Yeah, well in that case, I guess people will have to live with that if they want the capabilities. On the other hand, there will be a lot of people bolting stuff on and altering it so it looks more "manly" - like that old one with the round, deer-in-headlights stare.
New Defender Rage/Hate Thread
- Thread starter DieselRanger
- Start date
lumpskie
Independent Thinker
^This.I'd like to learn about all the places solid axles can't go. Where is the supremely-capable Playskool Defender going that previous vehicles haven't?
Are you going to answer the question above, when you talk about capability? Show us a picture!
DieselRanger
Well-known member
While I agree it would have been awesome if we had access to new-old Defenders post-1997, the economics didn't make sense at the time. Such updates necessary to continue to homologate the Defender were prohibitively expensive for Land Rover, too much to justify for the extremely small volume it was selling in the US. So actually, it left the US for all the right reasons as far as running a profitable business is concerned. Here's a great example of what it takes:
Why The 2019 Subaru STI S209 Is A Pain To Even Sell In America
The 2019 Subaru STI S209 may just look like a modified Subaru sedan on the outside, but it’s technically a product of STI, Subaru’s motorsports division. When STI went to homologate the car to our crash and emissions regulations separately from Subaru, it faced one setback: the U.S. government...
jalopnik.com
"No exceptions granted due to small production volume." Subaru sells several times more vehicles worldwide than Land Rover does, but they still acknowledge they'll lose money on the S209. At the time, it was much easier to continue with the Discovery/LR series and Range Rover in the US because it was selling in higher numbers and was easier to homologate. Even in its later years the last-generation Defender wasn't selling in sufficient numbers worldwide to justify spending the millions of dollars necessary to homologate for the US market.
Also note that emissions certification can take years as it also involves certifying the durability of emissions components. They began the program to update the Defender in the late 2K's. You don't just crap out new or updated vehicles and start shipping them to dealers, at least not in the US.
Were the low volumes a result of the Defender or were they a result of zero investment for 35 years? The frame, suspension and power train went on to live in the very successful Discovery I and II till 2004, models that LR has failed to eclipse with the LR3, LR4 and Discovery 5. The Defender was a self fullfilling outcome. No investment? No volume.
soflorovers
Well-known member
I'll happily respond to that. I95 at a steady 80 mph cruise. Could an old Defender do that? Maybe, but your experience would likely be similar to that of the Apollo astronauts on re-entry
While I agree it would have been awesome if we had access to new-old Defenders post-1997, the economics didn't make sense at the time. Such updates necessary to continue to homologate the Defender were prohibitively expensive for Land Rover, too much to justify for the extremely small volume it was selling in the US. So actually, it left the US for all the right reasons as far as running a profitable business is concerned. Here's a great example of what it takes:
Why The 2019 Subaru STI S209 Is A Pain To Even Sell In America
The 2019 Subaru STI S209 may just look like a modified Subaru sedan on the outside, but it’s technically a product of STI, Subaru’s motorsports division. When STI went to homologate the car to our crash and emissions regulations separately from Subaru, it faced one setback: the U.S. government...
"No exceptions granted due to small production volume." Subaru sells several times more vehicles worldwide than Land Rover does, but they still acknowledge they'll lose money on the S209. At the time, it was much easier to continue with the Discovery/LR series and Range Rover in the US because it was selling in higher numbers and was easier to homologate. Even in its later years the last-generation Defender wasn't selling in sufficient numbers worldwide to justify spending the millions of dollars necessary to homologate for the US market.
Also note that emissions certification can take years as it also involves certifying the durability of emissions components. They began the program to update the Defender in the late 2K's. You don't just crap out new or updated vehicles and start shipping them to dealers, at least not in the US.
wow this makes me want to buy a S209.
FYI - Discovery 5 volumes have doubled after the intro of the new Luxo Defender. The Discovery 5 sold 1,081 units in November 2019, up from 451 in October 2019. Not surprised. That was an outcome I thought might happen. The powertrains on the Luxo Defender are problematic. The D5 has the Td6 diesel or V6SC. The new Defender? Argh .........
soflorovers
Well-known member
Right? Have to appreciate their commitment. Also, it speaks volumes as to how good of a car it must be if they felt the need to jump through so many hurdles. Is it really worth 2x the price of a regular STI though? I used to have a 2013 WRX wagon and loved it, but I think the S209 is one Subaru that i'll probably bypass ?
The real comparison point should be the DI which with the same frame, suspension, powertrain as the Defender would cruise at a steady 80mph. The 35 year old Defender with ZERO investment was more comfortable at 65mph. Invest in the Defender? Well it would equal the DI/DII.
I am wondering how much drama the new Defender is causing on the actual Defender forum, given how much it does here. Much be off the charts.
soflorovers
Well-known member
Unsurprisingly, many of the individuals that hate on it here are also members of Defendersource. I'd say its a similar conversation, but with less activity. Their only 2020 Defender discussion thread is only 36 pages though...not sure what that says about us on these threads lol
soflorovers
Well-known member
Well, then I'd argue that the new Defender can go plenty of places that an older D1 couldn't in stock guise. Compare stock for stock, a D1 with its standard/mild AT tires (Not even the BFG AT's that came on NAS D90's), lack of TC and sole center locker would get absolutely dominated by a new Defender with its superior traction aids, dual lockers and more aggressive tires.
On a separate note, I feel as if this thread is what happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object. People can feel free to dislike the new Defender. At the same time, plenty of us will consider it and will end up purchasing it.
That is true of many of today's new vehicles relative to technology of the late 80's/early 90's. Product investment achieves higher levels of capability, across the automotive sector. We will see how the new Defender does but moving upmarket is only one strategy in defending a product space. You can only move so far upmarket before volume is too low to support further investment. JLR risk that outcome as does the entire auto industry.
There are advantages and disadvantages to higher levels of technology. The advantage is cost and feature set. The disadvantage is that the features are quickly commoditized such that there is little to differentiate you from your competition. In the end core values are key and once lost, are gone forever. We are somewhat seeing this with LR's design language that looks like every other SUV on the road today.
soflorovers
Well-known member
This is a fair take and I respect it.
soflorovers
Well-known member
I'm just going to leave this here for everyone that insists modern LR products are trash. Read the post and then report back.