On that note, great to see
@ChasingOurTrunks come over here with tons of Jeep experience and lay down some productive conversation........seriously, it is truly welcomed to have other OEM users any brand, class, or experience and bring constructive conversation to the table here in the LR rooms so we have viable and accurate opinion and fact.
Thanks for the kind words! I’m pretty brand agnostic and am a big fan of getting the right tool for the job, but every tool has compromises. Normally we have to compromise on payload or off-road proficiency in this market (As Payload goes up, off-road tends to go down), but with the Defender, those compromises appear to not exist. Instead the compromise appears to be price and reputation for reliability — I stress “reputation” because while Land Rover does have a historical reputation for not being very reliable, my understanding is they’ve made great strides in this area in recent years. And, they know their reputation just as well as we do, and have a LOT riding on the success of this Defender, so maybe they took that to heart in the design.
I’m actually very curious if there is any data on how reliable ‘modern’ rovers are from a “Get you there and get you home” perspective. Most of the data I have seen is based on “overall owner satisfaction” and “average number of service calls”, but I think comparing Land Rover numbers in this area with, say, Jeep numbers in this area is apples and oranges because they sell to very different markets.
I wouldn’t describe my Jeep as flawless — lots of issues with sensors and the transmission/clutch bearings — but it always got us home, and even when electronic gizmos failed the vehicles default “fault” state was still very much driveable. For example, the JK has an oil pressure sensor that controls if the oil is pumped through the galleys at high pressure or low pressure. It helps with emissions, but it fails often. If it failed and stuck to “low pressure” you’d have an engine lubrication starvation issue, but it defaults to ”high pressure” whenever it fails, meaning theoretically the car can be driven forever without it being fixed. But, the Jeep also had a ton of little issues — trim not lining up, phone not pairing properly, noises from the heating system, etc. Since it’s a jeep, I expected those things and lived with them. My understanding is people who spend $150k on a Range Rover may not have that attitude, and it’s more likely that every squeak or rattle could end up being a service call, which I think would get counted against them in most scores for how “reliable” they are. That’s not the case with a lot of jeeps that are fixed with duct tape and enthusiasm, even right out of the showroom, and don’t get counted against their overall ‘reliability score’. I’d be unconcerned about the “reliability” of a new Defender if my washer fluid heater malfunctioned and threw a code at me in the Back of Beyond as long as the vehicle still drove — I’m not doubting the common wisdom of “JLR cars are not reliable”, I just wonder if when one defines the terms a little more closely, what does the reliability data actually look like?
The real question won’t be
if things will break — every thing will, eventually, and I actually think the Defender with all it’s tech gizmos and gadgets will really push the whole market forward (which will increase the adoption of these features across brands, which generally increases reliability). The question will be “How often” and “What does the car do when something breaks”. Does it sit down on the trail with an error message and not allow you to move when an airbag sensor goes bad? Or is it designed to reset to a default PSI & ride height, flash a code, but otherwise allow you to carry on? For remote travel, I think it’s the “how is it designed to function when something fails” that matters most on a modern vehicle more than the “Can you fix it with bailing wire and chewing gum“ attitude of yesteryear.