Don't flame... BUT is the Wrangler the new Defender for the U.S. ???

[roverandom]

It's cool you guys think the new Freelander, Evoke, Disco 4, RRS and RR are the best vehicles Land Rover have ever made.

I'm sure Gerry McGovern appreciates your fan mail.

I don't. To my mind they are ostentatious, needlessly complex expensive. None of these attributes are desirable in a overland vehicle......or any vehicle I want to buy.

So the new units are are full of tech and powerful engines, big deal. So is every other new car.


The ONLY reason Land Rover enjoys its reputation as a rugged off road brand is because it's new products stand on the shoulders of the working vehicles they once made. The only reason they have spot on this forum is because of that heritage. Take that away and you have just another hum drum car.

 

[jh.]

It's cool you guys think the new Freelander, Evoke, Disco 4, RRS and RR are the best vehicles Land Rover have ever made.

I'm sure Gerry McGovern appreciates your fan mail.

I don't. To my mind they are ostentatious, needlessly complex expensive. None of these attributes are desirable in a overland vehicle......or any vehicle I want to buy.

So the new units are are full of tech and powerful engines, big deal. So is every other new car.


The ONLY reason Land Rover enjoys its reputation as a rugged off road brand is because it's new products stand on the shoulders of the working vehicles they once made. The only reason they have spot on this forum is because of that heritage. Take that away and you have just another hum drum car.

A new, stock LR4 or RR can do anything off-road that any stock 4x4 ever built can do. The one possible exception is rock crawling vs a stock Rubicon. I would say that you're entire statement is hyperbolic at best, trolling at worst.



Now, too expensive? Absolutely. LR has priced their new vehicles out of my market, but so has Jeep. I will forever buy used. If LR4s drop below $30k...I will be tempted. But if a JKU beats it to $10k, I can think of better ways to spend the $20k in savings than to relish in the LR4's capabilities, comfort, and yes, heritage.

 

[proper4wd]

ostentatious, needlessly complex expensive

Pretty sure that's how everyone described the 1972 Range Rover... The 1987 Range Rover... And so on. Don't you get that ostentatious, needlessly complex, and expensive IS their brand image that has been consistent for the past 30 years?

 

[I Leak Oil]

Then don't buy one. It's really that simple. So many people getting their panties in a bunch about a vehicle they don't want anyway. ************************ get a life already. The arguments about being stranded in the Sahara when you will never go there in one is just plain stupid. Not being able to drive outside city limit? Please..the over emphasis makes the argument look childish. My neighbors ultimately reliable 'yota broke down in his driveway. I guess he should just stay indoors! The JKU and Defender are different vehicles, meant for different roles. Just because they have 4wd and 4 doors don't make them similar.
Land Rover...take it or leave it...but stop being a bunch of whiney bitches already...

 

[brickpaul65]

You ever heard of the "Smart Car"?

Yep. Does not compete with a civic. Just saying.

 

[dwvninety]

Then don't buy one. It's really that simple. So many people getting their panties in a bunch about a vehicle they don't want anyway. ************************ get a life already. The arguments about being stranded in the Sahara when you will never go there in one is just plain stupid. Not being able to drive outside city limit? Please..the over emphasis makes the argument look childish. My neighbors ultimately reliable 'yota broke down in his driveway. I guess he should just stay indoors! The JKU and Defender are different vehicles, meant for different roles. Just because they have 4wd and 4 doors don't make them similar.
Land Rover...take it or leave it...but stop being a bunch of whiney bitches already...

Wow we got someone mad.

 

[roverandom]

The new units don't go everywhere the old ones can. My 1957 worn out, bone stock Series One on 40 year old tyres can beat any new LR product. On trail rides it's always the new vehicles on their ridiculous low profile rubber and massive curb weight that get stuck first.

Why do you care so much about what I think of the current offerings from Land Rover anyway? Although I don't share your opinion I'm not disrespecting anyone. I certainly don't expect you to share my view if you don't like it but all this Internet "tough talk" is just B.S. What is this, Dweb?

But ask yourself this. If Land Rover were to introduce a cheapish, rugged, low tech, solid axle utility vehicle to the North American market how many of you would walk past it in the showroom and tell the salesman 'no thanks, I'd much rather buy that $110,000 Range Rover'?

 

[proper4wd]

Sigh.

 

[zelatore]

It's cool you guys think the new Freelander, Evoke, Disco 4, RRS and RR are the best vehicles Land Rover have ever made.

I'm sure Gerry McGovern appreciates your fan mail.

I don't. To my mind they are ostentatious, needlessly complex expensive. None of these attributes are desirable in a overland vehicle......or any vehicle I want to buy.

So the new units are are full of tech and powerful engines, big deal. So is every other new car.


The ONLY reason Land Rover enjoys its reputation as a rugged off road brand is because it's new products stand on the shoulders of the working vehicles they once made. The only reason they have spot on this forum is because of that heritage. Take that away and you have just another hum drum car.

I'll have to agree with you on some points. In particular, the idea that the brand's reputation is built on the old vehicles. That's why I feel the next Defender is more important than just it's sales numbers. It's effectively a halo car for them.

I'm fine with the company chasing the super lux market, so long as they don't totally forget the rest of us. The current product range really only has one gap - and that's at the utilitarian end of the spectrum. I still say they need a vehicle that can do all those things we all dream about even if only a tiny percent of Rover buyers will ever use that capability. It's the core of what makes the Land Rover brand stand apart from any other luxury SUV.

I don't want/expect the next Defender to just be a rehash of the current one. I don't expect it to be a stripped out bare-bones work/military truck. It's obvious that's not going to happen for all sorts of reasons. But tell me why Land Rover can't build a $50K Defender that can match a Rubicon rock-for-rock off-road while still keeping reasonable on-road comfort and load capacity? Make it simple, or at least as simple as you can make a new vehicle these days, with room for easy owner upgrades and accessories. Heck, sell the darn accessories right there in the dealer's service department and make a few extra bucks for the company.

My LR3, with it's current mods, is a pretty capable vehicle. It's roughly the equal of a stock Rubicon, but it's certainly more comfortable and has much greater carrying and towing capacity. Of course the Jeep's trump card is how easy it is to take to the next level, while I've nearly max'ed out the build options for my Rover just getting to the Rubicon's starting point. And there is where I'd like to see the next Defender fit. I'm willing to give Rover a premium just to match the JK's capabilities given they don't have the depth of ChryslerFiat, but they should be able to get in the ballpark. They do have the advantage of starting with a new platform compared to the JK's '07 starting point, so that should help them a little.

 

[Kmrtnsn]

I am so underwhelmed. In what market segment is this going to compete? Against the Grand Cherokee? The Durango? The Nissan Pathfinder? I think I threw up in my mouth a little when I saw this. Clearly, the Jeep is the new Land Rover as the "new" Land Rover is, well, I not quite sure what the hell this is.

 

[XJLI]

Let's do a case study here.

OR

Which one is more of a departure from the brand's history?

so, you're comparing jeep's midsize crossover SUV to rover's flagship (that has a base price of over double the jeep)? thats fair. i'd say the WK2 grand cherokee is pretty true to its jeep roots.

 

[roverandom]

Thankfully, the DC100 concept pictured was shelved despite "rave reviews" from "everyone". Who exactly "everyone" was we don't know because nobody seemed to rate it at the time.

They found out that most potential utility LR buyers wanted a more conventional vehicle.


Before the DC100 most folks were excited about the new Defender and were content to wait as Land Rover invested huge $$$ in crossover and luxury/ road performance models seeing it as a necessary evil to allow development of a worthy Defender successor.

After the DC100 expectations were considerably lower.

So the new unit may be really great or totally lame but what is sure is that no model in the current line up offers the same combination of capability and versatility as the original. The closest you can get today in North America is a LR4 that is too heavy, luxury orientated and expensive to be seriously considered for a utility role.

 

[proper4wd]

I have faith in Land Rover to produce a worthy Defender however it will be thoroughly grounded in modern/advanced technology.

They are capable of building a vehicle that is true to heritage. The Jaguar F-Type is your example. What the F-Type is to Jaguar, the Defender will be to Land Rover. Probably at a near identical price point.

And by the way, my above reference to Cherokee vs. Range Rover was not in comparing them to each other, but comparing how the Cherokee has "evolved" with how the Range Rover has. Obviously the two models are different, but we are comparing Jeep to LR in a conversation about heritage right? Where's the heritage in the new Cherokee?

 

[zelatore]

Thankfully, the DC100 concept pictured was shelved despite "rave reviews" from "everyone". Who exactly "everyone" was we don't know because nobody seemed to rate it at the time.

They found out that most potential utility LR buyers wanted a more conventional vehicle.


Before the DC100 most folks were excited about the new Defender and were content to wait as Land Rover invested huge $$$ in crossover and luxury/ road performance models seeing it as a necessary evil to allow development of a worthy Defender successor.

After the DC100 expectations were considerably lower.

Thankfully indeed.

I makes me think of a parent/teacher talking to a child who's handed in some poor homework:
That's nice Billy, but I bet if you try reeelly hard you can do even better! What do you say, want to try it again?

 

[zelatore]

I hope you're right - the new F-type is dead sexy.
I just hope you're wrong about the price. By about 50%. Not confident by any means, but I can hope, right?