"boxrocket" (boxrocket)
09/04/2014 at 22:47 • Filed to: land rover, defender, 5.0, ford, suv, luxury
3
10|
"boxrocket" (boxrocket)
09/04/2014 at 22:47 • Filed to: land rover, defender, 5.0, ford, suv, luxury | 3
| 10 |
Like many, I have a dream garage. It is a constantly-changing thing for me, as new models are introduced, old ones discontinued, flaws found, or availability becomes an issue, so I like to keep my options open. Recently I changed my "off-road-capable luxury SUV money-no-object " slot from an Icon Bronco to the new Range Rover, but now may have to change it again: Introducing the Urban Warrior 110, a Ford 5.0L "Coyote" V8-powered Discovery 110 with all the modern fixin's a filthy-rich dandy could want, with all the off-road capability that gained Land Rover its worldwide reputation. All for the price of a Range Rover Autobiography L. !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! .
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
Adding to the excitement are a few fun facts: It can be tuned to have over 700hp. It has modern non-British electronics. It's new. It has a manual gearbox! It's a rare sight (in the US), so G-Wageneers and Range Rover faithful are likely to be green with envy. And currently, there is only one.
sm70- why not Duesenberg?
> boxrocket
09/04/2014 at 22:51 |
|
I wouldn't choose that over a G Wagon. Sorry. The G is supposed to be brash and flashy. That looks like some tried to make the utilitarian Defender even brasher and flashier. If they left the outside alone, it might be a different story.
Dunnik
> boxrocket
09/04/2014 at 22:55 |
|
You had me at "non-British electrics".
|
boxrocket
> sm70- why not Duesenberg?
09/04/2014 at 22:59 |
|
They're both essentially forty-year-old utilitarian - and military - designs that get minor updates from the manufacturers, and look it, in both a charming way, and not-so-charming ways, like the goofy LEDs on the current G-Wagen that look like they came from Walmart/PepBoys/AutoZone etc. that are very much like the metaphorical "lipstick on a pig", and aerodynamics, and fuel economy (ha!).
Besides, I like Land Rovers, if only for the charm of knowing something will possibly fail and it will be expensive to fix because the problem is odd and suddenly goes away when the vehicle is near a dealership, whereas the Mercedes have things that are designed to fail and designed to be expensive to fix, to keep customers coming back to the dealership in the hopes of selling them a new currently-unbroken new model (sort of like apple, in that regard, but even more expensive).
Matthew Phillips
> boxrocket
09/04/2014 at 22:59 |
|
Besides the Jeep wrangler and Factory Five, I've never been a fan of the bring your own car upgrade kits.
|
Matthew Phillips
> sm70- why not Duesenberg?
09/04/2014 at 22:59 |
|
This looks half done.
|
sm70- why not Duesenberg?
> boxrocket
09/04/2014 at 23:05 |
|
I agree, but I don't think Mercedes deliberately designs their cars to break.
Svend
> boxrocket
09/04/2014 at 23:55 |
|
Twisted Automotive here in the U.K. have a nice 6.2V8 520bhp 110 CSW for a ridiculous price of GBP£125,000.
http://www.twistedautomotive.com/
Another (LHD) has 500bhp and looks awesome in white for GBP£119,000.
AMGtech - now with more recalls!
> boxrocket
09/04/2014 at 23:58 |
|
I also agree. However, if Mercedes are designed to break, why are there still so many 123's, 124's, 126's etc. still on the road? I have a customer with a 203 coupe nearing 300k that still runs great. And a 163 that comes in on occasion with over 300k. Those aren't that old yet that they should have that many miles. I think Mercedes just knows how things wear out and warns you by way of the service sheets (at least somewhat). Also, they wouldn't keep producing parts for all of the classics like they do, long after aftermarket support has died.
|
AMGtech - now with more recalls!
> boxrocket
09/05/2014 at 00:03 |
|
It's rare that I would take something over a Mercedes, but I would love to have this. But without the ugly badges, lose the diamond pattern on the center console, and fit some black steelies to it. And it would be much better in 4-door short box truck form, just because that's quirky and unique looking. Or topless 2-door truck with an optional bikini top. BTW, I'm not a truck person, not even a little bit.
|
boxrocket
> AMGtech - now with more recalls!
09/05/2014 at 07:52 |
|
More so their newer cars than their old ones. There's a feeling of planned obsolescence when being in one and working on them since they push certain technological envelopes forward, but then those systems fail, or don't quite work right (voice control especially), or feel more dated as other OEMs introduce the same technology later that feels more polished, even in mainstream brands. Take, for example, backup cameras. They're a pretty simple system, and are a useful aid as greenhouses get smaller and visibility declines as a result, so it is a very popular option, along with parking sensors. With a Mercedes, in order to use that feature, one has to turn on the infotainment system, wait for it to boot up, then wait for it to realize you're in reverse to turn on the camera, and when it does come on, the picture isn't uncommonly blurry due to the camera's and/or screen's low-resolution (though newer cars have improved somewhat). Not the end of the world, but it diminishes the usefulness of the feature (which isn't cheap, usually part of a several-thousand-dollar infotainment system) especially when, for example, Nissan/Infiniti and Ford/Lincoln and others turn on the camera right as you select reverse, and it will have a nice, crisp image, along with moving lines that match the vehicle's trajectory based on steering inputs and colored blocks that indicate where the sensors believe obstacles are, even if not in the camera's view. Again, not the end of the world, and a very minor feature, but as a self-proclaimed technological leader, M-B should do better.