Will it still be a Land Rover....

I read in the latest issue of CAR, that Land Rover has decided to start offering a FWD only model of the Freelander (now called?.... LR2?). The upcoming Evoque (based on the Freelander/LR2) will also be available with a FWD only drivetrain. The reasoning? The company has come to realize that many folks don't take these vehicles "off-roading", and therefore a cost/weight/fuel economy savings can result from the "deletion" of the rear diff and the associated driveshaft.

As one of the few brands that has stuck to it's "core values" for more than 60 years, CAR wondered if this was the beginning of the end for "real" Land Rovers.

And a Range Rover Sport fits the core values?

As long as there is still a Defender, Land Rover stands strong.

In reply to Keith:

I saw Clarkson run from a tank through some decently nasty conditions in one.

CAFE thats why...

It could be worse.. 2wd wrangler?

nocones wrote: It could be worse.. 2wd wrangler?

We need to all sign an oath to slash the front tires of any 2WD jeep we come across...

I don't know about slashing the tires of any 2WD Wranglers you come across. But you have to wonder how many folks would buy an SUV if the manufacturers had to affix HUGE labels on the back and sides that said something like 4WD PRETENDER. Or at least something along the lines of the "special" badges BWM and M-B affix to their AWD sedans and wagons. Sort of a "this Wrangler is NOT AWD".

worst part.. unlike the fords where you can see the empty diff holder on the FWD versions.. the wrangler is rear wheel drive.. you can't tell from behind

MrJoshua wrote: In reply to Keith: I saw Clarkson run from a tank through some decently nasty conditions in one.

Yes, and a quote was "I've brought Puff Daddy's car to the Somme" To be fair, I know one of the powertrain engineers who worked on the RR Sport and they came through our town after doing high altitude and off-road throttle calibration near us. But still, it's hard to draw a line through my Series IIa and connect it with a Sport. Old Land Rovers are tractors. Even Discoveries are the F150 of Britain.

There are a lot of FWD Series Land Rovers, actually. See, the rear axles break fairly easily. So you work around that by putting them in high range 4WD and driving on the front wheels...

Hocrest wrote: We need to all sign an oath to slash the front tires of any 2WD jeep we come across...

The guys who picked up old mail Jeeps might not like that.

I didn't think they had been Rovers for several years now. ;-)

FWD land Rover is a major fail, but 2WD Jeep's aren't that bad. We rented one in Mexico a few years ago and had it for 1/2 a day before I even noticed it was RWD. That was after some resonable hoonage on a beach and it could still easily drive up nearly foot tall obsticals 6 up! Now if I were to buy one would I get 2WD, hell no, just pointing out it's not as bad as you might fear. It's not what you've got it's what you do with it remember!!!

Interesting to bash the 2wd full framed Jeep and not even more so bash the FWD Jeep Cute-Ute, The Jeep Compass

Every time I see an old jeep or samurai or landrover the first thing I think is how I would make it RWD and slam it to the ground.

Does loving this make me a bad person?

If you leave them to their own devices long enough, they'll do that on their own when the frame rusts out

Shame it was done to a Series I, though.

Typically, they depowered the wrong wheels.

Why bash a Jeep Compass? I mean, if anything with the Jeep name on it ISN'T really a Jeep...it's that monstrosity. And yet, I ask myself "what if Jeep built a "proper car, something like a Subaru Legacy SEDAN, but with 7 vertical bars between the headlights?"

BTW, Jeep has a fairly long experience with building vehicles that were/are RWD only. I believe the first Jeep wagons, the ones from the early 50s were RWD only.

Well, for starters the Compass is butt ugly. There are no two design elements which coexist on that vehicle. It is the automotive version of the camel which is a horse designed by a committee.The Patriot is much better looking.

But 2wd vs 4wd: face it, 95% of 4x4's never see anything worse than the occasional dirt driveway or gravel road. The Trooper has been in 4x4 about 4 or 5 times since I bought it and I have put around 100k on it. So the manufacturers went with the money: if they can save a couple grand per car by losing the front drive axle etc and sell the resulting vehicle for maybe a $750 premium compared to the profit margin on a 4x4, why not? The soccer moms are happy, the shareholders are happy, everybody's happy.

integraguy wrote: BTW, Jeep has a fairly long experience with building vehicles that were/are RWD only. I believe the first Jeep wagons, the ones from the early 50s were RWD only.

No.

The Willys Wagon and Jeepster Commando were both available with 4wd.

You could order the later trucks as 2wd but they're pretty rare.

Kaiser, Willys and AMC are all familiar with RWD only vehicles but Jeep itself founded it's name on 4wd vehicles.

Shawn

C.M. Burns: "It's time for an aggressive strategy, Smithers. I'll invest in those old stand-bys, Confederated Slaveholdings, Transatlantic Zeppelin, Amalgamated Spats, Congreve's Inflammable Powder, U.S. Hay, and that up-and-coming Baltimore Opera Hat Company."

A company will fail if it doesn't adapt to a changing market. Other luxury SUVs/crossovers are available in 2WD form, why not the Freelander? It's disappointing that they have to turn away from their past, but I'd rather see that happen then have them go away like Hummer, Plymouth, TVR, etc.

Bob