 | Home > General & Technical (L663) > Replacement for defender - a little bit more news |
 
|
|
|
| Limey Member Since: 18 Oct 2013 Location: Northern Italy Posts: 193  
|
part 3,
|
||
12th Mar 2014 10:45am |
|
| Limey Member Since: 18 Oct 2013 Location: Northern Italy Posts: 193
|
and finally part 4,.
The Land Rover Defender, the best 4 x 4 by Far...
|
||
|
12th Mar 2014 10:46am |
|
| SailingTom Member Since: 19 Nov 2013 Location: ESSEX Posts: 1722 
|
Sadly It will only be a case of they realize what they had when its gone.
Lets be honest and face it the defender is a  on the shoe for jaguar land rover that they put on a smile and put up with. They don't want a working vehicle as it goes against the premium brand they are/have created.
The next one might be good off road and nice inside, but it wont be a working vehicle we know. Realistically most company vehicles in those images as nice as they are could be Hilux's/ jap pickups and in my opinion will be. All the land rovers in my line of work are pretty much replaced with Ford rangers now! The Defender will still be the best 4x4xfar but we just wont be getting any new ones along the same lines. Defender puma dormobile camper |
||
|
12th Mar 2014 7:01pm |
|
| Setok Member Since: 16 Jan 2009 Location: Helsinki Posts: 422 
|
I know. There are many people like that, and it's amazing that Land Rover can't see that when so many other manufacturers understand the importance of their halo products. As I always like to point out: Jeep advertising often have a Wrangler visible, even when most people actually buy something else. |
||
|
12th Mar 2014 7:43pm |
|
| Setok Member Since: 16 Jan 2009 Location: Helsinki Posts: 422
|
Not to mention it's very pricey in some markets, and it's not even available in one of the most important markets of the world: the US. In many locations people have told me they would love to get Defenders, but at concerned with reliability problems. It seems it would be so easy to solve the Defender problem: take what already exists, update it as necessary to fulfil the requirements of various markets, and use good old-fashioned (and apparently not very sexy or fashionable anymore) British engineering to fix any weaknesses and make it a solid performer. |
||
|
12th Mar 2014 7:47pm |
|
| What puddle? Member Since: 25 Oct 2013 Location: Reading Posts: 952
|
Tiger, you are indeed correct. AutoEvolution has posted an update to that link to say it is a mule for the Jaguar SUV. Now left.
|
||
|
12th Mar 2014 8:30pm |
|
| Pickles Member Since: 26 May 2013 Location: Melbourne Posts: 3785  
|
Limey, Top images there mate.
Thanks, Pickles. |
||
|
12th Mar 2014 9:02pm |
|
| Limey Member Since: 18 Oct 2013 Location: Northern Italy Posts: 193
|
The funny thing is, that if Land Rover compare themselves to every other normal manufacturer, then the idea of their flagship vehicle being the highest spec Range Rover is an acceptable idea. But Setok has it quite right with his Jeep analogy. Because Land Rover is not comparable with the other normal manufacturers, in that their flagship vehicle is not their priciest model.
Land Rover are not Alfa Romeo, where an expensive 8C in the showroom might get peoples passion up for Alfas, for them to then spend their money on a MiTo. With Land Rover, the Defender is their flagship. There must be some people inside LR who know this, because in the current Range Rover TV Ad over here, as it tears up a mountain, there's at least one Defender parked on the peak, in the background -to add rugged authenticity. All they need to do, as already said is to make a refreshed Defender that can pass all foreseeable US/EU/Worldwide safety and emissions regs, and to get rid of the constant silly niggles. My '04 has rust coming through on the rear door frames, which is a disgrace in this era, that's an MG comparison right there! Sometimes it seems like there's a belief that it doesn't sell well enough to justify them making the vehicle, but as already stated, if it didn't have a reputation for these constant silly issues and for rust, then maybe that would have been enough to change those sales numbers? I'm sure it is wickedly labour intensive to build, and maybe the worry is that to improve it, the additional cost and labour rates would bump the final sticker price too high? I don't claim to know, but personally do think that making a cartoon version on the Defender may prove to be a costly mistake. I hope that there isn't a decision that's already been made, for JLR to retire the iconic Defender and basically live off it's history from now on. Here's some more for us Defender aficionados, although a little more historic this time!
|
||
|
13th Mar 2014 8:04am |
|
| 22900013A Member Since: 23 Dec 2010 Location: Oxfordshire Posts: 3149 
|
I'm still convinced that the Puma was intended to have airbags (which would have allowed US sale, as well as much longer-term EU sales) if you look at the big bulge in the steering wheel and the bit everyone changes to a glove box on the passenger side of the dash...a big part of the "problem" with the Defender has been the minimal investment over the years. 2011 110 USW 1973 Series III 1-Ton 1972 Series III 1-Ton Cherrypicker 1969 IIA 1-Ton 1966 IIA 88" |
||
|
13th Mar 2014 8:42am |
|
| NT5224 Member Since: 10 Jul 2012 Location: Robin Falls Posts: 50 
|
Gotta say I reckon Limey and others are spot on with their assessment of the value of our 90's 110's and 130's in the Land Rover lineup. By my reckoning, our vehicles are the true 'Land Rovers', that's what people identify with the brand.
Its incredible worldwide brand recognition that JLR seem to be willing to forego. 
Personally if a future 'premium' replacement for the Defender loses its rugged military/police/rescue/overland utility, then I question whether it should be called the 'Defender' at all. Perhaps instead call it the 'Contender' (because JLR will be producing just another SUV struggling to make its mark in an already crowded market). At least that way the Defender heritage remains secure in LR's history.  |
||
|
13th Mar 2014 8:49am |
|
| What puddle? Member Since: 25 Oct 2013 Location: Reading Posts: 952
|
That's a good post by Limey, and I hope someone at LR reads it. The only thing I would say (against it?) is that we MUST move on. I know it's good to have a nice feeling for Minis, Morris Minors, Beetles, MGBs, Defenders...but we MUST move on. The new Defender will HAVE to get away from its rivet image. That's gone now. It's possible to have a new model that is rugged - without rivets! It doesn't mean it has to be a cartoon version. I love my Defender, all Defenders, just like I love the Mini that I passed my test in, back in 1976. But I see the appeal of the MINI too. It's true that the MINI doesn't have the soul of the Mini, and neither will the new Defender have the soul of the old Defender, but we do have to move on. Toyota proved back in the early 1980s that you can have a 4x4 (with a heater!) that will get you up a hill, but in comfort. I sold a SWB Shogun two years ago that I had kept for 9 years - as it was the 'best' car I've ever had. It was unstoppable - started every morning, got through all that snow that dumped on us three years or so ago with absolute ease...yet it was automatic with air conditioning and cloth seats. I loved it. I had a Defender too, at the time, which was crude and uncomfortable. I loved that too. So, one was great and comfortable, the other was great and crude.
A modern Defender is inevitable, it would appear (though I did think a few weeks back that LR was dropping it altogether). It will be modern, and rightly so. Wobbly aluminium panels are character, but they are so last century. But there's no place for bleedin' rivets  Now left. |
||
|
13th Mar 2014 9:07am |
|
| blackwolf Member Since: 03 Nov 2009 Location: South West England Posts: 17414 
|
Playing devil's advocate for a moment....
The Defender is supposedly the most expensive vehicle in Landrover's portfolio to create, with the unit cost of each Defender rolling off the line being greater than that of any other vehicle. The margin on each vehicle is very small, possibly even negative, and it is simply not a profitable vehicle to make. Why is it so expensive to build? Many reasons, but chief among them is the fact that it is still largely built the 1950 way, by hand. Labour was (relatively) cheap then, it isn't now. So there are two problems trying to build a vehicle in this way now. Firstly the cost, secondly the fact that it is almost impossible to assure the consistency of the build quality. We all moan about the variable build quality of the Defender (there is thread after thread on this forum), but why does this happen? Because it is hand assembled. If something doesn't fit properly it is disproportionately expensive to sort it out, so the limits on what is and what is not acceptable tend to be slack, and problems are sorted by the dealer if and only if the customer complains. So we have a specialist vehicle which sells in small numbers, is expensive and problematic to make, and makes little (if any) profit for the company. It is also a vehicle which must, whatever happens, undergo an expensive re-engineering process due to legislative changes if we want to continue to sell it in traditional markets. On the other hand, we have a range of glitzy products which are built relatively cheaply to a very consistent high quality largely by robots, have high mark-ups and good margins, and which sell as fast as we can make them. We are also a privately-owned company which exists fundamentally to make money for our owners. Keeping the customer happy is only an incidental priority in as much as it helps the foregoing. Sentiment plays no part in our existence. Bearing in mind all the above, I think a more fundamental question is why woudl LR make a Defender replacement at all? Commercially it makes very little sense - the 500 units of Defender each week could easily be replaced by 500 (or more) units of a more profitable model which will sell just as easily and will generate more income. For what little it is worth, I think it is inevitable that if there is a replacement Defender it will be designed to allow a much greater degree of buld automation (a good thing since build quality should become more consistent) and will probably be of a much more modular construction. Whatever happens, we shall see in due course. I think it will be the end of the traditional Defender we all love, but I think that the replacement may be a very good vehicle. It will I fear be far more technical and electronic, and if the endless surveys from LR are anything to go by it will be filled with unnecessary high-tech "Infotainment" systems. |
||
|
13th Mar 2014 9:18am |
|
| 22900013A Member Since: 23 Dec 2010 Location: Oxfordshire Posts: 3149
|
Personally I think the idea that the Defender loses money is a bit much, yes I could accept the margins might be lower than on a robot built model, but it will still make money. I doubt the assembly line workers are on much more than minimum wage for goodness sake. They may even be more keenly priced here in the UK and then ramped up in other markets to "help out". I don't think they are a loss leader at all, if so, how could dealers possibly offer discounts on them?
I agree very much that the model must move forward, however it is important that it remains more then sum of its parts, plenty of vehicles perform just as well as a Defender but they don't have that x-factor that I don't think can be designed in. The history is a HUGE part of that and must not be written off as irrelevant. Sentimentality may not feature highly in the minds of the designers, but I can assure you it does in the minds of the buyers. I also think plenty of folk who but the oter models deep down want a Defender... 2011 110 USW 1973 Series III 1-Ton 1972 Series III 1-Ton Cherrypicker 1969 IIA 1-Ton 1966 IIA 88" |
||
|
13th Mar 2014 9:56am |
|
| NT5224 Member Since: 10 Jul 2012 Location: Robin Falls Posts: 50
|
Well put blackwolf.
Sadly I suspect you're on the money with your thoughts. But does this mean that in future we'll all be driving generic crossovers as all manufacturers gradually converge on the lowest production costs and most popular styles? Personally while I loved seeing the 'quaint', 1950's production techniques at Solihull and am fortunate to have one of the good ones (touch wood!), I wouldn't object to a automated (thus cheaper) production process for Defenders -as long as the ruggedness, capability, simplicity and utility of the design remained. And in terms of chasing markets, it could be argued that the road-friendly premium SUV market is already saturated, and so more hotly contested than that for a serious off-road utility. There is a HUGE market for the latter, particularly in developing countries, although this is currently dominated by Asian manufacturers. Big profits stand to be made if the right vehicle can be produced. Rivets and all.  |
||
|
13th Mar 2014 10:13am |
|
|
|
| All times are GMT |
< Previous Topic | Next Topic > |
Posting Rules
|
Site Copyright © 2006-2024 Futuranet Ltd & Martin Lewis
