Jump to content

progress. ....really ?


Recommended Posts

OK I'll start - First off I agree with the sentiment, that's why I run an old 90 with a 300TDI so I can fix it myself

BUT - take each of the above vehicles up to 50MPH and drive it into a concrete bridge pier and check passenger survival

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The newer cars and a lot faster, safer and a nicer place to be on a long trip. Not sure I would want to go to Cornwall in my 110 but the Freelander 2 made it easy.

That said I have just traded in the Freelander as it was 3 years old and didn't fancy running it outside a main warranty, It had alredy had a few thousands spent on repairs covered by the warranty as it was.

I just can't see any of the new cars, anything from the Disco 3 on wards still been around in 10 years from now, The cars are just too complicated to repair by your average man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well and interesting topic, but I'd like to point out, the Td5 era type engines have been well and truly "cracked" and rather than using the size 5 hammer, you need a electronic diagnostic tool instead. Humans are intelligent but a lot of humans seem to reject this. Its never too late to learn new tricks and info, but people seem to think they either can't, or can't be bothered to learn new things... - not saying I'll be going out to buy a new RR/D4 etc... but... use more energy moving with the times and less going against it, you can achieve so much more and have the best of all worlds... :i-m_so_happy:^_^

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's when the new tech is done for its own sake rather than for any real benefit and when it's done in a way that makes it hugely expensive or difficult to work on that I object. I wouldn't have fit a Tdi to my 109 or a full aircon system, including all the electrical bits, to my RRC if I was after complete simplicity or if there wasn't a tangible improvement. ECU controlled engines I understand. But air suspension, complex ICE and a BECM to control head lights, seat adjustment and windscreen wipers is just expensive trouble waiting to happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BUT - take each of the above vehicles up to 50MPH and drive it into a concrete bridge pier and check passenger survival

Funny, there weren't too many fatal accidents in the days when there were only Series LandRovers. Drivers didn't expect them to stop or handle well, so drove within the vehicles limits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny, there weren't too many fatal accidents in the days when there were only Series LandRovers. Drivers didn't expect them to stop or handle well, so drove within the vehicles limits.

Aye but there's the rub, you cant turn back time. Todays roads are more crowded and despite the driving standards test of today being much tougher younger drivers do not have a lot of mechanical sympathy nor sense of what they are doing.

Its similar to the big tractors of today, driver is so isolated from the driving experience they spend more time on their sides than upright.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny, there weren't too many fatal accidents in the days when there were only Series LandRovers. Drivers didn't expect them to stop or handle well, so drove within the vehicles limits.

Exactly. Confidence in the handling ability of modern vehicles is so high that drivers drive way to fast for most conditions - look at how fast and close they drive on motorways in poor visibility and very wet weather, and look at how inept drivers are when we get a light snow flurry; in the past drivers coped better because they exercised more care and thought. The problem is then compounded by the very effective safety advances in cars, like better seat belts, more supportive seats, air bags, better crumple zones and cabin rigidity. So, most modern drivers think they can drive with impunity. My wife's father held the view that all cars should have no seat belt on the drivers seat and a 6" spike protruding from the centre of the steering wheel to concentrate drivers' minds a little, and he was a doctor! I think he's right, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aye but there's the rub, you cant turn back time. Todays roads are more crowded and despite the driving standards test of today being much tougher younger drivers do not have a lot of mechanical sympathy nor sense of what they are doing.

Its similar to the big tractors of today, driver is so isolated from the driving experience they spend more time on their sides than upright.

Im a young driver, i drive with mechanical sympathy and drive a range of vehicles from a 13/60 herald and series land rovers all the way up to D4's and the most modern big tractors, i dont spend most of my time on my side or broken down

while i admit to having had a crash involving a brick wall at the side of a road i fully admit responsibility and to be quite honest if you ask 90% of poeple if they have crashed and its their fault they will say yes, no matter the age :) regards to sense what i am doing, i have been driving cars and tractors around 10 years, have a comprehensive mechanical and electrical understanding of the ins and outs of 99% of what i drive (but really who actually DOES understand what black magic is involved in an autobox?) so i would argue what makes me (21) have less sense than the average person who is 10-20 years older than me?

although i do agree with your statement i would also add that i see a lot of poeple who are twice, or 3 times my age drive with less mechanical sympathy than the stig so its not just us young'uns

and yes i can also drive in the snow :)

sorry, one day ill be the one complaining about young drivers and their lack of sense and mechanical sympathy too :hysterical:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bah humbug!

Someone once said to me: "The beauty of carbs is you can rebuild one in the middle of a muddy field"

So the next time I saw someone rebuilding a carb in the middle of a muddy field, I drove up to them in my computer-controlled motor and reminded them of it. They didn't see the funny side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've sat at the side of the road with an oscilloscope attached to an ECU, it's just a different tool for the toolbox .... you couldn't rebuild a carb without any tools either. Oh and the oscilloscope at the side of the road wasn't because of a breakdown :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But I do agree that there are too many non essential electronic gadgets in cars, but I'm just a moaning old git who likes to still use a window winder :) Wouldn't be without my reversing camera though.... so I guess we all like our different frills

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just a moaning old git who likes to still use a window winder :)

Thats way too complicated, you want sliding windows!

But to answer Nigels post (coming from the man who sells aftermarket electronics to update carburetted engines): yes We have made progress, the series does 20MPG for a petrol, or about 25 for the diesel, while the evoque does 30 for petrol and 35 for diesel. you can drive to the other side of the country in comfort, now try it in a series 3. And were they ever that reliable?

So, we on this forum dont fancy one, but look at the rest of the world, there are 200.000 sold since 2011, 80% to new customers (not previously owned a landrover), and 80% exported as well. Yes, google knowledge I admit, but that is very impressive in my eyes. They sell 20.000 defenders a year currently. The markets wants evoques more than they do defenders basically. Its complicated to work on, but most owners wouldn't dream of doing any work on it, electronics or not.

Daan

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I think, and always have thought, that the best vehicle is always one that consists of the best parts/techniques/engineering from each century, all mixed up in one, darn near perfect package. Like the ICON vehicles for instance, they take the rugged, beautiful body designs from the 60's/70's and combine them with the best parts made from the 90's until today. I love Series landies for their looks and simplicity and easy going, yet for the most part over engineered structure. I have nothing against points ignition and carbs per say, but I cannot deny the performance and economy advantages of electronically controlled engines. However I feel like the addition of electronic gadgetry has been taken to an almost absurd level these days. In my book they should've stopped at ABS, ECU, and for autoboxes gearbox controls. All the rest that has come later is just stuff you really don't need and are only their to earn the mechanic and manufacturer some more cash. Back in the 90's controls for engines and gearboxes etc were often pretty stand alone, allowing much more simplicity and fix-ability.

And honestly the arguments about comfort doesn't really hold water at all. If you take my '71 Jag XJ you will find it is just as comfortable and just as well suspended and damped than as new AUDI. And the old jags are nothing but a tiny bit of Lucas electronics, some vacuum controls and one heck of an engineering feat!

But it is not about quality these days, we must not forget, it's about quantity and most of all money making!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im convinced newish cars are disposable items. too much to go wrong and electronic wizardry i can't be bother to learn, and unless you're bother or semi-inclined to fix by your own hand, have a code reader and thingywhatistsmagicbox then a garage somewhere charges you the world for it!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I think, and always have thought, that the best vehicle is always one that consists of the best parts/techniques/engineering from each century, all mixed up in one, darn near perfect package. Like the ICON vehicles for instance, they take the rugged, beautiful body designs from the 60's/70's and combine them with the best parts made from the 90's until today. I love Series landies for their looks and simplicity and easy going, yet for the most part over engineered structure. I have nothing against points ignition and carbs per say, but I cannot deny the performance and economy advantages of electronically controlled engines. However I feel like the addition of electronic gadgetry has been taken to an almost absurd level these days. In my book they should've stopped at ABS, ECU, and for autoboxes gearbox controls. All the rest that has come later is just stuff you really don't need and are only their to earn the mechanic and manufacturer some more cash. Back in the 90's controls for engines and gearboxes etc were often pretty stand alone, allowing much more simplicity and fix-ability.

And honestly the arguments about comfort doesn't really hold water at all. If you take my '71 Jag XJ you will find it is just as comfortable and just as well suspended and damped than as new AUDI. And the old jags are nothing but a tiny bit of Lucas electronics, some vacuum controls and one heck of an engineering feat!

But it is not about quality these days, we must not forget, it's about quantity and most of all money making!

"LIKE" ;)

Look at the Eagle: an E-Type replica with more modern, reliable, but simple underpinnings. The Caterhams and AC Cobra kit cars are the same - modern, reliable mechanical parts in a classic shell with no excessive systems to go awry.

To be honest, though I dislike the hump in the bonnet and miss the vent flaps, I'm impressed by my wife's 2009 90XS. Finally a decent heater (incredible, in fact) and some comforts which make life easier like central locking, air con, heated seats and screens, but no over the top systems like air springs and Terrain Response. I can forgive ABS/ETC because of the obvious safety benefits. AT the same time, my 109 drives perfectly well. It needed a more gutsy engine, and with that came reliability, but otherwise it's all standard SIII and it works. A simple update with Defender seats, some noise proofing and cosmetic trim make it more comfortable, though not as quiet, as the Tdci, but more fun to drive and easier to maintain. If I could have as effective a heater, Id say it was better than the modern Defender in every way that matters to me.

Defender's poor sales is because of a perception of unreliabiliy, which is a legacy of LR's laziness under BL, BAe, BMW and only improving under Ford. Our 90 has been very reliable - the only defects we have had in two years of owner ship are a failed indicator because the lense was cracked and let water in, a blown side light bulb, a bolt that pulled through the turbo heat sheild (needing a washer adding to resecure the sheild) and squealing rear brakes. There is a noise from the rear diff, but that is not uncommon apparently. No break downs or interruptions. To meet safety standard globally, they could reinforce the A and B pillars, add airbags to the dash and steering wheel and keep updating the engines and call it job done. Sales in the US would be huge if they made the adjustments to pass their regs, and it doesn't need much. Certainly not the cost of a completely new vehicle.

LR has become an arrogant producer of Chelsea Tractors, not refined and distinguished 4x4s. The Evoque is 2wd, for Christ's sake, and look at the tastelessness of the new Range Rover, designed for Arabs, drug dealers and footballers. They are for some reason embarrassed by having a credible, iconic utility vehicle in their line up. They see it as a ruffian in a gentleman's club and want it out. It's their choice, not a legislative or economic requirement. McGovern's numerous comments suggest he's one of the leaders of this attitude - he clearly wants to cater for the wealthy and not dirty his hands on a vehicle for the working person.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i have asked myself numerous times just why I run old vehicles (the youngest being 20 yeas old, the oldest 32). I keep coming back to simplicity. I can fix em, I'm the first to admit that computers are a black art as far as I'm concerned, however, to the younger generations they are not as they grew up with them.

It does worry me that there is less driver input with modern cars - abs, traction control, cruise control etc - which , I think, slows down younger drivers learning to drive (not passing their test - that, at the end of the day is just the beginning).

I learnt to drive in cars with non-servoed drum brakes, as a consequence I learnt how to use brakes, how to cadence brake (poor mans abs), I learnt to use the torque curve to go fast, I learnt that understeer is generally terminal whilst oversteer is more controllable, kids today don't learn those things as quickly as the majority of modern cars do most of it for you.

I do like the improvements in safety of modern cars, but, I think a hell of a lot of modern drivers rely on these features rather than their ability - in my youth a serious fender bender in say a mini/escort/chevette generally caused lots of pain , but you thought twice about doing the same thing again. My nephew had a smash last year and because of the innumerable safety features walked away with the odd bruise, trouble is he also walked away thinking that a smash such as he'd just had was not a problem - that is, in my opinion a serious problem as he ain't scared of doing it again....

My opinion is that older vehicles are simply more rewarding to drive, they require more input and concentration and, overall make you a better driver.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We use cookies to ensure you get the best experience. By using our website you agree to our Cookie Policy