New Defender Rage/Hate Thread

[DieselRanger]

Engineering teams have already been collapsed into one team. Design and technology leveraged across a smaller JLR.

Again, engineering and design are different things, like construction and architecture. The same construction company builds many different houses or buildings architected by different people. Same same. Jaguar has a different design boss than Land Rover, and personally I do hope they begin taking some chances in design for that marque.

 

[mpinco]

Again, engineering and design are different things, like construction and architecture. The same construction company builds many different houses or buildings architected by different people. Same same. Jaguar has a different design boss than Land Rover, and personally I do hope they begin taking some chances in design for that marque.

The reality is that Jaguar and Land Rover engineering and design have been collapsed into a single entity. The single team serves different product lines but the goal is to reduce cost and leverage work across both product lines. JLR already wrote down $4B before the latest economic discontinuity.

As for Jaguar, agreed, they need to become more aggressive as the current product line is not differentiated enough. There has even been discussions that Jaguar moves to SUV's. Well, what does LR offer? SUV's! As for the 'design language' this thread already highlighted the Land Rover 'russian doll' issue, that LR product line is different sizes of the same 'language'. JLR followed BMW down that road. The next decade should be an interesting time for all companies as the challenges increase even as volume declines.

Edit add: As for McGovern's 'design language' maybe its just me but it seems like the end point of his vision has become highly refined but bland products. The latest RR is a good example. I see them as highly 'refined' but lacking appeal. Maybe the McGovern way designs out character. Or maybe its just me.

 

[nickw]

Quote me where I advised you expo-farkle your jalopy. Good luck.

You mentioned 'real' expedition vehicles and threw out this pic:



4 out of the 8 rigs are $$$ vehicles that @calicamper says are not proper 'expedition' rigs due to their price. Not to mention your love of LC70's, the lust for a modernized version of the old Defender and the Ineos, all of which would be (relatively to @calicamper point) massively expensive....yet you seem to be propping each other for bringing up contradicting points....well done

 

[EricTyrrell]

You mentioned 'real' expedition vehicles and threw out this pic:

View attachment 586970

4 out of the 8 rigs are $$$ vehicles that @calicamper says are not proper 'expedition' rigs due to their price. Not to mention your love of LC70's, the lust for a modernized version of the old Defender and the Ineos, all of which would be (relatively to @calicamper point) massively expensive....yet you seem to be propping each other for bringing up contradicting points....well done

Not even close. That was a refute to the ridiculous claim that one must drive a luxury brand to prevent driver fatigue while overlanding. Countless individuals have been traveling the world for decades without such BS, hence the images.

 

[Dendy Jarrett]

Thread being monitored for behavior - Please be gentlemen.

Thanks
DJ

 

[nickw]

Not even close. That was a refute to the ridiculous claim that one must drive a luxury brand to prevent driver fatigue while overlanding. Countless individuals have been traveling the world for decades without such BS, hence the images.

You propped him for saying:

"How do you spot a rookie overlander? Look for the vehicle worth 10x the local yearly income bonus points for lots of junk bolted and strapped on for the locals to strip as your hiking the tourist trail"

Any of the vehicles you seem to think are worthy of global travel easily fall into that category (LC70, Gwagen, Ineos and any sort of retro throw back Defender), that pic of the Earthcruiser is WAY up there and damn near falls into that category here domestically....that's all I'm saying, seems like you guys are saying very different things....like, opposite things

 

[Corgi_express]

Not even close. That was a refute to the ridiculous claim that one must drive a luxury brand to prevent driver fatigue while overlanding. Countless individuals have been traveling the world for decades without such BS, hence the images.

What an absurd strawman. That was not the claim at all. You were arguing that comfort does not matter, and I and others were refuting the absurd notion that there is no value to comfort or ride quality (which have NOTHING AT ALL TO DO WITH LUXURY) when overlanding.

Is luxury REQUIRED? No. Is ride comfort REQUIRED? No. Does a better ride improve safety and reduce the likelihood of damaging your gear? Of course it does.

Stop making up nonsense.

 

[EricTyrrell]

What an absurd strawman. That was not the claim at all. You were arguing that comfort does not matter, and I and others were refuting the absurd notion that there is no value to comfort or ride quality (which have NOTHING AT ALL TO DO WITH LUXURY) when overlanding.

Is luxury REQUIRED? No. Is ride comfort REQUIRED? No. Does a better ride improve safety and reduce the likelihood of damaging your gear? Of course it does.

Stop making up nonsense.

Your complaints about Jeep road handling made the impression that you overplay the importance of it in the context of overland travel. I never claimed there is "no value to comfort or ride quality", but that we should be more realistic in our expectations. Jeeps and other coil/leaf vehicles have traveled the world for decades without much fuss. Take it further and consider ferrofluid dampers, what LR brands "Adaptive Dynamics", or Dynamic Response which is a function of the sway bars, and you get an even better ride, but at what cost? I have a hard time buying into this added complexity to achieve that last mile of comfort when there is a very real cost to it in several ways.

 

[EricTyrrell]

You propped him for saying:

"How do you spot a rookie overlander? Look for the vehicle worth 10x the local yearly income bonus points for lots of junk bolted and strapped on for the locals to strip as your hiking the tourist trail"

Any of the vehicles you seem to think are worthy of global travel easily fall into that category (LC70, Gwagen, Ineos and any sort of retro throw back Defender), that pic of the Earthcruiser is WAY up there and damn near falls into that category here domestically....that's all I'm saying, seems like you guys are saying very different things....like, opposite things

Did not claim they were "worthy", only proven. Never claimed any bolted on bits seen were necessary, and several had none. You can do that to any platform.

 

[EricTyrrell]

Many of the criticisms myself and others brought up covered here by TFL and Scott Brady. For example, and as I expected, it turns out that on the Namibia safari, apparently vehicles with 19" wheels experienced several punctures while those with 18" did not.

 

[JeepColorado]

I think @EricTyrrell is exactly right here- it's At what Cost? ...for what? that inth' degree of comfort?

Stepping back to look at the entire Defender platform that's the problem- it's clear that their priorities are not with anyone who wants to Overland. We honestly shouldn't be surprised- it hasn't been their priority for years, but there was hope that this time would be different given the Defender Namesake.

LR goes for that final degree of comfort at the sake of performance and perhaps most importantly to an overlander at the cost of injecting complexity. The First tenant of overlanding expoused by this very forum's organization is to reduce complexity. Whether it's in a minimalist approach to packing and particularly when selecting and building your vehicle- REDUCE COMPLEXITY. Who on here can possibly argue that Land Rover prioritized this at all in building the Defender? I would love to hear @DieselRanger explain with his engineering knowledge how a multi-chambered dual-stage electronically controlled air bag reduces complexity for remote adventure travel.

LR goes for style over substance when they put fake stickers on the hood to represent what used to be functional plating.

Judging by the number of people on here and in pictures that have added a front bumper to their build for protection against an animal strike, adding lighting, and carrying a winch it is not unreasonable to conclude that adding a front bumper is one of the singularly most important and certainly popular modifications you could make to an overland build. Yet, what does LR do? ....they design a front-end that makes it remarkably complicated to build a front bumper for. Once again choosing style over substance.

Luxury features don't mean that the performance or the priority for ruggedness need to change- my 2020 JL Rubi has heated leather seats, power windows and locks, Satellite Radio, all manner of safety controls and back-up cameras, etc... this past weekend I was doing 80 MPH on my way to Moab from Denver quite comfortably. Yet there is no doubt that down to it's core it's designed for adventure travel whether to the local trail or circumnavigating Africa. It's purpose is clear and uncompromised- enough luxury features are added afterwards to make it nice to drive and be in. Throw on a pair of good shocks and it gets downright comfortable- no performance degradation or unnecessary complexity needed.

That's what the Defender should have been- the Los Angeles Lifestyle Instagram crowd has every Range Rover product to chose from already...we don't need anymore of those.

 

[soflorovers]

This thread gave me cancer. Honestly, I would say shut it down, but then we'd have no place to re-direct the trolls. It's become apparent that after 118 pages of bickering, neither side is going to concede. Frankly, I don't see this level of hostility on any other brand's thread, and it's just tiring.

We get it: Some people like it, and some people hate it. If you like it, then awesome; the future of JLR is bright for you. If you don't like it, then I'm sorry to tell you that this "new" direction has been around since 2003 with the debut of the L322 - you're about 20 years late to this party. Nothing you say is going to change the current direction of Land Rover. No vehicle is perfect, and many of us have plenty of criticisms about the "new" direction of Land Rover, but we've all learned to adapt, much like JLR has as a brand. Fighting with your fellow mates on here about a vehicle that hasn't been released is downright silly. The reality is that many of us vote with our wallets, and JLR has done a great job at appealing to the majority of people on this thread/forum/planet. If you're a part of the minority that hates this "new" direction, then maybe it's time you find another brand. I hate to sound like the guy yelling "If you don't love 'Murica then leave", but that's pretty much where I'm at with some of you. There are plenty of people that spend their hard-earned money on these cars and downright love them. To bash a vehicle/brand because it's not the same dinosaur it once was does nothing to further the conversation. I love this brand, and I know plenty of people with excellent credentials that still stand by the brand after having been with it since the 80's.

Based on this thread, I have no choice but to imagine that some of you still use candles to light your home instead of electricity: "CANDLES ARE OLDER AND CHEAPER THAN ELECTRICITY. CANDLES ARE MORE ROBUST THAN BULBS BECAUSE I CAN THROW A CANDLE AND IT DOESN'T BREAK. HUMANITY STARTED WITH CANDLES AND NO LONGER ADHERES TO THE HERITAGE OF CANDLES. I'VE NEVER LOST POWER BECAUSE I HAVE CANDLES; TAKE THAT YOU FAN OF ELECTRICITY! I CAN REPAIR MY CANDLE IN THE FIELD WITH MORE WAX AND YOU CAN'T REPAIR YOUR BULB. LIGHT BULBS SUCK BECAUSE THEY'LL EVENTUALLY BLOW OUT AT RANDOM, etc..."

 

[Carson G]

To those of you who just absolutely hate air suspension you will be able to get springs for a 110 if you absolutely have to have them I’m almost positive the 110 commercial will have them as a option. I don’t see why you couldn’t buy the springs and related components then re-flash the vehicles CCF and be on your way. Honestly I don’t think it would be that hard to do a SAS swap if you really wanted to either. Or just go buy a Jeep or a LC whatever suits you the best.

 

[EricTyrrell]

I have no choice but to imagine that some of you still use candles to light your home instead of electricity: "CANDLES ARE OLDER AND CHEAPER THAN ELECTRICITY. CANDLES ARE MORE ROBUST THAN BULBS BECAUSE I CAN THROW A CANDLE AND IT DOESN'T BREAK. HUMANITY STARTED WITH CANDLES AND NO LONGER ADHERES TO THE HERITAGE OF CANDLES. I'VE NEVER LOST POWER BECAUSE I HAVE CANDLES; TAKE THAT YOU FAN OF ELECTRICITY! I CAN REPAIR MY CANDLE IN THE FIELD WITH MORE WAX AND YOU CAN'T REPAIR YOUR BULB. LIGHT BULBS SUCK BECAUSE THEY'LL EVENTUALLY BLOW OUT AT RANDOM, etc..."

You mean luxury candles? The light sources that claim to last 20 years but the drivers burn out in 1?

 

[DieselRanger]

I would love to hear @DieselRanger explain with his engineering knowledge how a multi-chambered dual-stage electronically controlled air bag reduces complexity for remote adventure travel.

Never said it did - what I contend is that they're reliable enough now for complexity not to matter. Complexity is okay when you engineer and test sufficiently to ensure reliability and durability. Land Rover tests wading depth at 133% of rated values, for example - they drove the Discovery into a pond with 933mm of water in it, opened the doors and let the water in, let it sit for 2 hours, then swam back in, started the vehicle, and drove it out.

The old days of "build it, drive it till it breaks, and then that's how long it lasts" are long gone.



The Defender already has over one million km of real-world testing on it, plus countless equivalent hours of digital engineering behind it, which involve highly sophisticated physics-based computer models. Works for bridges, fighter jets, rockets ... and automobiles.