Defender Dilemma

[RR5L]

Dont know how many read go auto news but saw this thought it might interest a few in here.


Land Rover promises to replace Defender but is still to decide its form.


Read more.
Land Rover 2010 Defender - Defender dilemma drags on | GoAuto (http://www.goauto.com.au/mellor/mellor.nsf/story2/79696AE643C3E79DCA25764A00051AFF)

[vnx205]

That makes very interesting reading and seems to me to make a lot of sense.

They really are caught between a rock and a hard place. Attempting to expand their market would involve major investment which would mean they would have to have an even bigger market to recoup the cost.

It certainly is a dilemma.

[PAT303]

What a load of crap.There is a HUGE market for defender,people like me who don't want all the bells and whistles just an honest vehicle,many workplaces want the same thing and if companys spend 14 grand converting wagons into duel cab utes the market is there.LR need to make the vehicle people want,2.7 TDV6 with either a manual or auto,auto would sell very well,keep the same chassis just wider body with more rear leg room,that is the biggest gripe with all duel cabs,airbags,stronger diffs and start to sell them through say ford dealerships so they can be bought and serviced everywhere.Toyota are laughing at LR,LR has better vehicles but tojo outsell them a 1000 to 1. Pat

[vnx205]

What a load of crap.There is a HUGE market for defender,people like me who don't want all the bells and whistles just an honest vehicle... ... ... ... Pat

Isn't part of the problem that some countries or states won't let companies sell a vehicle that doesn't have bells and whistles like ABS, TC, particulate filters and so on?

It is not the customers, like you and me that are the problem. It is the gov't regulations that are the main problem.

BTW, I would prefer the TDi 300 engine or something similar to the TDV6 for various reasons and would buy the manual ahead of an auto. :)

[haggisbasher]

Interesting to read that the Vic govenrment have mandated ESC by 2011.

Sneaked that one in i say.

[PAT303]

Isn't part of the problem that some countries or states won't let companies sell a vehicle that doesn't have bells and whistles like ABS, TC, particulate filters and so on?

It is not the customers, like you and me that are the problem. It is the gov't regulations that are the main problem.

BTW, I would prefer the TDi 300 engine or something similar to the TDV6 for various reasons and would buy the manual ahead of an auto. :)

It's what the market wants that decides if a vehicle sells.The Tdi is a better engine in alot of ways than the 1HZ or 2H but people buy the tojo's because the engine is bigger and people in Oz like big engines.Companys buy manuals because they have too not because they want too. Pat

[JDNSW]

The biggest single problem with the existing Defender increasing its sales in Australia is lack of dealers and lousy support. Without this it does not exist on the radar of most potential buyers. Lack of front airbags means it cannot be bought by many industrial and mining concerns. Lack of an automatic transmission is not a major detriment, although it is one, certainly for commercial users, where the automatic minimises driver damage.

In my view, the engine size is a relatively minor concern, that affects mainly the recreational market - and I suspect Landrover's secret view would be that most of these customers should buy the Discovery if that is important.

Interior space is a definite problem, but so it is with many of the direct competitors in the commercial market - tried the baack of a dual cab Hilux lately? And while, as I have stated before, Landrover should have widened the body instead of fitting wheel spats in 1983, the simple fact is that widening or making other dimensional alterations to the body, requires tooling changes that are very large considering the volumes sold. And make a completely new design based on the D3 platform look very attractive in comparison.

There is no doubt this could make a very attractive vehicle for these potential customers, but without dealers it will not be successful here, and it is also doubtful whether it could be considered a "real" Defender (whatever that is - remembering that the name Defender was only introduced in 1989 to replace Landrover when this was changed from a type of vehicle to a company name, to use some of the gloss off the historic Series Landrover to market the Discovery.

John

[PAT303]

Couldn't agree more. Pat

[camel_landy]

Let's face it, whatever LR do, someone's going to have a whinge!

JD - I tend to agree with what you said there.

Frankly, I wouldn't make the body any wider as one of the nice things about the Defender is how it can squeeze through tight gaps.

Something else you might want to factor into your thoughts is just how expensive it is for Land Rover to make the Defender! Building the Defender is very labour intensive as it's pretty much hand built and as such Land Rover don't actually make much money out of it...

M

[JDNSW]

Let's face it, whatever LR do, someone's going to have a whinge!

JD - I tend to agree with what you said there.

Frankly, I wouldn't make the body any wider as one of the nice things about the Defender is how it can squeeze through tight gaps.

Something else you might want to factor into your thoughts is just how expensive it is for Land Rover to make the Defender! Building the Defender is very labour intensive as it's pretty much hand built and as such Land Rover don't actually make much money out of it...

M

The body could be widened to the width of the wheel spats without any effect on what you can fit through - and this would make a big difference to the space.

Making the Defender is labour intensive, yes. But against this has to be weighed the fact that it uses relatively little tooling, and that much of the tooling used has been in use for fifty years, meaning its cost has long since been written off. However, if you look at the structure of the Defender and its predecessors, you will note a gradual reduction in the amount of labour to build them - for example, the change from chassis rails made of flat profile cut plate with four welds to pressed sections with two weld (Series 3 for lwb, 90 for swb) or the change from fabricated door frames to pressed door frames (1987) or the change to steel door skins (2007), gradually changing traditional construction methods. The same happened to the RR classic in the late seventies - eighties as production volumes increased.

John

[spudboy]

Building the Defender is very labour intensive as it's pretty much hand built and as such Land Rover don't actually make much money out of it...

M

But just think - they can sell you spare parts for the next 40 years and make their money that way :D

Guaranteed income stream!

[camel_landy]

Making the Defender is labour intensive, yes. But against this has to be weighed the fact that it uses relatively little tooling, and that much of the tooling used has been in use for fifty years, meaning its cost has long since been written off. However, if you look at the structure of the Defender and its predecessors, you will note a gradual reduction in the amount of labour to build them - for example, the change from chassis rails made of flat profile cut plate with four welds to pressed sections with two weld (Series 3 for lwb, 90 for swb) or the change from fabricated door frames to pressed door frames (1987) or the change to steel door skins (2007), gradually changing traditional construction methods. The same happened to the RR classic in the late seventies - eighties as production volumes increased.

No...

I wasn't posting a discussion point, I was making a factual statement.

M