ImperialCollegeRRproject said:

Are JLR focusing too much on the tech and not enough on driver interaction? What do you think? By making it too easy, are they detracting from the potential off-road experience? Do you think they care?

Click to expand...

Yes, too many gizmo's, I dont want hill descent control, parking sensors and all that other stuff that just goes wrong. It's as iff the electronic development are out of control, kids in a sweet store syndrome, KISS technology is what I believe in. I'm sure JLR don't care as long as they are able to shift enough of their overpriced unreliable vehicles.
At least they could offer base models without all the gizmo's.

Anyone that puts a 'Sport' tag on what is essentially (should be) an agricultural vehicle is so out of touch of what Landrover is seen as being about by most of the world.


Imagine if others took the same route

Volvo F12 Sport tractor unit
John Deere 6115ED Sport

Do I think they care? Nope, they just want to sell them to the Chelsea Tractor set and drug dealers. As long as someone buys them why would they care?

Thanks Datatek.

What is KISS technology? Are you referring to the high precision measurement tools?

imperialcollegerrproject said:

thanks datatek.

What is kiss technology? Are you referring to the high precision measurement tools?

Click to expand...

o...my... God

my glass hammer needs replacing



and whilst your at the stores get me some sky hooks, mine are knackered

ImperialCollegeRRproject said:

Thanks Datatek.

What is KISS technology? Are you referring to the high precision measurement tools?

Click to expand...

Keep It Simple Stupid
For the record, I used to design and manufacture computer hardware and industrial micro control systems.

vilguy said:

o...my... God

my glass hammer needs replacing



and whilst your at the stores get me some sky hooks, mine are knackered

Click to expand...

:hysterically_laughi:hysterically_laughi sums up what is wrong with designers today.

Datatek said:

Yes, too many gizmo's, I dont want hill descent control, parking sensors and all that other stuff that just goes wrong. It's as iff the electronic development are out of control, kids in a sweet store syndrome, KISS technology is what I believe in. I'm sure JLR don't care as long as they are able to shift enough of their overpriced unreliable vehicles.
At least they could offer base models without all the gizmo's.

Click to expand...

Hypothetically speaking, if they offered a base model without the gizmos, would you buy one? Or would you want to see more changes?

im just off to kill myself at the thought of the prospect of this countries future in the engineering industry.

...

oh crap I didnt order the suicide button off JLR!!!!

Datatek said:

:hysterically_laughi:hysterically_laughi sums up what is wrong with designers today.

Click to expand...

Hands up. Numpty is the word.

For the record I'm not an engineering student. I'm studying at the Business School of Imperial College. Although I used to own a classic mini jet black and spent many an enjoyable weekend trying to repair whatever went wrong the preceding week.

ImperialCollegeRRproject said:

Hypothetically speaking, if they offered a base model without the gizmos, would you buy one? Or would you want to see more changes?

Click to expand...

I would certainly be more interested, but they need to introduce some reliability to compete with Japanese/Korean products.
I also detest V engines, but that is purely personal and the idea that the body has to come off to do many repairs as I do all my own maintenance is a big no no.

Range Rover used to be an off-road capable 4x4 with a touch of luxury.
Now it's a luxury car with a touch of off-road capability.

Not for me thanks.
Too complicated, too expensive.
Aimed at Bankers, Sheiks and WAGs.

Trewey said:

Range Rover used to be an off-road capable 4x4 with a touch of luxury.
Now it's a luxury car with a touch of off-road capability.

Not for me thanks.
Too complicated, too expensive.
Aimed at Bankers, Sheiks, WAGs and the scrap head in 5-10 years

Click to expand...

Edited for accuracy

Trewey said:

Range Rover used to be an off-road capable 4x4 with a touch of luxury.
Now it's a luxury car with a touch of off-road capability.

Not for me thanks.
Too complicated, too expensive.
Aimed at Bankers, Sheiks and WAGs.

Click to expand...

Sums it up nicely.

This is an interesting thread and although I don't own a range rover I thought I'd contribute. I bought my first Land Rover (Discovery 2) this May because I love offroading. I bought an LR because it is a quintessential British offroad product. Didn't buy a new Disco or RR because basically I do not have the money at the age of 26...at this stage in life I'd rather buy a house/flat or perhaps even 5 reasonably priced cars...or maybe even 10 dacia Sanderos. I don't think I'm alone in this age group, basically priced out. Now, those who can afford a new RR are an entirely different age group and have different interests (in most cases). I'm not talking about enthusiasts as its a totally different kettle of fish. Either they are older and have saved up the capital...like my dad, but he bought an Audi Q7. He doesn't care what is in the car as long as he feels it is good quality, (i.e. german) has bluetooth, has an automatic and is 4 wheel drive...though I'm pretty sure he doesn't know much about various versions of 4 wheel drive (haldex, etc). Ask him whether it has ABS and he has no idea what that is. He is not an enthusiast and doesn't go offroad...like most people who own these type of cars. He has road tyres. The second group will be young nouveau riche...and lets face it they dont go offroading for a plethora of reasons and have different interests. So basically those who buy RR don't really use them for offroad...I reckon if the. RR was 2 wheel drive the majority wouldnt notice. Now the. RR has loads of competition from Merc, Beemer, Audi, etc...which are bloody good, just as boring, much cheaper and are german. My dads Audi Q7 is so brilliant it is absolutely boring as fek...and I suspect an RR is as well.

What I'd like is an affordabke off-roader that I can use every day and is fun to drive and econimical (relatively). If god forbid I accidentally drive it into a river then I wont need to remortgage my home...hence a D2. Easy to repair, cheap parts comfy, luxurious and loads of aftermarket mod options that dont break the bank. Above all it puts a smile on my face...my dads Q7 does not...its far too refined. And one thing the Q7 does not have are the famous 'three amigos'...you always have company wherever you go

One important point. Vilguy raised an important issue on another thread on the ethics of using any comments made on this thread in any final report to JLR.

The initial request was for people willing to engage in customer research in return for an LRE Centre voucher.

Anyone volunteering for the research will be provided with a breakdown of the intended research activities and will need to sign a form allowing me to reproduce the information for JLR purposes.

The discussion that subsequently resulted on this forum is not part of any formal research. No actual statements made on this forum will be reprinted in any final report produced by myself without permission.

ImperialCollegeRRproject said:

One important point. Vilguy raised an important issue on another thread on the ethics of using any comments made on this thread in any final report to JLR.

The initial request was for people willing to engage in customer research in return for an LRE Centre voucher.

Anyone volunteering for the research will be provided with a breakdown of the intended research activities and will need to sign a form allowing me to reproduce the information for JLR purposes.

The discussion that subsequently resulted on this forum is not part of any formal research. No actual statements made on this forum will be reprinted in any final report produced by myself without permission.

Click to expand...

You can use any of my comments

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLHOK9ic0Rc&app=desktop

This is probably part of the reason RR owners don't go offroad. The only thing it appears to have going for it is, judging by the video at 0:27, its probably one of the most watertight cars LR ever made :hysterically_laughi

The new RR and RRS are simply a world away from what the LR brand used to signify. a 80k+ car with >500bhp that does 0-60 in 5.3 seconds is frankly unnecessary

As all have said, too much electrickery
too much focus on a being a road car for the elite
too much money
in summary its just too much. JLR need to take a step back and consider that Jaguar and Land Rover don't have to have the same focus and target market - in order to cover a broader audience both brands should stick to what they are (were) good at.
But again as others have said it won't and can't happen thanks to EU regs

Personally, I do like the L405, and if I had the money, yes, I would get one, but it would never see mud, I wouldn't think of it as a LR, and it'd have a defender sat next to it on the drive which would actually be used as a land rover, and it wouldn't be a new one with that transit engine.

I think its a waste of time and money for JLR to try making a car into something its not, each model has its purpose. Yes the L405 may be fairly capable offroad but I think time and money should be spent on making it more reliable before trying to make it an 'off-roader'. No-one wants an unreliable off-roader that they can't even repair themselves

Datatek said:

You can use any of my comments

Click to expand...

Thanks kind sir!

Datatek said:

You can use any of my comments

Click to expand...

Likewise




Can I have my LRE voucher now?! :cheer2:

Matticus said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLHOK9ic0Rc&app=desktop

This is probably part of the reason RR owners don't go offroad. The only thing it appears to have going for it is, judging by the video at 0:27, its probably one of the most watertight cars LR ever made :hysterically_laughi

The new RR and RRS are simply a world away from what the LR brand used to signify. a 80k+ car with >500bhp that does 0-60 in 5.3 seconds is frankly unnecessary

As all have said, too much electrickery
too much focus on a being a road car for the elite
too much money
in summary its just too much. JLR need to take a step back and consider that Jaguar and Land Rover don't have to have the same focus and target market - in order to cover a broader audience both brands should stick to what they are (were) good at.
But again as others have said it won't and can't happen thanks to EU regs

Personally, I do like the L405, and if I had the money, yes, I would get one, but it would never see mud, I wouldn't think of it as a LR, and it'd have a defender sat next to it on the drive which would actually be used as a land rover, and it wouldn't be a new one with that transit engine.

I think its a waste of time and money for JLR to try making a car into something its not, each model has its purpose. Yes the L405 may be fairly capable offroad but I think time and money should be spent on making it more reliable before trying to make it an 'off-roader'. No-one wants an unreliable off-roader that they can't even repair themselves

Click to expand...

Nowt wrong with the Transit engine, better than the M51 in the P38.
EU regs have nothing to do with what is going on. Look at the G Waggen, that is the way the Defender should have evolved.