To Top

Article Highlights Success of Mahindra Roxors

• CATEGORIES: Features

UPDATE: In case you missed it, FCA has won the first round of the FCA vs. Mahindra legal case over the jeep-looking Roxor. The court ruled that Mahindra violated FCAs “Trade Dress”, which isn’t a specific trademark or patent, because the Roxor looks so much like a jeep. Mahindra is currently deciding whether to appeal.

https://www.automobilemag.com/news/jeep-mahindra-roxor-infringement-case-update/

This was the second win against Mahindra. The first win came in January when the International Trade Commission agreed with Jeep’s charge that the company was not contractually barred from suing Mahindra for a Trade Dress violation. This freed Jeep up to pursue the recently won lawsuit.

https://www.autonews.com/blogs/jeep-scores-legal-spat-mahindra-roxor-rolls-detroit

=======================

Originally posted September 29, 2019: This article from the Detroit Free Press highlights the successful introduction of Roxors, to the point that the company can’t keep up with demand. Unfortunately for Jeep, there’s some real branding problems, as I’ve seen countless people on Craigslist advertising these as “jeeps”. Moreover, do a Google search for “Jeep ATV” and Roxors pop up on the results page.

https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/mark-phelan/2019/08/31/mahindra-roxor-atv-tractor-jeep-review/2132430001/

Mahindra-ROXOR-Beauty

 

11 Comments on “Article Highlights Success of Mahindra Roxors

  1. SE Pennsylvania Steve

    I guess their lawyers OKed the grill slot number and how they’re slightly angled to prevent copyright infringement.

  2. JW

    Steve, that’s right. Since 1947 Mahindra has a license to produce Jeeps in India, but they could not market in the US. They make a vehicle similar to the Roxor called the Thar in India, it even has a seven slot grille. Mahindra got around the Jeep trademark and licensing by using a different grill design. But apparently Jeep (FCA) still has an issue and alleged Mahindra is infringing on trade-dress by marketing a Jeep styled product in the US. It appears Mahindra didn’t consult Jeep before introducing the Roxor.

    I’m torn myself, I like these things but it seems like a waste being off-road only. Roxors are so close to being real Jeeps, Jason Torchinsky from Jalopnik asserts that Roxors have more Jeep DNA than 2018 Wranglers, but it is such a niche product at this point I’ll have to just enjoy the show and continue to enjoy vintage Jeeps.

  3. Seth King

    It’s an early cj5…if Jeep had wanted to they could have introduced one, but they didn’t so the heck with them.

  4. Jeff

    While similar to the CJ, I just cannot get beyond the weird look of the Roxor from the dash up (the windshield frame and cage make it look like a backyard creation compared to a CJ5). That said, they are basically offering folks what we’ve been asking for, for quite a long time: a new version of the old CJ’s, with a fuel efficient diesel motor, manual transmission, and minimal electronics. I tend to agree…Jeep could have brought this same vehicle to market (as an off-road only item that the end user could modify to be street legal…though their US-based attorneys likely wouldn’t allow it); the fact is they chose not to. If Roxor could clean up the look a bit, I’d take a closer look at them. From what I’ve read, they are priced a little too close to the really capable and well-built side by sides…so the market is going to be tough for them to really get a foothold in.

  5. David Eilers Post author

    Jeep’s flagship product, the Grand Cherokee, is also it’s most profitable product. My guess is that while Jeep could have entered the ATV market (or perhaps better stated, returned to the ATV market with a CJ-5 like product) and done well with it’s name brand, I’d bet it’s avoided that whole arena to focus on it’s continued positioning as a premiere SUV brand.

    My feeling is that to re-enter the ATV market would require substantial investment in design, marketing, and factory development. After all, Jeep sells primary and secondary vehicles. That’s a market all its own. Meanwhile, the ATV market is a playtoy market for most folks; it too is a unique market that differs from the primary/secondary vehicle market (from marketing, to different dealer networks, to parts distribution).

    That said, I’ve always believed that Jeep surrendered the ATV market and that it could have fully entered the market and bolstered its off-road pedigree by building top-of-the-line ATVs. However, perhaps in the end, the profitability was never large enough vis-a-vis the market for SUVs. So, it made sense to focus on the more profitable market.

    I suspect Jeep is better off avoiding the ATV market and, instead, working out a deal to both increase its licensing fees from Mahindra (related to Roxor sales) and encouraging Mahindra to make the Roxor look a little less CJ-5/CJ-7 like.

  6. Mike W

    I like the concept, i wonder if they have anymore legroom than a CJ5 or older Willys, if not they would not be of any use to me. But i would rather have one of these than a 25000.00 Polaris RZR

  7. Dave from Mn

    I haven’t sat in one but going by spec numbers in should have decent legroom. Wheelbase is a couple of inches longer than a cj7. And if the front fenders are same as short nose cj5’s that’s a ways between firewall and inner rear wheel well.

  8. Craig in ME

    A local ‘motorsports’ dealership has 3 of these displayed roadside. 2 are the newer ‘land cruiser’ type grill, while the other is the ‘jeeplike’ grill. I stopped by to look at them (in my ’79 CJ5). The jeep-ish one was manual, the others automatic. I must say that they are more of a pure ‘jeep’ than the modern Jeeps. Although not a fan, the TJ’s seem to be the last ‘real’ Universal looking vehicles. As far as I’m concerned, Fiat-Chrysler ruined the ‘legendary 4 x 4’.

  9. Tyler

    Maybe Jeep will take the hint that Americans want an older CJ-5 style product and make it themselves. I’d love to see what they could do

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Subscribe without commenting