New Defender Rage/Hate Thread

[jmodz]

This thread feels like we are beating a dead horse over and over again. Somehow we expected the new Defender to be as durable as a Land Cruiser, as capable as a Rubicon Wrangler, and as cheap as a 4Runner. It appears that we might have gotten a percentage of each of those, yet we still aren't happy. It also apparently doesn't tow like a half ton and have the power of a muscle car. We don't have to look very far back to find a modern example of what Land Rover didn't want to do. The FJC was a rugged utilitarian SUV that paid homage to an icon. It had a manual trans, a N/A engine, washable interior, and very little creature comforts. It was also likely the second best off-roader at the time next to the Wrangler. Toyota stated from the very beginning this was going to be a one generation vehicle with no refresh, and the sales backed up that claim. They were quite good the first year and then rapidly declined before leveling off that last couple of model years. Now those FJC's have incredible resale value and can be highly sought after. If Land Rover wanted to do that, like Toyota knew they were doing from the very beginning, they could have. But as many in this thread have stated, Land Rover needs this new Defender to help them return to profitability and relevance. You don't get there with an FJC type model. If they wanted to cultivate a model like the Wrangler, it would likely take a long time, and I am not convinced the sales would be there. The reason I don't think it works is because the Defender and FJ40 (and frankly all Land Cruisers) are not American history. If you ask a regular person in the U.S. they have no idea what a Defender or Land Cruiser is; however, they all know what a Wrangler is. While I do really wish they made a Defender that looked as incredible as the original, with the capability and the simplicity to boot, I feel as if LR made the right call. BTW I have never owned a Defender. Living in CA keeps it from becoming possible. I have been in a defender in AUS. I have owned a FJC, and it is the only vehicle, 100% of the time, I regret selling.

 

[DieselRanger]

Yes you can..
Because the tire size is related to the car’s weight, and the air pressure in conjunction with the tire volume.

Been there, still doting it from time to time..

And a 2.5+ ton truck with 55-60 sidewall, is like sending a heavy weight boxer into the ring with stilettos..

Volume has three dimensions. Diameter is just one.

 

[DieselRanger]

This thread feels like we are beating a dead horse over and over again.

Yes, that's why its here.

 

[DieselRanger]

Weak argument. Not relevant. What I described was made, road legal for the masses, not that long ago, by a few manufacturers.
It can be done, and as a benefit, it would be cheaper. All of the parts already existed, aside from strengthening the body to meet current regs.

And today there are far stricter emissions and crash safety and CAFE standards and all that. Small automakers like JLR have to build world cars, they can't afford to tailor vehicles to tiny niche markets like the 500 people in the US who don't want a Wrangler but who want an old Defender on beam axles and a lazy V8 and a manual transmission and three locking differentials and drafty doors and unreliable electrical systems and an interior you can hose out when you're done driving it through a river crossing with scuba gear. It's funny because the same people who are b*tching that Land Rover stopped building an unreliable vehicle are pointing the finger at the Defender saying it will be an unreliable vehicle, even though the Defender has already proven to be far more capable than the old Defender. Hell, the Discovery 5 is a more capable vehicle than the old Defender - Land Rover posted videos showing that comparison, too.

Even the Wrangler has a plug-in hybrid version and a 4-cylinder turbocharged engine. And they're putting a diesel in it for CAFE reasons. In ten years, without batteries that give it hundreds of miles of range and fast charging stations at the entrance to Poison Spider Mesa, it's dead.

It seems to me the only thing that would satisfy the critics is if Land Rover had built an exact copy of the Old Defender, but gave it 15,000lbs GVWR, 48 inches of articulation at each corner, 14 inches of ground clearance on 35" tires on 17" wheels, with 80 degree approach and departure angles and 45 degree break over, 300 hp and 500lb-ft of torque out of a 5 liter manual diesel, three lockers, and neoprene seats for under $40,000. In other words, they want this:

 

[onemanarmy]

Nope....no one is clamoring for that overbuilt expedition truck as a factory vehicle. The aftermarket has that covered.
There are examples of a variety of manufacturers taking a model and updating it slightly as the market and regs change.
JLR already builds a variety of 'world' cars that are quite capable for the purpose in which they were built. So why more of the same?
They could have made an 'unmistakable' Defender body, with todays crash standards in mind, used basic and simple existing parts for drivetrain and interior, and had a modern Defender. No where did anyone say they wanted 40" tires and 2 feet of suspension travel on a stock vehicle. I don't want that. JLR can't make money doing that.
Why would the doors have to be drafty? Why would the electrical system have to be unreliable? Why would the V8 be lazy? This isn't 1977 still. There are tried and proven methods of how to build quality cars.
They tried (and missed) to build an 'all new' Defender, when that wasn't needed at all. That incurred incredible expense.
A 280 HP NA 6 cylinder, run on 87 octane, 6 speed manual or auto, 32" tires, solid axles on coils, AC, 4 wheel disc, power windows and locks (removable doors?!...ha, who am I kidding), simple stereo and durable cloth seats could have been built using off the shelf parts, using a nice squared off body (for max cargo space...this they did OK'ish) would have payed a nice homage to the Defender name. Also, as you said, this is a 'world' car....many parts of the world demand simple and reliable and don't have fully stocked parts stores on every corner. I'd think simple and reliable would be best for the 'world'. Air suspension and twin turbo engines? Come on now.
That same model could be updated for an electric/hybrid power train, if the demand was there.
For example, Why does a 'Defender' need the overly complicated integrated custom designed LED headlight housings? Wonder how much that cost to develop? How much that would cost to replace? Whats wrong with a 6" round headlight that cost $20?
If you want 'fancier and still quite capable', JLR has a number of models for you, already on the lot.

 

[DieselRanger]

They tried (and missed) to build an 'all new' Defender, when that wasn't needed at all. That incurred incredible expense.
A 280 HP NA 6 cylinder, run on 87 octane, 6 speed manual or auto, 32" tires, solid axles on coils, AC, 4 wheel disc, power windows and locks (removable doors?!...ha, who am I kidding), simple stereo and durable cloth seats could have been built using off the shelf parts, using a nice squared off body (for max cargo space...this they did OK'ish) would have payed a nice homage to the Defender name. Also, as you said, this is a 'world' car....many parts of the world demand simple and reliable and don't have fully stocked parts stores on every corner. I'd think simple and reliable would be best for the 'world'. Air suspension and twin turbo engines? Come on now.
That same model could be updated for an electric/hybrid power train, if the demand was there.
For example, Why does a 'Defender' need the overly complicated integrated custom designed LED headlight housings? Wonder how much that cost to develop? How much that would cost to replace? Whats wrong with a 6" round headlight that cost $20?
If you want 'fancier and still quite capable', JLR has a number of models for you, already on the lot.

Ok, let's start with your desires. 280hp NA 6cylinder engine. They're giving you 300hp in a turbo 4 that's more powerful and more fuel efficient and works better in all conditions - in fact, just idling in my driveway I'm down about 18% from that NA 280hp, but I'd still have every one of those 300 turbocharged horses. The Wrangler offers a turbo 4 as a zero dollar option assuming you're getting an automatic, which the majority of Jeep buyers do. Manual take rates in the US are under 10% of all vehicles sold. Sure, manuals are engaging to drive but automatics have long surpassed manuals in fuel efficiency and power delivery. The 8-speed ZF auto is in vehicles ranging from Bentleys to 600hp Audis to RAMs to Fords. It's the definition of "ubiquitous." AC, 4 wheel discs, power windows and locks: check, check, check, and check. 32" tires: nope, they're 32.1". Oh well, minus one there, I guess. Cloth seats: check. Simple stereo: stereos are cheap, their base is a 380 watt unit. Oh, you mean no infotainment? Even $14,000 Hyundais offer infotainment screens now, with Android Auto and Apple CarPlay, standard. That's just "this tall to ride." Oh, and they're effectively required now because of the backup camera mandate that came into effect in the US in 2018, enacted in 2014. Gonna have a hard time seeing what's behind you in that monochrome LCD screen that just displays the radio station number and the bias of your cassette tape. And no, I don't care if you don't want it/don't need it/never asked for it, you can't buy a car without it.

LED headlights: I'll take the LEDs in my Disco over the halogens in my old Volvo any day. I never, ever have to replace them. Ever. Way brighter and clearer beam. Collision? Whatever, that's what insurance is for. Waaaaay less complicated for me - replacing bulbs requires unlatching rigid plastic fasteners, detaching ballast cables, removing housings, using nitrile gloves to make sure you don't get skin oils on the bulbs that would then cause them to burn out *again* just days or weeks after you did it once...oh, and that's on my mother-in-law's cheap ass Hyundai. LEDs are cheap now, thanks to Cree and the LED home bulb revolution. Oh, and headlight safety standards are driving everyone to LEDs.

Turbocharged engines reduce emissions and increase fuel economy. As noted, even Jeep is offering one now, for compliance reasons, because even FCA can't generate enough emissions credits to ignore selling 200,000 units a year of a car that can't meet CAFE averages mandated by Congress. Sorry, you're not going to replace a turbo in the field, but if your Heep doesn't start in the middle of nowhere you can't hand prime and bump start it either because of the myriad computers involved in just making the engine run. If you want *that* level of simplicity, you need to buy a 1970s or 1980s era used Jeep because once EFI became common, bump starting became all but impossible. And if any automaker tried to sell an engine with that level of simplicity today, they'd never get it past the EPA. Oh, of course, as you say, you can just slap a battery and electric motor in there and sell that, sure, OK.

Air suspension: as many many others have said, you're performing maintenance on air suspension at the same intervals or longer than you are replacing struts and bushings and springs on conventional suspension, and most of the time that's a valve and hose, which, if you've ever had to replace coils or struts on your own, is far easier.

And yes, I bought one of those "fancy and still quite capable" Land Rover D5s, and it goes everywhere the heavily modified D1 and bone stock D2 my good friends drive, in far more comfort and with far less effort. And it's a dream to drive every day. I have the money, so why wouldn't I want a vehicle that's nice to drive, can drive anywhere I want to go, and has technology and creature comforts to make it easier to do all of that? I'm going places in it, I'm not out for a rock crawl. It's the difference between bouldering and alpine mountaineering...one is a very technical exercise, and one is an activity you can do as its own enjoyable activity or as a means of adventurous travel from a starting point to a destination. I choose the latter.

If you want something simple and cheap, designed to do only one thing, which is go offroad over anything, seriously, buy a loaded Mahindra Roxor for $30k and spend the rest on a trailer and a decent used F250 PowerStroke to pull it wherever you want to take it.

 

[Victory_Overland]

What's more real world than Namibia?

Stop using that "track" that JLR used in Namibia. Because they put it on the map, planned it out, and said "hey, this looks legit, lets run loops on this thing further than any of vehicle test on the planet by any other OEM in the world so some guys on some forum can say it was fake".

Oh wait, so now I know that anytime I plan out a trip and do a route that somebody else has done and I actually plan for it with logistics, safety, weather, climate, spare parts, tires, and snacks; I'm not really overloading, off-roading, or adventuring, and my vehicle is a PoS if I go there!

Now I know what the metrics are so I'll just leave my truck in the garage cuz no matter what we do with a modern LR, it will surely be fake, and tee'd up for success only.

Time for Jeep to stop using "Rubicon"; that 22 mile "Jeep test track" has been used more than once by Jeep so must not be a measure of legitimate ability anymore! What's that Moab place everyone keep talking about; hasn't changed much in a few hundred years and the thousands of vehicles that run through it yearly really degrade the name I guess by doing it in ordinary vehicles.

Maybe I'll email JLR and ask them change the name to the D110 Defender "Namibia" since that's what it takes to get a brand name these days.

Of course, but based on the simplistic argument I was giving a simplistic view of the reality of the situation.

You can't do that here, we only have room for stuff that fits exactly in the mindset of the "trolls", otherwise it's just fake JLR news.

LOL, that probably happens more than we think. One guy is IGing #epictrip the other doesnt tell anybody....I'm sure we know who is who

Yep, happens everyday man; I sometimes laugh at how crazy our mindsets are for the crap that we put on our vehicles to believe if we don't have the best, it can't be done.

IG....what's that? Maybe I need to get my account going again so I can be "real" in the community.

Why would LR build a vehicle just for guys like you, the 1%? Beats me.

Sounds like you should stick with your 55. You do realize, if they made it old school like you say, it would still be a $40-50k rig (if not more).....to which many guys would come on here and call BS then go on a diatribe about how overpriced it is for what you get.

Do you realize that your stock FJ55 came with 28.5" tires? The sidewall height of your OEM tires on 15's is very close to the stock 32's w/19" rim on the new Defender. Too bad they didn't have a forum back in the 1970's for you to tell everybody a stock 55 didn't belong off highway.

We must stop with facts and historical data and always relate modern innovation to the 1980's and early 90's. Every time I get in a modern helicopter I tell myself how big of a PoS this thing is and I wish we would have stuck with Da'Vinci's design and never changed it to make it better....I mean worse, I mean functional, I mean............

If you want to talk aspect ratio, the 19" rims have 65 tires. What's the big deal? I don't get it....
a) The Tacoma uses 65's
b) The Land Cruisers since the early 2000's' uses 60
c) Many 1 ton pickups; use 65 - 70s

All perfectly capable for moderate offroad / expedition use 100% stock. In the case of the 1 ton pickups, they are much heavier the 2.5+ tons. What is your point?

The square peg doesn't fit in the square hole in the mind of the trolls..........only feelings matter and leaf-springs; leaf-springs matter. Oh, and torsion bars cuz those things are sick off-road! Every modern vehicles should come with steel wheels and leaf-springs, and drum brakes.

Volume has three dimensions. Diameter is just one.

Here you go with science and innovation, and engineering and stuff. Could you please stick to feelings and stop proving people wrong; it's getting quite old!

Yes, that's why its here.

#Boom!

And today there are far stricter emissions and crash safety and CAFE standards and all that. Small automakers like JLR have to build world cars, they can't afford to tailor vehicles to tiny niche markets like the 500 people in the US who don't want a Wrangler but who want an old Defender on beam axles and a lazy V8 and a manual transmission and three locking differentials and drafty doors and unreliable electrical systems and an interior you can hose out when you're done driving it through a river crossing with scuba gear. It's funny because the same people who are b*tching that Land Rover stopped building an unreliable vehicle are pointing the finger at the Defender saying it will be an unreliable vehicle, even though the Defender has already proven to be far more capable than the old Defender. Hell, the Discovery 5 is a more capable vehicle than the old Defender - Land Rover posted videos showing that comparison, too.

They want the Defender that was never built to the specs they want; even then it wouldn't be good enough.

Nope....no one is clamoring for that overbuilt expedition truck as a factory vehicle. The aftermarket has that covered.

For example, Why does a 'Defender' need the overly complicated integrated custom designed LED headlight housings? Wonder how much that cost to develop? How much that would cost to replace? Whats wrong with a 6" round headlight that cost $20?
If you want 'fancier and still quite capable', JLR has a number of models for you, already on the lot.

Innovation man, find one off-road vehicle that still comes off the production line from any OEM that meets the above information you just put down? I'll wait for a couple of minutes and hold my breath until I pass out. Yeah Ford should have listen to you guys too and build shutdown their plants, get out the rivet guns and tin snips and get back to hand-stamping panels on the Model-T line; produce the 1966 Bronco, attempt to make it pass any modern safety laws, CARB laws, and slap a carb, and leaf springs on it, and look to keep the doors and lights on at Ford for the 1% of people who want one. Should it be the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, or 4th Generation Bronco? Cuz you can't really use the 5th Generation Bronco because Ford actually advertised that one as "Modern for your Safety, but Still a Bronco". Anything modern won't work on this forum so we have to stick to the first 4 generations.

Also, I did a courtesy search for you and found that the cheapest OEM spec Jeep headlight replacement bulb is $32 and then you can go all the way up to $239. LED is an expense upfront for the longevity and performance it pays for 20-30 x fold in the life of one single purchase. Jeep sells the Rubicon LED package option for a cool $995; damn Jeep for doing that.......damn them and they should never be allowed to off-road again.

For your viewing pleasure; brand new LC76, bare bones on the lot minus tax (VAT if this is applicable to you), tags, title, etc; this is what the rest of the planet by comparison is paying on average.

$48,500.00: Toyota Land Cruiser 76 Station Wagon Turbo Diesel V8 FULL OPTION RHD. For a cool $50k, you get no frills and a V8 TD; replacement headlight bulbs are roughly $45 USD/AUS conversion.

Ok, let's start with your desires. 280hp NA 6cylinder engine. They're giving you 300hp in a turbo 4 that's more powerful and more fuel efficient and works better in all conditions - in fact, just idling in my driveway I'm down about 18% from that NA 280hp, but I'd still have every one of those 300 turbocharged horses. The Wrangler offers a turbo 4 as a zero dollar option assuming you're getting an automatic, which the majority of Jeep buyers do. Manual take rates in the US are under 10% of all vehicles sold. Sure, manuals are engaging to drive but automatics have long surpassed manuals in fuel efficiency and power delivery. The 8-speed ZF auto is in vehicles ranging from Bentleys to 600hp Audis to RAMs to Fords. It's the definition of "ubiquitous." AC, 4 wheel discs, power windows and locks: check, check, check, and check. 32" tires: nope, they're 32.1". Oh well, minus one there, I guess.

If you want something simple and cheap, designed to do only one thing, which is go offroad over anything, seriously, buy a loaded Mahindra Roxor for $30k and spend the rest on a trailer and a decent used F250 PowerStroke to pull it wherever you want to take it.

But that bare-bones F250 is gonna be $45k so wouldn't that mean your Roxor just cost you $75? I'm so confused.

On the real, people are now throwing around Bollinger like it's gonna be a affordable and not a niche market..........$125k price and a 1.5 year weight; at that point I'll stand in line at Arkonik for the base price $110 D110 which is essentially a brand new 1982 Defender.

Ineos is gonna be "$35k is our target" from what they say and realistically it's gonna be $45k minimum. People are using arguments on a vehicle that will start coming off the production line in numbers where we "might" get in line for after the 3rd year New Defender and New Broncos will be coming up on their first 36 month lease turn in cycle. Ineos supporters sound kind of like how us New Defender supporters were/are when we wish success in the new breed Defender before it was released.

And let's ditch seatbelts, airbags, LED's, crumple zones, and all the other stuff that makes modern vehicles better in every way more than yesterday's.

 

[onemanarmy]

No one is advocating for 1975 push start trucks here. I don't want a strictly offroad truck off the dealer lot. Roxors aren't street legal for the most part. Where did I say no airbags or seat belts or crumple zones? I don't listen to cassetes or want a cassete player. Putting words in my mouth does not help your argument. Jeep still uses stand alone headlights, not overly complicatred plastic pieces fully integrated into the body, you know, for styling.

Some seem to think that a innovative, reliable, capable, well rounded vehicle can't exist without a fully integrated HVAC, radio, suspension, and camera system. Stick a dedicated screen somewhere for the backup camera if you have to. The issue is that they called this a Defender. They should have called it a Disco Offroad or HD or something.

Make the frame and body meet current regs, but give us all we need, nothing we don't. This vehcile doesn't need a V8 TD.
Just because no one makes a more analog vehicle doesn't mean it can't be done. All the auto makers are guilty of watering down fabled nameplates.
Coil springs, simple shocks, soild axles, NA engines, material science all have come a long way since 1958. Innovation is good.
A truck CAN exist with coil springs, solid axles, a manual trans, tcase, hubs, windows and locks, lockers, mechanical HVAC controls simple radio, and simpler classic styling and STILL meet all crash and safety standards and also cruise 80mph down the hiway with the AC on.

 

[EricTyrrell]

This thread feels like we are beating a dead horse over and over again. Somehow we expected the new Defender to be as durable as a Land Cruiser, as capable as a Rubicon Wrangler, and as cheap as a 4Runner. It appears that we might have gotten a percentage of each of those, yet we still aren't happy.

What we got was a Range Rover with trashy angry eyes and plastic tread plate. It's really not that hard to figure out what a modern Defender should be. It's so obvious that INEOS feels compelled to the show the dandys at JLR how to build a proper utilitarian vehicle.

What should it be? Somewhere between the new Bronco, a 70 series, and a Wrangler. All meet modern regulations. Take the best from each, keep the Defender shape, and refrain from any stupid styling gimmicks.

 

[Christian P.]

Keep it going guys!!! We can make it to 100 pages!

I think the new Defender should have had portal axles

 

[DorB]

Volume has three dimensions. Diameter is just one.

So?..
It’s still in relation to the platform it serves.
And the sidewall hight is an easy role of thumb to estimate the risk of sidewall rapture when off-roading.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[nickw]

If you want to talk aspect ratio, the 19" rims have 65 tires. What's the big deal? I don't get it....
a) The Tacoma uses 65's
b) The Land Cruisers since the early 2000's' uses 60
c) Many 1 ton pickups; use 65 - 70s

All perfectly capable for moderate offroad / expedition use 100% stock. In the case of the 1 ton pickups, they are much heavier the 2.5+ tons. What is your point?

So?..
It’s still in relation to the platform it serves.
And the sidewall hight is an easy role of thumb to estimate the risk of sidewall rapture when off-roading.

So per my previous question, 60 - 70 aspect ratio is common these days, even on the Land Cruiser, GX, Tacomas, 1 ton pickups etc....but somehow is a show stopper on the LR?

 

[nickw]

No one is advocating for 1975 push start trucks here. I don't want a strictly offroad truck off the dealer lot. Roxors aren't street legal for the most part. Where did I say no airbags or seat belts or crumple zones? I don't listen to cassetes or want a cassete player. Putting words in my mouth does not help your argument. Jeep still uses stand alone headlights, not overly complicatred plastic pieces fully integrated into the body, you know, for styling.

Some seem to think that a innovative, reliable, capable, well rounded vehicle can't exist without a fully integrated HVAC, radio, suspension, and camera system. Stick a dedicated screen somewhere for the backup camera if you have to. The issue is that they called this a Defender. They should have called it a Disco Offroad or HD or something.

Make the frame and body meet current regs, but give us all we need, nothing we don't. This vehcile doesn't need a V8 TD.
Just because no one makes a more analog vehicle doesn't mean it can't be done. All the auto makers are guilty of watering down fabled nameplates.
Coil springs, simple shocks, soild axles, NA engines, material science all have come a long way since 1958. Innovation is good.
A truck CAN exist with coil springs, solid axles, a manual trans, tcase, hubs, windows and locks, lockers, mechanical HVAC controls simple radio, and simpler classic styling and STILL meet all crash and safety standards and also cruise 80mph down the hiway with the AC on.

Manual windows and locks, seriously? Manual lockers...Toyota did this is in the 80's and I think Mercedes too in their Gwagen and Unimog, but it's been 20-30 years. The closest you are going to get is an 80's era Cruiser, spend $20k getting it baselined and bobs your uncle. I bet you could walk away for $45k all in so your money ahead over the Defender....

 

[EricTyrrell]

So per my previous question, 60 - 70 aspect ratio is common these days, even on the Land Cruiser, GX, Tacomas, 1 ton pickups etc....but somehow is a show stopper on the LR?

Different use profiles. Defender is more off-road focused than your examples. Tire profile is less important on trucks where towing and hauling is key. LCs are rare and expensive mall crawlers these days. GX is a luxury product. While I'd still prefer the smaller wheel on a pickup, at least they have much longer wheelbases, larger tire wells, and the power to turn relatively larger tires if one wants their sidewall back.

 

[onemanarmy]

Manual windows and locks, as an example of what COULD have been...didn't necessarily have to be (removable doors?!), when you are tasked to recreate what made the Defender, the Defender. Maybe YOU don't want manual windows, but that would make it cheaper, more reliable, simpler, and overall less complex....the spirit of the Defender. They were given a blank slate and the opportunity was wasted cause some misguided moron was more concerned with style than heritage, is my point.
All the trimmings are nice, for sure. But that is already available in every other JLR vehicle. Give me a brand new, rugged, simple, proven reliable SUV, not more of the same.

Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk