Chicken Drumstick

https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/motors/court-says-land-rover-shape-can-t-be-trademarked-1.4322517 Court says Land Rover shape can’t be trademarked An interesting quote from Land Rover as well: “The Land Rover Defender is an iconic vehicle which is part of Land Rover’s past, present and future. Its unique shape is instantly recognisable and signifies the Land Rover brand around the world.” Are they just pining as they lost. Or is there a hint that they still had/have plans to do something a bit more "proper" Defender'ish?

Not sure why anyone wants to or is even trying to argue it. I was there, made an observation and simply relayed it in this thread. Also by the maths, they are not quite the same size, although the difference is minor. But nominally, they are not identical.

Could clearly see the difference fella I was there...... but I do know were you are coming from And you are assuming both tyres are strictly meeting the maths. Often tyres vary quite a bit. And I think it's worth noting, that the new Defender tyres on 19" rims have a chunkier sidewall than the standard tyres on a D2 or p38 Range Rover when running 18" rims. Which a lot of them had from the factory.

By the numbers the new Defender is rolling on tyres which are over 32", while a 235/85R16 is under 32". Was no optical illusion, I stood next between the two vehicles and the tyres were taller on the new one.

Under what conditions?

Agree. But the spacer was a cheap option. Nobody sells an 88 coiler rear prop off the shelf A 90 prop is too long, so I used an 88 one with spacer for now. Has done fine thus far, but is now a limitation. I'm hoping to get a custom one from Gwyn.

I hope the shocks do the trick for you. But sadly I think what you are experiencing is a live axle more than anything. The 90 also has a pretty short wheel base too. And of course quite a lot of ground clearance and ride height. I can't personally say I have an issue with live axles in this regard. But if you are finding the FL2 fine for the same use, then it does suggest something more fundamental in the design and behaviour of the 90. Not just tuning of the suspension. Maybe see if you can snag a ride in a V8 Discovery 1/RRC (late model). They have much better NVH than a Defender and ARB's. While they might not be sporting aftermarket shocks, they should give a pretty good idea of where you could get a Defender too. If they still don't suit, then there probably isn't much you can modify. The only last option would be to try a Discovery 2, but make sure it is one with working ACE (Active Cornering Enhancement). ACE is a hydraulic, reactive anti-roll bar. It senses when the vehicle begins to roll/lean and stiffens up the anti-roll bar. They do stay incredibly level.

Thank Daan. Yes they are the Tomcat ones. I'd like to know some specs on them too ideally.

Should be easy to T in the breather if you want. Or maybe be cheeky and vent to atmosphere with it.

I was surprised how big the tyres and sidewall are on the new Defender. In my pics above, when parked next to the green 90. You can clearly see the tyres are quite a bit taller than a 235/85R16. And despite being 19” rims, they have quite chunky sidewalls.

What sort of balance issues are you referring too? Most 90’s over the years didn’t have anti-roll bars. And with the right shocks/springs should handle well and not lean excessively. Do you know what suspension is on the vehicle now and what condition it is? If it’s an old mismash or worn out parts. It’s probably worth refreshing them before looking at ARB’s. Can always post some photos up here to help ID parts for you If you do go the ARB route, then factory fitted ones would be to the rear. You’ll need to check for the mounts on the axles though. As they normally aren’t present if it didn’t have an ARB from the factory. If you don’t have them you’ll need them welding on or sourcing an axle with them. Maybe from a Disco 1.

Ultimately I think any filter will work. Just make sure you have something. On a more technical level. I’m sure aftermarket filters can flow better than the stock air box. But I’m uncertain if the benefits would be realised on a diesel Land Rover engine in something heavy. Even more so if you aren’t tuning it for maximum power. So any potential performance gains will be negligible. On the flip side you don’t want to strangle the engine either. So try not to add anything more restrictive than a stock setup. In terms of performance. A K&N is a cotton weave filter. It flows more air, but at the sacrifice of some filtering ability. Although they are still pretty good. However they also need to be oiled in order to fully filter properly. And here is the snag. When clean they filter and flow well. However they become dirty far more quickly than a paper filter. And once dirty they also flow worse than a paper filter. So you need to clean a K&N more often than you’d swap out a paper filter. The cleaning products are also expensive. And after cleaning you need to re-oil it. And it is easy to over oil them. Not an issue on a diesel. But can cause MAF issues on petrol engines. For general UK use. I suspect the above doesn’t really matter all that much. Despite being an issue. However if I was planning on using the vehicle in a very dusty environment. I would be seriously considering what type of filter I would use. From research over the years. Foam filters tend to flow well, but filter less well than cotton weave. And they also need oiling and cleaning fairly often. The best filters are synthetic weave filters. A company called Donaldson in the USA uses this type of filter on heavy plant machinery. They offer high flow, high filtering and high durability. But are generally expensive and more difficult to buy. An oil bath is also a very good filtering system. But may reduce performance a bit if it doesn’t flow well enough.

Thanks for the insights and info. I think I'm reasonably set on which mounts I'd like to go for, as well as springs. I have found some that have an uncompressed length of 20.07", so a fair chunk longer than I what I'm running now. What I'm really undecided about are shocks. The Old Man Emu's are a tad pricey, but they are my preferred pick at the moment. Although I'd like to know more about the remote reservoir setups from Terrafirma, Britpart, Fox etc. If I'm spending the money, I'd like to do it right kind of thing. I'm also a little undecided about shock length. I can see that a longer (longer than the 11" offer by Gwyn) shock should offer more droop, esp on the rear axle. But if this is at the sacrifice of compression. I'm not convinced I want it. I'm also not convinced extreme suspension droop actually works better, as you get to a point where the wheel is no longer pushing/pulling vehicle along the ground. That said there seems to plenty of additional physical drop on the rear axle to make use of slightly longer shocks & springs over what I'm currently running. I think the prop is actually the limiting factor here and is a tad too short. However with the axle dropped this far, I do not like the prop angles at all. So it looks like a custom wide angle prop is in order first. But as these are a bit pricey, that might have to be for another pay packet. And thinking of safety, I think a wide angle prop for the front would be sensible too. Just to reiterate, I'm not unhappy with the suspension as it currently sits. It compresses well and is nicely balanced front/rear. These are traits I want to retain. I am looking at moving it to the next level however. This is how the suspension currently performs.

A friend picked up his new Defender yesterday. So we couldn't resist having a bit of a line up and photo shoot. We have vehicles spanning 1953 thru to 2020. I think the photos clearly show the new Defender had a lot more in common with the D4, than it does a traditional Defender or Series. However I think I can say, I do like the new vehicle, despite it being badged as Defender. Not because of it.

You might be correct. Although wouldn't that completely defeat the point of having turrets with dislocation cones in them? I also thought the Gwyn Lewis setup retained the spring on the lower perch?

Thanks for the reply. I have to say, I am curious about the front end travel. I looked over the Gwyn Lewis site and gallery, and I could not find any photos of the front spring dislocating. I know his kit uses the +5" shocks and taller turrets with optional dislocation cones. But it seems the restriction of the front radius arms may defeat having this somewhat. As demonstrated by my brothers 90. With longer shocks on the front, he is no where near getting additional droop with all other items being stock. Even on the Gwyn Lewis Challenge truck, you can clearly see the front spring is in no danger of dislocating. This has me thinking I could get away with the extended turrets without the dislocation cones. Which would suit for the ALRC regs more so. My current thinking is, I'd like to take some more measurements on my vehicle. Both static and full droop. I'd like to pick the front of the vehicle up with the farm loaded and disconnect the shocks, this should allow me to see how much physical droop I have in the rest of the system. And then look to getting some shocks to match. If I can't make use of a +5" shock, there is very little point fitting one in my opinion.

This is something I've thought of before. And I believe has been done with things like the Lada Niva, but not sure if it would be a somewhat negative tone for regular punters who aren't in farming. Also I'm not certain how comprehensive these networks are, seems there are a lot of Ag places and a lot of different companies.

I've not seen anything mentioned by Ineos or the press in relation to this. But for me, this would seem quite a critical part of the puzzle in making the vehicle a success. Where do you go to buy one? And how would it be serviced & maintained under warranty? I'm not sure how they are going to do this. Will it be online sales and delivery? Tesla seem to be making this work, although I don't really know the success of this kind of setup. I guess for 'fleet' buyers or even larger commercial buyers, they are less fussed about test drives anyway. And probably already buy multiple vehicles without ever seeing them. Will the team up with BMW somehow? Your thoughts on this?

I guess the joke here is. The Suzuki hybrids just have a special alternator and small battery. Basically the alternator charges up a smallish li-ion battery pack and can double up as a motor to assist the engine. The Ignis has such a system, the motor only produces 2.3hp and 22lb-ft. Such hybrids cannot drive on electric power alone. I really struggle to see how much of a difference such a setup as this makes. And no idea why Suzuki couldn't be bothered to fit it to the Jimny, it would have been easy, even as a retrofit.

What are peoples thoughts on using an in-line pump to compliment the mechanical lift pump, as opposed to an electronic lift pump and getting rid of the mechanical one completely?

How are you measuring? Looking at your photo, I couldn't tell what the dimension is, as you'd need to be square to the edge you are measuring, so moving your head back and forth could easily give a false reading. If you get a small flat stick 16" long and about 1/4" square, you can lay it on the rim, it'll sit on the very outer lip where the bead is (not the very edge of the rim). You can then use this to measure from, down to the naive plate. This will give you the front dish depth. For a 1 ton rim it should be approx 2.3" (minus half the thickness of the naive plate)

I don't have any figures to hand. But why type of body? fully tilt, hard top, pickup or station wagon? Also is the interior (seats and things) still in place? Generally it's the glass that adds the most mass and the bulkhead is the heaviest single item.

Wheel offsets.xlsx

Hi, measurements are calculated, they do not cater for the thickness of the naive plate. However this could be measured and calculations updated to reflect this, e.g. half of the naive plate thickness should be deducted from each side.