Highlander
The Strong, Silent Type
Drop the RR Sport, the Evoque, and Disco Sport.
dropping them? in fact they are/were thinking to get into the sedan and wagon market. Maybe they are not wrong... if you know what I mean.
Drop the RR Sport, the Evoque, and Disco Sport.
JLR is doing well in the US - their largest market.Land Rover would do good to stop robing itself of Money and cut the Fat. Drop the RR Sport, the Evoque, and Disco Sport.
The Line would be much Stronger with Just the Range Rover, Velar, Discovery, and the Defender 2. They have too many SUVs stealing sales from each other.
So they enabled SOTA updates on the D5, which includes 80+ software modules including the infotainment. I've received 3 or 4 updates since they did that last year - one just the other day to bring the infotainment to version 20B - when I bought it they started on 18A or 18B, I forget which. It's proceeded flawlessly each time as my car connects to my home wifi when I get home, and when I start the car it notifies me that it's available, and will download and install in the background as I drive. It won't complete installation until the vehicle is fully shut down and goes into sleep mode which I think takes 10 minutes. I can also download and install map updates myself - but I use Android Auto rather than the native app so this doesn't really matter. The best part about this is I don't have to go to the dealer for any of that crap. The dealer told me that Pivi Pro (the Defender infotainment) is now based on an LG smartphone architecture with a Linux kernel. Felt quite responsive and looked great when I played with it at the dealer.Not sure if this has been shared; Apologies if it’s a repost.
Land Rover’s Spiritual Leader Makes No Apologies for the Design of the New Defender | Gear Patrol
Gerry McGovern, Land Rover's head of design, sits down to talk through the design of the all-new Land Rover Defender — and why he hates retro cars.www.gearpatrol.com
The language Mr. McGovern speaks isn’t exactly “off road” - he reminds me of an architect talking about buildings; a lot of focus on high-brow concepts as opposed to practical, utilitarian features. He talks about the Defender the same way John Ivy used to talk about iPhones and MacBooks - of course, unlike Land Rover, Apple has a reputation for making stuff “that just works”! And, I think the parallel is apt especially for those who are really worried about the complexity of this new defender (as am I). My iPhone is incredibly complex, but total failures are incredibly rare, and often any minor failures are corrected by turning it off and back on again, or patched with an OTA software update within a few days. I’m hopeful — and reasonably optimistic - that the new Defender will be like an iPhone.
What I’m concerned about is this: Imagine if every time you tried to send an e-mail with an attachment that was too large, your iPhone defaulted into “safe mode”, limiting features, until you get to an Apple Store? I don’t think this is the reality, but I think it’s a reasonable comparison that puts to words why so many folks are worried about the complexity of this incredibly modern machine.
[Edit: To be clear I don’t really care about Mr. McGovern’s opinion as I’ll make my mind up on the vehicle on my own, and right now I REALLY want one — top of my list in fact, by a mile. I just found the comparison interesting for discussion]
Anyway enough rambling about iPhones and Land Rovers — As for the article, I found some stuff (like his comment about bull bars being aesthetic — maybe for some, but for many they are critical bits of kit) to be eyebrow raising, where some of his other comments make sense. Hope y’all enjoy it.
So they enabled SOTA updates on the D5, [shortened for length]
Gerry McGovern is a pure designer - he even shows his clear differentiation from "the engineers" and gives a token nod to his "mate" Nick Rodgers (in another version of this interview)...his job is how Land Rover vehicles *look*. "...you still gotta get the engineers to engineer your design..." and there's another longer version of this interview where he says something like "you push engineering as hard as you can but at some point the engineers run out of spit and you have to go with it because ultimately the vehicle has to function" or something like that. Function is secondary to him as a designer, but he does acknowledge the tension and the necessity. I like his comments about retrospective design, but at the same time at a certain age buyers start to prefer "modern nostalgia" - especially in America. Less a comment on the car, more a comment on society and a longing for times past. I do disagree with him where he says effectively, "if you don't like it you're wrong," especially because later he says that if nobody buys it he gets the bullet.
The new Defender did not have to necessarily look like the old one to "be good", but it needed to "look the part" of its namesake, and I just don't think it does. I am sure it is an excellent vehicle, as is the D5, but I just do not care for the styling too much and at the price points available now (base models/commercial variants and 130 wheelbases to come later) I could not justify buying something I did not really like that much aesthetically (I do like the interior). Then again, I did not like the LR3 compared to the DII and now an LR3/4 seems great, so it may grow on me.
A video featuring a P400 on an outing: