catman
Full Access Member
This is one reason why the diesels are not coming to the US anytime soon:
Another Defender hint?
- Thread starter iSurfvilano
- Start date
Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.
Hey can you explain this? Don't you have to use the truck more than 50% or something for business purposes? (not commuting). Maybe you do use it, aside from commuting? If so that's great!
The Discovery 5 diesel, available in the US, gets a similar paltry 7.7secs, as opposed to 6.9secs with gas.
Thinking about the pricing on this some more:
The only D110 that's previously been available in the U.S. was in 1993, when Land Rover brought over about 550 of them. The price then was $40,000, which is equivalent to about $70,000 today. They were all white, and there weren't really any options.
In terms of features, the $49k, base-level, new Defender 110 blows away what came with the '93 Defender 110.
The only D110 that's previously been available in the U.S. was in 1993, when Land Rover brought over about 550 of them. The price then was $40,000, which is equivalent to about $70,000 today. They were all white, and there weren't really any options.
In terms of features, the $49k, base-level, new Defender 110 blows away what came with the '93 Defender 110.
DWillyEffect
Member
""The challenge for our designers and engineers was to create a vehicle relevant for the demands of today’s world while capturing the essence of the original. The new Defender is respectful of its past, but it isn’t harnessed by it.”" -Gerry McGovern
I'd fire this guy on the spot if I ran the company.
I'd fire this guy on the spot if I ran the company.
iconoclast
Full Access Member
no reason to fire him... you have to translate it from marketing speak to internal corporate dialog. "we wanted to harness the tent pole nature the defender brand has while building a new vehicle that meets today's carb/cafe standards which will be used for a mall crawl but marketed as rock crawl capable. also we need to fit 7 fat yanks in these tanks so they can give us money and say thanks!"
catman
Full Access Member
Using that logic they should have just given the vehicle a new name and "moved on".
iconoclast
Full Access Member
see my comment above. easier to use the branding of a vehicle that has a history and following even if it alienates or doesn't appeal to the purists.
DWillyEffect
Member
I get that.
The interior is nice, couldn't they have just shoved that in the old body style and made a few tweaks to that to conform to all of the rules and regulations of today? FCA has nailed that philosophy with the Jeep and the Challenger. Mercedes did a good job with the G class refresh even if they dropped the front axle.
avslash
Full Access Member
For certain business equipment you are allowed to take the full cost of the asset against earnings in the year of acquisition regardless of how you choose to finance the vehicle.
It can be a very effective method of reducing AGI for business owners. I tend to try and ballpark my taxes and then I will usually buy a van or two or three for my business depending on what kind of reduction in AGI I am looking for in December of each year.
The only way to hose yourself is if you tend to roll out of vehicles quickly, because in a year of disposal, you could end up absorbing a gain if the vehicle still has significant worth.
It is a great tool overall to keep a business owner in a new vehicle while reducing your outlay to Uncle Sam.
