New Defender Concept

[Antichrist]

I'm constantly amazed at the number of people (including Land Rover apparently) who confuse "capability" with "suitability". They aren't synonymous.

And I agree (as did the Rover rep at the Atlanta Auto Show) this should never be called a "Defender".
Freelander 4 is closer to the mark.

I can't believe the juxtaposition Land Rover did in the beginning this video.

I find it telling they didn't use any footage from the '83 - '86 or '88 & '89 Camel Trophy events.

 

[jeffzx9]

I saw in an Autocar/UK article where LR is thinking about making the DC100 the entry level vehicle. I have visions of this thing becoming a yuppy urbanite "dune buggy." Granted, times change and vehicle styling is what makes for strong sales. However, if this comes to pass and LR actually turns the iconic Defender into the sales ***** that Ford attempted with the 80's Mustang abomination, then shame on LR execs for their error in judgement. I've given some pretty caustic Tweets to LRNA and Tata, as well as to Roverguide, regarding my disdain for the DC100. Really? Can LR not maintain one "hard core" vehicle for the faithful; those of us who bleed green (or black) and have this twisted passion for the beautiful utility (and reliability, when properly maintained!) of the LR pedigree? I fully realize that even if shod with the classic Defender bodywork, a "new and improved" version would be a veritable 4-wheeled electrical storm requiring a physics degree to maintain; that's "progress." However, is it too much to ask that LR pacify the faithful (those of us who defy the likes of Edmonds and JD Power reviews) to keep our allegiance to the brand, by giving us some morsel of validation? To me, the DC100 is a harsh slap in the face. It is a statement that LR is casting us aside; as if they are saying: "out of my house. Water is thicker than blood; begone."
Am I over-dramatizing this DC100 issue? Yeah; maybe. However, I feel discounted and betrayed, like the family business patriarch whose 2nd generation offspring has decided to sell Chinese (in this case, Indian?) I-phones instead of handcrafted Class A amplifiers. LR is whoring-out to make sales. That's a shame......that's a HUGE shame.

 

[LtFuzz]

New DC100 shots...

Haters gonna hate and it's certainly not the classic Defender...

...but that's a damn cool lookin' little modern Land Rover. I'll take two. I really dig the rear tire carrier... if that's load-bearing you could bolt a gypsy caravan to all that space.

And as far as the "cute ute" comments -- that's EXACTLY what people called the LR3.

It took, what, a year for the consensus on LR3's off-road prowess to flip from "mall crawler" to "top 3 capable stock mid-size SUV."

Let's give LR credit where it's due -- they have to sacrifice many things to maintain corporate viability. They don't have the resources Chrysler does to build a niche market vehicle, but they consistently overachieve when it comes to off-road capability. That's their nod to the hardcore crowd. Sure, it's more technology-driven now, but you can't fault them for building modern vehicles. Even the JKUs are filled with tons of stripper glitter.

I'm willing to bet if and when they build the DC100, it's going to surprise people just like the LR3 surprised people.

 

[LtFuzz]

I saw in an Autocar/UK article where LR is thinking about making the DC100 the entry level vehicle. I have visions of this thing becoming a yuppy urbanite "dune buggy." Granted, times change and vehicle styling is what makes for strong sales. However, if this comes to pass and LR actually turns the iconic Defender into the sales ***** that Ford attempted with the 80's Mustang abomination, then shame on LR execs for their error in judgement. I've given some pretty caustic Tweets to LRNA and Tata, as well as to Roverguide, regarding my disdain for the DC100. Really? Can LR not maintain one "hard core" vehicle for the faithful; those of us who bleed green (or black) and have this twisted passion for the beautiful utility (and reliability, when properly maintained!) of the LR pedigree? I fully realize that even if shod with the classic Defender bodywork, a "new and improved" version would be a veritable 4-wheeled electrical storm requiring a physics degree to maintain; that's "progress." However, is it too much to ask that LR pacify the faithful (those of us who defy the likes of Edmonds and JD Power reviews) to keep our allegiance to the brand, by giving us some morsel of validation? To me, the DC100 is a harsh slap in the face. It is a statement that LR is casting us aside; as if they are saying: "out of my house. Water is thicker than blood; begone."
Am I over-dramatizing this DC100 issue? Yeah; maybe. However, I feel discounted and betrayed, like the family business patriarch whose 2nd generation offspring has decided to sell Chinese (in this case, Indian?) I-phones instead of handcrafted Class A amplifiers. LR is whoring-out to make sales. That's a shame......that's a HUGE shame.

What's funny is that you feel "betrayed" by LR for building the DC100, but not for the utter absence of the Defender in the NA market for the last 500 years it's been in production. Not their fault? BS.

 

[I Leak Oil]

I'll take two.

You can have mine....

 

[HillbillyfromAL]

I'd rather just have a 25yr old one. In 2030 we can get a 2005. I personally don't blame Land Rover or any other manufacturer for not bending over backwards to adhere to the retarded EPA laws we have here. You'd have to be an absolute moron to think that a gasoline engine that only gets half the mileage of a diesel is better for the environment, yet we still cant import alot of diesels here not just Land Rovers. The red tape, and misinformation are the BS. That said this DC100 is not something I'd spend my money on. This pic is a correlation of what modern SUV's have become

 

[haven]

Maybe Tata will ship the old Defender tooling to India, and continue to make them there. Developing countries aren't as fussy about pedestrian safety.

 

[nwoods]

LtFuzz, you are making the same error Tom Rowe was concerned about. Capability and Durabilty (or Servicability) are worlds apart. A Defender needs all three. The DC100 might offer capability, as does the LR3, but not durability in its current guise. You won't find a bigger advocate of the LR3 than me (I have websites and thousands of photos dedicated to that platform), but it is a horrible replacement for what the Defender is and needs to be. As for resources, the Chryler division of our government has less to work with than Tata Motors! And regarding niche markets, have you seen what Tata produces?

 

[PhyrraM]

As a new member to the world of Rovers I'm left wodering how the Defender was viewed when it was proposed as the replacement to the series trucks?

I'm guessing conversations then were not all that different than the current conversation, albeit at a slower, non-internet pace.

 

[tacr2man]

As a new member to the world of Rovers I'm left wodering how the Defender was viewed when it was proposed as the replacement to the series trucks?

I'm guessing conversations then were not all that different than the current conversation, albeit at a slower, non-internet pace.

Sorry no they were not , and that apply,s to series 1 to 11 and 11 to 111 as well as they all represented a logical improvement in all areas , even if not very large improvements . TD5 was start of "negative improvment" from a overland vehicle point of view as opposed to Mall cruiser .

As a further observation look at pics of new "mini" 4x4 and Skoda Yeti design look similarity JMHO

 

[I Leak Oil]

You can go back to the 1948 vehicles and see the similarites to the newest defender, not only in appearance but in purpose. There is nothing similar between the current defender and the DC100, not appearance, not purpose, nothing. And no, I'm not the type of guy to say I walked up hill, in the snow, both ways to school when I was a kid. I really think rover will be slapping itself in the face if they name this vehicle "Defender". It's time to move on from that, start something new.

 

[groundpounder]

Here's a new article: http://content.usatoday.com/communi...000-defender-survivalists-gold/1#.T4HkzVHFUkh

 

[I Leak Oil]

New article but nothing new in it and written by an obvious Doomsday Preppers fan or zombie apocolypse believer. Best part of the article are the comments..."tactical vehicle"....right...

 

[Antichrist]

As a new member to the world of Rovers I'm left wodering how the Defender was viewed when it was proposed as the replacement to the series trucks?

I'm guessing conversations then were not all that different than the current conversation, albeit at a slower, non-internet pace.

There was probably more radical change between Series 1's and SII's than there was between Series III's and 90's.

 

[Antichrist]

Here's a new article: http://content.usatoday.com/communi...000-defender-survivalists-gold/1#.T4HkzVHFUkh

******? How could a vehicle that is impossible to maintain without computers be popular with doomsday or zombie apocalypse believers?
For a doomsday vehicle I want one devoid of electronics and diesel.