Search results

Maybe 50, so in terms of vehicle sales, none. In its intended environment, it's a purpose-fit machine. Outside of that, in the vast majority of its sales territory, and in terms of the culture it attracts, it's trash. Nearly Kahn Defender level trash. Check IG. The beginnings are already self...

Relative to later vehicles, yes. I still maintain that the Series trucks had relatively (of the time) impressive flex and payload, however without any citable data source other than experience, I'll agree to disagree.

Be specific. Are you saying LR branched the og Defender off into another line while the original continued? That's not the case. Are you saying the LC wagon line did not evolve incrementally? It clearly did. There's no irony to this whataboutism when the examples are completely different. People...

Reading the front page article, Tom Sheppard Reviews the Suzuki Jimny, it struck me how similar it was to how a review of an honest Defender successor should have read..

What we see there is an example of graceful evolution in a branched product line. The 50 series was an ugly, but sensible wagon variant which included many features of the 40. From 50 to 200, it is a straightforward evolution. The 200, while much changed, is devoid of ridiculous styling gimmicks...

As I've pointed out before, it was not inevitable that had the Defender evolved at sufficient pace to stay ahead of regulations, that it would resemble the current offering. The fashion Defender is not the result of prophecy, but of the current culture at JLR, and specifically the vision of a...

I'm not concerned about the environmental impact of doing a rally car impression down a dirt road, or CT which had nearly zero impact relative to logging and mining operations they ventured past. We're not talking destroying unique ecosystems or dumping trash, inexcusable acts. I'm concerned...

It says a lot when someone has to make an effort to say something positive about a product. It appears he's still trying to get JLR to let him drive one. Here's another notable one, echoing much of what I've highlighted before...

Checked out Jonathan Hanson's blog today and came across a few posts you JLR fangirls might enjoy.. https://www.exploringoverland.com/overland-tech-travel/2019/9/10/the-new-dc100-i-mean-defender-is-here

Relative to the competition at the time, they were impressive.

That's not how it's positioned. They're attempting to gaslight consumers by repeatedly posting pics on social media of the two next to each other. It's a forced and desperate attempt to convey lineage.

lol. It's an even greater stretch to call it an 80/86/88/90/107/109/110 successor.

This thread was lacking hate/rage, but now one can almost smell it. Fortunately, you could "create a natural, custom scent with your own personal blend of essentials oils." I guess it's what the fashion Defender market is into.

LR has been doing this since 1948. They flexed well and met or exceeded payload of competitors at the time. Compare the flex/payload of a TJ vs a D1. LR could continue this engineering feat, however there is absolutely no incentive to do so when the new target market doesn't off-road or haul...

Yes the level headed logic of judging a vehicle's worthiness on the solidity of its grab handles, or lamenting on the classic being ill-suited for domesticated daily driving , for which it was never intended.

The problem, in few words, is that your "new / modern / comfortable " Defender wears the wrong badge. It's a Jeep.

I'm very familiar with the historical sales numbers. Demand in the markets that Defender occupied, is and was very high, as evidenced by strong sales of trucks, Jeeps, and other competitors. However, demand for outdated vehicles (og Defender) in those markets is and was very low. In other...

You're either arguing that: 1. The fashion Defender's business case is completely different, thus the products must be designed completely different and the name makes no sense. or 2. No manufacturer ever made a profit including halo vehicles, and/or relatively simple capable utilitarian...

Yes, the original was a highly adaptable tool, but involved compromise in every task. Special-purpose tools will always perform better for specific tasks. However its strength was in adapting to off-road uses. For example, it made a terrible ambulance, but a great off-road ambulance. Terrible...