Yeah, wide, wide dirt roads, not a whole lot of turns, and a lot of whoops is a place where you can actually run solid axles without too much of a problem. Go rally in one, and you'll soon either be out in the trees or dead last. So, yes, you being a Baja fan makes a lot of sense.
New Defender Rage/Hate Thread
- Thread starter DieselRanger
- Start date
Yes, it has already been discussed. But that didn't stop you for bringing it up. You want something "modern", but you don't want modern tech, nor even the modern look.
What has also been explained to you before is that if it was actually updated during that period, it would have been IFS a long time ago, and it would look somewhat like the other LRs.
DieselRanger
Well-known member
But they didn't sell any of them, so did they really meet requirements?
The Defender went upmarket when it was reintroduced as the Defender from the 90/110. Land Rover as a brand has been upmarket for close to 40 years now.
Define "urban". Is that a look, the appointments such as leather seats, or is it in terms of functionality? If they intend the latter of the three, I think they're missing their mark very widely.
Box Rocket
Well-known member
Alright, for the last time, I'll go slow for your to understand.
Doesn't matter if you have IFS or not. There is still unsprung weight. You do not get rid of it just with IFS. It doesn't miraculously disappear. You control it with springs, shocks, swaybars. If you don't understand that I'm sorry for you.
Go back and read what I wrote earlier with the 4runner analogy. I never argued that on a solid axle vehicle the tire on the other side of the one that hits a bump has a reaction. It's ok, I know reading is hard.
And you really are one ignorant dude if you think Baja is "wide, wide dirt roads, not a whole lot of turns, and a lot of whoops is a place where you can actually run solid axles without too much of a problem." You might actually learn something if you knew anything about it. You have clearly NEVER been to Baja or seen the actual race. But since you're such a keyboard warrior, hop on over to the race-dezert.com forums and tell those trophy truck drivers about precision and control. I'm sure they'd love to hear what you have to say. LOL. You just lost the last shred of credibility you may have had in this whole discussion.
Ah, so because there are still some unsprung weight, there can't be any benefit in reducing it. Yeah, that is just about the most stupid thing you have said to date. With that same reasoning there are no benefit to make even a plane lighter. It still weighs something. I am not surprised you have to resort to this type of dishonesty, to be honest, because the answer is to disconnect the two.
You went from "Solid axles are better" to "well, it doesn't matter because there will still be some unpsrung weight". You really have shown yourself to be less than knowledgeable. To the extent you will come up with stupid ******** like the above to defend your position. But you have to, because the physics doesn't agree with you.
Again: How do you solve the problems caused by the wheels being connected? This time without being so dishonest.
Yeah, and just like your above reasoning, that doesn't actually answer the question of:
How do you solve the problems caused by the wheels being connected?
Compare it to rally stages and basically any other (off road or on road) anywhere else in the world.
And you still haven't answered my question:
How do you solve the problems of the rigid connection between the two wheels AND the unsprung weight problem? And exotic materials doesn't cut as a solution to the weight, as it still will have more weight than IS with similar materials.
Sure, that is why the "solid axle" Jeep sells at 20+K per month while the "IFS" D5 averages around 700 per month. Or maybe it's much more than IFS vs solid-axle that garners the sales volume? What attributes account for the large differential in volume vs the country of manufacturer?
Last time I went looking for a vehicle upgrade IFS vs solid axle wasn't even on the check-list.
Note: India will be the next manufacturing site up for a version of the new Defender.
Yes, to rock crawlers, bros, and barbies alike. And even though it sells well in the US, it is not exactly a global vehicle. That matters too. What Fiat/Chrysler can get away with when it comes to handling, safety, and cheap builds, LR cannot.
It shouldn't be. If you care about handling, it's merely a question of which type of IF.
They could make it in the US for all I care. As long as the design and quality control is there, it doesn't really matter. It is not a car made for the Indian market. You'd think the Jeep would be big there.
Oh, it was:
Box Rocket
Well-known member
I'm not going to debate with you on the topic any longer because you don't have the level of understanding or comprehension to follow the discussion. You keep talking in circles and you obviously have a very narrow of view of things. But you've been entertaining. Funny how someone that disagrees with you is being dishonest. That's a new one.
Last time. When you buy the new Defender let's take it out and I'll bring my cruiser. We'll find some fun roads, might even have some turns with trees. We'll have some fun I'm sure.
Ah, yes, the "level of understanding or comprehension" that makes one able to argue that since going IS can't remove ALL unsprung weight, unsprung weight doesn't matter.
You were dishonest when you claimed you have explained it. You are being dishonest when you claim that because you can't remove ALL unsprung weight by going to IS, unsprung weight doesn't matter.
On the latter, I'm willing to say you're not being dishonest. But if you're not being dishonest (i.e. saying something as ignorant as that on purpose), you really need to educate yourself. "We can't remove all the weight from X, Y, Z car, therefore weight doesn't matter. Not even in race cars. Yeah, let's make that apply to boats and planes too: Since you can't remove ALL the weight, weight savings doesn't matter.
Again with the bro-off. You do realise that regardless of who "won" that, it still wouldn't prove a damn thing. And while we are on the subject, you will simply deny reality, just like you did with the weight savings somewhere crucial where your springs can't make up for it (unsprung, see) were a waste of time, since it couldn't make it completely weightless.
With that kind of arguments and "logic", it is no wonder you're that adverse to learning anything. Or is it the other way around? That you're very much adverse to learning, and the rest just follows naturally?
Last edited:
Box Rocket
Well-known member
Put your money where your mouth is chump! Enough with your nonsense. Up to now you are nothing but mindless blather.
your question was “ how do you get rid of unsprung weight?” My response of it doesn’t matter whether was in direct response to “getting rid of it” ( your words not mine). Nobody ever mentioned the idea of reducing it. But I’m sure you’ll have a witty retort for that.
also. I never made such a wide reaching ignorant comment like saying “solid axles are better”. Only you did that with you’re stupid IS claim. Again I know reading is hard but it’s all there for you to go back and review.
You do know this is an offroad centered forum right? Most people on here aren’t even thinking about handling and stopping distance and all the other crap you’re wasting everyone’s time with. The Defender will be a joke in those areas as well. Come back and tell us when you’ve convinced all the trophy truck drivers that they’re clueless. Then we’ll talk more.
your question was “ how do you get rid of unsprung weight?” My response of it doesn’t matter whether was in direct response to “getting rid of it” ( your words not mine). Nobody ever mentioned the idea of reducing it. But I’m sure you’ll have a witty retort for that.
also. I never made such a wide reaching ignorant comment like saying “solid axles are better”. Only you did that with you’re stupid IS claim. Again I know reading is hard but it’s all there for you to go back and review.
You do know this is an offroad centered forum right? Most people on here aren’t even thinking about handling and stopping distance and all the other crap you’re wasting everyone’s time with. The Defender will be a joke in those areas as well. Come back and tell us when you’ve convinced all the trophy truck drivers that they’re clueless. Then we’ll talk more.
Physics, engineers, and every car manufacturer out there have done the work for me. I don't need to ship any car to the US to have a bro-off with you, just because your arguments have showed themselves to be an utter failure.
Let me repeat: Your argument is that since we can't remove ALL unsprung weight, unsprung weight can't matter.
And you still haven't answered the question:
How do you solve the actual problem of high unsprung weight as a result of having the wheels connected?
Your lates "explanation" that you didn't respond to that, but rather my "get rid of" is still dishonest, because you literally argued that since not ALL of it could be removed, unsprung weight couldn't possibly matter.
And how do you solve the problem of having the axles connected if you're not allowed to disconnect them.
You claim it is easy to solve, but then when confronted with that, you try to get a bro-off, or you simply declare that unsprung weight doesn't matter since there is no way to remove ALL of the weight.
Why the hell would I do a bro-off with anyone? I don't have the mind of a 13 yo.
Let me repeat: Your argument is that since we can't remove ALL unsprung weight, unsprung weight can't matter.
And you still haven't answered the question:
How do you solve the actual problem of high unsprung weight as a result of having the wheels connected?
Your lates "explanation" that you didn't respond to that, but rather my "get rid of" is still dishonest, because you literally argued that since not ALL of it could be removed, unsprung weight couldn't possibly matter.
And how do you solve the problem of having the axles connected if you're not allowed to disconnect them.
You claim it is easy to solve, but then when confronted with that, you try to get a bro-off, or you simply declare that unsprung weight doesn't matter since there is no way to remove ALL of the weight.
Why the hell would I do a bro-off with anyone? I don't have the mind of a 13 yo.
Box Rocket
Well-known member
You’re right you don’t have a mind of a 13 yr old. That’s ok you’ll get there in a few years.
you have nothing but talk that you know nothing about. I’ve at least used my own images not something I had to dig up on YouTube or some photo of someone else.
Please share with the group where you’re wealth of experience comes from. I’ll wait.
you have nothing but talk that you know nothing about. I’ve at least used my own images not something I had to dig up on YouTube or some photo of someone else.
Please share with the group where you’re wealth of experience comes from. I’ll wait.
Ah, that's cute. Remember, I am not the one repeatedly asking to have a bro-off like some wannabe tough-guy 13-yo. So, it's quite cute you attempt to say that I'm not there yet.
I note you still deflect from answering the questions:
How do you solve the problem of massive unsprung weight of a solid axle setup?
And how do you solvee the problem of the having the two wheels connected so that when one wheel reacts, so does the other?
EDIT:
I am also not the one who have to claim that unsprung weight doesn't matter because they can't remove all of it. That was what you claimed when confronted with your lie that you had already explained it. Says it all, really. You now have nothing else left than to ask for a bro-off, because - in your mind - if I don't immediately put a car on a ship to the US to play your infantile games, you must somehow be right.
Box Rocket
Well-known member
Still waiting for you in depth experience. I’m done until then.