Built in Detroit Roxor to start at $15,549.

[MrH]

Seems easier to just get a used Wrangler you can drive on the road

[Payman]

I think Mahindra knew what they were doing insofar as they're very careful to have changed the grille, removed most of the dashboard, deleted turn signals, etc. and marketed the vehicle exclusively as a "side-by-side" competitor. They probably knew FCA would have issue with this truck being sold here, so prepared themselves in advance to make the argument "Hey, look, we changed the look of the thing and made it so it's not street-legal and we've marketed it as an off-highway utility vehicle; we're not competing in the same market as Jeep®."

What will end up working against them is that in some states and municipalities the Roxor is legal to drive on-road. (I.e. in places where golf carts, SxS and ATVs are street-legal.) It's also incredibly easy to get aftermarket CJ-5 parts to make a Roxor "street-legal".

Well that depends on the jurisdiction, of course. No matter what street legal additions you put on a Roxor, you'll never be able to register it for the road in Ontario, and I bet you can't in any other province either.

[Payman]

Seems easier to just get a used Wrangler you can drive on the road

That can be said for any SBS ATV, which is basically saying there's no point to them, why bother.

[Soup DeVille]

Agreed.  I feel like Mahindra knew what they were doing and had/have their asses covered.  Don't worry, Jeep, the Roxor really isn't going to cut into Wrangler sales.  It's pretty niche for the simple fact that it's extremely spartan and not street legal. 

What FCA really needs to do is start making an off road only Jeep to compete with the SBSs. Call it a CJ9, and make absolutely no pretense about it being an on highway vehicle.

[Galaxy]

Cars like the first Land Cruiser are also remarkable close to the Jeep styling.

[Payman]

What FCA really needs to do is start making an off road only Jeep to compete with the SBSs. Call it a CJ9, and make absolutely no pretense about it being an on highway vehicle.

What it really boils down to, is that Jeep is butthurt it didn't think of this. A whole new segment to exploit.

[Laconian]

What it really boils down to, is that Jeep is butthurt it didn't think of this. A whole new segment to exploit.

Road-legal Jeeps are selling quite well, and they probably don't want to cannibalize their own market.

Jeep could spin up a sub brand or invest in Polaris or something.

[Soup DeVille]

Cars like the first Land Cruiser are also remarkable close to the Jeep styling.

The Land Cruiser was sued- successfully. After the BJs though, later designs diverged enough to avoid further lawsuits.

[Soup DeVille]

Road-legal Jeeps are selling quite well, and they probably don't want to cannibalize their own market.

Jeep could spin up a sub brand or invest in Polaris or something.

A non road legal Jeep couldn't possibly be a threat to their current sales.

[2o6]

No one cares about SBS

[Laconian]

No one cares about SBS

SBS?

[Soup DeVille]

Its a half million unit per year segment. Guaranteed some people care.

[Soup DeVille]

SBS?

side by side ATV.

[Payman]

No one cares about SBS

You need to get outta the city more.

[Soup DeVille]

I think its fair to say that young male gay black urban dwelling creatives aren't exactly the target audience here.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4HQUf9Y1Oi0

[Galaxy]

The Land Cruiser was sued- successfully. After the BJs though, later designs diverged enough to avoid further lawsuits.

Did not know that, interesting.

[CaminoRacer]

SBS are the way to go if you're gonna do a lot of adventuring. Don't have to worry about breaking your main vehicle and they're built to withstand more from the factory, no modding your Jeep necessary

[93JC]

... except that a Jeep is street-legal, and in most places side-by-sides aren't. You have to get your SxS to wherever it is you're going "adventuring", usually meaning truck and trailer.

[CaminoRacer]

Yeah? That's the point. And then if you break it, you just tow it home.

I'd rather get an RZR that is dedicated to off-road fun than a Jeep that has to compromise between the street and trail.

[Payman]

... except that a Jeep is street-legal, and in most places side-by-sides aren't. You have to get your SxS to wherever it is you're going "adventuring", usually meaning truck and trailer.

No, you have to buy a house correctly. Where you can leave your driveway and just go. Like me. Suck it.

[CaminoRacer]

Jeeps also need registration & insurance.

[MX793]

Jeeps also need registration & insurance.

A lot of places now require registration and insurance to operate ATVs on public land/trails.

[Soup DeVille]

A lot of places now require registration and insurance to operate ATVs on public land/trails.

ORV stickers and insurance are a fraction of real car insurance; its less than even motorcycle insurance. And it doesn't apply to everybody everywhere.

[93JC]

Yeah? That's the point. And then if you break it, you just tow it home.

I'd rather get an RZR that is dedicated to off-road fun than a Jeep that has to compromise between the street and trail.

Obviously a street-legal SUV has to make some compromises; to say "yeah, that's the point, if you break a side-by-side you just tow it home" is failing to acknowledge how incredibly impractical that is for many people. You make it sound like people ought to just have a truck and trailer at their disposal, and ignore the costs of that. A street-legal SUV is a hell of a lot more convenient to own, precisely because you can drive it on public roads to get it to trailheads. If you don't live right by a trailhead and don't already have a truck and trailer to tow the thing around in a side-by-side is, frankly: pointless, stupid, and preposterously expensive.

Jeeps also need registration & insurance.

A lot of places now require registration and insurance to operate ATVs on public land/trails.

Here you're not allowed to drive an "off-highway vehicle" on public land without valid registration and insurance.

[giant_mtb]

Sucks to live where you live.

[giant_mtb]

No, you have to buy a house correctly. Where you can leave your driveway and just go. Like me. Suck it.

That's one great thing about a small town.  Or virtually anywhere in the UP.  You're very unlikely to be pulled over on/in an ORV cruising through town to get on the trail unless you're being a goon. I've ridden through town dozens of times and seen cops multiple times and have yet to be stopped. 

Also nice that the shop is 2 blocks from the trail.  But I'll buzz through town if I wanna hit a different spot.

[Soup DeVille]

A street legal SUV that's actually used off road is usually either well modified, or a factory option package that cost equal to what a trailer and a decent SBS will cost. Look at a Rubicon versus a base Wrangler, or even better a Raptor versus an F150.

Plus, driving your trail rig everyday costs money in gas, while wearing down your expensive MT tires, and all in all giving you a worse on-road experience.

Cost wise, I'd bet its a wash a best; and that before the inevitable repairs and wear and tear start to show.

[giant_mtb]

One of the things something like a Roxor has over a SBS as a true adventure vehicle is cargo space.  Not much space on a SBS for multiple days worth of camping gear, especially if both seats are occupied.

[CaminoRacer]

One of the things something like a Roxor has over a SBS as a true adventure vehicle is cargo space.  Not much space on a SBS for multiple days worth of camping gear, especially if both seats are occupied.

A 4 seater RZR might be close if you pack the back seats with gear. Although the Roxor probably competes with the more utilitarian models instead of the racy RZRs

[giant_mtb]

A 4 seater RZR might be close if you pack the back seats with gear. Although the Roxor probably competes with the more utilitarian models instead of the racy RZRs

Yeah. 4 seat SBS's are weird, though. I'd pick a Roxor over one any day.