the 50s and 60s, a period which coincides with their heyday. The problem was that they were still largely hand built nearly 50 years later when the final old shape Defender rolled off the lines.

Subaru are a corporation making all sorts of things, we only know them for a narrow range of cars. It’s a common Japanese business model.

[cptsideways]

When a brand becomes more concerned about it's media profile than product reliability at some point it's going to get bitten in this modern day. No amount of back peddling will help.

One single YouTube channel has brought the issue to the fore. More potential customers will have seen the issue than not.

There is another similar channel accidently revealing the appalling (read potentially deadly) build quality of one of the Europes biggest boat brands. People take note of this reality, in their hundreds of thousands.

[Darkslider]

300bhp/ton said:

Andeh1 said:

You are wrong. JLR can't make a cheap basic car, as they are simply not big enough to achieve scales of economy sufficient to sell cheap & sell lots. They are 1/5th the size of the BMW, 1/15th the size of VW (IIRC). They have to stick with premium to achieve higher profit margins per unit. Nothing to do with it being "beneath them".

While I'm not directly arguing this point. It does make me wonder how they managed to be in the this market previously? Surely the company isn't any smaller today?

Or indeed how how other companies manage to build non premium vehicles. I believe Subaru is of very similar size to JLR.

I'm sure they could be capable of manufacturing a more basic vehicle for the utility end of the market at a higher volume/lower cost and still return a profit, they're already doing it successfully with the £30k Evoque and Discovery Sport, and a more commercial vehicle wouldn't need the luxury or complexity of either of these. However as Andeh points out I'm guessing they've a big team of accountants and forecasters crunching numbers who have concluded there's more profit to be made in adding another model to their (already over full IMO) luxury SUV lineup than there would be returning to a market segment they used to be competitive in and have now abandoned completely.

On the subject of reliability though I do think the Defender has been a victim of its own fame somewhat. If this were a new model of Focus or Golf we wouldn't even have heard of these examples of breakdowns, they're ordinary cars bought by ordinary people and I doubt you'd find very many people documenting their purchase of one on social media. But the Defender despite (and maybe partially because of?) all the discussion, controversy and hype over its creation and release is a desirable and aspirational car, and much more likely to have its honeymoon period documented by its buyers who are more likely to be enthusiastic about it than most.

[Smiljan]

I think people are also forgetting just how much the old Defender cost to buy in the last ten years of production. This is despite it being basic.

Land Rover should maybe just have retired the Defender gracefully and given this totally new car a new name.

[warch]

Smiljan said:

I think people are also forgetting just how much the old Defender cost to buy in the last ten years of production. This is despite it being basic.

Land Rover should maybe just have retired the Defender gracefully and given this totally new car a new name.

I drove a last of the line 2016 110 station wagon that was nearly 45k.

The Defender model name isn’t that old they only introduced it in about 1990.

[Smiljan]

That's 30 years ago! Seems a long time to me.

[craigjm]

Smiljan said:

I think people are also forgetting just how much the old Defender cost to buy in the last ten years of production. This is despite it being basic.

Land Rover should maybe just have retired the Defender gracefully and given this totally new car a new name.

Totally agree with this.

[warch]

Smiljan said:

That's 30 years ago! Seems a long time to me.

Fair enough! But as I’m sure you are aware it doesn’t define the Land Rover itself which was in existence 43 years beforehand or even that model which came out in 1983.

[andy_s]

'I was expecting a larger Jimny, I got a posher Range Rover'; I'm in the market for what it could be, but not what it is. Everything seems so 'lifestyle'.

[petery]

This whole land rovers are unreliable think, like with most manufacturers gets blown out of all proportion. if you build 1k of cars every year you are going to suffer a few that have problems, just one of those thing and the only people that ever go online to forums and youtube to talk about their cars are the ones that have issues so it looks like more of an issue than there really is. Who goes on to talk about how good they are? very few as they are out driving them!

My family have had LR products in various forms since 1991 (Discovery 1,Discovery 2(x2) ,3,4, Range Rover L322, Range Rover sport L494 and now a new defender) done getting on for 750k miles across the cars and not had any major issues with any of them, they don't get an easy life spend a lot of it towing fairly big trailers get used off road etc.

There is no doubt there are a few bad ones as with every item in life but the majority see to run round just fine.

[Smiljan]

warch said:

Fair enough! But as I’m sure you are aware it doesn’t define the Land Rover itself which was in existence 43 years beforehand or even that model which came out in 1983.

To be honest I didn't know exactly when the Defender name started being used, I had one as a works vehicle in the early 90's. Wikipedia suggests the introduced it to avoid confusion with the Discovery when that was introduced. I suppose it makes sense to keep the name and carry it forward and I'm sure the new car will sell well and bed in nicely.

[300bhp/ton]

Smiljan said:

I think people are also forgetting just how much the old Defender cost to buy in the last ten years of production. This is despite it being basic.

Land Rover should maybe just have retired the Defender gracefully and given this totally new car a new name.

Depends which model exactly. The 2012 pickup the farm bought (production engine in 2016 on the 65 plate). Was £17k+VAT!!

[300bhp/ton]

Smiljan said:

warch said:

Fair enough! But as I’m sure you are aware it doesn’t define the Land Rover itself which was in existence 43 years beforehand or even that model which came out in 1983.

To be honest I didn't know exactly when the Defender name started being used, I had one as a works vehicle in the early 90's. Wikipedia suggests the introduced it to avoid confusion with the Discovery when that was introduced. I suppose it makes sense to keep the name and carry it forward and I'm sure the new car will sell well and bed in nicely.

The Defender name was introduced to create distinction and separation between the then new Discovery and the traditional Land Rover.

So the name "Defender" came along in about 1990 with the introduction of the 200Tdi engines to the model. However..... "Defender" was just a branding of the core product they had been building continually since 1948! (noting the fact the Defender as a name does not hail from the 1940s).

Which in itself was just a model in the Rover car line up originally.

Today they may well make a vehicle with the same name. But it is not in any shape or form a continuation of the core product.

This isn't to say the new model is bad. It just is a very different model and vehicle conceptually. More akin to the origins of the original Range Rover or Discovery lines. And it is this fact that annoys and irks so many fans and enthusiasts of the core "Land Rover" products.

While those that like the new one (probably because it suits their trendy lifestyle ), seem completely blinkered and either unwilling or unable to even comprehend why some people may be less enthusiastic or even bitterly disappointed in the new model.

[camel_landy]

300bhp/ton said:

While those that like the new one (probably because it suits their trendy lifestyle ), seem completely blinkered and either unwilling or unable to even comprehend why some people may be less enthusiastic or even bitterly disappointed in the new model.

You were doing well until that point...

M

[bucks]

Size comparison between the Defender and the Bronco

https://twitter.com/DougDeMuro/status/133059163066...

[Smiljan]

300bhp/ton said:

Depends which model exactly. The 2012 pickup the farm bought (production engine in 2016 on the 65 plate). Was £17k+VAT!!

Sounds interesting how did a 2012 one end up with a 2016 engine?