
Originally Posted by
roverrescue
My understanding was it was a Euro/UK tax concession on low capacity engines for commercial vehicles?
But yeah if it fits jam it in!
I’m not sure if the irony is lost on anyone (I doubt it)
But ALL the fanbois (on this thread) of this jigger are Rangiephiles and Discophiles
Which honestly is fine by me but hilarious none the less.
calling this thing a defender which is in no way agricultural or commercial or IMHO real is a farce! I guess though some would say a D5 is a commercial vehicle because some euro police force bought a few?
Now don’t get me wrong, heck one day I might even buy one - but less than 0% of me will think it was a defender. This whole shizzle is about nomenclature.
S
I reckon you've hit the nail on the head here. From what I've seen I'd agree that generally those coming from the 'luxury' end of the range are more excited and interested and less outraged than those coming from the 'basic/utilitarian' end of the range. Perspective
Me? I'm ignoring the name itself and looking at what the new vehicle is and basing my thoughts on that. Mainly because I am in two minds about the name. Part of me thinks they should have retired it and started again with a new name (expensive and a long path) and part of me recognises that this vehicle takes that place in the range and it's OK to keep the name (cashing in on the heritage). Final decision may happen when the full specs and looks come out.
DiscoClax
'94 D1 3dr Aegean Blue - 300ci stroker RV8, 4HP24 & Compushift, usual bar-work, various APT gear, 235/85 M/Ts, 3deg arms, Detroit lockers, $$$$, etc.
'08 RRS TDV8 Rimini Red - 285/60R18 Falken AT3Ws, Rock slider-steps, APT full under-protection, Mitch Hitch, Tradesman rack, Traxide DBS, Gap IID
Bookmarks