School me, what is the appeal of Land Rovers?

You just described BMW, Mercedes, Audi, Alpha, Maserati, Lamborghini, Ferrari … they don’t make sense it’s just what people want. If I had that much money to light on fire I’d probably chose a Landrover over the others too. I think they look nicer and have a demeanor about them more befitting what I’d want in my 100k SUV. I’d love to have a new defender 90. People who buy them new don’t care about reliability. For that matter few people actually buy them, they are leased.
 
I don't know much about them but they've recently caught my eye....pretty nice looking SUV's. too much money for me but I do like the look of them.
 
You just described BMW, Mercedes, Audi, Alpha, Maserati, Lamborghini, Ferrari … they don’t make sense it’s just what people want. If I had that much money to light on fire I’d probably chose a Landrover over the others too. I think they look nicer and have a demeanor about them more befitting what I’d want in my 100k SUV. I’d love to have a new defender 90. People who buy them new don’t care about reliability. For that matter few people actually buy them, they are leased.

Ferrari and to a point, Lamborghini don't fall into that list. They will depreciate, but not at the MB, BMW rate, then over time appreciate.

Landrover's are pure junk.
 
It's just about brand and prestige. It's the same reason some buy a Lincoln instead of a Ford. When I last looked for a new to me car (I don't ever buy a brand new car, I let someone else take the hit in first year depreciation) a year ago, I test drove a Lincoln MKX and a Ford Edge, both similar age and mileage. They're literally the same car but the Ford was a few thousand dollars less expensive. Sure, all the fancy features like heated and cooled leather seats, sunroof, seat/mirror position memory, remote start, etc. came standard in the Lincoln and were optional extras in the Ford when it was new. Nevertheless, I have the exact same features as the MKX at a much lower price so the added few thousand $$$ were literally for the brand. Did not appeal to me, but may appeal to others and that's true for the Rovers as well. The only brand I'd spend extra for is Mercedes. Not because the cars are significantly better, just because I like the brand.
 
My ownership experience with a 2006 LR3 cured me of ever owning another Land Rover ever again.
 
We had an LR3 for some time. We loved the LandRover - took it into the back country of Death Valley, no problem at all. They are really off-road capable even though most of them will be mall crawler all their life…

IMG_4173.jpeg

IMG_4185.jpeg
 
Ferrari? Lamborghini? Not if they are maintained per factory specs.
Most owners don't drive 'em enough to have reliability issues. But if you do drive one much, the maintenance frequency/expense is staggering. A neighbor has a Ferrari 512BB. He's a pro mechanic and keeping up with the car's routine maintenance needs seems like <almost> a full time job. He just spent something like $12K on parts and 6 weeks of weekends and evenings doing a "routine" service to replace all the seals or something like that. Brutal.

That's the kind of thing that makes me want a Miata instead of a Boxster (both of which have far lower maintenance burdens than the supercars).
 
To me, a luxury SUV is a ridiculous concept. If you use it for the intended purpose of off-roading that involves mud, dirt, things that scratch paint, things that put dents into bodywork and bust out lights, etc. The kinds of things you generally would want to avoid in a nice expensive luxury vehicle.

If I'm going to do off-roading I want to buy some POS that I don't care about breaking beyond repair.
 
Exactly. You wouldn't believe how many tacticool land rovers and 4runners stuck in sand/mud I've passed with my disposable and lighter weight subaru mom-wagon.

1695010737018.png
 

School me, what is the appeal of Land Rovers?​

I buy some of the best deals classifieds/Craigslist/side-of-the-road buys have to offer. It's way more fun and fulfilling to buy an exotic vehicle for a grand or two. Get it to run right with the help of Youtube and the internet. Then selling it to the next person for a silly marked-up price so they can impress their family and neighbors. A real friend would never be impressed because friends try to help you spend money wisely. :nono:

Here's another question along the same lines...?

Why do I get all the phone calls to haul stuff, tow trailers, plow driveways and pull cars out of the ditch with my $700.00 craigslist '76 Chevy pickup. While my neighbors that have the much more modern and capable $60,000 to $80,000 pickups never are asked?
 
I never understood the appeal of those vehicles. Both the *Rovers and G-Wagons have always seemed silly given the price tag. But I guess they do have some status value.

Personally if I wanted to stand out with a rugged, versatile, proven vehicle I'd get an up armored Toyota Hilux. Can probably get about 10 of them for the price of a Land Rover, though you might need to put in a little elbow grease to buff out the <insert insurgent group name here> logo. It has the side benefit that if you ever need to participate in regime change -- you'll fit right in ;)
 
I could see the appeal of a mil spec Land Rover but you get more bang for the buck with a Wrangler. But a crossover SUV is still a crossover SUV regardless of the brand and they all drive the same and feel the same so why pay a premium.
 
I could see the appeal of a mil spec Land Rover but you get more bang for the buck with a Wrangler. But a crossover SUV is still a crossover SUV regardless of the brand and they all drive the same and feel the same so why pay a premium.
It depends on what you are looking at and comparing it to. If you have driven Toyota Rav4's or Honda CRV's your whole life then get in a Luxury SUV you will be blown away. If you've driven a domestic or Hyundai Kia the last few years it will not feel like as big a jump. My last car was a Fully loaded Equinox, now I drive a Lincoln Corsair. I got a deal on the Corsair is the main reason I got it. To be honest the Lincoln is inferior in many ways. The interior is certainly nicer but the dynamics, ride comfort, and noise are about the same. Both cars have the same amenities. Now compare that to my moms similar year CRV and both seem like luxury cars in comparison.
 
My neighbor has a Land Rover and was just complaining about maintenance a few days ago. An oil change is $500. He implied that it needs to be done at a dealer because of some status update that needs to be done electronically (he could be wrong on that - he's pretty naive). And it's currently a 2 month wait for an appointment for even a simple oil change. He has a friend who's LR has been parked for over a month because he can't get it into a shop.
 
If you use it for the intended purpose of off-roading that involves mud, dirt, things that scratch paint, things that put dents into bodywork and bust out lights, etc. The kinds of things you generally would want to avoid in a nice expensive luxury vehicle.
If people bought cars in this country based on the idea of matching the car’s intended purpose to the buyers actual mission, the most popular car in the US would be a sedan, not a pickup truck.
 
If people bought cars in this country based on the idea of matching the car’s intended purpose to the buyers actual mission, the most popular car in the US would be a sedan, not a pickup truck.
Now the appeal of sedans I don't understand, when hatchbacks are available. That also seems to be an American thing? The Europeans seem to grasp the increased utility of hatchbacks. Many models available there aren't available here, sadly.
 
Now the appeal of sedans I don't understand, when hatchbacks are available. That also seems to be an American thing? The Europeans seem to grasp the increased utility of hatchbacks. Many models available there aren't available here, sadly.
To me, cars are just appliances so I prefer a 4 door hatchback but most people don't buy based on utility. And there's nothing wrong with that. I don't get worked up about how other people spend their money.
 
In my youth, I owned a 1966 Landrover 88. I took it everywhere--trails in woods, forded rivers (got it stuck in the Snoqualmie River and had to be winched out by an International Scout--the shame!), coal mines, overgrown fields, across curbs and traffic dividers. Loved that car. It was a few years older than the 88 shown in the Top Gear video above. I doubt any modern LandRover own is doing similar stuff with their $100K cars.
CUsersPatPicturesLand Rover.jpg
 
Years ago, Click and Clack, the Tappet brothers on CarTalk got a caller who said her son just got his license and two family members offered to gift them old cars of theirs. One was a Toyota Corolla and the other was a Land Rover. There was a discussion of practicality, but they concluded that if he got the Land Rover it would teach him an important lesson: NEVER BUY A BRITISH CAR.
 
The car in which I learned to drive was a '71 Ford Capri. That generation's Capri and Pinto shared the same drivetrain and chassis - the big difference being that the Capri had Lucas electronics, and the Pinto did not.

Pintos had a reputation for burning up due to fuel tank ruptures. Capris had a reputation for burning up due to electrical fires.
 
Back in my rockcrawling days the group I ran with was mostly Jeeps (I had a CJ-5) and Toyotas, but there was one guy with a brand new D90. It was very capable on the trail. He took it everywhere and didn't work about scratching it or getting mud on the leather upholstery... but I grant that he was the exception.
 
Now the appeal of sedans I don't understand, when hatchbacks are available. That also seems to be an American thing? The Europeans seem to grasp the increased utility of hatchbacks. Many models available there aren't available here, sadly.
I agree. I am a lover of hatchbacks, hate that they are so disliked and unavailable here. Very annoyed that Subaru moved the WRX from a hatch to a sedan (not to mention what they did with the latest rev)
 
Years ago, Click and Clack, the Tappet brothers on CarTalk got a caller who said her son just got his license and two family members offered to gift them old cars of theirs. One was a Toyota Corolla and the other was a Land Rover. There was a discussion of practicality, but they concluded that if he got the Land Rover it would teach him an important lesson: NEVER BUY A BRITISH CAR.
Land Rover has been owned by Tata since 2008, Ford before that, and BMW before that. It hasn’t really been British since ‘94
 
I bought a 2002 MB G500 the second or third year that they were available through dealers in the US. It was like the love child of a Willys jeep and an S500 sedan...business on the exterior and luxury on the interior. When I took delivery I bypassed the culvert on my driveway, locked all 3 diff's/low gear and crossed a steep 4ft ditch with ease. I used that thing to haul a 24ft race trailer, albeit with with quality roller cam anti-sway bars and careful load balance, and it pulled it at highway speeds+ well/stopped well. I also used it to get to hunting camps and around my duck lease running through a bit of muck and it performed admirably. When I brought it in for service, which was quite frequent due to a gremlin in the driver's window operating system, the service department personnel were always amazed that I was using it for the purpose for which it was originally designed. They said they have never seen a dirty one. I told them not to bother to wash it since I never did on my own. On a couple of occasions on which they did, I found a mud puddle somewhere on the dealership property and re-established the desired patina. They got a kick out of that. I sold it to a friend who gave it to his daughter who was in Colorado Springs at the AF academy and she totaled it when she slid off a road in icy conditions and rolled down the hill about 60ft. He said she had a bruise on her left forehead but was otherwise unscathed. He was glad he bought that vehicle for her. Every now and then I see a current model and consider buying one again...then sanity returns.
 
I was in Boston for a week last winter and Hertz had one in the "Pick One" lot. I really liked it. It was super nice in a particularly nasty Boston winter.

That said, I'd never buy one. The price and the maintenance peculiarities are not at all in sync with a workhorse car. There are a lot of better/cheaper options to explore with. I doubt anyone is blazing new trails with a 6 figure car.
 
Back in my rockcrawling days the group I ran with was mostly Jeeps (I had a CJ-5) and Toyotas, but there was one guy with a brand new D90. It was very capable on the trail. He took it everywhere and didn't work about scratching it or getting mud on the leather upholstery... but I grant that he was the exception.
The rear of the new Defenders are just awkward. The multiple taillights, thick sail panels creating large blind spots. It may be capable off-road, but they seem to have gone out of their way to make it stand out by intentionally making it ugly.
 
The rear of the new Defenders are just awkward. The multiple taillights, thick sail panels creating large blind spots. It may be capable off-road, but they seem to have gone out of their way to make it stand out by intentionally making it ugly.
Oh I love them! Probably my favorite modern SUV! Like I said, if I had 100k to blow there would be one in my driveway for sure!
 
They are astonishingly expensive. They don't have a good reputation for reliability and they have high depreciation. 5 year cost of ownership is just at $100K
https://www.edmunds.com/land-rover/discovery/2023/cost-to-own/?style=401940914. :hairraise:

Out here in the country, no one that I know has one but they seem to be popular with visitors from the city.

I was thinking about the best way to answer this as someone who's owned two Land Rovers and have owned upper luxury cars for most of my driving career. Keep in mind, with the exception of our current Alfa Romeo, 100% of them were bought used - a number of them were actually given to me for free (granted in need of work).

Studies by some people who study these things more than me have determined that decision making is emotional. Obviously there is a practical aspect, but that can drive some level of emotion. Spending money that you don't have and can't afford to spend tends to cause stress, so that's a negative emotion we want to avoid. Maintenance issues cause stress. Some don't like the emotions that go with what they perceive as a flashy car, or a gas guzzler. Etc.

When you look at it through the lens of an emotional decision, then you're buying it because it provides you with positive emotions, or at least more positive emotions than negative ones. It makes you feel good. Maybe it's how the car makes you feel when you look at it, maybe it's how you feel when you look at, touch, and feel the interior. And yes, there are a number for whom the positive feeling is how they feel when they perceive people seeing them in their status symbol of a car. Practically speaking, no, they don't do anything that you can't do with a cheaper alternative. If you can afford to spend the money, then that cost doesn't bother you enough to outweigh any of the other issues. Cars are not strictly utilitarian or practical for all people, even people who aren't necessarily auto enthusiasts. If you want a vehicle that is strictly practical and does the job, look at what was created by the Soviets, and realize that none of us want those.

Like I said, I've owned upper luxury cars for almost my entire adult life. My first car was a 1982 Jaguar XJ-S V12 that I bought for $1,000. I've owned close to a dozen Jaguars over the years, two Land Rovers (a '97 Range Rover 4.6 HSE and now the '97 Discovery), some Mercedes and BMWs, couple Cadillacs and a Lincoln, and we now have the Alfa Romeo. I'm sure I'm forgetting a few. I've also owned my share of standard types, as basic as my C2500 retired work truck with vinyl seating and no cruise control. I think it came with an AM/FM radio. All of the luxury cars I've owned except for the Alfa were purchased used (I'll get to finances in a bit).

I couldn't care less about being seen driving any of these things. For the amount of **** I've gotten over the years, it would've be easier to just drive more unassuming cars that didn't get attention. But despite being an engineer (and thus a practical being devoid of most emotions - and certainly lacking any ability at humor), it's vehicles that stir my soul. No, they don't have to be expensive - a Mustang is a plenty fun car, and I've loved my couple of Excursions I owned, plus my diesel Rams. But, the higher end vehicles do tend to get more attention to detail when it comes to interior design and materials. The driving experience (and I'm talking feel, not numbers) is generally better with these higher tier cars - and specifically with the highest level ones, and they do have more of the little details that improve the experience. Basically, I love the way these vehicles make me feel when I drive them - all of them. It's about the driving experience. Back before I had my driver's license, one of my cousins 15-20 years my senior (someone who has given me a lot of advice over the years - all of it wrong) told me that driving would become a chore and I would find I wasn't so excited about it after a while. Of all the dumb things he's told me, that was probably the dumbest (or at least the most wrong). But, I'm not driving a newer front wheel drive Chevy Malibu. I'm driving cars that make me smile when I look at them before getting in, that excite my skin when I sit down and touch the interior, and that stir my soul when I push the gas pedal.

If bought right and if you have the inclination and skill to work on them yourself, they can be fairly practical. The values fall faster from new than an Aztec in a slip with full flaps, and so it doesn't take long before used examples are for sale much cheaper than same year, same mileage counterparts in the "normal" makes. I'm glad to see so many people who aren't interested in buying those - it means more are out there for me to buy.

When my wife and I got married, she had thought that there wasn't anything to these upper end cars. She absolutely does not care about "being seen" in one, and if anything doesn't like driving something that gains extra attention. Her first upper luxury car was a '97 BMW 740iL (bought with 140,000 miles for $4k). Yes, it needed work, and I got that work done. But that also really showed her that there was, in fact, a difference in how those cars drove. She loved it, she loved my E55, and then when it was time to get a replacement for her SUV, she wanted a GL550. Now we have the Alfa Romeo Stelvio Quadrifoglio. We both absolutely love driving the car, and it makes me smile to look at. We've owned it for a year and a half and had a few minor issues, but has only been to the dealer once for an oil change.

Will it depreciate? Of course it will. But we're keeping it a long time, and because nobody wants to buy an Alfa Romeo, we bought it for a significant markdown from MSRP during a time when most people were paying well over MSRP. It was actually a good value, and much cheaper than we would've spent on a new Jeep Wagoneer (or especially a Grand Wagoneer, or even a Grand Cherokee with a Hemi). With used car values at the time, we sold our 22 year old XKR for a profit vs. 2 years prior when I'd bought it, and sold our GL550 for what we paid for it 4 years and 40k miles prior.

It was both an emotional and practical decision.
 
I've posted this here before, but a much younger Ted with my first car, circa 2003.

jag.jpg

Our current Land Rover, a 1997 Discovery, that we tow behind our RV. Well, we will tow it behind our RV again once I get a new engine in it.

1695051811940.png
 
I bought my last vehicle for the same reason @Ted, so it could towed behind my bus...er RV. We got a Cherokee though.
 
Now the appeal of sedans I don't understand, when hatchbacks are available. That also seems to be an American thing? The Europeans seem to grasp the increased utility of hatchbacks. Many models available there aren't available here, sadly.
Because most hatchbacks aren't visually appealing. We often associate a vehicle's design with a the female form, describing them with words like "sleek" or "sexy". No one describes a Honda Civic Hatchback or Mazda 5 as "sexy". If you have a Jaguar XF and a Jaguar XF Sportbrake side-by-side, most people will prefer the appearance of the sedan. The Cadillac CTS-V looked better than the CTS-V Wagon. Utility usually comes second behind appearance for most American car buyers. Americans often use trucks or SUVs when they need something with utility, and leave the wagons/hatchbacks on the dealer lots.
 
Back
Top