While I 100% agree with
@DaBull (and am very pleased you have had this experience), I have to say I'm sad to read this news and I think it's an error on Land Ro-- er, JLR's part.
There's a human-centric heritage in Land Rovers that is special. For huge swaths of the world, the Land Rover was the first automobile that people saw. Grandparents tell stories of them to their children, and there becomes a recognition and heritage that goes along with that. The reality is that most people who buy a modern 4x4 are absolutely NOT using it for it's purpose - most Jeeps never leave the pavement -- but there is something undeniably attractive about the idea I'm talking about; a lot of people drive a Land Rover or a Jeep because they are in love with the
idea of what those things are.
JLR, with this move, has basically said "We no longer want to be associated with that idea". It might as well be totally different car company, in my opinion. Their products are great - and as DaBull said, the Defender is a phenomenally good car for a whole host of reasons -- but the "JLR Defender", with this move, is renouncing it's claim to the mantle or heritage of being the successor of the original Land Rover that popped out of the jungle into the village, often to the excitement and amazement of the locals. That Land Rover would be quite a splash, as would the sharing of candy, medicine, and mosquito nets that often came with them; that special day was the stuff of intergenerational stories, and every Land Rover had a bit of that soul with it.
Over time, the brand then becomes a symbol -- when you see those white Land Rovers with the dust clouds behind them, you know they were going to do something important in our world; people were going to be helped. Like Superman's "S" or the Syrian 'White Helmets' or the Red Cross -- the symbol means something to people. And folks like me are, at least in part, attracted to the brand because of that symbolism. Lots of cars can do what a Land Rover can do, but not many cars bring that symbolism with them while they do it.
At the same time, symbols mean different things to different people, and I won't get political but I am aware that there are likely some ill feelings towards the Land Rover that are directly contrary to the "fantasy" version I've presented above -- the arrival of the Land Rover from the jungle might also mean colonialism, cultural erasure, or resource exploitation, or other negative things for some people. Maybe JLR has more data on that then I do, which fully supports this divorce from the symbol. Again I don't want to get into a debate on the merits of this perspective other than to acknowledge some folks have it, so maybe it's not all bad that this change is happening for some folks.
But the way I think of it is this: if I pretend that every vehicle in the current JLR lineup had an Acura badge on the front, or a Volvo badge on it -- the vehicle is in every way the exact same, but offered from a different manufacturer -- it changes the way I feel about it and, for totally emotional reasons, it does change the desirability of the rig for me. I like the idea that I could be in my Defender and not get automatically shot at by an angry local, because that local knows that folks who arrive in Defenders are usually the helpers. Folks who arrive in an Acura or a Volvo - well, it's just different. They aren't automatically the helpers, and losing that is a shame.
On the other hand, with Ineos aiming at that market and supporting groups like the Halo trust, combined with the practical silhouette that
definitely is heavily inspired by the Land Rover, perhaps a new truck will soon be seen as being driven by helpers. That's a good thing -- because helpers bring hope, and I think the world always needs a bit of that.
