2020 Defender

[fishEH]

The only thing that made me laugh harder than the repeated emphasis on branded mud flaps was the silly little suitcase on the outside of vehicle and that chick taking out 4 plates and some kind of fruffery

I liked when the chick unzipped the awning when the back was wide open.
There goes Kenny's idea of the side box being for quick access items. "Quick, get the plates and cups!!!!!!!!!!"
Their marketing is so awful. I've seen better, more inspiring commercials from Hyundai.

 

[rover4x4]

I really like the guy whittling away on his hotdog stick. Land Rover has hit rock bottom..

 

[ERover82]

They have laughable cargo capacity, they rattle like mad, you can't keep the water out, you can't keep the BUGS out, they're not overly comfortable, and they're too narrow as a result of their origin. They do handle quite well, but not as well as a Discovery; certainly not as well as a DII.

A stripped D1 rattles like mad, lets water in, and invites plenty of bugs, or at least mine did. Of course there's different levels and strategies of "stripped". The only polymer parts left in mine were the seats and dash cover. The rest was custom aluminum panels. Actually a Defender, even an early hard top, would have been considered luxurious in comparison.

Defenders have many limitations, but lacking cargo capacity, not sure about that one. Maybe in the HCPU, but the wagons are as good as it gets for the vehicle size.

I hope the Nufender if successful, that they've sorted the issues from the LR4 platform, and that it proves capable in the rear world. I'll probably buy one some day, depending what else is one the market. Looks like Ford may be moving the F150 to coil rear. The Bronco is still on the horizon. We'll see.

 

[pinkytoe69]

Remote control...

https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/land-rover-defender-remote-control-off-road-suv/

 

[DiscoHasBeen]

Remote control...

https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/land-rover-defender-remote-control-off-road-suv/

Why not. How long do you think it will take before you come across some idiot on the trail operating his rig from the roof rack? But hey, at least then you'd have something to put in that box.

 

[SCSL]

Defender designers tells us their biggest challenge crafting the new icon | Digital Trends

Few vehicles are as iconic and celebrated around the world as the Land Rover Defender. We spoke with the designers that had the difficult task of propelling the Defender nameplate, creating a modern vehicle while keeping it true to its roots as an exceptionally capable vehicle.

www.digitaltrends.com

That respect for the past, but also something that enthusiasts, and we’re all enthusiasts at Land Rover design—we’re all here because we love Land Rover—was a worthy successor.

From the “enthusiasts” that rebadged a Ford Explorer.

 

[kennith]

A stripped D1 rattles like mad, lets water in, and invites plenty of bugs, or at least mine did. Of course there's different levels and strategies of "stripped". The only polymer parts left in mine were the seats and dash cover. The rest was custom aluminum panels. Actually a Defender, even an early hard top, would have been considered luxurious in comparison.

Defenders have many limitations, but lacking cargo capacity, not sure about that one. Maybe in the HCPU, but the wagons are as good as it gets for the vehicle size.

I hope the Nufender if successful, that they've sorted the issues from the LR4 platform, and that it proves capable in the rear world. I'll probably buy one some day, depending what else is one the market. Looks like Ford may be moving the F150 to coil rear. The Bronco is still on the horizon. We'll see.

Aside from the occasional audio installation, my DII has spent the majority of it's life trimmed with nothing but two seats, most of a center console, and the dash minus the passenger airbag. That spot makes a good storage area. Now, there was a cage back there with stuff mounted in it for a while, but that's all; and with the factory seat and belt mounts freed up, the interior was endlessly flexible.

You've got to cover those door cavities, though. Right now mine are open, and yes... Stuff gets in. Cover them up and it's fine. I've got some tiny roof/Alpine leaks I haven't tracked down and a slightly twisted body, but I know why that's happened, and it's not the car's fault. That was all me.

It's never given me a problem. I've driven D1s like that in various places, and RRCs, and they weren't quite as good, but not as bad as a Defender with a hundred thousand miles of rough stuff on it.

The one thing I can't figure out is how the hell that cargo door stays on there so well. You'd think I'd have bent or pulled out the hinges with my antics, but it's solid; if seemingly impossible to line back up after removal. Five attempts and it's not right yet. Don't ever take that door off. Just don't do it. It was a split-second decision on a movie shoot that's bugged me for years.

Now I've got the rear carpet back in and a plywood tray on top of it with the factory bins. I intend to make that out of something else, but I wanted to live with the basic arrangement for a while to determine what I want when I use more expensive materials. It's a good thing, too... I mounted the refrigerator plate on the wrong side of the cargo area. Didn't realize it until I put it in there and tried to plug it in.

Cheers,

Kennith

 

[K-rover]

I can agree with most of his talking points

o

 

[kennith]

I can agree with most of his talking points

o

That's essentially what I've been saying the whole time.

I'm still cool with the 18" wheels, though. It used to be you couldn't get 16" tires in many places, because nobody used wheels that "big" in the middle of nowhere. Now it's difficult to get exactly what you want in 16" domestically because it's too small... That does matter; it's going to annoy you much more often when you live in the US, because you typically don't ship a car when bouncing around the world; you get one locally. That means you're living with this Defender here, in The States, because that's where it lives.

I'll take the 18s on a vehicle that can get the best out of them. The only place that rig is going where it matters is South America, and tires won't be hard to find there. Mongolia? Sure; but it's not going there if it lives here. That's too much expense just to get a job done.

Of course, today, as he said, 16" is more common elsewhere. It's no different than 22" wheels. You see them on cars that have survived long enough to putter enthusiasts around. Wait a while, and 18" wheels will pepper the world as newer rigs begin to replace older models again. It's a cycle. Bigger wheels and brakes have great benefits.

Land Rover built an overland rig. That's what it is. It appears to be a comfortable overland rig, but that's valuable, as well. It's not just the vehicle getting the shit kicked out of it, after all. The more fatigued you are, the less work you're going to get done, and the more problems you'll have later in life.

I can't really fault any manufacturer intending to sell a car in the US for difficult service, though. I can see the Apple comparison, but that's pretty much every new vehicle allowed in the United States. Not even diesel is safe from our complication. Even Cummins had to give in eventually.

It's not hard to define a Defender, and it's not hard to define this vehicle, either. Strip away the fancy screens that everything has these days, and you've got a modern overland rig. This is not a simple replacement. Look around. Even the G has changed dramatically. This is not D1 to DII.

This is Series II to DII, and Land Rover isn't the only one on that boat; they're just piloting it. Off pavement vehicles are changing, and we've been seeing the last throws of passion out of other manufacturers as they follow suit.

The Defender just kind of "fit" when adapted to circumstance. This is a more tailored, purpose-built endeavor, as strange as that sounds. Jeep doesn't really count, because they pretty much get away with murder. It's not a fair contest by any stretch of the imagination. Let Toyota encourage people to remove their doors and see how that works out for them after the first broken arm...

The game is rigged here, and it has been for a long time.

Cheers,

Kennith

 

[DiscoHasBeen]

The Defender just kind of "fit" when adapted to circumstance. This is a more tailored, purpose-built endeavor, as strange as that sounds. Jeep doesn't really count, because they pretty much get away with murder. It's not a fair contest by any stretch of the imagination. Let Toyota encourage people to remove their doors and see how that works out for them after the first broken arm...

The game is rigged here, and it has been for a long time.

Cheers,

Kennith

Please explain, Jeep gets away with murder how? Aren't they owned by Fiat? So it's not like they have home field advantage. Seems to me they just build a vehicle people want, as opposed to one the manufacturer thinks they want.

 

[DiscoHasBeen]

It really goes to how far they've inserted the ECU/PCM into the normal functions of the Defender. This guy seems to think quite extensively. As someone said, seems they've made a rolling computer. Given Land Rover's history of reliability, or lack thereof, that could be problematic.

 

[SCSL]

Seems to me they just build a vehicle people want, as opposed to one the manufacturer thinks they want.

This.

 

[kennith]

Please explain, Jeep gets away with murder how? Aren't they owned by Fiat? So it's not like they have home field advantage. Seems to me they just build a vehicle people want, as opposed to one the manufacturer thinks they want.

Being owned by Fiat has nothing to do with it.

Land Rover has been passed around like a three dollar prostitute, and they're still treated as a valuable British institution.

Jeep doesn't build what people want. People want what Jeep builds. There's a difference. The same tiny percent of customers use them in technical terrain.

Most Jeep owners would be overly served by the new Defender; just as most Land Rover owners would.

It's obvious if you look back at what they sold and when. Domestic favoritism is not new. It's not necessarily wholly conscious or a single intent, but it happens.

Good, bad... I don't know. It doesn't really matter.

Cheers,

Kennith

 

[SCSL]

The problem with the Defender 2 is that it doesn’t draw new customers to the brand. It cannibalizes the existing line-up. The average buyer is debating whether to purchase a D5 or a Def2. Or maybe a Rangie Sport. WTF is that? This is what should have been the D5. Then build a utilitarian Defender updated for 2020 regs, a la Wangler, and JLR is in the money. This isn’t a massive fail because the vehicle sucks, or because it’s too expensive. It’s a massive fail because it’s been introduced as the next-gen Defender. It’s a continuation of the Discovery fail. Tata should replace these executives. It’s incompetence on a grand scale. And it’s the worst kind of executive incompetence: incompetence in the face of your core customer hollering their preferences, only to be ignored.

I guarantee you Wrangler isn’t cannibalizing Jeep sales. Few are wandering onto the lot debating whether to buy an SUV or a Wrangler.

 

[SCSL]

Most Jeep owners would be overly served by the new Defender

Sure. “Most” who want a soft or removable top, solid axle, easily modified off-roader that looks pretty much the same as it has for decades, with vast aftermarket support, would be “overly” served by a ‘Defender’.

 

[DiscoHasBeen]

Being owned by Fiat has nothing to do with it.

Land Rover has been passed around like a three dollar prostitute, and they're still treated as a valuable British institution.

Jeep doesn't build what people want. People want what Jeep builds. There's a difference. The same tiny percent of customers use them in technical terrain.

Most Jeep owners would be overly served by the new Defender; just as most Land Rover owners would.

It's obvious if you look back at what they sold and when. Domestic favoritism is not new. It's not necessarily wholly conscious or a single intent, but it happens.

Good, bad... I don't know. It doesn't really matter.

Cheers,

Kennith

Jeep doesn't build what people want. People want what Jeep builds. There's a difference.

I guess you'd have to explain that to me in simple language I could understand.

Most Jeep owners would be overly served by the new Defender; just as most Land Rover owners would.

So they built the space shuttle of SUV's. I'm not sure that because you can do a thing is a good reason to do it. I mean what should be the driving force behind the design of a offroad vehicle, technological advancements or reliability and capability?

 

[ERover82]

Jeep doesn't build what people want. People want what Jeep builds. There's a difference.

I guess you'd have to explain that to me in simple language I could understand.

Special K is trying to say that Jeep doesn't build comfortable, reliable, efficient, inexpensive Wranglers, they build highly capable, industrially designed Wranglers that people buy into the image of.

He's kind of right, but speaks in odd Kennithisms. If the JL was terrible off-road, they'd probably still sell nearly as many assuming it was marketed and designed the same.

 

[kennith]

Special K is trying to say that Jeep doesn't build comfortable, reliable, efficient, inexpensive Wranglers, they build highly capable, industrially designed Wranglers that people buy into the image of.

He's kind of right, but speaks in odd Kennithisms. If the JL was terrible off-road, they'd probably still sell nearly as many assuming it was marketed and designed the same.

True.

We're criticizing the wrong entity, here. People buy an image. To be more precise, the people who matter buy an image. Those are the tens of thousands driving around in Jeeps right now who've never removed a hard top in their life. They subsidize and control your interest via numbers alone.

The manufacturer sells to those people and simply endures you as long as it can. Jeep has a strong, organized community in the United States; an incredibly large market. Yeah, there's that marketing again... That's what they exist for: Jeep tolerates Jeep enthusiasts to propagate that brand image. So long as the marketing expense is weighed favorably against income, they will continue to build that Wrangler on a box frame and solid axles.

The day that's not the case, though... The Wrangler as the world knows it will be put out to pasture.

Land Rover didn't market effectively. They weren't able to leverage enthusiasm for sales, because their brand is weak. It is weak because they can't even decide what it is. There is a disconnect in the product line that needs to be rectified before that can happen. Essentially, if they can't fix their shit, Land Rover needs a divorce.

Well, that or military contracts, and I doubt the new Defender is at risk of securing any. What it can do, however, is spearhead a re-imagined brand portfolio.

They cannot sell a token truck alongside that pile of Range Rovers. Mercedes and the G are a different game entirely; it's a borrowed platform. They're essentially coach-builders. They've also got a long history of many different models under their belt. Land Rover can't even convince people they build the Range Rover.

The Defender isn't what we want because of a marketing failure. It also isn't what we want because the enthusiasts can't manage to hold as solid a community together as Jeep and Toyota enthusiasts. Some of that has to do with demographic, but that's where Land Rover is supposed to come in; to knit those people together into one image.

They never have.

Cheers,

Kennith

 

[kennith]

I mean what should be the driving force behind the design of a offroad vehicle, technological advancements or reliability and capability?

All of the above, because at a certain point modern technology becomes more reliable, and along the way it becomes more capable and loses initial complexity.

Failing to embrace new technologies to a rather hard-headed degree is part of what sealed that vehicle's fate. In it's final days, almost everything else they made would smack it's bitch right up off road; straight out of the showroom, anyway. They were all more comfortable, they all handled better...

What are you supposed to do with that as a manufacturer? They put themselves there, but once at that point there really is only one logical move: Kill it before it bleeds you dry.

You can always come back later and look like a hero. In the meantime, you stretched the utility of a platform by monetizing it under a different brand; a brand with legacy appeal.

Cheers,

Kennith

 

[SCSL]

Speaking cannibalizing the existing line-up.....