New Defender Concept

[Dendy Jarrett]

Rumor on the street- Tata's Land Rover Group CEO resigned this past Friday because the polls taken on the Concept DC100 came back at a 96% disapproval rating. The same rumor also states the head designer was given a week to turn in his resignation. The news reports state he resigned due to personal reasons- but the rumbling is it all centered around this cluster debacle of a truck design - wait - is that a truck design?

http://www.roverparts.com/News/Archive/LandRoverCEOResignsDC100DefenderDebuts.cfm

http://in.reuters.com/article/2011/09/09/idINIndia-59247720110909

Tatas stock hit a 52 week low on Monday as the news spead. We may never see this truck as stated above!
D

 

[Harald Hansen]

Interesting times indeed.

 

[Rocket Ship]

To be clear, the reasons sited by Mr Forster were "unavoidable personal circumstances", not explicitly due to the results from this design. I guess everybody can make their own choice to believe that or not.

The stock price is down 41% over all of 2011, but only 3.3% of that has occurred since the announcement of his resignation.

 

[406to417]

I am a Jeep guy but have always been a Defender fan but this doesnt do it for me. Every fourm, blog and chatter I have seen or heard has been negative for this concept.

 

[Christophe Noel]

My first thought was - my wife would love one of these. She also really wants a Fiat 500, so that puts things into perspective.

I don't hate it for what it is. I don't particularly car for the drowsy look of the headlamps or the door handles that look big enough to fit oven mits. The front also looks lacks the angular stylings the rest of the car has.

Eh. Doesn't do it for me given the dosh you'll have to shell out to own one.

 

[Snagger]

As a new addition to the brand to compete with Suzukis and the like, as a relatively inexpensive soft-roader for the younger generation, I reckon it'd be a good vehicle - it would have a big market and would probably do very well in it, but as a Defender replacement it's an utter joke. If it is intended as a replacement, heads should roll, but if it is meant to be a new entry level toy, then I think that it should be green-lit.

 

[Rocket Ship]

I think that's a fair assessment. I agree that it's not a replacement for the Defender, but the concept in and of itself isn't bad.

Maybe they should just let the Defender die. The fact is, it just can't be replaced. New passenger car regulations just will not allow them to design it how old time brand loyalists want them to. And they can't continue the line either. So, instead of tarnishing the Defender name, just let it die.

 

[Snagger]

Well, they're being re-engined next year with a 2.2l version of the Tdci to meet new emissions regs, but the rest of the vehicle is the same. Most legislation only affects new designs, with existing designs continuing under grandfather rights. While that doesn't help with US exports, if production costs can be reduced (perhaps by manufacture as CKD kits with assembly in South Africa or Turkey, which have both done CKD for years), then I see n o reason to discontinue the Defender until outlawed. There is simply no other equivalent platform - the Defender is uniquely flexible in adaptability and modification for specific tasks.

I have heard that EU regs will preclude the use of separate bodies and chassis from 2015, though that must mean just for new designs, otherwise even the new 2012 Range Rover with its aluminium chassis would fall foul. It's going all-monocoque, and that'll rule out just about all significant 4wd vehicles, not just Land Rovers - Jeeps, Toyota Hilux and Surf, Nissan Patrol, Mitsubishis, the lot...

 

[Red90]

The fact is, it just can't be replaced. New passenger car regulations just will not allow them to design it how old time brand loyalists want them to.

Bull****. Jeep can do it. Land Rover could do it as well if they had any amount of vision.

 

[TexasTJ]

Bull****. Jeep can do it. Land Rover could do it as well if they had any amount of vision.

I have to agree with that statement. No one thought the JK could be as well rounded a vehicle as the TJ but it is. It dose have flaws (tin foil sheet medal) did a great job on bringing the wrangler up to par. Rover can do it to they just don't want to. I see Rover wanting to take there line more to the lux and trying to hold on to any of there off road heritage. They could more than likely do both but they would have to sacrifice ride quality. Plus from an economical stand point it makes more since to build off the LR4 chassis. Save them on Design time and R and D for a new solid axle design. I just hope they spend the R and D money and end up with something closer to the late model wrangler.

 

[Pskhaat]

Yep, I don't read anything within US CFRs minus emissions ('nother topic) that would reasonably prevent a manufacturer from designing a vehicle very close to an original Defender. We're not talking about a brand-new car manufacturer. Rover already has the parts, OEMs, supply chain setup to get really, really close.

 

[haven]

The base Defender costs about 1/3 more than the Toyota HiLux in Great Britain. (The 4x4 HiLux costs about the same as the Defender, but most people don't need the 4x4.) That effectively kills any chance that the Defender can survive on sales as a utility vehicle alone. Land Rover needs to broaden the Defender's appeal. The company can't justify making the truck if they can sell only 20,000 copies a year worldwide.

The alternative is to make one for military sales only, and avoid the pedestrian safety issue. This is the route Mercedes wants to take with the G-Wagen.

 

[UK4X4]

Funny thing is before a certain tax law came out hilux's were not popular at all-
the average UK driver - workman would buy a van.- landy if in a rural area

The hilux and its ilk only became popular when the UK tax man decided to tax company cars

Pickups were exempt from this as they were work trucks !

every man and his dog who could -swaped their vauxhal vectra for a 4 door pickup

- it was worth arround 5kGBP a year or 7500usd.

That new design looks like a x between the freelander - crap drive train and LR4 better but more complicated.

I'm actually very surprised that Tata - who make some very rugged off road trucks and have an indian - middle eastern customer base of millions could not use a modern designed offroad built tuff defender 2.

hell last year I saw a bunch of S1's still running arround Sri lanka

was the Puma the last of the real defenders ?

or will LR maintain two production lines like Nissan for the patrol and Toyota for the LC series

ie one becomes the work horse and one becomes the chelsea chariot- branded the same for the yuppy welly boot crowd.

translations available if you yanks don't get it !


Now if we look at this another way here i am in Colombia- available new are the following

Defender- special import but available
Nissan patrol swb and long
Toyota 70 series and the 200 series

Both the patrol and the LC 70 series have large capacity - solid axels and a bulit proof drive train-
their engines output way more horsies than the LR
The interiors are comfortable - but not leather filled - just enough with none of the fluff
The prices are less than the LR
Locally parts and support are awsome in comparison to the LR
the LR looks on the exterior like the same truck from 1980- yep classic but please slightly dated !

price wise second hand you can get a better LC - patrol for the same money as an LR 5-10 years older

I do love the latest 70 series 4 door they have them in stock - but as we move so much a new car is out of the question

if I had the choice of 4 door 70 series- 4 door nissan- and a funky new defender

I think I'd still go with the LC or patrol- just got to love those horsies !

 

[Snagger]

Bull****. Jeep can do it. Land Rover could do it as well if they had any amount of vision.

I agree too. I was chatting yesterday to a franchised dealer's salesman as I had dropped in out of curiosity to look at the Evoques in the display room - he started the usual patter, I told him that I was curious but not interested in buying one and that I am a Defender person. He then replied that Defender dies next year; I replied that it gets a new engine next year and the future hadn't been fully decided, but added that the DC100 is not an appropriate replacement and that LR seemd to have given up on commercial and utility vehicles and had clear intentions of being a prestige vehicle only brand. He got very agitated and spouted the same EU legislation bollocks excuses about crumple zones, airbags and so on. LR could very easily incorporate those if they wanted to continue the Defender, but I'm certain that LR now view the Defender as too "workman-like" and that they feel it devalues their brand (which seems to be drifting towards the RR brand anyway). I don't think they understand the credibility Defender gives the LR brand...

 

[Snagger]

The base Defender costs about 1/3 more than the Toyota HiLux in Great Britain. (The 4x4 HiLux costs about the same as the Defender, but most people don't need the 4x4.) That effectively kills any chance that the Defender can survive on sales as a utility vehicle alone. Land Rover needs to broaden the Defender's appeal. The company can't justify making the truck if they can sell only 20,000 copies a year worldwide.

The alternative is to make one for military sales only, and avoid the pedestrian safety issue. This is the route Mercedes wants to take with the G-Wagen.

LR were invited to tender for the UK MoD Wolf and 101 replacements, but refused to enter (hence the Hobson's Prometheus and Tithonus programmes and the Pinzgauer). They have turned their back on the UK, and thus every other, military service. Short sightedness in the extreme.