Hot Take: The 2025 Land Rover Defender V8 Feels More Like a True Discovery Revival
On the flip side, the Land Rover Discovery came across the pond in the mid-1990s to compete with the likes of the Toyota Land Cruiser, Mitsubishi Montero, and the Jeep Grand Cherokee. Those models were bringing a new kind of off-roader to the surface: one that could be capable and comfortable. So, the Brits took notes from the Defender's incredible off-road prowess, threw a bunch of leather in it, a CD player, and comfortable seats, rounded out the boxy design Land Rover was famous for, and shipped it off to the States. It took a while for them to become popular (think Discovery 2 and beyond, after BMW took over from Lucas Electronics), but once they did, they caught on like wildfire. The difference is simple: the Discovery was made to go off-road in style and comfort, or even be driven daily, and the Defender was not.
Before the Discovery came along, Land Rover wasn't considered a luxury brand as a whole (unless you isolate the Range Rover, but that's one model, not a whole brand). As I mentioned before, the Defender's focus was utility, not comfort and design. The Defenders of old weren't exuberantly expensive like they are today, either. After all, farmers could afford them. The Discovery was more expensive, as it was a family-friendly luxury off-roader, competing with the trucks I mentioned before. The Discovery was geared more towards the doctors, lawyers, or professors who needed the four-wheel drive to get to their lake cabin in the woods, to the ski slopes, or on their remote hunting trips, but still be able to drop the kids off at school comfortably.
Nowadays, the script is flipped. The 2025 Land Rover Defender is the pinnacle of luxury off-roaders in league with the Mercedes-Benz G Wagen and can cost up to $120,000 for the 5.0-liter Supercharged Jaguar V8 model. In my opinion, it speaks a similar design language as the old Discovery over the 1980s Defender, since it's more rounded instead of boxy, is covered in leather from head to toe, and is still a rugged off-roader, but only when it's needed. The singular point of being a capable four-wheeler and only a capable four-wheeler is gone. Now, it looks more at home in a Whole Foods parking lot than it does on a sheep farm in the country.
The Discovery is still around, but in my [not so humble] opinion, the new Discovery looks and feels more like the modern Range Rover. It doesn't look anything like the OG Discovery, while the new Defender does. I'll use my own first-generation as an example, and before purists come for me, I'm not comparing it to the 1970s Range Rover because I feel the new Defender looks more like an older Discovery, and the intent of the Range Rover was luxury, not more of a balance between luxury and capability like the Discovery was. The Discovery filled a gap between the Defender and the Range Rover. More than anything, the Discovery was more of a sugar-free version of the Range Rover.
If we look at the styling, the new Defender has the iconic round headlights of the olden days while the old Discoverys have glass headlights, and the new Defender has faux metal step zones on the fenders (the 1980s models had real metal, and they were more reinforced-I wouldn't dare put my full weight on a modern one now), a spare tire mounted on the rear door that opens sideways, still has the alpine windows in the rear, and a large sunroof to let in the light. All things the old Discovery had, too, minus the metal steps on the hood. Sitting in my old Land Rover and then driving the new one made me realize the new Defender had a high seating position like my 1996 D1 does, to the point where I can see both corners of the hood, and look out the window and see both the front and rear tire on the driver's side. Visibility was key for the Discovery's off-road success, as well as the Defender's.
The old Discovery, while being old and fitted with a solid front axle and ball-style steering instead of a steering rack and pinion setup, is incredibly comfortable on the road. Unlike its competition at the time, the Discovery was AWD unless the 4WD was activated with a center locking differential, making it off-road-ready at all times. One drawback, though, is that it has a massive gas tank, enabling you to explore the remote wilderness without running out of fuel, and it uses premium-grade fuel. It's incredibly thirsty as a result, though, since you can't drive it in FWD if you wanted to. The 4.0-liter V8 isn't quick, but it's incredibly torquey, thanks to its robust transmission, so it can still tow a 7,500-pound braked trailer if needed.
The Defender's drivetrain was the same, even in the 1980s. Like the Discovery, it was an AWD truck that had a center differential lock, and that's carried over into the 2025 model. This time around, the Defender comes standard with a center locking differential, and a rear locking differential can be added before delivery (or after, at an additional cost). It's nice to see that Land Rover is at least sticking to its roots there, especially since the Discovery has a full-time 4WD, and so does the modern Range Rover. At the price point of the new Land Rover models, no one's taking them off-road to do the crazy things their predecessors got into, but… We can pretend.
Fun fact, my 1996 Discovery shares the same full-time 4WD system as the 90/110 Defender of the time. The Discovery didn't have an altered version of the Defender's 4WD system until the second generation.
The Defender may bear the same trim level names (90, 110, 130, etc), still have a mounted rear tire, alpine windows, and a rugged 4WD system, but it doesn't stand close to its utility-focused and relatively affordable predecessors. The Defender was never intended to be a luxury car, and it certainly wasn't supposed to cost over six figures. Yes, some models start at above $60,000, but if you want the V8, the cost gets crazy high. Style-wise, it represents what the new Discovery should be. The modern Disco shouldn't look like something Kim Kardashian would drive to her favorite LA bakery. It should look more like the new Discovery does.
Was the Defender 110 V8 still a great SUV to drive? Absolutely. The rear seats were tight, akin to my old Discovery, but it was incredibly cozy, it was packed with some incredible off-road technology, a wonderful sound system, a gorgeous in-house operating system that was super easy to use, and a LOVELY exhaust note when I put the pedal to the metal. My kids loved the large rear windows, my husband loved that it still had Alpine windows, and he liked the simple yet elegant interior, just like our old Disco has. More than anything, seeing the similarities between the new Defender and my old Discovery made me crave a proper revival of one, which the Defender felt like it could be.
I just couldn't get over the price. The model I drove had a metal-infused windshield to speed up defrosting and help keep the interior cool during the summer, which it did. It had auto-dimming side mirrors, and so much more, but at $120,000, I could never see myself beating it up in Moab, Utah, like my husband and I did in the D1. I see it becoming a status symbol more than the capable off-roader I know it is.
Copyright 2025 The Arena Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Motor 1
an hour ago
- Motor 1
Give Jaguar a Chance
You've seen the exaggerated headlines and read the negative comments, which paint a grim picture of Jaguar's current state. Yes, sales are grinding to a halt, but that was to be expected, right? After all, production of nearly all models ended in 2024, with the F-Pace being the last one standing. Even that SUV has limited availability and will be gone entirely by early 2026. Some people are quick to blame Jaguar's rebranding. Sure, the controversial "Copy Nothing" ad campaign may have alienated traditional buyers—but when you wipe out an entire lineup save for one model, sales are bound to nosedive. This isn't about playing devil's advocate; we need to wait and see how the rebranding plays out before passing judgment. Photo by: Jaguar I'm not particularly swayed by Jaguar's claim that traffic to its website more than doubled after the relaunch. That's just about as meaningful as, say, placing a $50 refundable deposit on a new car. The company also reported a 24 percent increase in searches from wealthier individuals, but unless those people actually buy cars, these stats don't hold much weight. Jaguar isn't chasing volume anymore like it did in the past when it repeatedly failed to compete with the German luxury brands. The company has been in BMW's shadow for decades. The old strategy clearly didn't work, and with the EU banning the sale of new combustion-engine cars in 2035, transitioning to an all-electric lineup isn't exactly a surprise. Engineering new gas-powered cars only to sell them for a few short years in such a major market wouldn't make much sense. The hard reset begins with a production version of the radical Type 00 concept . Parent company Tata Motors is taking a bold risk with Jaguar's reinvention, and it's not just because of the EV pivot. By moving upmarket into six-figure pricing territory, Jaguar is consciously letting go of most of its current customer base. Managing Director Rawdon Glover openly said that as many as 85 percent of existing buyers won't stick around . The plan is to sell high-end products to the remaining 15 percent while attracting new customers. Jaguar hopes to draw in younger buyers, but that's easier said than done. It's typically older customers who truly appreciate Jaguar's racing pedigree and iconic designs, and who are more likely to have the means to afford a next-generation Jag. Photo by: InsideEVs But let's look beyond percentages, pricing, and eccentric ad campaigns. The car itself remains the most important part of the equation. Jaguar's bold four-door GT could make or break the company when it goes on sale in 2026. The production version debuts later this year, introducing the dedicated Jaguar Electrical Architecture (JEA) and a complete design overhaul to create something as striking as the Cadillac Celestiq or Rolls-Royce Spectre. Could Jaguar have done things differently? Arguably, yes. Perhaps the relaunch should've kicked off with a production model that people could actually order the next day. Waiting over a year from the Type 00's debut to its production version, while simultaneously discontinuing nearly the entire lineup, was a gutsy move. But if the car delivers and its wild styling resonates, the doom-and-gloom over 2025's sales collapse will seem overblown. Sure, the controversial 'Copy Nothing' ad campaign may have alienated traditional buyers—but when you wipe out an entire lineup save for one model, sales are bound to nosedive. Consider this: The Rolls-Royce Spectre outsold the Cullinan in Europe last year. Who knows, starting with a sleek GT instead of an SUV might just work. Two more models will follow the Type 00. While their identities haven't been confirmed, we can safely assume at least one will be an SUV. At full capacity, total production across the three models is expected to hover around 50,000 units annually, less than a third of Jaguar's 2018 record of 180,833 sales. As for going all-in on EVs, Jaguar doesn't think it will be a deterrent. Internal research suggests that the affluent customers they're targeting don't really care about what powers the car : "People buy cars for their design and interior. Powertrain is about 13th on the list," according to Glover. Speaking specifically about the new GT, the company's Managing Director believes people will buy it because "they think it's beautiful, and the brand resonates." Photo by: Jaguar We'll see about that, especially with a starting price north of $100,000. For that money, buyers will get a sleek grand tourer promising 478 miles (770 kilometers) of WLTP range, or 430 miles (692 kilometers) per EPA testing. Jaguar hasn't shared many specs yet, but claims a 15-minute charge at peak power will add enough juice for 200 miles (231 kilometers). Before customers even drive the radically new Jaguar, they'll encounter an entirely different retail experience. The first of the brand's high-end stores opens in Paris. Many criticized Jaguar Land Rover for modernizing the Defender too much by turning it from a simple workhorse into a fancy SUV. Nevertheless, it is now a resounding success. JLR sold 114,646 Defenders last year, helping the company post its highest profit in a decade. Here's hoping Jaguar can silence its naysayers the same way. Until then, let's hold off on writing its obituary. The Jaguar of tomorrow won't resemble the brand we grew up with, but maybe, just maybe, this reboot is exactly what it needs. The New Jag Era: The New Jaguar Looks Like Cruella's Car On Video The Jaguar Type 00 Doesn't Even Look Real On the Road Share this Story Facebook X LinkedIn Flipboard Reddit WhatsApp E-Mail Got a tip for us? Email: tips@ Join the conversation ( )
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Explainer-Auto winners and losers of proposed EU-US export mechanism
(Reuters) -Brussels is considering pursuing a potential arrangement that would allow European automakers that produce and export cars from the United States to import vehicles from the EU at reduced tariff rates, according to two sources familiar with the matter. The discussion is part of the European Commission's efforts to broker a trade deal with U.S. President Donald Trump and would replace the hefty 25% tariff on car and car part imports the U.S. administration implemented in April. This would be a clear positive for those carmakers with major U.S. production facilities, who would be able to use their U.S. production to lower their exposure to tariffs. This is what a trade deal means for the EU and how individual European automakers would be affected: WHAT'S AT STAKE FOR EU? According to data from European auto association ACEA, nearly 758,000 cars worth 38.9 billion euros ($45.55 billion) were exported to the U.S. from Europe in 2024, more than four times as many as in the other direction. One EU diplomat said cars were a "red line" for the bloc, making a concession on cars a caveat of any deal. However, Brussels and Washington have conflicting goals as Trump wants to revive U.S. auto production while Brussels wants open markets for its sector, which is struggling with high energy costs and competition from China. WHO STANDS TO WIN? Germany's BMW and Mercedes-Benz would benefit most from a mechanism counting U.S. exports against imports from the EU, as both companies operate large factories in the United States. BMW, for example, exported around 225,000 vehicles produced at its Spartanburg, South Carolina, plant in 2024, while it sold around 400,000 autos in the U.S. market. It imported around 175,000 autos from other markets, less than what it exported. Mercedes-Benz exports around two thirds of the vehicles it makes at its plant in Tuscaloosa, Alabama, or around 170,000 based on 2024 production. It sold around 324,528 vehicles in the United States last year and imported around 235,000 from other countries. WHO WOULD BE THE LOSERS? Volkswagen, Europe's biggest carmaker, would not benefit, as it mostly sells cars produced at its Chattanooga, Tennessee, plant locally rather than exporting them. An industry source said for that reason, there has also been a push to get Washington to agree to investment credits, which would support foreign automakers' plans to expand to boost local production. Volkswagen, for example, is currently deciding whether to localise production of its Audi brand - which imports all of its cars into the U.S. market - either via a new factory or expanding existing sites. Porsche would also see no benefit: it has no local production and imports all of its cars from Europe. LITTLE IMPACT FOR STELLANTIS Stellantis, the world's No. 4 automaker, owner of brands including Jeep, Ram and Chrysler, would not be seriously affected by such an arrangement. Stellantis operates a number of U.S. plants, mostly serving the local market, while import and export flows of its cars between the U.S. and the European Union have historically been very low - typically small volumes of U.S.-made trucks versus European-made models from the Alfa Romeo, Maserati and Fiat brands. The group is far more vulnerable to any U.S. tariffs on Mexico and Canada, as it manufactures around 40% of its North American vehicles in those two countries, particularly in Mexico. CLEAR LOSS FOR VOLVO CARS Volvo Cars is one of the most exposed European automakers to U.S. tariffs, as most of the cars it sells there are imported from Europe. The U.S. accounted for 16% of group sales last year. The company has said it will expand production at its Charleston, South Carolina factory, adding a new model alongside the electric EX90 that is currently made there. Volvo has said the new vehicle would most likely be a plug-in hybrid mid-sized SUV, a popular option with U.S. consumers. Last year Polestar, which like Volvo Cars is part of China's Geely group, started producing the Polestar 3 SUV at the Charleston plant to avoid hefty U.S. tariffs on Chinese-made cars. ($1 = 0.8540 euros)
Business Insider
6 hours ago
- Business Insider
Lucid Group (LCID) in Danger of Short Squeeze as Cash Burn Intensifies
(LCID) is another EV maker struggling in the stock market—a company with weak margins, erratic valuations, high cash burn, and a persistent habit of diluting existing shareholders. It's one of the clearest examples of how the early hype surrounding EV SPACs collided with the brutal realities of the automotive industry. Don't Miss TipRanks' Half-Year Sale Take advantage of TipRanks Premium at 50% off! Unlock powerful investing tools, advanced data, and expert analyst insights to help you invest with confidence. Make smarter investment decisions with TipRanks' Smart Investor Picks, delivered to your inbox every week. Not only has Lucid's stock dropped more than 90% since going public in mid-2021, but it has also fallen by over 30% this year, driven by very high short interest fueled by weak fundamentals and the real risk that it will soon run out of cash. That means it'll likely need external funding, leading to more dilution—a vicious cycle that's steadily destroying value for retail shareholders. When compared against the S&P 500 (SPX), LCID has drastically underperformed. That said, for now, the best long-term play is arguably to Sell Lucid, in my view. However, shorting it could also be risky, as the current setup makes a short squeeze a real possibility. How Lucid Lost Its Spark In 2021, Lucid went public via a SPAC at the height of the EV frenzy, driving the stock to a peak of nearly $60 per share. At that time, the market was pricing electric vehicles as a highly disruptive technology, expecting massive production growth for Lucid and assuming it would reach 'Tesla-like' margins within a few years. The problem is, very little of that has actually happened. Lucid overpromised and underdelivered on production targets, missing them multiple times due to supply chain issues, manufacturing challenges, and operational inefficiencies. The initial expectation was to deliver 20,000 vehicles in its first year as a publicly traded company, but actual deliveries came to less than 5,000. To put it in perspective, by 2024, the company had delivered 10,241 vehicles for the year. Lucid has positioned itself in the EV market as an ultra-premium luxury brand, with models like the Lucid Air priced very high (ranging from $70,000 to $250,000), which limits its addressable market. Over the past few years, rising interest rates have made luxury buyers more cautious, while cheaper EVs have gained traction, thereby hurting Lucid's value proposition and increasing its cash burn. As a result, Lucid has had to undergo multiple rounds of fundraising and share dilution, even with Saudi Arabia's Public Investment Fund (PIF) as its primary backer. Still, shareholders have felt the pain of dilution. In the past four years, Lucid has grown its shares outstanding by 83%, raised $6.53 billion from equity sales, and burned through $7.79 billion in operating cash flow, resulting in a 96% decline from its all-time high reached at the end of 2021, according to TipRanks data. The High Cost of Betting Against Lucid Trading near penny-stock levels at just $2.16 per share, despite having a market capitalization of $6.6 billion, Lucid's troubled outlook unsurprisingly attracts considerable attention from short sellers. Currently, LCID is one of the most heavily shorted stocks in the U.S., with around 47% of its float sold short. One significant reason for this heavy skepticism is that Lucid has approximately $3.6 billion in cash and short-term investments on its balance sheet while incurring only $1.95 billion in annual operating cash flow. This gives it an estimated cash runway of only about 1.8 years—if the burn rate stays the same, meaning it will likely need more funding soon, which would probably lead to further dilution. Adding to these liquidity challenges, LCID trades at an EV-to-sales ratio of 8.3x, which is more than six times the industry average and over three times higher than its peers, such as Rivian (RIVN), which trades at 2.7x. While these factors help explain why short interest in LCID is so high, it's also important to note that borrowing shares to short LCID comes with a steep cost—15.7% per year. This cost-to-borrow (CTB) is driven by supply and demand for shares available to borrow. Even with a large float, the high CTB indicates that there are too few LCID shares available to borrow and a massive demand to short the stock. For comparison, stable blue-chip stocks usually have a CTB of 0.5% or less. On the one hand, this combination of explosive short interest and a high borrowing cost signals a strong market belief that Lucid's stock price will decline. On the other hand, it also sets up a high risk of a short squeeze. If any positive news briefly shifts investor sentiment and causes the share price to rise, short sellers could be forced to buy back shares to close their positions, triggering a snowball effect that pushes LCID's price up quickly. Of course, this is speculative, but the setup is definitely in place. As a result, LCID stock tends to be highly volatile. Where the Lucid Bulls Find Hope If the pessimism surrounding LCID is already fairly straightforward, there are still some points that bulls can latch onto that might eventually squeeze a large number of sellers out of this stock. For example, the release of its Gravity SUV—which, although there's little clarity on pre-orders—has reportedly been doing well. Lucid continues to expand its production capacity, and the SUV is expected to give a significant boost to sales in 2026. The consensus expects revenues to reach $2.74 billion, compared to the $870 million reported in the last twelve months. Lucid also hints that it's working on a new mid-sized model, which could arrive by the end of 2026, potentially generating some buzz depending on market reception. However, in my view, the most considerable foothold for bulls is Saudi Arabia's support through its sovereign wealth fund, which owns 73% of the company, according to TipRanks data. Lucid has already begun operating its plant in King Abdullah Economic City (KAEC), Saudi Arabia, with an initial annual production capacity of up to 5,000 vehicles. The company plans to expand this to 155,000 units annually by the end of the decade. This plant is strategic to meet the agreement to deliver up to 100,000 vehicles to the Saudi government and is part of the country's push to diversify its economy and attract cutting-edge technology. So, while execution risks are enormous, it's not all bad for Lucid. The company has a 'demand anchor' with the Saudi government agreement providing a revenue floor, and the expansion is well financed by the PIF (implying less dilution risk). Add in potential progress in local production and meaningful deliveries, and that could be enough to shake the short-seller's narrative—even if only slightly. At current levels, that might be enough to trigger a quick spike in the share price. Is Lucid Group a Buy, Sell, or Hold? The consensus among analysts is still skeptical about LCID's near-term future. Of the seven analysts covering the stock over the past three months, none are bullish, one is bearish, and six are neutral. LCID's average price target of $2.38 implies a potential upside of about 14% from the current share price. Brutal Fundamentals Induce Risk of Short Squeeze Lucid currently faces a challenging outlook. While long-term sales growth projections appear promising, the company's elevated cash burn rate makes further dilution highly likely. Additionally, Lucid operates in a price-sensitive segment of the EV market, which complicates efforts to scale efficiently, helping to explain the stock's persistently high short interest. From a fundamental standpoint, I view LCID as a Sell, as ongoing capital raises may continue to weigh on the stock despite potential revenue growth. That said, for risk-tolerant traders, LCID may still present speculative opportunities. The stock's high short interest creates the potential for short squeezes, offering the possibility of sharp, short-term gains—albeit with elevated volatility and downside risk.
