Chicken Drumstick

I'd take that with a pinch of salt tbh, it's not as if they'd say it will be the least capable, or not as capable as the old one. New stuff must always be perceived as being superior to the old, at least from a marketing perspective, even if it isn't actually true.

Thanks for sharing. Although I have to say I think the DC100 looked better. Being honest, I rather liked the look of the DC100. I fully admit it would never be a utility vehicle. But that is where the divide is, do they want something utilitarian or something sports utility? In the World market, the DC100 concept (so long as it was capable), would likely have faired well when compared to things like the Jeep Wrangler, Toyota FJ Cruiser and so forth. If LR want to be competitive in the utility market, then it's a whole different ball game. For the home market, yes a true Defender replacement would suit well, but the wider market less so.

One of my S3's doesn't have a heater. I know years back you could buy a "kit" to add a heater, as we did this to an ex-Mod 88 we had at the time. Does anyone still sell anything like this? I've had a look about but haven't seen anything of the sort. Failing that, are there any worthwhile ideas to consider when adding a heater to a Series these days? Thanks.

Lumintop SD20 XM-L2 U2 Side Switch Torch provided by Lumintop for review. Conclusion Summary: This is a very nice EDC sized light, it seems to do everything very well and does nothing badly. Good output, construction, feel and modes. Manufacture specs: These figures are not claimed as ANSI FL1 standard. Also please note the wide supported voltage range that allows you to run 2xCR123a or even 2xRCR123. However I have opted to conduct all my testing using an 18650. Info about my reviews and testing: I like to keep my reviews fairly informal and not overly technical. There are plenty of talented people with fancy measuring devices to offer more technical detail. What I want to do is give an honest appraisal of owning and using this torch, and what a regular punter will make of it. What's in the box: If you have purchased higher end flashlights, you will be accustom to getting a pretty standard set of items with your flashlight, something many 'budget' lights don't offer. Lumintop is no exception and included with the torch is a very nice holster, a lanyard and some spare O-rings along with a set of nicely written concise instructions, written in good clear English. Exterior design and ergonomics: The SD20 is a stumpy design, it is very short for an 18650 torch with a switch (rather than a twisty). It does appear a little chunky, but is in fact no wider than many other torches in this class. It does feel very high quality and solid. And there is plenty of material to make it robust and help with heat dissipation. The knurling is fairly smooth and pleasant to hold. On each side there is a flattened area of the body, where on one side you have the crisp logo printed. This makes the overall grippiness of the torch very good. It is a very nice torch to carry and hand hold. The side switch is rubber and while it feels a little squishy at first, you actually need a fairly solid push to activate it. The switch also acts as a very good anti-roll device and works better than many other anti-roll designs I have seen. Lastly there is a rotary ring just below the tail cap, this has an eyelet for the lanyard to attach to, and freely rotates around the body of the light. I'm not a huge lanyard fan, but this design will prevent the lanyard from knotting up, as can happen when it is only attached to a fixed point on the tail cap, as per most other flashlights. The threads are square cut and have very little slop. The O-rings are heft and well fitting. And the threads where suitably lubed. The SD20 has a smooth stainless bezel, this means it is comfortable in the pocket, but the stainless offers additional protection to the light and reduces the risk of the anodising rubbing off the front of the light. The SD20 also happily tail or head stands with no issues at all. In fact, the tail standing is supremely stable, thanks to the stumpy design and flat tail cap. This is an attribute I personally really appreciate, as I often find the need to tail stand a light, such as to light an entire room and then leave my both of my hands free. A torch that is easily knocked over or needs to be leant against something is a pain. The SD20 is neither of these and you can quickly plonk it down and it'll stay standing. Beam: The SD20 has a good size reflector for a tube 18650 torch. Slightly larger than some others, without making the light too big. The reflector itself is a mild Orange Peel(OP). The emitter is the current XM-L2 of U2 bin. My example it's not quite 100% central in the reflector, but I'm being picky, it's very close and doesn't seem to affect the beam at all. The tint is what you would expect from a U2 bin, most would call this Cool White (CW). But I must say it's actually very pleasant and to my eyes appeared to have a very nice neutral colour rendition. The light is certainly white, but it doesn’t feel cold like some CW emitters do, it doesn't have the yellow you normally associate with a warm or true neutral white emitter. Maybe a better word for this would be 'natural', rather than neutral. I'm normally a huge NW fan, but I honestly liked the light the SD20 emits. The beam itself is completely artefact free. Despite the OP reflector, there is still a nicely defined hot spot. But somehow the spill beam seems to be more bright than other lights I've used. The beam is neither floody nor throwy, it's a nice blend, that means it is ideal for almost any use. Close up work, reading or out across the fields. Switch, UI and performance: Being an electronic side switch, there will be some battery drain with the light off, however this is so low, it is almost negligible. A simple quarter turn of the tail cap will offer a complete lockout should you want to store the light for longer periods. The switch itself is of white rubber with the standard power switch symbol on it. The switch is actually very nice to use and requires a firm press to activate. While offering a nice amount of squish and give in the boot itself. Where this really shows itself, is that it is very difficult to accidently activate the light. In fact, I will be as bold to proclaim, this is the ONLY side switch torch I own that hasn't turned itself on in my pocket! I had decided I would no longer EDC side switch lights due to this very problem, however Lumintop have proved me wrong in designing a side switch light where this is a none issue. The UI is very easy to use. Long hold turns the light on and a long hold turns the light off again. If you aren't use to this kind of UI, then it might take a day to acclimatise, but it feels quite natural after a while. The long press is only 1/2 - 1 second. To change modes you simply perform a normal click of the button. Mode sequence is: High - Medium - Low And it has memory that works as it should. There is a hidden strobe via a double click. I like the fact this is hidden, but instantly accessible by any On mode. This is how it should be. The firm switch means it's almost impossible to accidently activate strobe, but it's there should you want it. A simple click when active will return you to your output mode. Personally I like this kind of UI, simple, robust and intuitive. For EDC use you rarely need more than this. There are 3 output levels: High Medium Low If you are a moonlight fan, then you will probably be disappointed. That said, I found the modes to be almost perfectly spaced. High is great for outdoors or ceiling bounce indoors. Medium is good for general indoor use. Low is bright enough to be very useful and extend runtimes, but not so bright that you can't use it to map read or shine at your hand. Lumintop claim 900 lumens from the SD20. Using my DMM and a freshly charged 2600mAh Sanyo ICR it pulls 2.56amps on high. And out using the light it is noticeably brighter than my ANSI FL1 rated Klarus XT2C (rated at 725 Lumens). Despite the high output, the SD20 must have very good internal thermal management. The body does warm up, but even after prolonged periods of use on high, it never gets excessively hot. And light output appears to be rock solid and very well regulated, I could not detect any noticeable drop in output visually. In addition to this, I cannot detect any sign of PWM on any of the modes, nor is there a tint shift between modes. This makes it a very nice light to use and rely on. Usage: I have been EDC'ing the SD20 for the best part of 2 weeks now. In that time I have put it through varied uses indoors and out. I have not found any gripes with this torch at all. It really is a very nice EDC light. The only thing I have found missing, is there is no pocket clip. I do quite like to EDC torches in my jeans pocket and clip them to the inside of the pocket. That said, the SD20 has proven to be quite comfortable in the pocket regardless, so I can't really knock the light for this minor omission. It has however performed brilliantly as an EDC light and will be a torch I continue to use. Beam shots & comparison: Personally I do not believe in the use of white wall beam shots, as I never use any of my torches to shine at a blank white wall from a couple of feet away. Thusly, my beam shots are actually using the torch as a torch. In order to keep this review balanced, I decided to compare the SD20 to a couple of my other favourite EDC 18650 lights, the Solarforce T1 XM-L U2 and the Klarus XT2C XM-L2 U2. The T1 uses a gen 1 XM-L emitter and Solarforce claim 505 lumens, while the Klarus uses an XM-L2 and claims 725 Lumens (ANSI FL1). The SD20 seems to be noticeably brighter than the Klarus or Solarforce and in my opinion has far superior tint to the Klarus. Video review: Lumintop asked me if I would include a video review of the light, I haven't done this before, so apologies in advance. All photos & video shot with a Pentax K-50.

I've not heard of many issues with the KV6's. We've had two of those engines (MG ZS 180 and 825 Sterling) with no bother at all. As for the 1.8's, I think the internet highly inflates the issues with them too. Our 1.8 Freelander did need a HG doing, but was fine once done. Surprisingly it also wasn't much different on fuel compared to the Td4 Freelander that replaced it. That said, anyone buying a 1.8 should expect to do the HG at least once. But get it done right and they are cracking engines.

I think a 2.5NAD is approx 67hp and a 2.5TD approx 89hp. I think there is a CR change between them. But it shows a non intercooled turbo adds 22hp. The 200Tdi def runs lower CR and more boost and is intercooled. Logically this means the turbo must be making more than 22hp difference over a Di with no other changes other than the turbo removed. Defender inlet 107bhp - 22 = 85bhp this is best case for a Di and it won't have the large torque spike without the turbo. I suspect in reality however it's another 10hp difference or more. Which brings it down to 75hp. Pretty on par with the stock 72hp a 2.25 petrol makes. MPG wise, I was meaning Di vs 2.25 petrol.

Thanks. Symptom: Jumps out of 1st low when going down hill while engine braking. And will do similar in 3rd high on the road. Yeah Ashcroft are very close, but fairly sure they don't do Series boxes anymore.

Auto's are slower, less fun to drive and typically lower mpg than manual counter parts. Off road, well some people just prefer manuals to auto's, but auto's can be very good. In the case of the Freelander however, the TD4 manual is WAAAAY to easy to stall. And the clutches suck on FL's for off road use. An auto will be better in this regard. If mpg isn't a major issue, check out a KV6 powered one.

From an mpg point of view I can see why people would do this. However I've never really been convinced that a Di is worth doing and I wonder if they really do make more Hp than a standard "good" 2.25 petrol.

I think that's a little unfair, especially considering the 2.5TD and 200Tdi actually share a lot of major components and design. On a personal note, I know of a few high miler TD's, one 170,000+ miles and the other over 200,000+ That said, if you are going to the hassle of the swap, I do agree a 200Tdi is the way to go for only marginally more cost and no real additional hassle.

Can anyone recommend any places that: a) sell good recon Series gearboxes or b) offer a recon/rebuild service on them (and the transfer box) My S3 is in need of a replacement and I don't have the time/space to do it myself. Thanks.

How sideways are we talking here? Only over the past couple of weeks I've read a number of posts on here about drifting a Series Land Rover. I'm not saying it can't be done, just curious what people are actually meaning,

Do you have any vids of this, or is it when on grass?

Do you already have an engine? If not, might be worth considering the Td5 anyhow. Dynamically it's a far superior engine to the Tdi's.

The thing is, when you get claims way above what the makers claim, it just sounds fishy. And it's so easy to balls up the calculations. Or simply start with inaccurate data. For instance, I had a mate who used to work out his mpg. But he'd do it by driving from half tank on the gauge to quarter tank and claim that was 'x' gallons. Despite having no idea how much fuel was really being used between those two points. Even reading the gauge is not going to be accurate. But he used to swear by his claims, as I'm sure others do, even if they are just as misguided. As an example, if you have a speedo drive setup for 7.50's and you are running 205's. Then your odometer will not be accurate. Could be 10% out easily, as they probably aren't accurate at the best of times. You do an indicated 100 miles. You then fill up at a different petrol station and you put what you think is a similar amount of fuel in. But being as you can't see into the tank, it's quite hard. Lets say you put in 2.86 gallons. This means 100 miles / 2.86 gallons = 34.96mpg However the reality might be you only covered 90 miles and you actually put in half a gallon more fuel. 90 / 3.36 = 26.79mpg I'm in no way saying you did this. But you can see how some fairly simple, easy and mundane errors can drastically change the end claims.

Must have been on the back of a trailer..... Seriously, I'd love to see someone actually get these kinds of mpg. But I just don't believe it.

110's (and 127's/130's) up until around 2002 use a Salisbury rear axle. Which is sort of a Rover'ised Dana 60.

The only sensible type of pie chart

I knocked up this spread sheet, hope it helps a bit. Of course running bigger or smaller tyres will affect this. Overall I think it depends on what you want to use it for. If you see lots of motorway or high speed cruising, where every mpg counts. Then taller gearing makes more sense. The flip side is, taller gearing also dulls performance and makes a vehicle feel less lively. A stock 3.5 on SU's/Strombergs is not a revvy engine and over gearing them can make them feel more sluggish than they ought to be. Personally I've driven/owned under and over geared V8's. And I much prefer something more lively, you also won't need to change gear as much. On this note, looking at the tables I'd personally prefer the 4.7 diffs in a vehicle such as this, I think it'd just make it more fun. The reality is, they are noisy, bumpy, usually have wobbly steering and drum brakes. So cruising above 60mph is far less likely or important.

I think the thing with boost is, as mentioned before, it's a measure of resistance not flow. So it's quite easy to see differences in readings, even down to where you decide to plumb in your boost gauge. Not saying this is the case and I suspect the normal production variances exist anyhow.

Much rarer for the V8, it's a completely different box. But as with all things automotive, there will always be exceptions.

Bit more room for the rear prop on a 109 though.

Personally I'd try phoning them rather than emailing. See what they can sort. Although, I'm not really sure why you'd want an LT77 in a Series anyhow, the 4 speeder is arguably nicer to use and certainly has a nicer feel and shift to it. And unless you are brutal with it, or have a juicy engine, then it should be plenty strong enough.

Yes to all of your questions. They are not really any more complex than any other modern car. Although they do have TCS/HDC and air suspension. But as a rule I think they are pretty stout. The TD6 is ok performing compared to a Td5 D2, but under powered compared to the wider market place. The gearbox LR used on the TD6 also can't handle the stock torque rating. So all TD6's will suffer gearbox failure. And it's a matter of when, not if. Even if it's had a rebuild. A remapped TD6 will go a lot better than stock (still not as well as a V8 one), but obviously puts the gearbox at more risk. The BMW 4.4 V8's ones don't suffer this as they use a different gearbox. I know the allure of better mpg says diesel is better. But if you aren't going to do huge miles in it, it's worth considering the V8. You'll get higher spec too as a rule. I have found the lower price end most are all high milers though. Early L322's don't have terrain response, but do have fancy TCS/HDC systems. The early ones also come on 18" rims, which offer more AT and MT tyre choices. When the Jag engines where introduced they moved upto 19" and different front brakes which mean the 18's won't fit.

I think it depends what sort of off roading you do. If you are into trials, then even with stock gearing it can be a little too fast for some technical sections. Likewise if you are on rocks or very challenging terrain. I suspect it's not a major issue, and some people like to drive faster off road than others. But I think it's worth mentioning. I suspect that in most cases it's down to people miscalculating and also by only using the vehicles tacho for the travelled distance. I've been around Land Rover's all my life and between myself and close family I think we've had somewhere in the region of 40-50 of them. Of all shapes and sizes, and no matter how any where driven, I've not seen close this kind of mpg from them. I'm not sure I can really believe 39mpg either, unless it was fill up, drive 10 miles at a constant 50mph and refill and work out the mpg, despite not even using a gallon. The margin of error is simply huge.