Harry Metcalfe Leaves Evo For Jaguar Land Rover
Long time Evo writer Harry Metcalfe has left the magazine to work for Jaguar Land Rover, in a role that is the dream of journalists everywhere: helping to develop halo versions of their current and future model range.
A frequent meme on TTAC (at least when you see my byline) is the denigration of what I call the armchair product planning brigade, the peanut gallery cohort who insist that OEMs import diesels, build station wagons and equip every car with a manual transmission. It’s easy to call for these kinds of cars without an understanding of the auto market and the economic and regulatory realities that underpin it. It’s not an exaggeration to say that TTAC helped open my eyes to them.
In my brief career as an auto writer, I have had the privilege of seeing what really goes into automotive product planning. Before I had any understanding of how the industry worked, I thought it was simply a cabal of guys and girls who liked to sit and talk about cars and decide on what would get built by the car company. In other words, it seemed like the best job in the world. Little did I realize how difficult and exacting the job really is.
My estimation of the profession has only increased as I’ve had more access to that side of the industry. It is a job that requires attention to detail, hours of Excel spreadsheets, and endless presentations to senior management. Everything must be justified on an economic basis to finance people who want to do things for as little money as possible.
All in all it is an essential job that most people who discuss cars on the internet tend to believe they could do better. Personally, I’m not so sure I could. But Harry Metcalfe seems to have, against all odds, landed that dream-like version of the Product Planning gig, the one where someone is paying you to act as a visionary for a range of high-performance luxury cars. Best of luck to Harry and Jaguar Land Rover.
More by Derek Kreindler
Latest Car Reviews
Read moreLatest Product Reviews
Read moreRecent Comments
- ToolGuy First picture: I realize that opinions vary on the height of modern trucks, but that entry door on the building is 80 inches tall and hits just below the headlights. Does anyone really believe this is reasonable?Second picture: I do not believe that is a good parking spot to be able to access the bed storage. More specifically, how do you plan to unload topsoil with the truck parked like that? Maybe you kids are taller than me.
- ToolGuy The other day I attempted to check the engine oil in one of my old embarrassing vehicles and I guess the red shop towel I used wasn't genuine Snap-on (lots of counterfeits floating around) plus my driveway isn't completely level and long story short, the engine seized 3 minutes later.No more used cars for me, and nothing but dealer service from here on in (the journalists were right).
- Doughboy Wow, Merc knocks it out of the park with their naming convention… again. /s
- Doughboy I’ve seen car bras before, but never car beards. ZZ Top would be proud.
- Bkojote Allright, actual person who knows trucks here, the article gets it a bit wrong.First off, the Maverick is not at all comparable to a Tacoma just because they're both Hybrids. Or lemme be blunt, the butch-est non-hybrid Maverick Tremor is suitable for 2/10 difficulty trails, a Trailhunter is for about 5/10 or maybe 6/10, just about the upper end of any stock vehicle you're buying from the factory. Aside from a Sasquatch Bronco or Rubicon Jeep Wrangler you're looking at something you're towing back if you want more capability (or perhaps something you /wish/ you were towing back.)Now, where the real world difference should play out is on the trail, where a lot of low speed crawling usually saps efficiency, especially when loaded to the gills. Real world MPG from a 4Runner is about 12-13mpg, So if this loaded-with-overlander-catalog Trailhunter is still pulling in the 20's - or even 18-19, that's a massive improvement.
Comments
Join the conversation
"It is a job that requires attention to detail, hours of Excel spreadsheets, and endless presentations to senior management." Therein lies the rub, if you assume that senior management actually knows what they are doing. This design by committee and death by a thousand cost cutting measures results in middling products that inspire lust in exactly no one and remind you of their cheapness or questionable design decisions constantly. Product planning is definitely more difficult than the average internet commenter gives credit, but it's also more difficult than it needs to be given the dysfunctional bureaucracies that seem to run car companies these days. I once sat in a meeting at Ford reviewing the plan for the protective wrap during the transport of a low volume new vehicle. Just a small piece of the huge effort it takes to launch a new car, but not one that should require the 50 people in attendance!
I don't know if I would want the responsibility of the development of a "halo" car. If you get it right you're a genius hero, get it wrong and you're a Bangle Butt