By on July 20, 2015


Land Rover, just after building its two-millionth Defender (pictured), looks to be extending final production of the go-anywhere utility into January of next year.

According to Automotive News Europe, the manufacturer will extend production of the Defender and increase production before the new best-before date to meet renewed demand, the company said a statement.

Unfortunately, none of those Defenders will be making it stateside — at least not in new condition. However, Jaguar Land Rover is looking for an additional facility, likely outside of the U.K., in order to expand future production. Contract builder Magna Styr recently signed an agreement with JLR to produce unnamed models in Austria.

The next-generation Defender, which will address tightening safety and emissions standards, is expected to launch in 2018.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

27 Comments on “Land Rover Defender Production Extended Into 2016...”

  • avatar

    Go on, then; rub it in, why don’t you?

    • 0 avatar

      Just sell me the shell without a drivetrain or electronics.
      An LS powered version would take care of 80% of potential problems.

      • 0 avatar

        Good man.

        By the way, is there anything an LS engine *hasn’t* been swapped into?

      • 0 avatar
        Big Al from Oz

        The 3.2 Duratorque with 470Nm of torque with the MT82 6spd is offered in these. Far superior to any V8 that could be used in the Defender.

        This will outperform any V8 off road, with the added advantage of going twice as far on the same amount of fuel.

        Maybe you should leave the US and see what is available globally. We have many much more capable off roaders available than the US.

        • 0 avatar

          Any idea if these real SUV’s are available in Mexico, and what they might go for there?

          I seriously consider moving down to Baja where my best friend has lived for years now.

          I can speak the language, love the food, think the beaches are great, and the people are for the most part friendly, salt of the earth kind of people.

          I could be happy running around in a Defender down there.

  • avatar

    While Land Rover might not be my brand of choice, I commend them for continuing to build a real SUV, as so few seem to be doing these days.

    I hope real SUV’s have a comeback. By real, I mean it will actually have the ability to do more than not be damaged by a curb. An SUV to me was like a truck. It could do truck things with truck looks and a truck feel.

  • avatar

    To anyone in the loop about this, how important were military sales to the existence of the Defender? I ask because I have heard that the discontinuation of the Defender has a lot to do with the British MOD abandoning the design in favor of better protected vehicles. Long story short, the British Army found that even uparmored Defenders were inadequate in Iraq against IED’s and the MOD is now looking to replace their defenders with heavier and better armored vehicles.

    Were military sales significant enough that without MOD purchases there is no Defender?

  • avatar

    Not specifically Defender-related, but the Humvee is being abandoned for combat roles because they can’t be made IED-resistant. And they are much bigger and more able to take up-armoring than the Defender.

    • 0 avatar

      Yeah, I know that Iraq has made armies everywhere rethink their utility vehicles. But I was more wondering to what extent did Defender production rely on military sales.

  • avatar

    Whenever I see the Defender it makes me want to repeatedly punch the people who won’t let us have it here in America in the face.

    • 0 avatar

      I second that motion, and that feeling…@VenomV12. Reminds me of the stupidity I heard on an NPR show recently. Oyster beds were successfully reintroduced into NY/NJ waters. Suitable for the marketplace, and ecologically great, as each oyster filtered dozens, even hundreds of gallons of water a day.

      Must have threatened somebody’s monopoly, because a government agency went to court to have the oyster beds destroyed, under the doctrine of attractive nuisance. Seems the oysters encouraged people to go oystering, as they have done in the Ches Bay for centuries, and someone might get hurt (no seatbelts in those oyster boats, I guess)…so the agency got court permission to dredge up and destroy all of the oysters.

      No food, no water purification, and no risk of anyone getting hurt foraging for seafood the way our forefathers did.

      To hell in a handbasket…there is no limit to the stupidity that can be promoted by bureaucracies, without the faintest backlash by the voting public.

      You can’t blame all of our problems on NAFTA and similar. Some of it is people just being too dumb and too lazy to demand anything different from oyster bed destruction and the prevention of sale of true SUV’s based on some technicality.

  • avatar

    Alternative production facilities for the Defender? Hell a blacksmith shop with a hammer and a pair of tin snips could make this thing. Just buy the oily bits off Ebay.

  • avatar
    Zekele Ibo

    Enough already with the fawning over the unobtanium. Has anyone driven one of these heaps of junk? I have: it is the second-worst vehicle I’ve ever driven, and I’ve driven some real dogs in my time.

    The Defender is an anachronism, it sells only for its looks, it’s no better than a Wrangler off-road and much, much worse on-road. The military don’t want it any more because it’s a 1940s deathtrap. It’s time to let it go.

    Any truck currently available in the US, in any configuration, is vastly superior to this overrated relic. Don’t be jealous of the Europeans, be happy that your choices are so much better.

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al from Oz

      On road they are questionable.

      We used to have 130s at work and we were not allowed to exceed 100kph.

      Off road it is a different story.

      You must remember a trade off occurs as you make any vehicle, whether it be a 2 seat sports car, off roader, commercial vehicle, family car, etc.

      The trade off is the loss of capabilities/attributes that make a vehicle perform well in one area diminish as capability is move to enhance other areas of the vehicle performance.

    • 0 avatar

      But is there any better way to arrive in a jungle scene in James Bond?

      To that I say, no sir!

  • avatar

    Still have my trusty Isuzu Trooper…the poor man’s Land Rover.

    • 0 avatar

      The idea of the Trooper being a poor man’s Land Rover was precisely what drove me to buy one for myself, and later an A/T version for my wife to haul our infant son in, in the nineties.

      Nits and nats of age finally made them too much to deal with, and the wife went to a Corolla, while I departed for a Cherokee Sport (XJ, I believe).

  • avatar

    Defenders are only really cool stateside because of their rarity and looks.

    If you’ve ever had to drive one day in and day or or had a fleet of them to use as general purpose utility vehicles in the bush, you’d be pretty happy to dump them at first opportunity in favor of 70 series LandCruisers.

    • 0 avatar

      The ones that were sold here in the mid-1990’s (before the airbag requirements drove them out) trade hands for silly money if they are in nice condition – generally for more than they cost new!

      I personally don’t get it. For what people are asking for used Defenders with no warranty, you could easily get a brand new Wrangler Rubicon 2-door (or 4-door) with a warranty and a lot more capability out of the box.

      • 0 avatar

        Everyone knows that the Defender premium has nothing to do with the vehicle’s actual capabilities or reliability (LOL @ Defender reliability!). They sell for what they do because of the unobtanium status coupled with the general brand status of Land Rover. People are paying a premium for the classic, off-road, Euro aesthetic that can only be had with a vehicle of the Defender’s iconic status… and say what you will of the Defender, it is pretty much the definition of an iconic vehicle.

  • avatar
    Roberto Esponja

    Jeez, could they put an uglier grille on that thing?

    Well, I’m sure Subaru could…

  • avatar

    I gotta say, I realize this thing is a legend and all, but it just seems like one of those cars they made because they’d always sell, and out of habit. It’s not particularly good when considered as transportation, and it has been eclipsed by offerings from many other manufacturers.

    Regulation is finally killing it, and they’re bringing out another to take its place. It’ll sell too, but never have the history of the original.

    Like the VW Combi in Brazil.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • ajla: The lighter-duty GM 3.0L is only $1K more than the 5.3L V8. And the diesel gets a better transmission. I still...
  • Steve Biro: Is it truly rev matching… or just obnoxious rev hanging due to emissions controls?
  • golden2husky: The problem with the intake gasket was widespread. The material was not compatible with the new OAT...
  • ToolGuy: In which Bob Lutz boasts of having added approximately $1,000 per vehicle to GM’s cost structure:...
  • jack4x: “Selective environmental regulations have made diesels cost more” Even this is misleading....

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber