Jedward McGovern strikes again

[Mo Murphy]

Oh hang on, I don't really care about shopping trolleys.

For Sale

 A pitchfork (not been used on flesh)

A flaming brand (unlit so not actually flaming yet. You have to light it)

Will discount if you are angry enough to buy both together.

 

Mo

 

[Tal]

manufacturer asks design and tech team ...."How much can we put on there that will drive the price up and make it impossible to work on at home so they have to come and pay dealership prices for everything?"

 

Manufacturers....we're not stupid. Wise up and just make a properly reliable usable car for the money. Ever heard of Value For Money (VFM in retail circles)

[Shackleton]

5 hours ago, PhantomSVE said:

Shakelton,if you don't mind me asking :Where did your uncle purchase his L405 ??

Phantom

Hi Phantom, 

I'll drop you a direct message. 

[Snagger]

7 hours ago, PhantomSVE said:

Hello Chicken,

I must admit,even in my position where I am privileged to drive all Land Rovers before they even reach the general public my favorite is still a Defender.

The issue of design brief is driven by the profit margin.The markets and current buyers of the product is nothing close to what you would consider to be the original Land Rover owner.The majority of people who own or operate one of these vehicles today will never use 50% of the capabilities of these units.But they like how they look,lot of toys to play with and it makes a statement.

If you talk to Land Rover Engineers you will realize almost all have Defenders,but the final decision of design is not left to the engineers.It's the age old problem,Marketing Managers making engineering decisions.

 

Phantom

That's encouraging, that at least the testers and engineers still prefer the capable, more basic and more honest vehicles.  If only McGovern and Tata would move on...

[Davo]

5 hours ago, PhantomSVE said:

I agree,

Technology move on and in today's world it moves quite rapidly.The concern I have as an Engineer is that we have moved the Technology along at such a rapid rate that the service industry don't have time to catch up.

A perfect example of this is the new Range Rover (L405): Three different CAN bUS,LIN,MOST,WIFi and all the connectivity on the planet.You wake one morning and it decides it does not want to start,which one of the nearly 72 ECU's you going to look at.

One of the big pluses of Defender is during it cycle of production it was one of the few vehicles you can buy and work on and customize for your self,no more.

 

Phantom

If you have enough time to do enough searches on enough forums, (er, fora), you'll see that this subject has come up regularly over many years. One group just wants a decent and versatile work vehicle, and the other group applaud JLR for dominating the corrupt totalitarian government/drug-fuelled superstar/nouveau riche shopping trolley market. And yes, good for them, the company is making money. 

What I've never understood is why they can't - like Toyota - make these luxury parade floats as well as something industry needs. They had such a good platform in the Defender and in the decades I've watched have never done anything useful with it. Small engines, embarrassing gearboxes, weak diffs . . . it's just amazing. I'd buy a good new work car if one was available, but I live in the north of Australia and there isn't really anything that stands out in versatility and reliability. Cheap dual-cab utes like Navaras and Rangers are really popular but not very strong and are a good indication of the lowering of standards in the utility market. There's a glaring opportunity for JLR to exploit this but I think the directors are too busy smelling leather samples to understand this. 

So I live in the middle of nowhere and drive a rebuilt 1983 Range Rover, because that got me what I needed. There's nothing comparable and new from any company. 

I had a new Land Rover parked behind me the other day. First I thought it was a Vitara or something. I still don't know what model it was! 

[Snagger]

5 hours ago, Davo said:

If you have enough time to do enough searches on enough forums, (er, fora), you'll see that this subject has come up regularly over many years. One group just wants a decent and versatile work vehicle, and the other group applaud JLR for dominating the corrupt totalitarian government/drug-fuelled superstar/nouveau riche shopping trolley market. And yes, good for them, the company is making money. 

What I've never understood is why they can't - like Toyota - make these luxury parade floats as well as something industry needs. They had such a good platform in the Defender and in the decades I've watched have never done anything useful with it. Small engines, embarrassing gearboxes, weak diffs . . . it's just amazing. I'd buy a good new work car if one was available, but I live in the north of Australia and there isn't really anything that stands out in versatility and reliability. Cheap dual-cab utes like Navaras and Rangers are really popular but not very strong and are a good indication of the lowering of standards in the utility market. There's a glaring opportunity for JLR to exploit this but I think the directors are too busy smelling leather samples to understand this. 

So I live in the middle of nowhere and drive a rebuilt 1983 Range Rover, because that got me what I needed. There's nothing comparable and new from any company. 

I had a new Land Rover parked behind me the other day. First I thought it was a Vitara or something. I still don't know what model it was! 

I think it's very telling that JLR is now not only supporting the classic Jag market, but announced that they are also going to support the classic LR market.  Maybe they're waking up to the idea of the enthusiast being an asset and a great boost for the brand's heritage and credibility, as well as a good source of direct revenue in the spares market.  I wonder if they're starting to realise they have missed an opportunity in moving the entire range so up the designer market.

[Daan]

19 hours ago, Snagger said:

You know what I mean, Shak - bling is for pop stars, footballers and drug dealers, ie new money with no sense of decorum.  That's what I mean by class, not the old class system of upper, middle and lower - I could never make it up those ranks.  But remember in Four Weddings how the aristocrat drove a tatty old SII 88"?  That's not unrealistic - the truly wealthy stay that way by not wasting their money, and they know the difference between class and brass!

Like the comment about not wasting money. Interestingly, the series landy was worth pennys until recently. Now I see some for sale well over 10K. I also remember the range rover voque first being sold, and what a classy and expensive car it was. You really were someone if you drove one of those! again, until recently, You couldn't give one away, and now they started gaining in price.

The whole thing about landrover changing their ways: They need to compete with the likes of Mercedes audi and BMW, who go the same way, so it is only natural.

I must admit, If I had the choice of either of the above, It would be the new range rover, purely because of the appearance of it. It has that classy appearance more than anything else on the market. 

[Snagger]

I agree, but I think the L322 looked better, and the classic better still, but the 405 is more becoming than the other new models.

 

I just wish that LR would retain its heritage and core while also chasing the cash with the bling stuff.  It's not only possible, it's complimentary.  Their reputation rests on their rugged, go anywhere, dependable image, and once that is consigned to history, then where will that credibility be?  How can you show adverts featuring Defenders and earlier vehicles waist deep in mud, fighting fires and delivering aid supplies if all you make are Chelsea Tractors?  None of the new breed hold the slightest interest for me, which is not atypical of the enthusiasts, and isn't that a bit sad?  

[Shackleton]

To be fair the full fat RR is where it has been since the early '90's, a very expensive luxury car with class leading (if not only on par) off road capability. You can't argue with that. I don't mind that LR has added "Sport" to a few models and made a ladies RR in the Evoque, but I do take offence at the lack of proper utility vehicle. That's like a baker saying "hey I'm all about the confections and to hell with bread." Understandable but a total sell out.

[Happyoldgit]

Buying an umpteen thousand £££ vehicle that is perceived my many to be "classy" does not automatically promote you up the social ladder. How you conduct yourself, treat others and how they remember you is the ultimate mark of an individual. Expensive objects are nice to have but in reality are only first world trinkets.

Innit.

JLR are quite capable of producing vehicles to satisfy all levels of the market but at the moment at least are aiming at sectors where they believe they will get the best return in profit and ongoing business.

[Shackleton]

dollah dollah bills yo

They say it's what makes the world go round. What makes the western world go around is the hard working guy tending the crop with the ute . But f him right! He aint profitable.

[Daan]

51 minutes ago, Happyoldgit said:

Buying an umpteen thousand £££ vehicle that is perceived my many to be "classy" does not automatically promote you up the social ladder. How you conduct yourself, treat others and how they remember you is the ultimate mark of an individual. Expensive objects are nice to have but in reality are only first world trinkets.

Innit.

JLR are quite capable of producing vehicles to satisfy all levels of the market but at the moment at least are aiming at sectors where they believe they will get the best return in profit and ongoing business.

You are right about this, and were getting really philosophicall on this subject. My Polo Bluemotion works really well for me....(apart from the little emission problem of course)

 

Daan

[Tal]

Personally think they were onto a good idea with the freelander.

It has a smaller engine so is more road and fuel friendly it's still 4x4 so has a certain range of versatility but has lots of extras that make it a nice going out shopping to the opera etc (whatever it is your supposed to do in them) type of car

The VCU seems to have let them down though and given the vehicle a semi bad reputation so if they went back to a transfer box with a known reliablity they could be onto a really good thing.

[reb78]

1 hour ago, Tal said:

Personally think they were onto a good idea with the freelander.

I don't.

[Daan]

1 hour ago, Tal said:

Personally think they were onto a good idea with the freelander.

It has a smaller engine so is more road and fuel friendly it's still 4x4 so has a certain range of versatility but has lots of extras that make it a nice going out shopping to the opera etc (whatever it is your supposed to do in them) type of car

I agree. It is what the market wants. I can't say the same of the Evoque, but they do sell like hot cakes so who am i to judge?

The freelander replacement, the discovery sport I would consider as a family car if it weren't for the 40 k price tag. 

[Shackleton]

 

Ok so it's not anywhere near the price point of the Freelander but speaking of versatility the RR above is 430kg lighter than it's L322 equivalent. Specifically talking about the L405 3.0 TdV6. It's all aluminium which they say was a saving of 300kg, which knocked on to being able to use the 3.0 engine which in turn saved some kgs. The further knock on was that because the whole package was more economical they were able to reduce the fuel tank size which saves 25kg on a full tank. Anyway the result is a claimed combined mpg of 40+. That's something for a machine of that size, that can reportedly do a 0-62 time in the mid 7's. Apart from the price tag it's quite the all rounder then, and as LR guys - something to be proud of the marque for.

[studmuffin]

4 minutes ago, reb78 said:

I don't.

Have to say I disagree Richard.

Like most of us, originally, I wasn't keen on freebies because they had a viscous coupling, but they have grown on me. Freebie 1s and 2`s at least look like a proper LR product and are better off-road than you would think.

My nephew works at an LR dealer and people coming in to upgrade their Freebie for a Disco Sport are saying no and buying the youngest second hand  Freelander on the forecourt in preference.

Equally Freebies  have their own following and are fast becoming the affordable entry level vehicle to LR ownership. They held their inaugural Freelander Fest in June this year, and I say good luck to em!!!  Might even go and join them next year as it is the 20th anniversary for the Freelander(makes you feel old doesn't it?).

My youngest son  wants a Land Rover which he can afford to insure, and sub £2000 to purchase and 25 plus mpg, a Hippo 1 is just about the only game in town.

Cheers

Barry

 

 

[PhantomSVE]

This is the dilema,

You have the Freelander2,which many people like and sold very well.

Then came the Evoque,which is a Freelander in drag.People flocked to the dealership,payed full price and then some in full and in some cases waited up to eighteen months for the new vehicle to be delivered.

Then we launch L405,the Chinese then decided they wanted every single one that's built and are paying double the price.If a L405 cost 100k in the UK it's 200k in China..

How do you then convince senior management to continue spending large sums of money on R+D for a utility vehicle

 

 

Phantom

[GW8IZR]

I bought a brand new FL2 and loved it, two years in I wanted to change it but there is no credible alternate.

Tried the Discovery sport, was OK but at the price there are other vehicles from BMW/Merc/Volvo that are just better.. so thats what I did.

The FL2 was a good vehicle and fitted into the market well.

I did some work with Arctic trucks at about the time the Defender was dropped, I thought it might have caused some stress in their business ( particularly as I wanted to buy 130 based radio trucks from them ) but they were happily chopping Toyotas up and that's what we did.

[Chicken Drumstick]

1 hour ago, reb78 said:

I don't.

Why?

 

FL1 was and is a good vehicle. For me the only thing it lacked was a low range. 

[Davo]

15 hours ago, PhantomSVE said:

This is the dilema,

You have the Freelander2,which many people like and sold very well.

Then came the Evoque,which is a Freelander in drag.People flocked to the dealership,payed full price and then some in full and in some cases waited up to eighteen months for the new vehicle to be delivered.

Then we launch L405,the Chinese then decided they wanted every single one that's built and are paying double the price.If a L405 cost 100k in the UK it's 200k in China..

How do you then convince senior management to continue spending large sums of money on R+D for a utility vehicle

 

 

Phantom

Because the Chinese (and similar) markets can't go on forever. We know that over here in Western Australia, where they fuelled a huge mining boom that's definitely over. A utility vehicle for JLR would be their bread-and-butter sales they could rely on. It's not like industry is suddenly not going to need 4WDs. But it's a short-sighted, profit-driven mindset like everything else. The world economy is apparently staggering with debt and if things go downhill then JLR will probably go with it. 

It's interesting that when the Land-Rover did so well in the 50s and 60s, some old Rover types found it embarrassing that it made so much money instead of the bank manager cars the company had always prided itself on. So it never had the money put into it that it needed, opening up the way for Toyota to take over the market. Here we are in a similar situation, where the company seems to find the Defender an archaic embarrassment, so it just does nothing with it while it's being built and does nothing to replace it when production is over. 

[Shackleton]

I read (or watched) somewhere that LR actually had the Aussie market before Toyota. Going on hazy memory was it that the mining company that had the monopoly had chosen LR over Toyota for their utility vehicles and so it went until some deal fell through or the company changed hands and LR went with it. It's not surprising that Toyota have the foothold in Australia anyway given the geographical proximity.

I also thought that the deal with the Defender was that it had been taken as far as it could in terms of the fundamental design being dragged kicking into the 21st century, that finally no more workarounds could be devised to get it through safety legislation? Obviously it doesn't explain the lack of new model development but I suppose comparing the money being made from selling bling to the money they'd recoup from selling utes doesn't compute. I'm covering old ground I know.

EDIT: It was a Japanese - Australian trade agreement I'm starting to remember?

[Lewis]

What seems to get regularly forgotten in threads like these is that rugged off road ability, endless reliability and outstanding build quality don't have to be mutually exclusive with luxury and sophistication. Toyota manage it without issue.

 

Sadly Toyota has withdrawn their largest land cruiser (the 200) from the uk market due to dwindling sales, but elsewhere in the world they are the first choice for an executive 4x4.

 

In my role I regularly get feedback on Disco 3/4 and Land Cruiser 200 from users and fleet managers alike. Whilst the users love the disco it's widely loathed by fleet management due to the incredibly poor reliability - even in the UK where there is excellent dealer support I have heard managers say they cannot keep them on the road, and you can imagine the situation in Africa and further afield. The Land Cruisers on the other hand just keep going - we have some @ over 200,000km in under 5years running at 4.5tonne kerb weight and in the worst environments, any failures we see are largely down to aftermarket fittings.

 

For me, if Land Rover want any of Toyota's global market share they need to look long and hard and the quality of workmanship and reliability of their products.

[Davo]

2 hours ago, Shackleton said:

I read (or watched) somewhere that LR actually had the Aussie market before Toyota. Going on hazy memory was it that the mining company that had the monopoly had chosen LR over Toyota for their utility vehicles and so it went until some deal fell through or the company changed hands and LR went with it. It's not surprising that Toyota have the foothold in Australia anyway given the geographical proximity.

I also thought that the deal with the Defender was that it had been taken as far as it could in terms of the fundamental design being dragged kicking into the 21st century, that finally no more workarounds could be devised to get it through safety legislation? Obviously it doesn't explain the lack of new model development but I suppose comparing the money being made from selling bling to the money they'd recoup from selling utes doesn't compute. I'm covering old ground I know.

EDIT: It was a Japanese - Australian trade agreement I'm starting to remember?

Australia and South Africa used to be the two biggest markets for Land-Rovers, but Toyota came along with bigger engines, disc brakes, more driver comfort and a huge support network. Even now, it's a bit weird reading about how Rover basically sat still during this crucial time of the 70s. But they weren't the only British company to do so back then. What amazes me is how, decades later, (and no doubt some of their executives weren't even born when the whole mess started), they still did very little with the Defender. It never got the engine, gearbox, or reliability it needed. The whole situation just loped along. These days, there's all this garbage about the "Defender replacement". What? It's still not done? Does it even exist? It's just a bizarre way to run a business. 

[Davo]

40 minutes ago, Lewis said:

What seems to get regularly forgotten in threads like these is that rugged off road ability, endless reliability and outstanding build quality don't have to be mutually exclusive with luxury and sophistication. Toyota manage it without issue.

 

Sadly Toyota has withdrawn their largest land cruiser (the 200) from the uk market due to dwindling sales, but elsewhere in the world they are the first choice for an executive 4x4.

 

In my role I regularly get feedback on Disco 3/4 and Land Cruiser 200 from users and fleet managers alike. Whilst the users love the disco it's widely loathed by fleet management due to the incredibly poor reliability - even in the UK where there is excellent dealer support I have heard managers say they cannot keep them on the road, and you can imagine the situation in Africa and further afield. The Land Cruisers on the other hand just keep going - we have some @ over 200,000km in under 5years running at 4.5tonne kerb weight and in the worst environments, any failures we see are largely down to aftermarket fittings.

 

For me, if Land Rover want any of Toyota's global market share they need to look long and hard and the quality of workmanship and reliability of their products.

Toyotas do have problems, but I think the sheer numbers of them tends to hide it a bit. However, they are generally well built. The 200 sells well here despite its tiny payload and monstrous price, just because it's a Toyota. The interesting thing for me is how, in a small and remote market like Australia, Toyota has really put the effort into selling cars and it has paid off for them. I can't figure out why, but JLR hasn't, and is laughable because of it. I just can't believe they'll ever regain this lost ground - I think they could, if they'd bother - but I can't see it happening, ever.