New Defender Rage/Hate Thread

[nickw]

60 is low.
When off road tires went low as 65 you could somehow swallow the pill, but it crawled down to 60 and even 55 in LR.

You’ll have a true fifficulty airing down, and finding quality off-road worthy tires.
Especially out of the big urban centers.
In case of tire failure, I’m wandering if you could find such tire in back country Namibia.. or even the back country in most countries.

The problem is that these vehicles are so complex, you cannot use a different rim due caliper clearance, tires or diameter differences.

Non such issue with other vehicles.

And yes,
If LR created an impressive off-road oriented SUV, I would have expected a company with such deep roots in true off road vehicles (101, and other platforms) to attend to that matter.

To rein back the convo a bit - @EricTyrrell said it was "not practical" offroad due to it's tire/wheel size which is clearly bullocks. You have options of 18's to 22's, aspect ratio of 70 to 55, pretty std. stuff....some can be aired down more than others, pick your poison...that is stock.

Gearing in these is 3.55's to 4.10's, so re-gearing is an option depending on what get stock.

I've also read the 35's may fit with a 1" lift if you need it (can't find the article), which is probably optimistic, probably a better chance 33-34's will fit. Not sure why you think you won't be able to use different tire and/or wheel combo.....

If your use case is extended back country driving in Namibia - go buy a LC70 series, they exist in the market already and are better supported in Africa than even the old Defenders. While your at it you should probably eliminate any of the newer rigs like the Landcruiser 200, Jeep Rubicon, ZR2, etc. etc. for some of the same reasons and also poor payload capacity which is going to be important in your trip across Africa.

Edit, found article:

The New Land Rover Defender Is Designed to Make You Swoon

Exclusive details on the most hardcore Rover in decades

www.outsideonline.com

"Speaking with the engineering team, I asked about the ability to fit larger off-road tires. They said a 35-inch tire will certainly fit, but will require a one-inch suspension lift. A response that direct gave me the feeling that someone at Land Rover had already tried this. "

 

[Victory_Overland]

Edit, found article:

The New Land Rover Defender Is Designed to Make You Swoon

Exclusive details on the most hardcore Rover in decades

www.outsideonline.com

"Speaking with the engineering team, I asked about the ability to fit larger off-road tires. They said a 35-inch tire will certainly fit, but will require a one-inch suspension lift. A response that direct gave me the feeling that someone at Land Rover had already tried this. "

Just me, but I would stick to a 33-34" or equivalent as they tend to be a tad less or more to actual diameter. I would steer clear of the 35" as you start to get into wider patch, wheel scrub issues, and now lift. I really do not believe 35" is necessary for the slight gains in performance in a small percentage of situations you need it. I also believe that JLR took into consideration they are selling a stock Defender on a great tire (Duratrac) that is excellent performance for the value and helps maximize the vehicles abilities in stock form; yet gave us room to go up a tad on tire choices to increase the traction and clearance for those who are looking for additional performance.

If it were my Defender, I would stick with skinny minis and taller sidewall of tire choice; E-Rated and never look back. A proper AT tire with a narrower contact patch provides better all around performance for your buck in "almost all" conditions; wet or dry. Ditch the Defender tire cover initial cost and hang the primary spare on the back; buy your 2nd spare and carcass pack it on the roof. I do not believe in the "need" for another 2nd spare wheel in my opinion as "most" punctures can be repaired and rehung on the back; if not repairable in the field, crack the bead and swap wheels when you get to camp that night. The 2nd spare is there if you need it and a great place to pack-out additional light weight kit on the roof; you'd have to break the bead and wheel swap but it's not all that hard to do with the right training, tools, and patience in the field. Of course a full 2nd spare wheel/tire combo is most ideal but with steelies you're packing a lot of additional weight on the rack and I try to avoid that to my max degree possible.

 

[nickw]

Just me, but I would stick to a 33-34" or equivalent as they tend to be a tad less or more to actual diameter. I would steer clear of the 35" as you start to get into wider patch, wheel scrub issues, and now lift. I really do not believe 35" is necessary for the slight gains in performance in a small percentage of situations you need it. I also believe that JLR took into consideration they are selling a stock Defender on a great tire (Duratrac) that is excellent performance for the value and helps maximize the vehicles abilities in stock form; yet gave us room to go up a tad on tire choices to increase the traction and clearance for those who are looking for additional performance.

If it were my Defender, I would stick with skinny minis and taller sidewall of tire choice; E-Rated and never look back. A proper AT tire with a narrower contact patch provides better all around performance for your buck in "almost all" conditions; wet or dry. Ditch the Defender tire cover initial cost and hang the primary spare on the back; buy your 2nd spare and carcass pack it on the roof. I do not believe in the "need" for another 2nd spare wheel in my opinion as "most" punctures can be repaired and rehung on the back; if not repairable in the field, crack the bead and swap wheels when you get to camp that night. The 2nd spare is there if you need it and a great place to pack-out additional light weight kit on the roof; you'd have to break the bead and wheel swap but it's not all that hard to do with the right training, tools, and patience in the field. Of course a full 2nd spare wheel/tire combo is most ideal but with steelies you're packing a lot of additional weight on the rack and I try to avoid that to my max degree possible.

I totally agree - just pointing out options exist for guys that are looking for a more "offoad" oriented setup based on some of the comments in here about it's "offroad" competence.

 

[DieselRanger]

Nobody, in the ENTIRE world, would buy one? Quite the statement, and incorrect. Even the 2wd unibody Freelander sold.
JLR would go out of biz?
The truck would have OPTIONS of choosing up or down in luxuries.

Fine, "not enough" people would buy them. I don't think you understand how certification regimes work or the economics of vehicle production. Land Rover doesn't just certify the Land Rover Defender once. They have to do it separately for every configuration of engine, transmission, and body style they offer. Certification in the US and for EU6 standards take years and can cost millions of dollars to certify for the US EPA alone, on top of the tens of millions they'll spend developing and refining the engine and transmission combination. Very large automakers like FCA and Ford and Toyota can afford that, because they'll amortize the cost of that certification over many hundreds of thousands of each configuration sold. Still, automakers are ceasing to offer manual transmissions except in enthusiast models where they can get a return on that investment. You don't get a discount because you're a small automaker - unless you're very small, like Ferrari or Lamborghini small.

Consider the 1997 Defender, a manual, completely analog vehicle with a NA V8 in it. This is essentially what you want, only "better" somehow - meeting current regulations for safety and emissions, just like the last one did right up until it wasn't worth it - when airbags became required standard equipment for the 1998 model year. Across the entire model run of that vehicle in the US, they sold less than 7,000 copies.

So how many manual transmission Wranglers have been sold in the last three years? Well, judging by how many manual Jeeps are on the lot from some incomplete data, it's about 3.26% of all Wranglers sold, maybe a little more. That number comes from listings of ALL Jeep vehicles, not just Wranglers, on the lot. In the US overall in 2018, manuals were just 2% of all vehicles sold, and most of those are on sporty cars like the Miata or WRX. In the 3rd quarter of 2019, it was less than 2% of all new cars sold.

OK, so Jaguar Land Rover sells about 300,000 cars annually worldwide - Jeep sold over 900,000 vehicles in the US alone in 2019. In the US in 2019, the Land Rover brand set a record with a little over 94,000 vehicles sold. Land Rover has previously stated they want to sell 200,000 Defenders globally per year. By straight percentages, about 31% of Land Rover's sales come from US buyers. OK, so that means maybe 62,000 Defenders in the US per year. Since Jeep has a higher percentage of manuals sold as compared to the national average, let's use their numbers for Land Rover - that would mean Land Rover could potentially sell a few more than 2,000 manual vehicles per year in the US. Over an average five-year model run that's only 10,000 vehicles to amortize the tens of millions of dollars of investment and certification costs - and then there are the fines the automaker has to pay for each vehicle that falls under the CAFE standard that it sells. In 2019 that was something like $5.50 for every 0.1mpg below the CAFE target per vehicle sold. In 2020, that CAFE requirement is 30.6 mpg, in 2025 under current rules that's 39.3mpg for light-duty trucks. The Jeep Wrangler is certified at 22mpg for the Pentastar V-6 and a manual, so let's use those numbers - that means each manual Defender gets fined at close to $1,000 per vehicle sold in 2025 at the end of its run - reduced ever so slightly for the few emissions credits the I-Pace generates for the automaker. So that cost has to be calculated and passed on to consumers as well as the development cost for the transmission/engine combination and the cost per vehicle to certify, as balanced against the company's cash flow. The short of it is, even the big automakers don't bother engineering a manual if the take rate for that vehicle is much below five percent - which is why we only see them sell in significant numbers on sports cars and very inexpensive entry-level models/brands.

Now, since the US and EU drive the engineering for things like emissions and collision certification worldwide for automakers who have to build world cars, it's possible that Land Rover could sell a manual in more places than the US or EU, and get some benefit of amortization, but the cost of development is still high, and if anything you may see about 25% of all cars sold globally being manual in 2025, so let's say one third of those 200,000 Defenders sold annually worldwide being manual. Are less than one hundred thousand cars annually enough to justify engineering a manual/NA engine combo as a base engine offering? Jaguar Land Rover clearly doesn't think so.

Blame your elected representatives for making it cost prohibitive to certify new vehicles in the US, and blame lazy Americans for wanting to pay more attention to their mobile phones. Don't blame Land Rover.

 

[Victory_Overland]

Not to mention, more and more numbers of kids do not learn to drive these days which makes it more and more likely that a young adult either can't drive manual, can't drive at all, or doesn't choose/watnt to drive for a variety of reasons; this is surely not specific to the US and we all know that for sure.

These declining numbers are figured into sales and marketing and trickle into future decisions which makes it even less likely that a manufacturer will produce anything outside of an automatic that will fit into multiple vehicles requiring only a software change to make it perform in said "other" platform.

I mean, this whole lean logistics, sales, and marketing thing is pretty amazing when someone takes the time to understand decision processes that are factored the vast majority of times by the restrictions and measures put in place through regulation, licensing, certification, and taxes; "NOT" that of the manufacturer who is attempting to keep the lights on and keep up with all the BS changes they face almost daily.

 

[onemanarmy]

I do blame the gov't for most of the countries ills, not getting cool cars is at the top of that list.
I do know that CAFE plays a huge part. Fine, give me turbo 4.....but why are they using engines different from the Disco? That can't be a cheap decision. Manual hubs also help MPG and overall wear and tear on drivetrain.....longevity and serviceability in mind.
I do know what goes into getting a vehicle to market. I do know that most, not all, are built to world standards now, so there aren't 5 different versions of a ford focus coming off the same line. The old way adds complexity and cost. Just as we finally got the 'world' Ranger.
JLR sells less vehicles per year than GM, but they also have way less overhead, can be more agile, and can keep a finger on the pulse of the market and suppliers easier.

Yes, I understand that the take rate of manual cars in general is very low %, but other makers find a way to offer it AS AN OPTION.....especially when its in a vehicle when history and pedigree demands (mustang, wrangler, rumor even the Bronco will get one, mini, tacoma, miata, civic, wrx, accord, rumor for the Supra, 911, Hilux and Land Cruiser, etc)
They don't have to engineer a new trans, just use an off the shelf one from a supplier. Create an adapter, driveshafts, interior trim, some computer coding, and roll on. A manual trans and/or manual T case won't make a vehicle fail crash testing. If they can hire someone ( a team...big $$$) to code in all the terrain choices and the ability to recognize a street sign, making a manual trans work is childs play. Someone had to 'engineer' and design that fancy tire cover. A cloth/vinyl one would have done the same job, for far less $. You not gonna buy one if they didn't offer a hard plastic tire cover?

Fine, no manual trans for the new defender. I get it, to a point. A case can be made either way.
Still, I do blame JLR for straying so far from the idea, the image, the pedigree of the Defender (and series) nameplate. The series and Defender were the workhorses....tough, reliable (for a british product), spartan, configurable, slim and trim, no nonsense. Nothing you didn't need.
Yes, the new truck ticks some boxes....approach angles, water fording, rear spare tire, rear styling, ability to add winch, the rear roof windows, and steel wheels.
However, as minor as it may be, having integrated headlights and taillights, digital multi zone climate control, IFS/IRS, plastic cladding, everything integrated into a screen, air suspension, even OFFERING 'appearance packages' (the defender is not about dressing up...black wheel lug nuts for $500?!), not offering removable doors or roof (i can dream) fails to live up to the Defender heritage. All that stuff is already offered in ALL the other cars on the road.
Not all auto makers have the luxury of having such storied nameplates to feed from and keep going. JLR was given the opportunity and made more of the same, when we could have had SO MUCH. That is my hate.

 

[JackW]

Manual hubs? When that might save what? One mile per gallon with the added complication of a fragile hub that you have to get out of the vehicle and engage before you get into trouble? How cute.

Land Rover started building all wheel drive cars with the introduction of the first Range Rover in 1970. The last Series III rolled off the assembly line during the early 1980's. Since the introduction of the Ninety and One Ten every Land Rover has benefited from the advantages of an all wheel drive platform. Why in the hell would you want to give up the safety and better dynamics of all wheel drive for one mile per gallon? I guess it's a Jeep thing, I don't understand....

 

[onemanarmy]

Ford super duty has manual hubs.
Point is, manufacturers go to all sorts of technically complex ways to eek out 1 mpg.
Turbos, stop start, cylinder deactivation, strapping on electric motors, auto ride height, etc. Added cost and complexity, which inherently lowers reliability and longevity.

Manual hubs on a Defender would not be out of place. Range Rover, yes.

Just an example of how the Defender could be more 'analog' with out giving up much, no crash testing concerns. Keep the hubs locked if you want, never have to worry about locking them when the going gets tough.

Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk

 

[JeepColorado]

Land Rover in front of a Starbucks Store Art Print

Saatchi Art is pleased to offer the Art Print, "Land Rover in front of a Starbucks Store," by Lukasz Laniecki. Art prints are available from $40 USD. Archival inks on Fine Art Paper, Photo Paper, Canvas. Size is 10 H x 10 W in.

www.saatchiart.com

Just another example of the wonderful design language of LR

 

[nickw]

Ford super duty has manual hubs.
Point is, manufacturers go to all sorts of technically complex ways to eek out 1 mpg.
Turbos, stop start, cylinder deactivation, strapping on electric motors, auto ride height, etc. Added cost and complexity, which inherently lowers reliability and longevity.

Manual hubs on a Defender would not be out of place. Range Rover, yes.

Just an example of how the Defender could be more 'analog' with out giving up much, no crash testing concerns. Keep the hubs locked if you want, never have to worry about locking them when the going gets tough.

Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk

You do realize the new Defender is Awd right? Not sure what purpose you'd like it to serve besides looking cool. It's a means to not drive the front differential in a part time 4wd vehicle....0 reason to have it in a Awd rig unless you wanted 2wd for some reason, although the front diff would still be spinning since it's getting power from the drive shaft. It would add complexity, cost and another point of failure.

 

[EricTyrrell]

You do realize the new Defender is Awd right? Not sure what purpose you'd like it to serve besides looking cool. It's a means to not drive the front differential in a part time 4wd vehicle....0 reason to have it in a Awd rig unless you wanted 2wd for some reason, although the front diff would still be spinning since it's getting power from the drive shaft. It would add complexity, cost and another point of failure.

True, there's not much efficiency to gain. The fashion Defender leaves much to be desired, but locking hubs are not.

 

[Paddler Ed]

An interesting piece from Autocar - note where the Defender (and S1-3) Land Rover sit in the total numbers - and where the Ford F-Truck sits as well:

Best selling cars of all time, from each car maker | Autocar

We look back at the best sellers throughout history, and some may surprise you...

www.autocar.co.uk

 

[XJLI]

Ford super duty has manual hubs.

Super duty has vacuum-operated auto locking hubs with a manual "on" override. Every part time four wheel drive on sale currently (and for the last many years) and lots of awd models have some sort of front (or rear, in the case of many crossovers) axle disconnect system.

 

[JeepColorado]

The "you don't want technology" people on here who say that anyone who wants the Defender to be rugged long for the stone ages are advancing a straw man argument. There's nothing wrong with leveraging technology- what's exciting is when a company keeps incorporating new technology into a platform that is firmly rooted in the original soul of the vehicle- what made it great in the first place. And I don't mean staying rooted in it's soul in a superficial, appearance is all that matters, fake diamond-plate sticker kind of a way that adorns the hood of the current Pretender. I mean in a current Wrangler or G-Wagon way- both of those companies- one a high-volume entry level- to medium price point 4x4 company whose vehicle today still passes more than a striking resemblance to the original from 70 years ago all the way to as luxury as you can afford G-Wagon. Both of them showed LR how to do it, but Gerry and his team of fashion designers couldn't help themselves so we ended up where we are. I can't wait for the LC 300 to come up and provide further proof of how LR swung and missed. All the Defender had to do was be at least as capable as a Wrangler, it's not, be at least as reliable as a Toyota, that'd be a first, or as retro-modern as a G-Wagon- and I'd see a place for it- a niche it could carve out to say here's my piece of the market. It hasn't done that- The Defender didn't have to be all of those things, any one of them would have given legitimacy and it appears to have fallen in all categories. The world didn't need another decently capable, rides nice, nod to 4x4s that's basically a rugged cross-over. Once the Bronco comes out, the new LC 300 and what that will mean for the Lexus GX- all come on stage- the Defender sinks further and further into the oblivion of mediocrity no different than the Discovery did.

 

[DorB]

If your use case is extended back country driving in Namibia - go buy a LC70 series, they exist in the market already and are better supported in Africa than even the old Defenders. While your at it you should probably eliminate any of the newer rigs like the Landcruiser 200, Jeep Rubicon, ZR2, etc. etc.

You totally missed the point.

I was referring to availability of low profile tire in provincial areas.
Not the LR brand.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro