New Defender Rage/Hate Thread

[Pilat]

This is an Overlanding forum after all, not rock crawling. We've all got places to go and lots of gear to bring with us.

Exactly!

 

[nickw]

A very quick Jeep 'build' with Turbo-diesel and some options = $50K

The D110 will be pushing $100K out the door.

The Jeeps are closer to $60k optioned like the Rovers would be....

 

[TrekkerOutdoors]

The Jeeps are closer to $60k optioned like the Rovers would be....

My D110X that I ordered was $84,944.00 including delivery. I know there's tax, tags, title, doc fees, ... but I wouldn't hold that against the brand, same no matter what you buy. Funny thing is, while comparison shopping, I looked at a Toyota Land Cruiser (USA spec model). I couldn't believe they want $87,645 for that, with little to no options! You only get a choice of black or white.

 

[Pilat]

Did a search to help Eric a little with a little primer on front suspension. I figure I can find something at this (quite easy) level for the rear as well.

Advantages of Independent-Front Suspension:

1. 1. 1. Low unsprung weight.
      2. Softer suspension compared to rigid type.
      3. Better ride quality.
      4. Improved vehicle stability.
      5. Overcomes the ill-effect on steering geometry.
      6. More space to accommodate the engine.

(much more at this link):

https://carbiketech.com/independent-front-suspension-design/

And this - about solid axle front suspension:

Disadvantages:

1. Hard springing due to a small amount of maximum spring deflection. Thus, it restricts the vertical movement to the extent of the clearance between the axle and the engine.
2. Accurate control of steering geometry is not possible.
3. High unsprung weight resulting in minimum wheel bonding.
4. For providing clearance, the engine needs to sit behind the axle. This reduces the passenger compartment area.
5. It produces an over-steer effect due to poor rolling stiffness.

Due to a number of disadvantages of the beam or rigid axle front suspension, the manufacturers use an improvised form i.e. independent front suspension for passenger cars such as sedans, coupes, and hatchbacks.

From here - again, much more to read:
https://carbiketech.com/rigid-front-axle-suspension-system/

 

[DieselRanger]

Thinking back to my previous 4WD trips I never see another Land Rover. It is all Jeeps, Toyota's, Fords and Broncos. Some modified, most not. A relatively recent trip up Engineer's Pass with my LR4 some girl yelled out "I wouldn't bring my LR4 up here!" as she rode by in a ATV.

The LR4 performed very well in the San Juans. It just isn't the crowd that LR is targeting. DieselRanger was correct when he characterized LR as the 'aspirational' brand. Most LR's are kept in garages. LR understands that as they have collapsed Jaguar and Land Rover design into a single group. (Well, other than the financial realities that drove the redundancies)

And again, you see so few compared to others because JLR are a small automaker who build in small volumes - the Slovakia plant is supposed to increase that capacity, but not by the orders of magnitude you see in Jeep and Toyota. They never have been and never will be at that level - they've publicly stated their production targets and they're still a fraction of the others.

The person you saw on an ATV who said they wouldn't take their LR4 over a pass I've driven a Subaru Outback over is fully entitled to their opinion. My last trip to CB, we were going to go up and over Schofield pass to hike the wildflower superbloom below East Maroon and Frigid Air Passes in July, but due to a 40-foot deep avalanche debris flow across the road at the top we couldn't drive over the pass. More than one person remarked as we turned around on that shelf road, "hey, that's a Land Rover - should hop right over that!!"

I see plenty, FWIW. Came across this one (left) driving the old mining roads around Paradise Divide outside Crested Butte last year - he owns an LR4 and a D5 (his 4th or 5th LR) and he says it's the best he's ever owned. It now has rock sliders and a light kit. Then saw another green D5 a couple hours later over in Washington Gulch on the other side of this pass, covered in mud and the driver's huge smile. Three D5s in one day? On dirt? And not a mall in sight? What are the chances?? There was an LR3 parked at the trailhead in Schofield Park that day too. No mall there either.

 

[nickw]

Inaccurate. There are reasons that nearly every true utility vehicle uses them; everything from a Wrangler and G-wagen, to mid and full-size trucks, to every medium duty truck and semi out there. Countless vehicles use them today and will continue to. The kind that are actually used for off-roading and hard work far more often. They’re simple, easy to repair, very strong, articulate very well when coil sprung, simple to align, and move vertically with constant track width. The Defender used to be a utility vehicle too. It needed updated in the saw way other utility vehicles have been successfully updated, not replaced with a luxury car. Imagine if the early F250 had evolved into something like the Ridgeline instead of the SuperDuty. Sad times.

You should separate design intent from the design itself. If Ford decides to use IFS/IRS on the F250, it would still be a 3/4 ton rig, it wouldn't magically devolve into something less. IFS can absolutely be robust, long lasting and every bit as strong as a solid axle. Just because we have not seen it commonplace doesn't mean it's inferior, simply that it has not proved to be cost effective or fit the design requirements of the vehicle.

Hummer H1's but more importantly the Pinzgauer military vehicles both us IFS/IRS, their #1 goal is speed and reliability over variable terrain. The G-wagen has gone to IFS. All Hiluxes and Landcruisers (besides the 7X's) have gone IFS. Several very large military use IFS / IRS. Many of the new rock buggies are IFS / IRS.

Solid axles are cheap to make strong, cheap to upgrade and cheap to lift. They also have bad clearance and don't handle as good as high speeds offroad. It's a trade off for certain but for Expo use, I think the new Defender nailed it.

 

[mpinco]

Amusing that we are discussing unsprung weight when the first mod is large heavy load range E tires on the end of the axle, independent or solid.

Plus everyone knows LR tries to mimic solid axles with air suspension management

 

[nickw]

Here in the PNW, there's very little rock crawling. It's mostly dirt, mountains, light snow, and ruts. A stock Defender would be perfect here, which is why I have one. I'd really like a modern one though. Again, the luxury Defender isn't it though. The Wrangler/Gladiator is closest, but yet so far. I'll stick with my F150 for now, even though it's kind of boring and mediocre off-road, but at least its utility is unquestioned, is safe enough, and is somewhat minimally complicated. If I squint while looking at the hood, remember its aluminum body, solid axle, ZF trans (same as LR3/4), then I can almost imagine what a Defender 130 might have been.

I'm in the PNW too, if your not rock crawling, why the attraction to solid axles. Snow, dunes, gravel roads, highway use....I see IFS/IRS as superior.

 

[nickw]

Amusing that we are discussing unsprung weight when the first mod is large heavy load range E tires on the end of the axle, independent or solid.

Plus everyone knows LR tries to mimic solid axles with air suspension management

Get the best of both worlds with air-sus....makes sense!

 

[EricTyrrell]

No it doesn't. It only matters to people who make up weird "definitions" due to nostalgia.


As most people travel at more than crawling speeds, independent suspension IS the right choice.


Any other motivational poster insights you'd like to share?
No, it is not "rare". Look up "unsprung" weight. You don't have to be racing or have your foot down to get better grip by independent suspension. Seriously, you need to stop making up a reality that doesn't exist. Not only the "definition" of a Defender, or the "Luxury Defender" monicker, now you also make unsubstantiated claims that you don't get more grip by independent suspension unless you go really fast. Seriously, that is so out of touch with reality it is unbelievable.

How is "simple, utilitarian, capable" weird? What's weird is presenting a product that suddenly changes purpose and demographics completely, and instead of giving it a new model name, appropriate one that is well established and understood.

Must we inform engineers choosing solid axles for brand new vehicles that their vehicles must be limited to molasses speeds off-road? No. The threshold is higher than you suggest. I maintain that since this is an overlanding forum, not an extreme 4wd racing forum (where both solid and IS are used), that the speeds which are relevant off-road offer minimal advantage to IS at the upper-end of that range, and offer advantage to solid axles at the low-end. Of course that's not the only consideration; economy and simplicity also must be considered in a utility vehicle.

 

[EricTyrrell]

Get the best of both worlds with air-sus....makes sense!

It's a great idea, but the compromise is expense, complexity, reliablity, and capability because it doesn't articulate or maintain contact patch pressure nearly as well as what it seeks to emulate. It's perfect for a Range Rover, but not for a Defender. They are polar opposites of the lineup, or are supposed to be. Otherwise, they just offer dozens of restyled variations of the same thing. lol well, looking at the lineup, some might actually make that case.

 

[DieselRanger]

The Jeeps are closer to $60k optioned like the Rovers would be....

Build & Price Your New Jeep® SUV or Truck Today! | Jeep®

Build & Price your Jeep® SUV or Truck to best fit your needs. Choose the color, trim, options and more to easily customize your vehicle today.

www.jeep.com

About $63K with some options left unchecked. But hey, another $10-15K in lifts, tires, winch, sliders, shocks, full cage and roof rack, LED light kit...and you're ready to rock bash in Poughkeepsie Gulch.

 

[Pilat]

How is "simple, utilitarian, capable" weird?

It's weird in the sense that is a definition made up from whole-cloth. As the rest of your definition.

What's weird is presenting a product that suddenly changes purpose and demographics completely, and instead of giving it a new model name, appropriate one that is well established and understood.

It hasn't changed purpose. You need to learn the difference between "purpose" and "what I'd use something for". It is finally once again the most capable offroader Land Rover makes. It has only changed "purpose" if your personal "purpose" was to use it as a rock crawler and mod the hell out of it. But that is not actually what the Defender was.

[Added]I don't know what demographics you're talking about. But the old defender from new was very expensive for what it was, and it didn't sell. So those 5000 sales a year, yeah, not quite the huge "demographics". Are you once again talking about image?[/Add]

Must we inform engineers choosing solid axles for brand new vehicles that their vehicles must be limited to molasses speeds off-road? No. The threshold is higher than you suggest. I maintain that since this is an overlanding forum, not an extreme 4wd racing forum (where both solid and IS are used), that the speeds which are relevant off-road offer minimal advantage to IS at the upper-end of that range, and offer advantage to solid axles at the low-end. Of course that's not the only consideration; economy and simplicity also must be considered in a utility vehicle.

Read the damn links I gave you.

You want cheap, moddable into a rock crawler, and no frills so it can be cheaper. You have the Wrangler. Go buy that. The old Defender didn't frigging sell! It was probably because the market isn't there. The "mod it so we can do an obstacle course" isn't actually a large percentage of potential buyers. Nor are they important. Hell, don't buy the Wrangler. Go buy a Mahindra. It's everything you want in a car. It is even towable behind that RV.

 

[EricTyrrell]

I'm in the PNW too, if your not rock crawling, why the attraction to solid axles. Snow, dunes, gravel roads, highway use....I see IFS/IRS as superior.

Forrest service and BLM roads here routinely push the limits of articulation and low-speed traction. Solid axle vehicles perform very well. The LR3 had a hard time keep all-four on the ground and would rock and fall, as you'll witness in videos of them in cross-axle scenarios when they tip over the threshold. No rock-crawling here, only uneven ground, which is common many places in the world. Add some deep snow or patchy mud and the ground gets very uneven without full visibility or warning.

 

[EricTyrrell]

It's weird in the sense that is a definition made up from whole-cloth. As the rest of your definition.


It hasn't changed purpose. You need to learn the difference between "purpose" and "what I'd use something for". It is finally once again the most capable offroader Land Rover makes. It has only changed "purpose" if your personal "purpose" was to use it as a rock crawler and mod the hell out of it. But that is not actually what the Defender was.


Read the damn links I gave you.

You want cheap, moddable into a rock crawler, and no frills so it can be cheaper. You have the Wrangler. Go buy that. The old Defender didn't frigging sell! It was probably because the market isn't there. The "mod it so we can do an obstacle course" isn't actually a large percentage of potential buyers. Nor are they important. Hell, don't buy the Wrangler. Go buy a Mahindra. It's everything you want in a car. It is even towable behind that RV.

The Defender and Series were around a very long time. To define the Defender is very easy. It is self evident, by the market it served, the engineers intentions, the way it was advertised, and established customer expectations. The name has meaning, properties, definition. Call it what you will, but the name isn't re-defined upon a whim any more than a Toyota Prius can suddenly be passed off as a Ford Mustang just because it's superior in different ways.

I don't want a rock crawler. I don't have an RV. I don't do obstacles. I want want a genuine honest Land Rover Defender, not a Discovery or luxury Defender, whatever that means.