New Defender Rage/Hate Thread

[Pilat]

Still waiting for you in depth experience. I’m done until then.

You are the one who claimed to have already answered those questions, but that was shown to be a lie. So you still haven't answered the questions.
You beginning to demand things or else you won't answer only show that you're running out of options. You either have the answers or you don't. So far, you have tried just about any trick in the book. And now this.
I don't need to divulge anything about myself. It's a simple engineering exercise - one you claimed to have the answers to:

How do you solve the problem of massive unsprung weight of a solid axle setup?

And how do you solve the problem of the having the two wheels connected so that when one wheel reacts, so does the other?

 

[lumpskie]

You're right, I won't take you up on it because I'm quite literally on the opposite side of the country. However, if I'm ever that far west then I have no problem going for a spirited drive with you. The LR3 is on 35" and is surprisingly capable...biggest downside is the extensive armor which weighs it down (and that it has 172k on the odometer and I'm certain I'll break something).

Where are you based? I'm in New England. It would be fun to get together and have a friendly grudge match. In face, a group of us are heading out tomorrow, if you want to join. PM me if you're interested.

 

[EricTyrrell]

How do you solve the problems caused by the wheels being connected?

I never met a Defender owner who worried about that. They usually only want better insulation, heating, cooling, sealing, component quality, a few airbags, and don't change anything else.

It's like worrying about suspension travel on a Honda Civic.

 

[lumpskie]

Still waiting for you in depth experience. I’m done until then.

Haha, man. You have more patience than me. I'm sorry I tagged you in this thread... I feel dumber from reading it.

But, I will add one more point to those who say "SCORE uses IFS" etc. Take a look at the control arm setups on those rigs. They meet directly in the center of the vehicle. Now, take a look at the control arm setup on your IFS rig (LRX, Tacoma, 4Runner), they don't... they are much shorter. The length of the arm dictates the diameter of the circle through which the arm travels. The CV binding dictates the bottom of the available travel. The bump stop dictates the upper limit. That arc is all you get. And production IFS setups don't have much travel available... no matter how good your springs or shocks are. The only way to get more is to lengthen the control arm. (long travel setups). Doing a long travel is not a simple deal as every piece of suspension and frame must be strengthened to support it. A solid axle setup is not hampered by this. The limit of down travel is shock length... which can be set as desired. The limit on up travel is bump stop. This is why you see solid axle rigs running bolt on "long travel" kits which consist of springs, shocks and supporting geometry mods.

FWIW... I, like @Box Rocket, have owned IFS rigs. I have setup "mid travel" front suspensions, using longer than typical springs and shocks. (I even have come up with my own designs using parts from other makes/models on my rig) At the end of the day, it was always that control arm radius that limited me. On my solid axle rig, I bought a simple setup that uses 12" travel shocks. Done. It soaks up bumps way better than my previous setup and I didn't have to engineer anything.

 

[EricTyrrell]

All this Baja/Rally talk is silly here. I'm confident there has never been a Defender owner who purchased one to go fast, on or off road.

 

[DieselRanger]

Where are you based? I'm in New England. It would be fun to get together and have a friendly grudge match. In face, a group of us are heading out tomorrow, if you want to join. PM me if you're interested.

Why don't you join Rovers on the Rocks in New York State next year?

I'm in Colorado but I'd bring my D5 to that every year if I lived anywhere in Virginia or parts north.

You'll probably see all the Lucky8 Landies, including their D5 there.


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-T337A using Tapatalk

 

[DieselRanger]

Were the low volumes a result of the Defender or were they a result of zero investment for 35 years? The frame, suspension and power train went on to live in the very successful Discovery I and II till 2004, models that LR has failed to eclipse with the LR3, LR4 and Discovery 5. The Defender was a self fullfilling outcome. No investment? No volume.

Ok, but what investment would you want to see in the Defender that would have kept it a Defender to those who want it to look and function exactly the same as the old one, so that it would sell more and justify bringing it back to the US? You see the problem with that perspective, don't you? Invest money to...keep it the same??? Yet Land Rover did invest in it for the New Defender, in one giant leap, and it's being criticized for not being the old one.

The Discovery has progressed since 1989 such that each successive generation has been more capable and more profitable than its previous iteration.

And the Discovery was NOT based on the Defender - it was originally based on the Range Rover chassis and running gear, and if you remember, was marketed as a *down-market* Range Rover in the US, where it still fits in their product lineup, and it still shares running gear with the Range Rover Sport.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-T337A using Tapatalk

 

[EricTyrrell]

Ok, but what investment would you want to see in the Defender that would have kept it a Defender to those who want it to look and function exactly the same as the old one, so that it would sell more and justify bringing it back to the US? You see the problem with that perspective, don't you? Invest money to...keep it the same??? Yet Land Rover did invest in it for the New Defender, in one giant leap, and it's being criticized for not being the old one.

The same investment that Jeep, Mercedes (G-wagen), Porsche (911), Toyota (70, spare me the irrelevant non-US comments), and others with gracefully evolved models have done. Invest money to keep them the same, yet different at the same time. These are halo cars of their markets, which sell all the others cars in a manufacturer's lineup. This is why Subaru brought the S209 to the USA at a loss. They need not sell extremely well, or be everything to everyone. They're niche vehicles, for a niche market. LR has sabotaged their halo car. I find it highly unlikely this bland design will ever grace media as an icon of adventure the same way the classic does. It just doesn't have what it takes.

I have a colleague who has always wanted a Defender, a former US Marine who's service involved some exposure to them. He popped into my office this week and said "Hey, did you hear? The 110 is coming back the USA!". I nodded and showed him LR's Defender site. He said "Oh, they changed it. Into a Honda." Disappointed, he left.

On the other hand, I have another acquaintance who's into lifted brodozers who seems quite interested in the new model. He likes the angry headlights.

 

[Pilat]

The same investment that Jeep, Mercedes (G-wagen), Porsche (911), Toyota (70, spare me the irrelevant non-US comments), and others with gracefully evolved models have done. Invest money to keep them the same, yet different at the same time. These are halo cars of their markets, which sell all the others cars in a manufacturer's lineup. This is why Subaru brought the S209 to the USA at a loss. They need not sell extremely well, or be everything to everyone. They're niche vehicles, for a niche market. LR has sabotaged their halo car. I find it highly unlikely this bland design will ever grace media as an icon of adventure the same way the classic does. It just doesn't have what it takes.

LOL, in global world, you consider "non-US comments" irrelevant. Yeah, while talking about Land Rover (UK), you mention Mercedes (Germany), Porsche (Germany), Toyota (Japan), and Subaru (Japan), but we have to ignore the "non-US comments".
You don't see any conflict there at all?

 

[mpinco]

Ok, but what investment would you want to see in the Defender that would have kept it a Defender to those who want it to look and function exactly the same as the old one, so that it would sell more and justify bringing it back to the US?..........

Agreed, the LR product line sequence was the Range Rover Classic, Discovery, Defender. All leveraged each other which highlights the latitude of the underlying architecture to extend into the 00's with investment.

If there was investment in the Defender product line I suspect it would have mirrored the IH Scout III.

International Harvester's Corvette - A future Scout, left in the past
The 1981 Scout that never was

".......The prototype shop was given the job of shortening a standard Scout chassis 5 inches and attaching the SSV body. Most were built-out only enough for the crash or road tests, but a handful were dolled-up as demonstrators and show rigs. The first of many crash tests took place in May 1978 at the Fort Wayne Test Track. The results were generally good, which was a relief since data on the behavior of composites in a crash was in short supply. As weak links were discovered, evolution of the body design took place. The exact number of SSV-95s crash tested is unknown, but the initial plan called for 19. .........

..........The SSV Coupe was built from a ’79 Scout II Traveltop that rolled off the line March 20, 1978. It was a complete Scout but special-ordered with certain deletions and additions knowing it was slated for conversion. The body was removed at the prototype shop and the composite body installed. There was very little adaptation required for the chassis, just some extra body mounts that bolted on. ........

.......Historians have doubted the market viability of the SSV Scouts. They may have been too specialized to succeed in a market that was rapidly going four-door and upmarket. Then there are rapidly evolving crash test standards that may have made them more difficult to get on the market. Product planning documents from 1979 show a push towards a more exclusive, low production, upmarket Scout with more per-unit profit at a lower sales volume. In fact, their planning looks a lot like what Range Rover North America did later in the ’80s with great success. How big a part the SSV would have played in all that is unclear, but it showed the Scout Division of International Harvester was creatively fighting back against the market forces working against it. If they could have hung on just a few years to when SUVs became the rage, some of you might be enjoying a new Scout today. ........"

What killed IH Scout?

"......In the latter half of 1979, IH's financial woes seemed on the mend, and that's when new CEO Archie McCardell challenged the United Auto Workers Union to a game of chicken. The goal was to negotiate better terms and reap lower costs. The result was a nearly six month strike. Projects like the SSV were slowed or halted, but more importantly, the strike was enough to push IH over the financial cliff. ....."

In summary the IH Scout II was a viable platform for the Scout III as it was built on a Scout II, the 'Corvette' Scout III passed crash testing and was at the beginning of the SUV emergence with a highly successful Scout II. The Defender, with investment, could have continued on while retaining many of the attributes the Defender owners value.

IH corporate played chicken with the union and lost. LR was bailed out by Ford, BMW and Tata. The recent was $4Billion. Without those sugar daddies you probably wouldn't see the new Luxo Defender.

 

[mpinco]

Evolution of the Defender was a viable alternative as demonstrated by the Scout III and competitors such as Jeep. They had the underpinnings of the RRC and Disscovery I. LR chose to not invest for ............ 35 years. Ask LR why. I suspect four owners and financial realities prevented investment.

There is another aspect that is lost in history. Evolution maintains your ties to the values customers want. Each successor model retains and improves on that value system. Jumping 35 years into the future like the new Luxury Defender, without any interim models (data points), breaks that line of evolution.

Edit add: The 'new' Luxury Defender was mostly done in 2010, with the DC100. Considering normal 5 year design cycles that says the new Defender has been around since ......... 2005, when the Discovery II ended life and the LR3 began.

 

[mpinco]

If anything it looks like Gerry McGovern's DC100/new Defender leveraged design cues from the late 70's / early 89's Scout III ............

 

[EricTyrrell]

LOL, in global world, you consider "non-US comments" irrelevant. Yeah, while talking about Land Rover (UK), you mention Mercedes (Germany), Porsche (Germany), Toyota (Japan), and Subaru (Japan), but we have to ignore the "non-US comments".
You don't see any conflict there at all?

It should have read, "non-US homologated comments", preempting some dipshit from saying "but but but it's not available in US.."

 

[EricTyrrell]

Leading independent vehicle safety advocate, the Australasian New Car Assessment Program (ANCAP), today announced a maximum 5 star ANCAP safety rating for the upgraded Toyota Landcruiser 70.

Toyota responds to consumer demand: Upgraded Landcruiser 70 Series now 5 star

Leading independent vehicle safety advocate, the Australasian New Car Assessment Program (ANCAP), today announced a maximum 5 star ANCAP safety rating for the upgraded Toyota Landcruiser 70. The Toyota Prius also achieved top marks.

www.ancap.com.au

Funny, Toyota didn't even have to turn it into a Kia.

 

[Dendy Jarrett]

Gents - This conversation and the participation is about to be completed here. I've seen this same behavior proliferate on some of the other forums and it will not be acceptable here. We maintain a gentleman's decorum here and you agreed to that when you signed up through our terms of use. If you continue to sway from that behavior, you'll be banned and the land rover forums locked down for a while. I appreciate everyone's willingness to revert to an acceptable behavior pattern. The truck doesn't matter. How we explore and the fact that we do is what is important. Let's get this back to everyone sitting around the campfire beer or bourbon in hand and good talks about our adventures.