Don't flame... BUT is the Wrangler the new Defender for the U.S. ???

[Omar Brannstrom]

Howdy from Sweden Europe

We have the Defender and Wrangler here. I think that Defender looks better and more maskuline than the Wrangler and it is more robust. I choose a Wrangler because it is cheaper and is more refiened. Also the Defender would not fit my garage (it is very high) and it only have stick and diesel engine. I want auto and I dont like diesel, I have driven booth several Wranglers and Defender with diesel and I dont like the sound, it drives like a tractor and the swedish anual diesel engine tax is very high here in Sweden. The driving position in a Defender is not so nice. Maybe the Defender cost about 7-12 grand more than a Wrangler here. The Defender have a nice room in the back for dining etc and the payload is more than twice that the Wrangler has. The Defender has better ground clearance and better approach and departure angles and looks more military than the Wrangler, cooler.

I wish that Landrover saved the sexy exterior and made big changes inside. And added airbags and electronic windows in the back.

I think it is easier to sleep in a Wrangler because the floor is wider. And I dont think that a Defender has a 12v outlet in the back for a fridge.

Anyway, The Defender looks better than my 10th anniversary 2013 unlimited Rubicon

The 2014 Defender here in Sweden, drool

 

[David Harris]

Maybe it's just me, but I'm fairly certain that 9/10 people would take the Defender 110 over a JKU Rubicon if they were side by side and they had their choice of keys.

 

[Kmrtnsn]

I think we are all going be extremely disappointed in the 2016(or will it be even later than that now?) Indian designed and Tata parts-sourced Defender replacement when it finally arrives, adorned with airbags, and Euro-softy front bumpers and hood. No more bush bars, or side facing seats, likely narrower, shorter, IFS, probably even a four cylinder Ford or Mahindra engine now that the model will have to meet EU safety and emissions standards. I think it will probably have more in common with a five year old Liberty or Escape, than anything that ever rolled out of Solihull.

 

[zimm]

And even if you do buy one for the allure, you'll likely sell it after 6months-year because it's a tractor with a high price tag.

in websters thats one of the definitions of a piece of ****.

 

[zimm]

Maybe it's just me, but I'm fairly certain that 9/10 people would take the Defender 110 over a JKU Rubicon if they were side by side and they had their choice of keys.

and it was free.

even then, a defender is an ergonomic nightmare with 1940"s cockpit proportions. put the average person that doesnt know **** or have some odd emotional attachment to 4x4's in the drivers seat and ask them which one they think costs more, or they would want and now youre dividing into zero.

 

[David Harris]

and it was free.

even then, a defender is an ergonomic nightmare with 1940"s cockpit proportions. put the average person that doesnt know **** or have some odd emotional attachment to 4x4's in the drivers seat and ask them which one they think costs more, or they would want and now youre dividing into zero.

Emotion is everything with humans. Same reason why most people would rather have a Lamborghini than a Corvette, or why women go for the bad exciting guys over the good boring ones, until they want to get married. Then they choose the good boring guys and force them to drive Toyota Camry's. . .

 

[roverandom]

I'm pretty sure when the "new" Defender finally shows up it will have one of Land Rovers brand new 'Ingenium' 2.0L Gas/Diesel engines that the JLR drivetrain engineers developed in house. First real LR power plant since the TD5.

IFS/IRS is ok but it does complicate modification.

I think the fella from Sweden has the right idea. A exterior similar to the original but with an interior designed for human beings.

 

[roverandom]

Then they choose the good boring guys and force them to drive Toyota Camry's. . .

Wait. What!

Anyone want to buy a beige Toyota Camry?

 

[zelatore]

I'm pretty sure when the "new" Defender finally shows up it will have one of Land Rovers brand new 'Ingenium' 2.0L Gas/Diesel engines that the JLR drivetrain engineers developed in house. First real LR power plant since the TD5.

IFS/IRS is ok but it does complicate modification.

I think the fella from Sweden has the right idea. A exterior similar to the original but with an interior designed for human beings.

I more or less agree. But I doubt they'll be able to keep the look and meet crash/economy standards.

As for IFS/IRS, if they could make it flex (it's possible, just unlikely) like a solid axle I'd be fine with it. People love to talk up how much the LR3 air system mimics a solid axle. Hmmm....then why did I have a tire 4' in the air last weekend when the guy in the Classic kept all 4 on the dirt on the same trail? Check out that flex!



Of course the Jeep guys are hyper-worried about loosing their solid axles in the next gen Wrangler as well. Egad! what if both trucks go independent? What will we do then???

 

[zelatore]

Wait. What!

Anyone want to buy a beige Toyota Camry?

beige --- Toyota
A little redundant there, eh?

 

[David Harris]

What will we do then???

The shootout of the millennium. . . . :lurk:

 

[roverandom]

Yeah the LR3 only works so well because of the traction control. Independent suspension can be really good off road but to get the long travel you need to have it very wide. Also it is costly and complicated to modify and that is what almost every off road buyer will want to do ASAP and if for no other reason this is what makes the Jeep JK so popular.


The Toyota Camry thing was a joke.

 

[Longtallsally]

Interesting discussion from the Rover folks on this. Disclaimer: I'm a JKUR (that's a 4 door Wrangler Rubicon for those that care) owner.

I have to admit that the points being stated here are hilarious. Let us not forget, and it was mentioned and quickly dismissed that Rover started from a Jeep. But without beating up on Rover, they win for style and cool factor. I have longed for a Defender or a Disco for years. I did all the research, read on Rover specific forums, looked at all the good and bad of various years, etc (why else would I come over to the Rover forum to poke around?). You know what keeps me from them? Reliability and fuel economy. I know that will raise the ire to no end with this group, but the reality is, parts are expensive here in the States, and not near as ubiquitous as for a Jeep.

I would also argue that the current generation Rubicon cannot be dismissed as an appearance package or not the real deal in any way. Perhaps I am being ignorant, but find me a Rover with a 4 to 1 low range. Also, despite some of their shortcomings, the Dana 44 axle is not exactly a weak axle allowing 35" tires very easily without being concerned about breaking parts. Larger tires such as this also are mounted with minimal modifications- again, difficult for anything but an unobtanium D90 or the like.

Which brings the thought to something more practical: comfort and the like. No one will ever argue Rover rules this world, but in an apples to apples discussion, a Grand Cherokee is actually nice vehicle, but nothing much to say here.

The last thing I'd mention is that of utilitarian capability. To think an LR3 can do what a new Rubicon can do without sustaining SIGNIFICANT body damage is quite silly. This has nothing to do with IFS, or anything like that. It is simply ground clearance, better articulation, better breakover entry and departure angles, better gearing and blah blah blah. The Jeep will also cost pennies on the dollar to repair if body or other damage occurs. So what if it's disposable, the discussion is around capability. We tow a 3500lb camper with ours. Matter of fact, we towed the camper up to the Sierra, pulled the doors and top, and then ran a good bit of the Rubicon in an afternoon, and then came back to camp, put the top and doors on and drove home in AC comfort listening to Sat Radio. Hard to beat that level of utility.

And finally, fuel economy. I think the latest LR3 and such get comparable economy, but as a whole, the fire breathing V8s always put in them are not exactly economical. And since when are head gaskets a maintenance item?

Anyway, I hope no one takes offense to this post, but looks at it as food for thought. Personally what told me the best story was living in Europe and seeing how incredibly cheap a D90 or 110 could be had, and a worse condition, older G Wagen cost a lot more. Suffice it to say, we brought back a 460 series G that is in ALL ways supremely superior to a D90.

 

[dwvninety]

Interesting discussion from the Rover folks on this. Disclaimer: I'm a JKUR (that's a 4 door Wrangler Rubicon for those that care) owner.

I have to admit that the points being stated here are hilarious. Let us not forget, and it was mentioned and quickly dismissed that Rover started from a Jeep. But without beating up on Rover, they win for style and cool factor. I have longed for a Defender or a Disco for years. I did all the research, read on Rover specific forums, looked at all the good and bad of various years, etc (why else would I come over to the Rover forum to poke around?). You know what keeps me from them? Reliability and fuel economy. I know that will raise the ire to no end with this group, but the reality is, parts are expensive here in the States, and not near as ubiquitous as for a Jeep.

I would also argue that the current generation Rubicon cannot be dismissed as an appearance package or not the real deal in any way. Perhaps I am being ignorant, but find me a Rover with a 4 to 1 low range. Also, despite some of their shortcomings, the Dana 44 axle is not exactly a weak axle allowing 35" tires very easily without being concerned about breaking parts. Larger tires such as this also are mounted with minimal modifications- again, difficult for anything but an unobtanium D90 or the like.

Which brings the thought to something more practical: comfort and the like. No one will ever argue Rover rules this world, but in an apples to apples discussion, a Grand Cherokee is actually nice vehicle, but nothing much to say here.

The last thing I'd mention is that of utilitarian capability. To think an LR3 can do what a new Rubicon can do without sustaining SIGNIFICANT body damage is quite silly. This has nothing to do with IFS, or anything like that. It is simply ground clearance, better articulation, better breakover entry and departure angles, better gearing and blah blah blah. The Jeep will also cost pennies on the dollar to repair if body or other damage occurs. So what if it's disposable, the discussion is around capability. We tow a 3500lb camper with ours. Matter of fact, we towed the camper up to the Sierra, pulled the doors and top, and then ran a good bit of the Rubicon in an afternoon, and then came back to camp, put the top and doors on and drove home in AC comfort listening to Sat Radio. Hard to beat that level of utility.

And finally, fuel economy. I think the latest LR3 and such get comparable economy, but as a whole, the fire breathing V8s always put in them are not exactly economical. And since when are head gaskets a maintenance item?

Anyway, I hope no one takes offense to this post, but looks at it as food for thought. Personally what told me the best story was living in Europe and seeing how incredibly cheap a D90 or 110 could be had, and a worse condition, older G Wagen cost a lot more. Suffice it to say, we brought back a 460 series G that is in ALL ways supremely superior to a D90.

Being a Land Rover owner (2003 Disco with CDL F/R Lockers, 2006 LR3 HSE with HD, 2007 Range Rover Supercharged) upgrading, maintenance cost, and aftermarket parts and equipment are still scarce and expensive. Yes they are more than capable, have a lot of more luxury features for that model year compared to the same model year of Jeep, but the cost of keeping the vehicle running, the cost of parts, etc can be expensive.

That being the reason I also own a Jeep (2012 JKU) Rubicon (Yes I still own my Rovers). I got all options available for that year, Dana 44 front and rear, electronic sway bar disconnect, front and rear e lockers, Rubicon transfer case, rock sliders, skid protection, 4.11 gear, leather, heated seats, dual climate control, towing package, SAT, etc. Yes it's loaded but the comfort level (driving, wind noise, quality of interior, body) is still nowhere close to a Land Rover even the older models.

Why did I get a Jeep?

1. Aftermarket parts and equipment are common and very inexpensive.
2. You won't need much modifications to make it extremely trail worthy.
3. If you do break something you can get it at almost any parts store (NAPA, Autozone, PepBoys etc.)
4. Dealer won't give you the run around about warranty issue. Either they will cover it or not. Land Rover always finds a way to decline warranty work.
5. If Dealer declines warranty at least they won't rape you on parts and labor cost.
6. Lots of independent Jeep specialty shops that compete against each other so if you want to put lifts, larger tires, bigger engine, DTD suspension, coilovers, etc.
7. You won't pack as much Land Rover parts as camping gear to Overland and off-road.
8. Head Gasket issue? 180 degree thermostat, drive shaft that can take out your transmission if you don't grease it.
9. You can wheel with doors and top off (some people don't care)
10. Floor drains.
11. 35" and up tires without having to cut fenders and do serious lift modification.
12. Available full body armor and cage for less money than a used LR3

Will I get rid of my Rovers and switch to Jeep? Hell no I still like my Rovers, at the same time I kinda dig my Jeep. If Land Rover castrates the NA Defender, then maybe I'll buy the new Ford Bronco if its available by then.

 

[Viggen]

I more or less agree. But I doubt they'll be able to keep the look and meet crash/economy standards.

As for IFS/IRS, if they could make it flex (it's possible, just unlikely) like a solid axle I'd be fine with it. People love to talk up how much the LR3 air system mimics a solid axle. Hmmm....then why did I have a tire 4' in the air last weekend when the guy in the Classic kept all 4 on the dirt on the same trail? Check out that flex!



Of course the Jeep guys are hyper-worried about loosing their solid axles in the next gen Wrangler as well. Egad! what if both trucks go independent? What will we do then???

Flex is important but only to a degree. Add traction aids and you will be fine. You made it through that spot, did you not? You will go up with a wheel, pass center, and then it will come down. G Wagens are solid axled but do not flex any more than many IFS rigs do. They make it because of the lockers.


If the Jeep goes independent, it will be about 2.3 seconds after it goes on sale before everyone, from Synergy to RE, offer a bolt on solid axle swap kit. I can almost guarantee that. The advantage of the CJ/ Wrangler is that the aftermarket has embraced them and will be with them from cradle to grave. That is something that no other marque has. The ability of easy catalogue builds (most of the Jeep section will indicate this) will never end for that model. The only Jeepers that are worried about IFS are the mall crawlers as an easy, cheap lift will be an issue where it was not before. The ones that actually wheel, are not too overly concerned. They usually ditch, or heavily modify, the factory set up anyway.