2020 Defender Spy Shots....

[Todd n Natalie]

I don’t have friends with LRs; most of the failures have been in trucks from the Big 3, both aftermarket and factory.

Nor do I. I just see as a fairly close ratio of all air bag equipped vehicles of all having issues. I don't think any manufacturer is worse off than another.

To be clear, I am not saying there will be a 100% failure rate with ANY air bagged vehicle. I'm just not willing to play those odds personally.

Thank you for the link about the calcium chloride. I follow it quite closing and have voiced my opinion to the city a few times about it. From what I understand, it is just used on the Henday and Whitemud freeways.

 

[REDROVER]

Follow few land cruisers and Few H1s and you will see it, don’t have to hear it.
It doesn’t even come with lockers

It’s a medium duty 4x4

 

[nickw]

Personally, I'm liking what I see in the new Defender... my biggest gripe (as it is entirely untested by the public at this point), would be the lack of diesel offering in the US market... and yes, given the published GCW/tow capacity ratings, that diesel needs to be more in the neighborhood of 450 lb ft of torque.

My last 5 vehicles have all been diesel, perhaps I'm biased but justifiably so IMHO. While I agree small displacement turbos and mild hybrids are beginning to blur the lines between diesel and gas, there is still no substitute for a diesel in terms of low end power and range/mpg. To make my point, I did a bit of digging. Since the EcoBoost was mentioned as an example of a [superior to diesel] small displacement turbo, I dug into the Ford EB vs baby (3.0?) Powerstroke to do my best to compare apples to apples... The difference is significant - dyno tested stock at the rear wheel: 280 lb ft @ 2000 rpm for the diesel vs 200 lb ft @ 2000 rpm for the ecoboost. As far as mpg across the two: the baby diesel bests the ecoboost by 100 (towing) -170+ miles of range... that's the difference between needing to fill up every 200 miles vs every 300 miles when significantly loading the engine. Significant and important to me and how I use my vehicles.

My real world example of the benefits of low end power... towing my buddies old Shasta camper into Kane Creek trail (Moab area), with two dirt bikes in the bed of my Cummins 2500 and having a hidden campsite all to ourselves right off the trail. After climbing back out of there while hauling a trailer, crawling over rocks on a steep incline with zero tire slip, my buddy who is a diehard Toyota guy, said, "no way we coulda done that in my Tacoma." (granted that's not a small displacement turbo gasser)

Fast forward about 5 years and I no longer need to haul boats and horses, I'm in an EcoDiesel WK2, sufficient to haul my 12' enclosed trailer with 2 motorcycles and gear around the Rockies... Same buddy, always giving me crap that it's a soccer mom car is jealous I'm getting 13mpg towing with 275/55R20 AT's (the biggest that will fit my WK2 w/o mods). My buddy remarked he's lucky to get that driving Telluride to Denver w/o a trailer in his latest model TRD Pro Tacoma with aftermarket tires and ARB bumper... Meanwhile, I'm still driving down "Jeep" trails and finding campsites like this one from last month...


View attachment 539327

Outside of regular maintenance (oil change, fuel filter change, brake pads, etc.), I've had zero reliability issues with my past 4 Cummins and my current EcoDiesel - but yes, modern EPA/CARB stuff has complicated matters. I went from a 2004.5 Cummins to a new 2010 Cummins and then back to a used 2006 Cummins because of the ULSD/DEF stuff absolutely killed the mpg (about 17 mpg empty highway on the 2010 back to 22 mpg empty on the 2006). And now with the EcoDiesel and the "Approved Emissions Modification" I've noticed my mpg suffer yet again. Of course there are always examples of this one or that one failing - doesn't mean they are all unreliable. I towed my buddies wakeboard boat to the lake last weekend (comfortably at 70 mph when conditions permitted), because... His F150 EcoBoost had been at the dealership for 2 weeks.

And if diesels are (should/will be) going the way of the dodo bird, then why is the entire domestic 1/2 ton truck segment, many SUV's and Jeep (hopefully) offering them now/recently? It's a good thing to have options and no two overlanders are alike.

Back to the Defender - there's the old vs new argument, but time hasn't stood still for me. I drove to Alaska when I was 20 in a 1974 VW bus; took the Cassiar Highway (that was long before it was paved) and we survived (minus a broken rear shock we had to wait a week for in Whitehorse), and up to Manly Hot Springs where I had to change a tire. Today, I can afford a $70-80k car, and because of that I also appreciate and like to have AC seats and IFS with air suspension. If I were to drive to AK again I'd happily do it in a new Defender, but I'd have to go out of my way to find some roads the Defender couldn't handle and in the meantime I'll lower the suspension to save some fuel and be comfortable.

Measuring torque at the rear wheels like that is a bit of a fallacy....all it's doing is accounting for drivetrain losses and not vehicle performance. We know the diesel has more torque at the flywheel, it also has more displacement. In real world application, the 2.3 EB has the ability to generate more torque at the rear wheels vs the diesel, of course at the expense of mileage, there is no contest on MPG...diesel has that in the bag.

 

[EricTyrrell]

Follow few land cruisers and Few H1s and you will see it, don’t have to hear it.
It doesn’t even come with lockers

It’s a medium duty 4x4

Lockers are an option in nearly all 4x4s, either factory or aftermarket. The stock articulation, off-road angles, and weight of classic coil-sprung LRs are relatively excellent. Very competitive with Jeeps, Toyotas, and others of the same vintage, or even many modern 4x4s who've had decades of advantage in evolution. Combine coil LR's strengths with lockers and you've got capability that's at the top of the pack with Unimogs, coil Land Cruisers, G-wagens, etc. Hilarious you present H1s as the pinnacle of off-road capability when they can't even fit through most trails, among their numerous other off-road failings.

 

[mklucas]

Measuring torque at the rear wheels like that is a bit of a fallacy....all it's doing is accounting for drivetrain losses and not vehicle performance. We know the diesel has more torque at the flywheel, it also has more displacement. In real world application, the 2.3 EB has the ability to generate more torque at the rear wheels vs the diesel, of course at the expense of mileage, there is no contest on MPG...diesel has that in the bag.

Not sure I follow you. The numbers I used were measured at the rear wheel (on a dyno), showing a 40% advantage for the diesel at the same rpm.

If your saying dyno measurement is a fallacy, then how do you know the EB bests the diesel in torque at the same low rpm?

 

[ChasingOurTrunks]

Nor do I. I just see as a fairly close ratio of all air bag equipped vehicles of all having issues. I don't think any manufacturer is worse off than another.

To be clear, I am not saying there will be a 100% failure rate with ANY air bagged vehicle. I'm just not willing to play those odds personally.

Thank you for the link about the calcium chloride. I follow it quite closing and have voiced my opinion to the city a few times about it. From what I understand, it is just used on the Henday and Whitemud freeways.

Good to know! I didn’t realize it was restricted to those roads; most articles have not been very clear. Fluid Film and RustChek are our friends at any rate.

I am curious how well these will sell here — I see there is a second LR dealership opening in town, so there’s obviously a market (or at least, obviously someone thinks there is!)

 

[JackW]

YES. THIS. EXACTLY.

I just drove 18 hours back from SW colorado and the comfort aspect is something that is ignored over and over and over by people arguing about departure and breakover angles. It's not much use if the 90% of the time you spend on the highway getting there is miserable. And judging by my friends with Toyota/Jeep/etc, it's important to note that I'm the only one who never has to drive solo... AND I'M STILL ON THE SAME ROADS! *turns on heated seats, climate control, etc*

(Again, I love the wrangler. I just don't own one because I know how much more it matters for us to be comfortable to get TO the trail than the extra little capability that I seem to never need).

I was one of the first ones in our Land Rover club to buy a used 2007 LR3 - I got it in 2012 to replace a thoroughly reliable but boring CR-V Honda because I'd always liked the look and needed something with towing capacity (not a Honda attribute). I of course got a bunch of crap from all of the D1 & D2 owners - as well as my fellow Defender owners in the club. Well it wasn't long before a few more started showing up at our gatherings and then on the trails at Uwharrie where surprisingly they were pretty damn good. We watched an almost stock LR3 crawl up the big hill at Daniel and started thinking these things can really work. Now there are lots of them showing up on the trails and some of the more hard core Series guys have bought LR3's for the long trips to the trails out in the far west. They drive from Atlanta to Colorado or Utah, sometimes sleeping in the back of the LR3 and run all the trails that you see in the on line articles and then have a nice comfortable ride back.

It kind of reminded me a little of my first Range Rover - a grey market 1985 Vogue model - when I started going out on the trails in it back in the late 1980's everyone thought it was too fancy to be out in the woods -when it proved to be more capable than most of the Jeeps of that time it got a lot of people thinking about what a vehicle really needed to be great off road and pleasant to drive ON the road.

 

[Blaise]

It kind of reminded me a little of my first Range Rover - a grey market 1985 Vogue model - when I started going out on the trails in it back in the late 1980's everyone thought it was too fancy to be out in the woods -when it proved to be more capable than most of the Jeeps of that time it got a lot of people thinking about what a vehicle really needed to be great off road and pleasant to drive ON the road.

This still happens to me.

"Hey man, might not wanna go down that road, you might scratch it"

Me: So?

 

[nickw]

Not sure I follow you. The numbers I used were measured at the rear wheel (on a dyno), showing a 40% advantage for the diesel at the same rpm.

If your saying dyno measurement is a fallacy, then how do you know the EB bests the diesel in torque at the same low rpm?

I made a point of not comparing the EB to new diesels but rather to the old diesel that everybody said was very torquey. My point was the current gas turbo engines are every bit as good as the older diesels that everybody seems to love.

RE rear wheel torque, run the numbers at a higher engine RPM. Torque at wheels is 100% reliant on HP at crank, higher HP = higher torque at wheels....most dyno runs are done in 1:1 ratio because of this.

 

[68camaro]

I like loaded out trucks and cars. Those vehicles have crazy amounts of tech in them that will cost thousands to fix WHEN they break. I think the days of me buying second hand vehicles is over. I also think that high end vehicles (Denali, Limited, Platinum, etc) will start to see a significant drop in the depreciation rate as people start to realize that Nav, audio, and hvac systems will costs thousands to repair on that used luxury car they just bought for $20k.

I think you are correct. I think most cars have solid engines and drivetrains but computer compexity is achilles heel in new vehicles. In 2013 when I bought my JCG Overland, I paid $2400 for Mopar lifetime warranty, not because of mechanical concern but to cover the computer/navionics/ electrical. Already I had Nav system including display replaced and several other electrical issue addressed.

 

[Boston90]

.... having to use premium fuel, in a vehicle badged as a Defender?! Come on now.

FYI. The original NAS Defenders, at least the 97’s, required premium fuel. The manual for my 97 states “always use premium unleaded gasoline”.

 

[onemanarmy]

FYI. The original NAS Defenders, at least the 97’s, required premium fuel. The manual for my 97 states “always use premium unleaded gasoline”.

Never heard anyone ever mention that before, or seen anyone do it. Seems quite silly.

Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk

 

[TexasTJ]

Hey where did Blackangie go???

 

[mklucas]

I made a point of not comparing the EB to new diesels but rather to the old diesel that everybody said was very torquey. My point was the current gas turbo engines are every bit as good as the older diesels that everybody seems to love.

RE rear wheel torque, run the numbers at a higher engine RPM. Torque at wheels is 100% reliant on HP at crank, higher HP = higher torque at wheels....most dyno runs are done in 1:1 ratio because of this.

And I was speaking to “low end torque” and the benefits of how a diesel makes power in an off-road towing scenario (typically not done at high RPM’s). ✌

 

[JeepColorado]

This still happens to me.

"Hey man, might not wanna go down that road, you might scratch it"

Me: So?

I applaud you gentlemen because you are without a doubt in the distinct extreme minority of LR owners. I wish I saw more of them on the trail, I really do. I hope to see this Defender out there- can't remember the last time I saw a LR on a trail here in CO or UT for that matter.

I don't know if you've driven a new JL, but Jeep has much improved the on-road drivability- especially with the 2.0L Turbo- it's much improved in comfort and feel- which I'd agree have always lacked a little. We drove a Discovery and a JL Rubicon the same day and while the Discovery rode a touch better, to me or my wife, it was overall negligible. When you factor in the questionable history with electronics and air springs and then realize you are paying $15-20K more to get a similarly equipped model- in my opinion it's just not quite right. Let the Defender run for a few years- have a great service record of reliability- if the aftermarket responds with a robust offering- and I could potentially see it. Right now we like getting out in the dirt, loading the dogs in the back, exploring the backwoods without worry- I've seen no vehicle that does that with less complication and less expense than the Rubicon. I'd love to see some competition though- it's been a while since Jeep really had any.