I am not impressed and I fail to see how it is substantially different than Land/Range Rover's other products. Just another over-priced, fully independent air ride suspension SUV. The tires are still too low-profile, but at least they are slightly better than their other products. I think just about every off road test I have read in recent years that includes a Land/Range Rover talks about puncturing their low-profile street tires and damaging their ridiculous wheels.
In my opinion, Land/Range Rovers don't have much actual offroad capability, just a bunch of electronic gimmicks that impress people who don't actually go offroad. Their only saving grace is that they usually make a lot of power.
They're better than most crossovers, and probably better than most other independent suspension vehicles. The big shortcoming is durability and ease of repair. Those electrowidgets are complicated, and parts availability is going to be dreadful in most places.... In my opinion, Land/Range Rovers don't have much actual offroad capability, just a bunch of electronic gimmicks that impress people who don't actually go offroad. Their only saving grace is that they usually make a lot of power.
No. And that's the point I was making. While Land Rover heritage is quite similar to Jeep and Bronco, they have diverged to target different buying populations.... For those saying it’s too hard and complicated to work on, do you seriously think somebody who shells out 100k plus for a vehicle is EVER concerned about how hard it is to work on? ...
With the exception of some shots from Moab, that's all staged marketing material. I'm sure Ford will do plenty of the same kind of thing in a year when there are prototype bodies.I sure wish Ford would test the Bronco all over the world like Land Rover has been doing with the defender so we could see it under test conditions. ...