2020 Defender

DiscoHasBeen

Well-known member
Aug 7, 2016
1,171
262
Indy
The Gladiator is a LOCK to hold its value. The new Defender.... doesn't have good odds, especially considering the "it's not that bad" reaction its gotten.

I hate to say this but it won't hold it's value because it is a Land Rover.

56875

I'd rather pay 75k for a vehicle that may never need more than normal maintenance than 55k for one that stands a very good chance of being a constant headache. IMO Rovers are for wrenchers who not only don't mind working on their vehicles but enjoy it or people with enough disposable income to deal with their issues.
 
Last edited:

Howski

Well-known member
Oct 19, 2009
1,483
209
Alabama
I hope that paint booth photo is just an old concept run, because it's fucking stupid looking and will further inflate values of classic Defenders, of which I'm in the market for.
If Land Rover rolls out a clone to the original or a Kia Sorrento it won’t do a thing to the Defender market. More and more imports coming in each year and the NAS market is its own niche market. I don’t think there’s as much crossover between markets as you think
 

ERover82

Well-known member
Nov 26, 2011
3,899
450
Darien Gap
If Land Rover rolls out a clone to the original or a Kia Sorrento it won’t do a thing to the Defender market. More and more imports coming in each year and the NAS market is its own niche market. I don’t think there’s as much crossover between markets as you think

If Land Rover did for the Defender what Mercedes or Jeep have done, I'd strongly consider the newer alternative. I highly doubt I'm the only one.
 

kennith

Well-known member
Apr 22, 2004
10,891
172
North Carolina
If Land Rover did for the Defender what Mercedes or Jeep have done, I'd strongly consider the newer alternative. I highly doubt I'm the only one.

I don't know what Mercedes was thinking with the independent front on the new G. That makes absolutely no sense to me from any perspective in regard to their own sales. Two corners independent if you're racing or otherwise driving fast under the right circumstances or driving a heavy tow vehicle, but four or none if you're doing almost anything else.

They can't say it's for ride quality, either; because you're just putting down the hammer to smack your thumb with a wrench. You've swapped one inconvenience for another, and you're now uncomfortable in a novel, sudden, and slightly less interesting way.

Okay... But will it washboard? That might have been what they were thinking of, as many of us know the down-sides of a solid front quite well, in that regard. It may. That could have been the point; to keep the front from skittering about as much, and it probably does, but at what cost?

What I want to know is who actually made the decision. Was it on the Mercedes wish list, or did Steyr actually decide their design needed an improvement? If Steyr did it all on their lonesome, I'm more ready to believe it served a real purpose and they got it right. Just swapping the front suspension arrangement isn't enough; you've got to build the whole chassis around that change. You wouldn't fail in that regard if you intended it to be an update to a military and commercial platform.

It's not some backyard project; it's a production light, multi-use wheeled vehicle. It's possible they got it right, but outside of heavily modified stuff, I've historically been unimpressed with that arrangement.

Losing after-market support on the new Defender isn't much of an issue. It's a different vehicle. Why in the hell would I go buy the new G, though? I'd rather have the fancy new Mercedes that's still largely compatible with the old stuff; because it's fucking expensive as hell. Also, how long before the after-market picks it up?

I'll take one of those 4X4 Squared vehicles any day of the week, though. I do like those quite a bit. I'd love to have that jacked up wagon they made.

I just need to do a little more research to see who was responsible and why. If Steyr upgraded their military design, it's fine. If Mercedes tried to make it a more comfortable vehicle... That could have gone very, very wrong.

The Defender doesn't look to be a military platform at this point. I think that's a mistake on Land Rover's part. I believe they do need that platform, even if they don't sell it in the civilian market. That's a lot of money deliberately left on the table, and they've historically done very well in procurement tests.

Cheers,

Kennith
 

Blue

Well-known member
Mar 26, 2004
10,043
856
AZ
I’m in a relatively new Jeep Wrangler Sport Unlimited Whatever as a rental here in Utah for 3 days. I was surprised at how well it actually drives. It’s bouncy and feels like it’s constantly immersed in viscous jelly but it’s not as bad as I remember older Wranglers. Unfortunately the one word that keeps coming to mind is “cheap”. The fucking thing doesn’t even have a goddamn dome light that comes on with the door open for Christ’s fucking sake. How cheap can you be? I keep thinking about the $60k+ Roman Gladiator and I’m wondering what the improvements are.....it better be fucking night & day different. But it’s probably not.
 

kennith

Well-known member
Apr 22, 2004
10,891
172
North Carolina
I’m in a relatively new Jeep Wrangler Sport Unlimited Whatever as a rental here in Utah for 3 days. I was surprised at how well it actually drives. It’s bouncy and feels like it’s constantly immersed in viscous jelly but it’s not as bad as I remember older Wranglers. Unfortunately the one word that keeps coming to mind is “cheap”. The fucking thing doesn’t even have a goddamn dome light that comes on with the door open for Christ’s fucking sake. How cheap can you be? I keep thinking about the $60k+ Roman Gladiator and I’m wondering what the improvements are.....it better be fucking night & day different. But it’s probably not.

The interior looked a lot nicer on those I saw. At least that much didn't look cheap. It actually looked pretty decent.

I don't typically like those dashboards, though. It's something that bothers me in Porsche's and to a degree, Defenders. I feel like my face is a foot from a wall instead of sitting in a vehicle cabin.

This new one tamed that a bit. I didn't get inside any of them, but I may at some point. It's the drive that really matters, and the feel of everything. Jeeps have historically felt cheap; but at one point they were cheap, so it didn't matter. I don't like the way they handle, though. It will be interesting when I get a chance to drive one of the latest models.

Hopefully they improved, because even the last model was very disappointing in both conventional and Unlimited versions; from base suspension to Hard Rock. Handling still sucked. It's not as bad as it used to be, but it's still pretty damned bad. I hope it's better now.

Cheers,

Kennith
 

DiscoHasBeen

Well-known member
Aug 7, 2016
1,171
262
Indy
Wranglers always are at the bottom of CR's "Best of" ratings because of the way they handle but yet every other car on the road is a Jeep. On one of the Grand Tour episodes they trek across Columbia and Clarkson is in a Wrangler. He bitches about the ride and the thing in general but at the end of the episode he says something like "I liked it when we got here and I like it even more now". He also states that it's the first vehicle in all the shows he's done that didn't suffer a break down during the filming of the show.

That all said I'm not trying to make this a vs argument. I've had both and they would both be in my top three favorite vehicles. But at the end of the day the jeep is the only one I would buy again. The Discovery was a maintenance nightmare and then overheated, dropped a sleeve, and left my house on a trailer to be parted out. Until they fix that shit it doesn't matter how great the Defender might be, it'll still be a niche vehicle.
 

ERover82

Well-known member
Nov 26, 2011
3,899
450
Darien Gap
The JL's only problem is that it's a Jeep. If it looked like a Defender you'd all be happy fitting 35s on real dana 44s with a relatively reliable and capable drivetrain, and AC, heating, and door seals that actually work You'd be thanking the Rover gods they didn't screw it up.

The interior is nice for a utilitarian SUV and far better than any Defender or Jeep that came before.
 
Last edited:

K-rover

Well-known member
Jan 15, 2010
2,163
62
Raleigh, NC
I hate to say this but it won't hold it's value because it is a Land Rover.

View attachment 56875

I'd rather pay 75k for a vehicle that may never need more than normal maintenance than 55k for one that stands a very good chance of being a constant headache. IMO Rovers are for wrenchers who not only don't mind working on their vehicles but enjoy it or people with enough disposable income to deal with their issues.

This is me. The D2 for me is a hobby. I enjoy wrenching on it and then taking it wheeling. That said, I drive a Hyundai daily that hasnt needed anything done in 4yrs except tires and oil change. I never understood the appeal of daily driving a Rover.
 

Blue

Well-known member
Mar 26, 2004
10,043
856
AZ
I daily drive my 2004 D2. I have another car for more fuel efficient longer drives across town when I don’t need the truck, but I use it daily to at least shuttle the kiddos to & from school (other car is a 2-seater).
 

BDM

Well-known member
May 23, 2005
333
30
OR
The CEO of LR himself talked about how "refined" the new Defender is. That's all you need to know about their intentions for this new design. It isn't really meant to compete head to head with the Jeep Wrangler. It's only meant to hold the spirit of what the original Series/Defender was all about. It's a soy boy version of the old one. I mean, no one drives a Jeep for its comfort. They're friggin' loud and the seats suck. But it wasn't designed for comfort and that's why people love them.

My DD is a 99 D1 and if I'm not in a hurry, the experience is worth the shitty mpg. Hell, I bought it for $2500. Based on the value alone of what I paid for it vs getting another car, paying insurance, etc it doesn't make economical sense.

I sold my prior 99 D1 that was Chawton white with 215k on the odometer to a finance manager at Cole European. He said he preferred on his 30 mile commute it to driving his Tdi RRS.

There's just something about coil springs, the V8, the proportions, comfort, presence and visibility inside the cabin of these trucks that make them truly unique.
 

kennith

Well-known member
Apr 22, 2004
10,891
172
North Carolina
The JL's only problem is that it's a Jeep. If it looked like a Defender you'd all be happy fitting 35s on real dana 44s with a relatively reliable and capable drivetrain, and AC, heating, and door seals that actually work You'd be thanking the Rover gods they didn't screw it up.

The interior is nice for a utilitarian SUV and far better than any Defender or Jeep that came before.

At least two Wrangler models look close enough to the Defender to make no difference.

When you see the same car every day, though, driven by a predictable group of people with predictable lifestyles and interests... There's more than one reason I never went to a Rover event. It's worse from a car perspective, but at least the people are more varied.

I won't judge the Jeep on interior quality, as the Defender never had much to say for itself, in that regard. I can't say it kept the weather out, either. Jeep figured that one out very well; and may be the only manufacturer who's removable tops I actually trust. Jeep has also offered some great engines, but we can't discount the Rover diesels over the years.

The new interior looks much nicer. I don't think it'll feel as cheap, but it had better not, because they're charging Land Rover money for it in 2019. I hate to make that "current year" argument, but the Gladiator is overpriced at this time. Sold today, the Defender would be, as well. Land Rover stopped selling it and reevaluated, though.

Now, I don't know about the latest Mercedes, but I'd wager that if you lined up the old Defender, the last generation G, and that new Wrangler in comparable wheelbases, the Defender chassis would drive circles around them.

I've said it many times, and I'll say it again: Land Rover always considers handling. It's just as much a part of their history as off-pavement performance; perhaps even more important than that. It's what makes a Land Rover a Land Rover, because otherwise, why not just buy the competition? They all go off-pavement just fine. That's not hard to do.

That's something the others do not have. That is a feature that cannot or will not be replicated by the competition, and it's not as if it's a feature you don't notice every day. Those vehicles may not always compete in the market, but make no mistake: Toss in the H1, and every last one of them was built around the same packaging ideas with different interpretations of the same requirements.

They are all designed to be HMMWVs. They simply focus on different letters in that barely qualifying acronym. Every last one of them (Jeep is stretching it) competed in the same procurement tests for that same designation directly against one another.

None of that applies to the new Defender, naturally. It's obviously not even in the same class, but the actual Mobility will still be there one way or another.

Cheers,

Kennith
 

DiscoHasBeen

Well-known member
Aug 7, 2016
1,171
262
Indy
There's just something about coil springs, the V8, the proportions, comfort, presence and visibility inside the cabin of these trucks that make them truly unique.

I agree, that's why it's a top three for me. We lived in a smallish town in Indiana. One day at lunch the wife showed up in a Discovery II. She had found it used on a lot eight months old still under warranty and was test driving it. Land Rover, legendary performance I thought and let her buy it. Once it started leaving our house on a flatbed headed in for repairs regularly and I found this forum detailing what a high maintenance vehicle it was we should have sold it, but by then we had fallen in love with it and hoped for the best. It ended up being like the babe girlfriend who loves sex and has a great job and does nothing but bitch, whine, and complain.
 

JackW

Well-known member
Mar 17, 2005
675
69
My D5 has been very reliable - about to turn 30K on the odometer and just got back from 2500 mile trip that averaged over 28 mpg.
Even took a run down the Tail of the Dragon in it.

2586006-s.jpg
 

ERover82

Well-known member
Nov 26, 2011
3,899
450
Darien Gap
Let's see it complete the VOT, Nevada, Columbia, etc. Where's the pickup version? Soft-top? PTO? E-rated tires? Camper conversion? I'm talking about a Defender. You're showing us your car that went on a nice road trip.
 
Last edited:

kennith

Well-known member
Apr 22, 2004
10,891
172
North Carolina
Let's see it complete the VOT, Nevada, Columbia, etc. Where's the pickup version? Soft-top? PTO? E-rated tires? Camper conversion? I'm talking about a Defender. You're showing us your car that went on a nice road trip.

There have been rumblings about a pickup version, but you know how that goes. They're probably watching that Mercedes, but that won't help us, as it's not sold here. The stupidest fucking thing Mercedes ever did... Build (brand) a pickup, and then refuse to sell it in the US. They're just like Toyota with the real Land Cruiser.

You're not going to find what you want in that price range in this nation. Nothing like that exists here, that won't change, and that's the end of the story. Unless you want to buy a used vehicle, everything is a massive compromise. That's assuming this new Jeep drives like the old one, but I think it's a safe assumption.

Hell, you can't even get a decent SUV anymore, barring the new Rovers.

Land Rover is still the beginning and end of that niche, whether you like the new stuff or not. You warn people for fucking years, and they don't want to hear it. They don't want their little bubbles burst. They want to sit on their ass and watch the bullshit associated with the modern world roll right over them, and they laugh the entire time.

People seem to think Land Rover just loves to spend money regardless of whether or not it's needed...

Everyone using a cell phone for navigation is to blame for this nonsense. You won't believe it, though, because you're fucking addicted to convenience instead of performance. The exact same mindset is responsible for operating systems automatically resetting your shit and manuals no longer coming with software. It's also responsible for every ounce of electronics in those vehicles.

That person (and MANY of you reading this are guilty as sin and unrepentant) who was right the fuck here on Discoweb passing out Gmail and Facebook invites back in the day and calling tinfoil whenever anyone warned them... You lost the right to bitch long ago; or at least the right to be taken seriously in the process.

You people are crowding my shit now. Get your heads screwed on straight, or this new Defender will be remembered as the last true Land Rover.

Here's some life advice that will save the world: Stop being lazy.

Cheers,

Kennith
 

kennith

Well-known member
Apr 22, 2004
10,891
172
North Carolina
The new Bronco stands a chance at being a decent take on a "modern Defender 90". This is more in line with something that Land Rover could have actually built than some of what people imagine; a partnership with Ford to produce the Ranger platform in three lengths. They have a lot of good modern history to draw from, but that was expensive history to manufacture. The Ranger isn't.

For looks the Jeeps are obviously the closest, and the Gladiator really does stand out. I do like the looks of the thing, and I hope the wheelbase added some refinement.

We still have the G, and that's now whatever it is. I'm sure the result bashes through sand quite well. If it didn't, they'd lose the only reason it's still in production. That's a completely different price class, though. I don't really think that class makes sense, but if it allows a 6X6 with portals to come out of a modern factory... There's not much room to complain.

What was Land Rover going to do, though? The G was already much more modern; it was from the day it was designed. Steyr may as well have been building bank vaults while Land Rover was still busy riveting carports together on manually fabricated frames. Yes, it was sexy and it does any job anywhere, but was it actually as good as it should have been in 2016?

Hell no. It was crap. That body is only one step above the Model T; and that step is a metal firewall. End of steps. It's a facade wrapped around an overly complicated and corrosion-prone 1960's convertible boat top. That's the whole car I'm describing, mind you... Not just the canvas top. That part is a bit more like a lawn chair than anything else.

The only thing keeping that vehicle on the market during the last decade of it's life were good looks and tradition; two things that fall apart very quickly once that first crack shows up. It's not like Toyota keeping the 70 alive, or even the 200. Land Rover was sixty years behind the times in construction practices.

That's no update. That's a re-imagining. If I stare at what's in that paint booth keeping a sixty year update in mind, it actually works. If I asked you in 2016 what a Defender would look like in 60 years... Well, you'd have probably imagined that very vehicle, or something out of a cyberpunk novel (Demolition Man might not have missed the mark with the 101...). Land Rover had to ask themselves the same question.

...because that is indeed the question. If you ask what a Defender should look like today, you're asking what a Defender should look like after sixty years of development. That's the only question you can ask and make sense.

They should have let Ford answer it, instead. They were too close to the brand's lofty imaginings, and too ambitious. They always have been. Hell, they could have partnered with Honda and actually broken the entire pickup/utility/SUV market for everyone, permanently.

Nope. They had to do it themselves...

Cheers,

Kennith
 

ERover82

Well-known member
Nov 26, 2011
3,899
450
Darien Gap
I enjoy your stream of consciousness, but I believe the issue can be summed up in two perspectives.

1. The more developed and densely populated a nation/market, the more efficient and convenient its product offerings are to fit everyday life. The market in much of the world has developed a lot since 1948, and we're pretty far on the graph away from Australian and Africa, close to Europe, but not quite. Nothing new here.

2. Due to JLR's chosen strategy, as of 2015 their lineup consisted of a dozen designer purses and an AK47 (1949). It was hilarious to see a Defender in a showroom amongst Range whatevers and pretty LR4s. In their eyes, a Jeep/G-wagen take on the Defender wasn't an option. You just can't convince rebels to buy weapons from a purse store, and the weapons kind of scare the yummy mummies away.
 

kennith

Well-known member
Apr 22, 2004
10,891
172
North Carolina
I enjoy your stream of consciousness, but I believe the issue can be summed up in two perspectives.

1. The more developed and densely populated a nation/market, the more efficient and convenient its product offerings are to fit everyday life. The market in much of the world has developed a lot since 1948, and we're pretty far on the graph away from Australian and Africa, close to Europe, but not quite. Nothing new here.

Eh... One thing new, there...

You certainly know how to sweet talk, but I'm not going to drop all the way down the causal ladder on this one, because there is a very important rung that had a lot to do with all of this; a rung upon which a vast portion of our population still support themselves to this day:

I'd agree up until the point that the World Wide Web was blindly embraced by the average person, which was around 2002, or so. That really fucked up historical precedent, and gave the insulated members of society a technological teat from which to hang while they made poor decisions. Computers, as it turns out, were the answer to all the world's problems...

Everything goes back to that day; specifically the idea of cramming a thousand shitty, half-ass functions into a device that's too small to efficiently use. The second that iPhone launched and put what they thought was the Web in their pocket the world changed; and not in a good way. Jobs was right where he needed to be: Standing in front of tens of millions of new, ignorant tech addicts with no map for the modern world.

Smart phones existed long before that (I had a few), but it was a matter of being at the right place at the right time with something that masked away the confusion; much like a plastic engine cover. Popping the hood isn't so scary when all you see is a hole for more oil, after all. It's interesting that the practice of covering engines began to become an art around that same time, isn't it?

Regardless, it should have all taken much longer. The problem throughout modern history is impatience and an obsession with innovation at any cost. You put a company like Land Rover in that world, and it's like dropping a guy with severe OCD in Vegas for a week. To paraphrase Jeff Goldblum: They can't not touch.

That world is driven by convenience and instant gratification; quick shots of dopamine, as it's been described. From idle games to streaming films, to the extreme difficulty of actually purchasing a full album nowadays and issue of being surrounded by cameras constantly, it all informs vehicle design.

What you wanted was a tool box, but what you got was a smart phone. That's no accident.

The Defender wouldn't have worked in a corrected society, either, mind you. It was still an out of date tin can; potentially the worst vehicle in production anywhere in the world during it's last days. It's not like the Discovery, which was honestly closer to what the Defender should have been, at that point. It was truly Yesteryear Motors' top product.
2. Due to JLR's chosen strategy, as of 2015 their lineup consisted of a dozen designer purses and an AK47 (1949). It was hilarious to see a Defender in a showroom amongst Range whatevers and pretty LR4s. In their eyes, a Jeep/G-wagen take on the Defender wasn't an option. You just can't convince rebels to buy weapons from a purse store, and the weapons kind of scare the yummy mummies away.

Well, they've clearly never been to a proper purse store. If I can't have a free RPG and two bricks of questionable cocaine with my imitation Gucci handbag, I'll buy it somewhere else.

That was indeed quite amusing, though. What really puts it into perspective was my trip to test drive that 4Runner and the disappointment bordering on anger and insult. They had an FJ40 in the showroom. Now, that's funny because that's about as advanced as the Defender ever got, and it's in there as an antique display with a plaque and a "do not touch" sign.

In 2016 (supply was probably petering out at that point, but you get the idea), that would have been no different than a Land Rover dealership, aside from the fact that the FJ40 would have a window sticker, a warranty, and a brochure. It truly was insanity; a company that had given up on trying to find a way around it and eventually decided to just throw it away.

To be fair, it's the smart move when a project gets like that, but it would have been better to partner up with someone and hope to gain in defense and private sector contracts on the side. "Defender" was still (somehow) strong enough to support it's own brand; it still is.

I really wanted to scribble "token" on a piece of paper and put it under the wiper of that FJ40, as if it's presence somehow legitimizes the other nonsense.

Cheers,

Kennith