Land Rover is dead... Long live land rover!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackrangie

The old defender is dead, Long live the new one, would be a more fitting title.

---

Do you think a new 'Defender' will have a long life ?

The high tech features are ideal for people who are not interested in the 'driving experience' but long term how the vehicle be supported ?

How easy is it to repair an aluminium monocoque after an accident ? I don't know the answer but guess it might be harder that straightening out something with a chassis & bolted on panels. (I do understand why they had to move away from this method of construction though).
How many ECU's was it to cause potential problems in the future.....?

For many years cars have been a consumable, early on they were a durable (like Series I to III, Counties and Defenders). The new 'Defender', like most other modern vehicles, will be a consumable.

Yes it's comfortable has all these wizz bang features to take away the driving experience and very much suits the direction Tata/Land Rover are taking the brand.
How it competes with the brands that already have a strong hold in the 4WD market will be interesting to see. I'm sure there will be an initial surge of sales (when they finally become available) but the longer term sales growth will tell if they got it right.......



Colin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by goingbush

There needs to be a dislike button.

the new vehicle (which I refuse to call a Defender) is the definition of consumerism out of control. Sometimes I get sucked into looking at a thread with Defender in the title and end up with a sick feeling, Every time I see a picture of one I feel a little bile coming on, hope I never get to see one in the flesh . Doubt I will as I do live a good distance from a city or a JLR service centre and I'm not close to any urban hero destinations.

---

Some could say the same about your series vehicle "sick feeling" but they don't because they know its right for your needs.
Beauty is on the eye of the beholder.

I agree on consumerism, but any vehicle beyond the horse and carriage is imo too far, yours included.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gromit

Do you think a new 'Defender' will have a long life ?

The high tech features are ideal for people who are not interested in the 'driving experience' but long term how the vehicle be supported ?

How easy is it to repair an aluminium monocoque after an accident ? I don't know the answer but guess it might be harder that straightening out something with a chassis & bolted on panels. (I do understand why they had to move away from this method of construction though).
How many ECU's was it to cause potential problems in the future.....?

For many years cars have been a consumable, early on they were a durable (like Series I to III, Counties and Defenders). The new 'Defender', like most other modern vehicles, will be a consumable.

Yes it's comfortable has all these wizz bang features to take away the driving experience and very much suits the direction Tata/Land Rover are taking the brand.
How it competes with the brands that already have a strong hold in the 4WD market will be interesting to see. I'm sure there will be an initial surge of sales (when they finally become available) but the longer term sales growth will tell if they got it right.......



Colin

---

Good questions, i think of the ecu like windows 10, will keep getting better and better. And i believe it has ability for modules to be changed as tech changes.

If your scared of tech, dont fly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackrangie

Some could say the same about your series vehicle "sick feeling" but they don't because they know its right for your needs.
Beauty is on the eye of the beholder.

I agree on consumerism, but any vehicle beyond the horse and carriage is imo too far, yours included.

---

For once we are in complete agreeance !!

BTW, The Lightweight is arguably the ugliest Series LandRover ever made, but it was made for purpose, not looks. I can understand it might make some people sick to look at it. ( but far from the Ugliest LandRover , D5 takes that prize and I think it was likely made for looks over purpose) .

I wrote in my original post that Land Rover no longer make a vehicle appropriate to my needs and so I would not be buying another. I’m not passing judgement on the merits of the new vehicle.

This is a shame because I have brand history and I’m probably the type of customer that they would wish to retain. I bought my last vehicle in cash and will buy my next the same way, but this time my money will go to a different brand.

Land Rover probably feel they can afford to lose my custom, if they can attract ten other customers new to the brand with a trendy urban-focused SUV runabout. But I would question whether the pricing of their new model is appropriate to the new generation of customers they are chasing.

If statistics are to be believed, fewer urban 20-40 year olds are homeowners than 20 or 30 years ago and many do not enjoy the same level of employment security in the new economy. Which right minded millennial will spend 70k on a new vehicle which immediately depreciates when they are still struggling to get on the property ladder? Furthermore, the whole concept of the gas guzzling SUV is out of vogue among the more environmentally conscious -unless there is genuine need for it. Yes, Land Rover do a hybrid, but you get better bang for your green buck with smaller more efficient electric vehicles.

I would love to keep buying Land Rovers. But for me there was only ever one ‘Land Rover’, and now that is discontinued. Looking forward for a glimpse of the Ineos Grenadier.

Alan

Yes, I agree. The new Defender looks great, but it's not in the same market as our 110.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DiscoMick

Yes, I agree. The new Defender looks great, but it's not in the same market as our 110.

---

That market unfortunately only had 5k public buyers and 15k fleet per year, profitable but not enough volume and not future proof.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackrangie

Good questions, i think of the ecu like windows 10, will keep getting better and better. And i believe it has ability for modules to be changed as tech changes.

If your scared of tech, dont fly.

---

Interesting analogies.....

Aircraft
I'm not scared of tech for the right application.

Aircraft and their spare parts are highly regulated so very different to cars, despite your regular comments about how the the extensive testing will make the 'Defender' more reliable I'm not sure it will be comparable to aircraft.

Have you seen Air Crash Investigation programmes on TV ?

Daily driver, 6 years old and all the analogue instruments stop working. Dealer had no idea so it was going to cost lots of $$'s to investigate.
Removed the instrument cluster and noticed a large IC on the back, CanBus and the cluster has to be paired to the vehicle so replacement expensive and may not fix the problem.
Digital display can give digital speed reading and distance to empty so drove it without analogue instruments. 3 weeks later it came good !

Windows
You might not be old enough to remember the reply from GM when Bill Gates made a comment about the speed of development of the computer vs. cars (I'll include it at the end of this post).

I understand that the software in the vehicle will need to be regularly updated but will they make it go slower as it gets older, then you have to upgrade the vehicle to 'Defender' 2.0 ?
Will it suddenly stop for no reason and you have to turn it off & on again ?
They won't give software updates to independent service centres so you are locked into LR and their huge service costs (I sort of understand this).
At the moment the dealer has to connect the car via PC to LR head office as any upgrade is done, not sure why this is but I guess it keeps tabs on the dealer ???

Joking aside, I understand why there is so much electronics but it makes it much less likely to be a vehicle with a long life, I guess you'd argue that we'll have to go electric before the new 'Defender' reaches the age of my Defender so it's not relevant.


They are seen now as a prestige brand so the purchase price and service costs reflect this and it needs all the wizz bang features to appeal to the modern 'driver'.

Capable - yes.
Meets the demands of the current (cashed up) market - probably.
Long term investment - no.

Many buyers nowadays move a vehicle on in a few years so it'll be interesting to see the secondhand price in say 3-4 years time (out of interest, because I wouldn't consider buying one)

Interesting that it was launched well before they have vehicles to sell, I guess they are hoping the hype will generate interest and therefore sales. Also interesting they are controlling the media (you can 'test' it but you can't have the keys).



Here's the reply from GM from many years ago.

For all of us who feel only the deepest love and affection for the way computers have enhanced our lives, read on. At a recent computer expo (COMDEX), Bill Gates reportedly compared the computer industry with the auto industry and stated, "If GM had kept up with technology like the computer industry has, we would all be driving $25.00 cars that got 1,000 miles to the gallon." In response to Bill's comments, General Motors issued a press release stating: If GM had developed technology like Microsoft, we would all be driving cars with the following characteristics:
1. For no reason whatsoever, your car would crash twice a day.
2. Every time they repainted the lines in the road, you would have to buy a new car.
3. Occasionally your car would die on the freeway for no reason. You would have to pull to the side of the road, close all of the windows, shut off the car, restart it, and reopen the windows before you could continue.
For some reason you would simply accept this.

4. Occasionally, executing a maneuver such as a left turn would cause your car to shut down and refuse to restart, in which case you would have to reinstall the engine.

5. Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun, was reliable, five times as fast and twice as easy to drive - but would run on only five percent of the roads.
6. The oil, water temperature, and alternator warning lights would all be replaced by a single "This Car Has Performed An Illegal Operation" warning light.
7. The airbag system would ask "Are you sure?" before deploying.
8. Occasionally, for no reason whatsoever, your car would lock you out and refuse to let you in until you simultaneously lifted the door handle, turned the key and grabbed hold of the radio antenna.
9. Every time a new car was introduced car buyers would have to learn how to drive all over again because none of the controls would operate in the same manner as the old car.

10. You'd have to press the "Start" button to turn the engine off."


Finally, no I don't believe the World is flat (before you ask).


Colin

Given a few years of sales there should be a good amount of cheap second hand parts for this new model. ECUs included.

Aluminium monocoque, independent suspension and airbags will practically guarantee a statutory write off after any half decent impact.

It doesn't take much to pop an airbag - strike one.

It doesn't take much to impact on the structure of the car when it's aluminium monocoque and designed to crumple - strike 2

It doesn't take much to bend steering linkages when your wheels are right out there to take a hit - strike 3.

You're out! Statutory Write Off.


If LR sell a good amount of these hippos, and a good chunk of owners think they can drive like James bond, the salvage auctions will soon have them in good supply!

And if this new rover is as reliable as we all hope there will be a good supply of salvage parts coupled with very little demand. Cheap cheap.

Quote:

---

5. Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun, was reliable, five times as fast and twice as easy to drive - but would run on only five percent of the roads.

---

I like this one. [emoji28]