 | Home > Off Topic > Ford Bronco - Getting Closer |
 
|
|
|
| Philip Member Since: 09 Mar 2018 Location: England Posts: 510  
|
No; just demonstrably more than you, it seems.
No; hence why I own three old LR products.
No; I question why they're terrified of progress.
No; my personal experience of them tells me it's a very capable car. As for "never be used as such" - such a lack of self-awareness - the vast majority of those critical of the new one here absolutely do not use their old Defenders for any kind of work, perhaps why a concept as flimsy as the Bronco is so exciting. I'm seeing more and more new Defenders towing tri-axle Ifors, plant trailers, at the markets etc. - I can guarantee you won't see a Bronco or Wrangler doing the same.
No; neither do I encourage my rugged lifestyle fantasies by wanting a car wilfully made less capable than it could be.
No; that appears to be you - just not so much self-awareness.
No; no vehicle complying with modern legislation and requirements is simple (even the ones with archaic underpinnings). Practical - a 90 Hard Top will be every bit as practical for my needs as the various previous ones were, more so perhaps given the road manners are better even than a D3/4 commercial. If flexible means unbolting bits, then enjoy taking the doors off your Bronco (maybe channeling a bit of Zoolander), because that's as far as it goes with anything modern. As for affordable, a basic Defender compares favourably with a far less competent twin-cab.
No; not quite sure where that comes from - one of my old Range Rovers has quite a lot of aftermarket parts (but nor do I have a load of silly, and unused, off-road equipment stuck on to make me feel more like a frontiersman lumberjack or whatever).
I couldn't afford his bills at Henry Poole (but you do know he didn't design the Defender?). |
||
27th Jun 2021 1:57pm |
|
| 22900013A Member Since: 23 Dec 2010 Location: Oxfordshire Posts: 3140 
|
Grenadier gets my vote for post of the year right there, very funny and well crafted, but the obvious humour seems to have gone over the heads of some, although the tendency for self- contradiction remains intact.
 2011 110 USW
1973 Series III 1-Ton 1972 Series III 1-Ton Cherrypicker 1969 IIA 1-Ton 1966 IIA 88" |
||
|
27th Jun 2021 8:24pm |
|
| Grenadier Member Since: 23 Jul 2014 Location: The foot of Mont Blanc... Posts: 5765  
|
Never mind Philip, any comment any member of this forum makes in support of their classic Defender and what they think is missing from the new one, continues to fall on deaf ears. Apparently we (the many) can’t have positive views of our charming, characterful and occasionally frustrating vehicles, because you (the only) tell us we’re wrong.
But I do have one question of you. You regularly mention that you have (previously owned) LR products, but you have never said which. So, I wonder (as a fully signed up member of a Defender forum), have you ever actually owned a Defender? You’ve never said ‘when I owned my Defender’ or ‘I can speak from experience, Grenadier, as I owned a Defender and so I think, blah, blah blah, etc, etc, etc’. Instead you talk only of three old LR ‘Products’. Very vague. One, we know, is a RR. What, pray tell, are the other two? Just curious to know.  Monsieur Le Grenadier
I've not been everywhere, but it's on my list..... 2011 Puma 110DC - Corris Grey |
||
|
27th Jun 2021 9:50pm |
|
| Philip Member Since: 09 Mar 2018 Location: England Posts: 510
|
Thinking about it, I actually haven’t had a Defender registered in my name - but I grew up with them (lots and lots of them, from SIIIs to 90s to Defenders - alongside Discoveries, RRs etc), learned to drive in one, have driven many, many thousands of miles in them. Current LR list is a 1979 6 cyl 109” SIII truck cab, 1993 RR Vogue LSE, 2011 RR Vogue TDV8, 2019 RR SDV8 Autobiography. Possibly a 90 HT soon (and I quite fancy an SI, current prices aside).
|
||
|
27th Jun 2021 10:17pm |
|
| Ads90 Member Since: 16 Jun 2008 Location: Cots-on-the-Wolds Posts: 800 
|
Like the Jimny (& sadly unlike the ND), this has so much charm - shame only LHD. I could actually be tempted otherwise, a basic spec., self-IVA. Then add the Putin-lift kit. Nice. |
||
|
27th Jun 2021 10:40pm |
|
| Supacat Member Since: 16 Oct 2012 Location: West Yorkshire Posts: 11018 
|
You and many others. "Consumers aren't always happy with the latest electronic magic in their vehicles Automakers and suppliers are spending billions to dazzle drivers with new tech features. In some cases, consumers just don't like them. Many of these technologies originate from suppliers. Parts and systems companies have become the industry's idea labs in many cases, with vast supplier investments going into R&D pursuits for new products. Automakers look to suppliers to bring them the newest and coolest additions. But since 2015, Kolodge and J.D. Power have been researching consumer attitudes toward such vehicle features, and they have a difficult message for automakers: Consumers have tried the vaunted premium electronic features, big-screen entertainment systems, adjustable seats, lane-changing warning systems and voice-activated air conditioning, and in many cases, they are underwhelmed. Among the problem children now in showrooms, according to J.D. Power's research: voice controls, touchpads, radio controls, factory-installed apps and the expanding suites of automated safety devices." " What to do about new technologies and features that leave consumers blase is unclear. The problem is that adding a new feature to a vehicle can be much easier than acknowledging its shortcomings and pulling it out of production — with Musk's surprise order on Tesla's moving lumbar feature as an exception. "The industry has been very additive in technologies and not very good at taking away unsatisfactory features that are no longer wanted," Kolodge said. "Look how long it took automakers to stop installing CD players. "But we can't ignore the voice of the consumer," she added. "The industry needs to make sure the products it's designing are really getting used by the customers they're intended to serve." https://www.autonews.com/technology/consum...r-vehicles |
||
|
28th Jun 2021 6:47am |
|
| 22900013A Member Since: 23 Dec 2010 Location: Oxfordshire Posts: 3140
|
Iirc the Niva was all round coil springs before the Landrover, (ditto the G wagen) 2011 110 USW
1973 Series III 1-Ton 1972 Series III 1-Ton Cherrypicker 1969 IIA 1-Ton 1966 IIA 88" |
||
|
28th Jun 2021 6:48am |
|
| Grenadier Member Since: 23 Jul 2014 Location: The foot of Mont Blanc... Posts: 5765
|
My wife has a fully loaded new gen TT, the first Audi to launch the infotainment/dash/sat nav combo. And of course being Audi, all the other infotainment stuff. There must be a hundred options of things we can use, not use, turn off or on. Aside from the obvious that most people use (lights, AC, music - synced to phone, and Sat Nav) we use exactly none of it. Don't mind the prompts for oil or brake changes, clearly, but the rest of the electronics are largely ignored. What we do have to use twice a year, (therefore now up to ten times during her ownership) is recalibrating her tyre pressure each time we swap from summer to winter tyres and back again. And I can tell you, the amount of bezel turning and button pushing to find the correct tool is a bl**dy nightmare, far from intuitive. In the Def I climb on board, fire her up, sync my music, turn on the side lights and drive off. Simples.  Monsieur Le Grenadier
I've not been everywhere, but it's on my list..... 2011 Puma 110DC - Corris Grey |
||
|
28th Jun 2021 7:03am |
|
| Philip Member Since: 09 Mar 2018 Location: England Posts: 510
|
Full-time 4WD before both, too. |
||
|
28th Jun 2021 10:57am |
|
| 22900013A Member Since: 23 Dec 2010 Location: Oxfordshire Posts: 3140
|
I've heard the Niva is excellent off road too, and I've always liked the G wagen. 2011 110 USW
1973 Series III 1-Ton 1972 Series III 1-Ton Cherrypicker 1969 IIA 1-Ton 1966 IIA 88" |
||
|
28th Jun 2021 11:37am |
|
| markb110 Member Since: 22 May 2010 Location: Guildford Posts: 2529  
|
From what Supercat has copied above I think that this will be another reason as to why the Bronco will do well.
So much of the vehicle has been designed around nuts and bolts, that the consumer can take their wrenches out of their garage and change the look of their Bronco in an afternoon. Be it for show, nice weather or a weekend of wheeling with friends and family. Knock a panel, reach for the spanner’s and change a part. It’s hands on, just like us and our parents and grandparents before. You can involve the kids to get them away from social mediocre and their tablets. Knobs and dials That you can feel on the fly not motion detection or touchscreen that you have to look away from the road or trail to operate. And because of the above, and America being America the after market will be on a par with Jeep to get the most out of the vehicle. All the while the average UK JLR consumer in too scared or ill educated (as in they don’t read the manual), to use all that tech for it’s intended use for fear of upsetting the dealer with a warrantee claim or reducing the value of the vehicle before the finance deal expires. They would rather be trapped in a never ending finance trap for a vehicle that will never be theirs instead of owning a vehicle that they could do so much more with. And finally it’s not just electric / software gizmos. Remember when the transfer box stopped being a standard fit on a RRS because PCP buyers never used it and it was an excuse to reduce weight and improve MPG. |
||
|
28th Jun 2021 12:04pm |
|
| Philip Member Since: 09 Mar 2018 Location: England Posts: 510
|
Single-speed transfer box is hardly a surprise - it just reflects reality. Lower weight, marginal efficiency gains, lower CO2. The necessity for Land Rover to offer class-leading off road ability is the albatross around their neck - a Road Rover sub-brand can’t come soon enough.
As for fixing a Bronco with your home tool kit - no chance. Safety and emissions legislation and performance expectations mean that - like every single other modern car - it’s still loaded with electronics, even if you can (entirely pointlessly) take a door off it. The screen in the middle of a Bronco dashboard controls all the same things that they do in other cars, it has traction control and stability control just like everything else. |
||
|
28th Jun 2021 12:29pm |
|
| 22900013A Member Since: 23 Dec 2010 Location: Oxfordshire Posts: 3140
|
Why is it pointless? Some folks like driving about with minimal bodywork on. Ever seen the pink panther? Motorbikes? Just because you wouldn't do it doesn't make it pointless. It doesn't especially grab me either but I won't knock those who indulge. 2011 110 USW
1973 Series III 1-Ton 1972 Series III 1-Ton Cherrypicker 1969 IIA 1-Ton 1966 IIA 88" |
||
|
28th Jun 2021 12:33pm |
|
| Grenadier Member Since: 23 Jul 2014 Location: The foot of Mont Blanc... Posts: 5765
|
Agree with 22900013A, why is taking things off entirely pointless? Firstly, and most importantly, it’s the owner’s choice, which is what makes classic Defenders great, (they are almost all unique), and will be the same for the Bronco and is the same for the Wrangler, individuality in an amorphous automotive world. And it’s one of the biggest failings in the ND. I love driving in stripped down LR/Defs. I’d happily take the doors off mine over summer.
Philip, thank you for your list of LR products, but reading your history seems to imply your were made to work in Defs or Series vehicles but chose to buy RRs. The outlier is the S3, so I wonder if it is an heirloom rather than something chosen/bought? Either way, you’re clearly not a classic Defender owner in the truest sense with your last 30 years of ownership being at the luxury end of 4x4 ownership. So I understand why you like the ND but I certainly don’t understand why you keep telling those of us on a forum dedicated to, and monopolised by, Defender ownership (in the real sense of it: love, obsession, frustration, passion, individuality, care, maintenance, adventure, modification, more frustration) that we’re either wrong, or living in the dark ages, or macho, or masochistic, or any of the other slurs or points of view you have, when you clearly don’t live it, ‘get it’ or indeed want to get it. You’re like a pub bore or armchair manager. You know it all without having ‘lived’ it. And I don’t count being dragged around in LR products growing up as living it, it’s clearly never been your choice. So whilst you may prefer the cosseting nature, luxury and silence a RR affords, we prefer (even if only some of the time or as you call it as a ‘toy’) to indulge in the opposite. That’s our choice and that’s what Classic Defenders and their predecessors gave us. But apparently according to you and LR we’re wrong for wanting to do that, when clearly a huge market still remains. In this regard the ND simply doesn’t cut it. And as per 22900013A’s earlier photo, the ND simply never will. Off roading and towing aren’t everything. Whilst you may have seen many NDs towing plant machinery or trailers, that does not a Defender make. Isuzus can do that for a lot less money. But who wants an Isuzu? Certainly not someone who wants their car to have character, however frustrating that ‘character’ can sometimes be. So in terms of a ND doing everything a CD can, please get back to me when you’ve also seen a ND military varient, the pizza oven, the flatbed, the sewage van, the cherry picker, the 130 global overlander, the 50 year old S3 still driving and being fixed with butchered parts in a garage in Africa, the NGO version, the toy, the one with no doors on, the gin bar, the nomad surfer’s beach home, the electrician’s van with roll-up sides, the airport fire engine, the ambulance, the ambulance converted into a camper, the 4x4 competition truck, the petrol truck, the tow truck, the one being repaired by the side of the road in Mongolia using goat’s guts, and of course Prince Philip’s hearse. But you won’t, not one. None of the above really ever applied to the Disco, albeit early models were used extensively for overlanding, but towing and spending 95% of the time on road did. Much like the ND, which is why so many Disco owners are buying them and so many Defender owners are comparing them to Discos. And whilst you’re right that the majority of Defenders now don’t spend much time off road, I’d still warrant that over their lifetime far more than 5% have (LR’s own estimate as to how many NDs will be used off road), on farms, during mountain rescue, in wars, assisting humanitarian efforts and expeditions etc, off road adventures in far flung continents that the new variant will simply never see and if it does, never in the same numbers as the old variant. And, I’d suggest, that the classic Defs still running continue to see. And further, the ND won’t offer 1% of the variants and incarnations the classic Defender did and still does to anyone, anywhere and of any class. What it will offer is a road biased, limited, luxurious and comfortable SUV at a price unattainable for most people. Much the same as the Disco. Oh and the Velar. And, um the RRS. Not to mention……you get my point. Wholly unnecessary addition to LRs fleet of identikit SUVs, and the termination of a unique vehicle that was still needed and desired and that made the LR name. That’s what Ford understand with the Bronco (which hasn’t been made to look/copy/perform like the Explorer SUV), Jeep with the Wrangler (which hasn’t been made to look/copy/perform like a Grand Cherokee), Merc with the G Wagen (which hasn’t been made to look/copy/perform like a ML) and Ineos with the Grenadier which HAS been made to look/copy/perform like a classic Defender, just better and more reliably. Instead LR have created a Disco 6 that looks like many other SUVs, performs like its Oval Badged stablemates and will mainly be left unchanged from when picked up in the showroom, or if they are changed at all they will look like this. Sad. https://www.topgear.com/car-news/modified/...without-v8 Monsieur Le Grenadier I've not been everywhere, but it's on my list..... 2011 Puma 110DC - Corris Grey |
||
|
29th Jun 2021 9:50am |
|
|
|
| All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
< Previous Topic | Next Topic > |
Posting Rules
|
Site Copyright © 2006-2024 Futuranet Ltd & Martin Lewis
