What is it specifically about Land Rovers that makes them prestigious?

"MegaSuper" (megasuper) 04/27/2015 at 22:26 • Filed to: None

0

16

I’m not coming from a position of criticising them here, I’m genuinely curious:

Why is it that so often you’ll hear auto journalists refer to Land Rovers (particularly Range Rovers) as “the ultimate car”, “possibly a better cruiser than a Bentley,” “a very stately vehicle” ?

I’m not saying they’re not, but isn’t it true that…

If it’s for off-roading, you could do just as well with a G-Wagen, Wrangler, Land Cruiser…?

If it’s for performance, you could do just as well with a top-of-the-line Cayenne, Macan, AMG Mercedes, X5M, etc?

If it’s for image or interior design, you could just get a Bentley, 7-Series, A8, S-Class (even the new Volvo XC90 has a spectacular and creative interior)?

If it’s just because they’re expensive, well, the sky’s the limit. Someone could always get a Rolls-Royce instead.

Maybe people who are buying one don’t care, but when you factor Land Rover’s poor reliability into the mix…I just don’t get it. What is the “X Factor” that Land Rovers possess that make people overlook this so much? What negates the poor reliability?

And then, in markets outside of the EU where (AFAIK) the diesel engines are not available, there’s the not-so-great fuel economy. Again, wouldn’t that lower the car’s position in a potential buyer’s mind?

For what it’s worth, I’ll mention that I understand that they have a legendary reputation for their service out in the deserts of Africa during WWII and whatnot; I’m referring more to their modern-day perception of being luxury vehicles on par with top-of-the-line saloons and luxury cars.

So what is it then? Is it because it’s British? Is it because of celebrities in the UK and Los Angeles who have them?

In fact, I forget what magazine/website it was, but there was a poll in the UK that asked “What is your dream 3-car garage?” The most common response was “Ferrari, Porsche, Land Rover.” THAT’S what I’m referring to. Why are they seen this way? Again, I’m not saying they don’t deserve it…it’s just not obvious me what the “thing” is about them in the way that Ferrari = performance, noise, racing heritage, or GTR = tuner culture, engine that can handle lots of mods, lap times, etc.

For Sweden > MegaSuper 04/27/2015 at 22:30

2

Because people still think bad teeth, rain, tasteless food, and being bad at football is prestigeous

TwinCharged - Is Now UK Opponaut > MegaSuper 04/27/2015 at 22:33

3

Because they were there first - the mass production of the original Land Rover made offroading affordably available to the masses. That’s why so many were used by people ranging from farmers to the military. Yes, you could get cars like the G-Wagen but back then, it was mostly a military-spec vehicle and being Mercedes, it was pricey. At the other end of the spectrum, the Range Rover was one of the first cars to combine offroad ability with luxury and style. It didn’t work all the time, but it was the SUV that began the surge of offroaders appearing in city centres and on the school run.

Steve in Manhattan > MegaSuper 04/27/2015 at 22:49

0

Probably because the aristocracy embraced them early on. And I’m guessing that only the Land Cruiser is as capable off road, if that’s your thing.

Viggen > MegaSuper 04/27/2015 at 23:01

0

Because -BRITISH-

boxrocket > MegaSuper 04/27/2015 at 23:18

0

Honestly, drive one, and it makes sense.

Land Rovers - even LR2s and Evoques, but more so the Discovery and Range Rover - have a specialness to them that other vehicles just don't match. G-Wagens, MLs, LXs, GXs, Land Cruisers, Sequoias, Escalades, Navigators, X5s, Cayennes, Q7s, and QX80s all have their own pros and cons, but they just don't feel as completely competent and civilized as a Land Rover. They feel unstoppable yet comfortable, just as at home in Death Valley as Rodeo Drive: They seem to demand hard use, borderline abuse even, and take it all day long. The only SUV I've yet encountered that has a similar feeling within its own class is the XC90.

Granted, that feeling diminishes when the warranty expires and parts start failing, but when they're kept up and treated right, there's just something so right and satisfying about a Land Rover. As alluded to above, LR isn't alone in that sensation: To me, most Volvos, Jaguars, Mazdas, the Ford Raptor, a basic small Toyota pickup, and - oddly enough - the Kia Sedona all share it as well, in their own ways and to their own degrees.

MegaSuper > boxrocket 04/27/2015 at 23:33

0

2 questions

1) Can you describe how it feels to drive? Are you speaking from experience? Is it sort of a Citroen DS-like “It just floats over bumps!” or a Chevy Suburban “Oh man this car is the size of a small township and yet I can steer it with just my two fingers!” sort of sensation?

2) What is the deal specifically regarding their reliability? Are they just poorly built, overly complex, or is it something like the Mazda RX8 where the reliability is low because there’s something special you have to do to maintain it, but the average person doesn’t know it?

It’s weird to me because, AFAIK, they were (are?) the same company as Jaguar, yet Jaguar is no where near as unreliable…and they built sports cars!

MegaSuper > For Sweden 04/27/2015 at 23:38

0

Brittisk mat är ganska bra idag, är det inte? (Gordon Ramsay, Heston Blumenthal, etc)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_M…

Distraxi's idea of perfection is a Jagroen > MegaSuper 04/28/2015 at 00:59

0

Partly because they were the first in market - both with a basic civilian 4WD (Landrover, or as it is nowadays, defender) and with an upmarket SUV (Range Rover). And heritage counts in the prestige market, just ask VW.

Partly because they ARE the best in class as a pure offroad vehicle, in all the classes they’re in. It’s something they pride themselves on and a core product attribute. You simply CAN’T do as well offroad with a G-Wagen, Wrangler, Landcruiser etc, and never have been able to. And that cred brushes off on the whole package.

Partly because their approach to offroad capability (since the early 70s at least) has been based on extreme wheel travel and axle articulation, unlike most of the competition. Which in turn leads to a very comfortable onroad ride, which they’ve kept improving with a lot of innovation around intelligent suspension systems. And (with the exception of the “Sport” series) they haven’t compromised this by trying too hard for extreme on-road capability. So the onroad feel is more like a luxury car than your average SUV.

Partly because they are the ride of choice of aristocracy, and that lends prestige which the “celebrity” crowd pick up on, which trickles down to every one else.

And partly because the Brits still do classy best. Just look at Jag, Aston, RR, Bentley. Even if none of them are British owned any more.

Basically, they’re selling the romance. And because of that people gloss over the reliability, fuel consumption, etc, etc.

Distraxi's idea of perfection is a Jagroen > MegaSuper 04/28/2015 at 01:07

0

Re (2), it’s partly just plain crappy assembly, which they’ve never shaken off since the 70s. Partly excessive complexity (and custom complexity at that - LR don’t like off the shelf stuff). And partly because historically the products were (deliberately) designed to be repaired with 2 screwdrivers, a crescent and a hammer, to suit 3rd world operation. Which leads to a high parts count, a high number of disassemble-able joints, and a lot of bits dropping off...

They’re under the same umbrella as Jag, but operate pretty much independently. And before that, when they were with Rover, they operated independently of them too, which meant they missed out on what Honda and BMW had to offer in terms of quality improvement. Being purely 4x4 manufacturers meant they could get away with saying to the car guys “that doesn’t apply to us, our products are different”. Whether that was true or not. I worked for Rover in the 90s and saw it in action, I’d be surprised if it’s changed much in later years.

Svend > MegaSuper 04/28/2015 at 01:59

0

I think its part because Land Rover came out of the ashes of WWII to try and save Rover. The company needed a vehicle that was as capable as the ‘Willys’ jeep that had been used so much during the war and parts and sources were scarce so nothing went onto the car that didn’t need to be there but had to be capable of doing everything expected and more of it. It soon be came a by word for toughness and many other things. Land Rover was the first vehicle seen by many in the developing world. They crossed massive expanses with ease and when they broke they were easy to fix. Later Land Rover came out with the Range Rover, a farm vehicle made to be hosed out after a hard working day on the farm but soon adopted by the gentry as tough reliable vehicles to slog around the estate and drive to village shops which soon propelled them up the ranks with the wealthy and soon Range Rover became a brand in its own right as the epitome of luxury as Land Rover started building the vehicles not so much aimed at the original purpose but the wants and needs of the wealthy but Land Rover wanted them to still be as capable as the rest of the stable rather than have a watered down version that may effect the reputation of the brand. In the U.S. market I guess many Land Rovers are seen as ‘prestigious’ because invariably wealthy individuals, celebrities and aristocrats around the world are seen driving them. From a British prospective the Range Rover is seen as quite prestigious but the Defender, Freelander and Discovery are regular everyday vehicles that do a job. The Defender for farming a no nonsense vehicle, the Freelander as a small off roader for getting the kids to school and going away with the caravan, etc... and the Discovery for people who want either more than a Freelander and/or aspire to a Range Rover or someone who wants to tow trailers for horses, etc...

As with any car you have to maintain them and unfortunately the wealthier people get the less they seem to take care of their vehicles and either fix them or get shot of them when they brake. I guess to a degree this is where most of the bad name for Land Rover comes from as the previous owner has had no care or intention of looking after the vehicle or learning what it does and think the vehicle will know instinctively that they are in trouble on a certain type of terrain and get them out. Many an airbag has been ripped off when changing a tyre because the owner didn’t know how or that they had to lock out the suspension either by a lever under the driver’s seat or by opening the tailgate.

Sam > MegaSuper 04/28/2015 at 08:25

0

Modern Land Rovers (2013-now) are much more reliable than earlier models. And they are the same company as Jaguar now, but they weren’t in the past.

StndIbnz, Drives a MSRT8 > MegaSuper 04/28/2015 at 10:36

0

Never got it. Been in a Discovery - interior is shit, tons of problems, exterior looks terrible.

Been in a new RR - basically a nicer Explorer, what does this have a fully loaded Grand Cherokee doesn’t plus cash in hand.

Evoque - just a nicer looking Escape.

I don’t get it.

boxrocket > MegaSuper 04/28/2015 at 13:09

0

1: Depends on the model and suspension settings. If you put a RR Sport it in the "Access Height" and drive it over potholes, you'll feel every pebble, but if you put a RR or LR4/Discovery in "Off-Road Height" and crawl over a boulder, it can feel like a regular car might on a fairly-maintained road. The best way to experience this is going to a dealership that has the "Experience" man-made off-road course on their lot or a natural one nearby, as well as an on-road course they've scouted to be a fair test if the vehicle. YouTube user Shmee150 has a very good video series where he was in California and experienced that dealership's "Experience" tour, and is worth a watch.

boxrocket > MegaSuper 04/28/2015 at 15:14

0

2: Doug DeMuro has a good series about his Land Rover Range Rover. For certain things, it's not a question of if they will fail, it's when. Like the air suspension: Expensive to repair, cheaper to install a non-air suspension if out-of-warranty as a replacement. This is true of pretty much ALL air suspensions, from old Lincoln Town Cars to new Mercedes-Benz S-Classes, so it's not exclusive to Land Rover.

Part of the other issues with reliability stem from two factors: Land Rover's (as a company) owners, and Land Rover owners (customers). In the last few decades, Land Rover's been majority-owned by Rover group, BMW, Ford, and now Tata. Because of this, each new owner has had to "make-do" with existing models, parts, and plans, unless they wanted to burn even more cash redoing the entire lineup. So a BMW-era Range Rover would have Rover design and assembly plans, BMW engine and electronics, and some team of engineers crazily trying to make it all work and make them warrantable. When Ford took over, they still used a lot of BMW's electronics and powertrains until they could substitute their own, and by "their own", they were essentially Jaguar and Volvo engines, and the Ford-developed 4.4L V8 diesel which was intended for the F-150, but that isn't available in the U.S. Ford sunk a lot of money into getting Land Rover up to date and competitive, lending Volvo's XC60 platform for the LR2, Evoque, and the new Discovery Sport, and turned over all development of the (frankly excellent) new Range Rover to Tata, ditto the Jaguar F-Type, XE, and next-generation XF and XJ. As we've seen, a strong recipe for success that Ford just didn't want to sink more money into during their "One Ford" transformation under Alan Mullaly.

The owners of the vehicles tend to take care of them when they can get the vehicle fixed at a dealer under warranty, but outside of that they don't seem to want to be bothered. No the vehicles are abused and neglected, leading to further complications down the road. This is something Toyota/Lexus excel at because they include long warranties and included maintenance, so customers are more encouraged to take better care of their vehicles, so they seem more reliable because they're better taken care of. For all we know Lexuses might have worse reliability than a Land Rover, but the dealerships don't tend to reveal issues that they might fix under warranty to the general population. So that leads to greater depreciation of the Land Rovers, so folks who can barely afford them - let alone repairs and proper maintenance - drive then until something goes catastrophically wrong, and either fix it on the cheap then sell it, or sell it as-is to the next "chump".

I've seen dozens of Land Rovers with well over 150K feeling about just as well-sorted as a new model (not a hit on the new models), and ones with 80K that seem ready for the parts yard. I've seen the same with Lexus cars as well: Last week I encountered a 2008 LS460 that looked like it'd been through the wringer, and the person who owned it also had a LS400 in immaculate condition with almost 380K miles. Same owner, completely different results.

YMMV definitely applies.

MegaSuper > StndIbnz, Drives a MSRT8 04/28/2015 at 18:48

0

Are you talking about the new Discovery, the Discovery Sport? If so, that’s too bad…it got great reviews and looked fabulous.

The Evoque is too much like a pillbox on wheels, very narrow windows and poor visibility.

The RR has a fabulous interior but the seating position feels strange somehow. It’s almost like you’re on a bird on a perch, glancing at the wheel and display at a very sharp angle. Maybe it’s a result of the stadium steering; it does sort of feel like you’re driving one!

StndIbnz, Drives a MSRT8 > MegaSuper 04/29/2015 at 09:42

0

No I mean the one from the 00’s I guess. Friend had one that had a lot of problems, interior was nothing special either.