2020 Defender Spy Shots....

Status
Not open for further replies.

grizzlyj

Tea pot tester
* In fact, so heavy that with the metallurgy at the time, it would put so much stress on the remaining wheels that it couldn't cope.

Why do you say that? I said it's not because they couldn't. IFS continued at the time for even heavier armoured vehicles, Tatra continued with IFS at similar vehicle size to a Kat1. Excessive stress isn't stress that can't be built around, just they chose not to do that

Yeah, if people doing that project from 1965-75 thought independent suspension was too complex and not viable for a super heavy*, 10 wheel (or more), slow truck, then independent suspension must be inferior.

I take it all back. We should all use the same type of steel used 50 years ago and built cars the same way they built huge trucks back then. But why stop there? Why not drop the tubeless design of wheels and tyres and go with tubes? And why even that? Let's go with solid tyres instead of pneumatic tyres, because what they thought in 1839 (that it wasn't feasible to have pneumatic tyres) must still hold true today.


* In fact, so heavy that with the metallurgy at the time, it would put so much stress on the remaining wheels that it couldn't cope.
 

DieselRanger

Well-known member
"Slightly" OT but reading about the development of the MAN Kat1 in the Tankograd book which involved pretty much every German truck manufacturer from 1965 to the first actual production vehicle after more than ten years of development later, independent suspension systems were ruled out in 1967 because of limited travel, technically more complex and so more prone to failure, the limited travel led to more wheel lifting and then excessive stress on the wheels still on the ground and reduced traction with wheels up. The resulting truck had rear diff locks so they're talking about less traction despite that.
Not the fact they couldn't make it work, but that restricted access to independent suspension components, more actual components and joints which are more ....blah blah blah....

And yet the US military went in the complete opposite direction, dumping "Jeeps" as we know them for the FIS HMMWV.

'Murica.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-T337A using Tapatalk
 

Christian P.

Expedition Leader
Staff member
Sooo can we lock this thread already? Its getting redundant and its a circular argument. CAPITALISM if you like it buy it, if you dislike it don't.

Well I was kind of thinking that we could let the 2-3 members arguing over IFS until someone actually makes a Defender vs Jeep video on YouTube and comes up with a catchy name like "Why Did I Decide to buy a Jeep over a Defender after spending 2 months arguing on the web about Solid Axles?"

:)
 

dreadlocks

Well-known member
theres a lil button on top right corner, says UNWATCH.. for those of you wishing you had the power of the Mods.. thats a little taste for yeh.
 

Pilat

Tossing ewoks on Titan
Regardless of the era, vehicle weight or level of engineering development, the questions raised during the design are the same.
Do you want more comfort and speed so requiring complexity (cost, more points of failure)?
Modern and technological do not mean complexity unless that's what you choose which JLR here have.

Yes, you're right. My bad. If only we could buy new cars designed in the 1960s and built with the same materials and technology, we would have much more reliable cars these days. [/sarcasm]
 

Pilat

Tossing ewoks on Titan
Why do you say that? I said it's not because they couldn't. IFS continued at the time for even heavier armoured vehicles, Tatra continued with IFS at similar vehicle size to a Kat1. Excessive stress isn't stress that can't be built around, just they chose not to do that
I said that because in your post, it was mentioned that they couldn't go IFS because when one wheel was in the air, the rest of the wheels/suspension couldn't take the load.

the limited travel led to more wheel lifting and then excessive stress on the wheels still on the ground
 

nickw

Adventurer
Regardless of the era, vehicle weight or level of engineering development, the questions raised during the design are the same.
Do you want more comfort and speed so requiring complexity (cost, more points of failure)?
Modern and technological do not mean complexity unless that's what you choose which JLR here have.

The Pinz certainly has stood the test of time every bit as good as it's SA counterparts, if not better. Of course it's a very different design than consumer IS, but it's certainly a robust, well proven and well regarded platform.
 

grizzlyj

Tea pot tester
The Pinz certainly has stood the test of time every bit as good as it's SA counterparts, if not better. Of course it's a very different design than consumer IS, but it's certainly a robust, well proven and well regarded platform.
It certainly is, but cost several times that of a Range Rover when it was sold to civilians.
 

nickw

Adventurer
It certainly is, but cost several times that of a Range Rover when it was sold to civilians.
Your original quote was regarding IS as a system and pointed to its complexity and failure capacity....it doesn't have to be. It's not a IS flaw, the Pinz is an example of that.
 

REDROVER

Explorer
H1 hummer has heavy duty IFS all 4 sides, never any problem, handles like a sports car,
And when IFS vehicle comes with locking differentials what’s the point of articulation?

Articulation is an old time argument, ppl used to believe if all 4 wheels touched the ground then it can go anywhere, NO!

99.9% of overland travel doesn’t need a vehicle to be able to do rock crawling, those rock crawlers are purpose build vehicles and are not even road legal technically.

I still hate the new defender;)
 
H1 hummer has heavy duty IFS all 4 sides, never any problem, handles like a sports car,
And when IFS vehicle comes with locking differentials what’s the point of articulation?

Articulation is an old time argument, ppl used to believe if all 4 wheels touched the ground then it can go anywhere, NO!

99.9% of overland travel doesn’t need a vehicle to be able to do rock crawling, those rock crawlers are purpose build vehicles and are not even road legal technically.

I still hate the new defender;)

My point exactly, which is why I posted what I did about IFS taking over the "off-road" market; not the "rock-crawling" market. I'll put my 08 stock LR3 against any bone stock jeep and if I lose in rock-crawling, my point will be proven. I'll even put my 18" wheels back on it so it's US spec and not Euro.

Love Jeeps, kind of like the new Defender (need diesel to love), and love my LR3. I also love my buddy's Tacos, 4 runners, Jeeps, LC's, and all the other crap; I just don't compare them because they are not the same vehicles.
 

ChasingOurTrunks

Well-known member
In case anyone cares the NA Defender Order Guide is now out, not sure if the books are actually open yet for the US or not. Per Umbertob LR Pasadena is asking 20k over MSRP to even take an order and LR Encino is asking 30k over MSRP.


I like the last line of the intro:

View attachment 540833

And they even mention Jeep:
View attachment 540834

Thanks for the link!

I really like the tablet hangers with integrated charging in the backs of the seat. You can also hang a table there. Families with kids will especially like this I think. There are often lots of boring miles between the interesting ones so having a way for passengers in the back seat to watch a tv show, play a game, or colour in a book is handy.

I also really like the Activekey technology. A waterproof and shockproof wristband key eliminates a common and significant inconvenience. No more worrying about where the ignition keys ended up — folded In the tent, dropped on the ground or locked in the rig? Nope, just on your wrist like a watch.

And I was very impressed with the strength of the recovery points. I’m not sure if that’s a direct pull only or if it’s side pulls too, but it seems to indicate enough strength in the body.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
188,039
Messages
2,901,517
Members
229,352
Latest member
Baartmanusa
Top