WesBrooks

I've seen plenty of pictures of Tomcats running with a check strap between the chassis and axle to limit travel. Wouldn't that be suitable? Limited by shock travel would be ideal, what sort of variability in shick lengths are there? P38 bags are inboard of the chassis rails as standard, but I don't think the chassis rails are parallel. If they are closer to the centre than the spring/bag position on RRC/Defender/Disco1 then you may get over travel on articulation rather than symetric bounce?

Yeah, I'd got my thought process twisted by making the mistake of listening to the words released by marking... 😉

I mentioned that a few pages ago and also thought the emissions regs would fit into the same puzzle. My original argument was based around the lower limit discouraging people from buying it who would be likely to drive it like a car then whinge bitterly and publically when full live axle peculiarities bite. I'm not sure how many parrallels there are between type approval and IVA but calling your homebuild a commercial and stomaching the reduced speed limits makes external projections testing easier. Only thing that added a little doubt to that was the mention of families in one of the videos. I think they have been painting a more constructed story in those videos though.

On re-read it looks like those are the figures for the G-Wagon.

From the quoted text on this post along with dimensions:

**checking** 😄 Thought I read it - 2.5t - here...

I'm going to re-watch the videos at some point as either I wasn't paying attention properly or they painted a subtly different story to the text someone posted a few links back!

25% more weight than a 110, but in contrast to my previous statements I'd rather drive one of these over a Defender if they've sorted the roll over protection. I thought there where emissions regulations on manufacturers now that gave average targets for the whole range of vehicles? So the largish BMW unit in themselves either hint at expected low initial sales or more hints at these being registered as commercials? Have I misunderstood soemthing on the emissions regulations at the moment?

Fair point, a pitch forward cab with that still had the option of a passenger area and sealed well would have been a challenge worthy of the gifted! 🙂

It's just my gut reaction to it. I mean no offence by it. What they should done differently is a near impossible question to answer, as I would be directly contradicting myself. I like an overall project that has been designed inside out without unnecessary aesthetic constraints. That way you get the most capable vehicle. Fair enough there may well be hints from other vehicles but overall there are masses of visual cues from the defender. Entering a new mark and model into the market is a risky endeavour and they have clearly appeased the stakeholders by targeting a captive, discarded market by giving them something that looks and feels familiar. Fair enough. Ironically for a group such as us the comments that have developed the most heated discussion are based on aesthetics. Personally I liked the defender for what it was capable of, and it's serviceability, not what it looks like. My comments are merely flagging the over constraint in the design phase. Items that show over constraint? How about windscreen rake? It's steep. A shallower angle and shorter bonnet would have resulted in lower fuel use, more resistant to stone chips, and less likely to smash with a bush or tree strike. Also what about driver position? We're not making a racer here, so why not move the drivers forward, heading more towards a cross between a forward controls and people carrier? Grants either more cabin space or loading space for the same wheelbase. Anyhow, that is enough from me on that.

I have not said the Grenadier as a vehicle is bad. Ironically it is essentially a high budget version of what my - and many other peoples - home build aspires to. I haven't even said I wanted to see more curves. There are plenty of ways you can do a boxey version of a jacked up estate/ or pickup and not end up with a defender clone. Jeep, Jimny, Hummer, Gwagon, range rover classic, tesla... All of those have their own feel and flavour. Yes it is the vehicle that would have far better satisfied the fan from this forum as a defender mk2. The design work was just too restrained make the best it could have, but that would have been a far more expensive exersize.

@Anderzander; copying another car is of little interest to me. What interested me about this this project was the presented persuit of excellence in building a no compromise utility offroader. If the visuals were so clearly comprimised by a 'make me a defender' brief then I wonder how much of the rest of the car was fixed at the start, rather than clean sheet, make the best for this budget brief. I strongly suspect ladder chassis and live axle were part of the 'make a defender' brief. You've read my previous message a little differently than I intended. I don't dislike the defender. I wouldn't be here if that was the case. But I was hoping this was going to be a little more than what it is. As far as I have seen so far there is nothing new, no innovation. This is acceptable and may stand it in good change of being capable, but it's facing very severe competition to be the best at anything without heavy comprise (relative to competition) in oposing areas.

I'm not sold on the looks. For me it is at odds with the rest of the development effort. This is how obvious it must be for school teachers when one student copies another. It appears to be rooted in teddy being thrown out the pram when they were told they couldn't continue manufacturing the defender. I love the results of inside out design work, where everything is designed around a set of key objectives and the form takes up a sort of abstract beauty. Case in question F1 cars. Designed to excel in aerodynamics protect the driver. I'd be very surprised if they can honestly say they took the key requirements of serviceable, durable, drives well off and on road, wastes no more fuel than needed, and they realised the design solution set was so narrow in scope it was unavoidable to look like a defender. To me this feels like we'll get the best axle, chassis, running gear, but can't spare the resource to give the body the same effort. Don't get me wrong, I admire the effort and the end result but the body just feels like unfinished work/missed opertunity.

Hinge bolts like you have on most modern double glazing and security problem is solved.

Bonnet - perhaps related to pedestrian impact regs that the old defender got away with under grandfather rights? I'd be nervous trying to get some of those edges - particually the hinges - through an IVA! 😄 Edit: I realise IVA and type approval are different ball games!