Thoughts and musings on the new defender

[FridgeFreezer]

2 hours ago, Snagger said:

Plastic sill covers do nothing to protect the body.  Look at RRC and Discovery 1 sills -  all the plastic did was encourage rust.

To be fair those were a 1970's British Leyland design and no-one back then designed to avoid rust-traps etc., just look at any other car from that period (if you can find one that hasn't rusted into the ground) and then someone came along later in the 1980's and stapled a plastic trim to it to try and make it look modern, with no design changes to account for it (because they had no money back then).

The modern stuff they are more cunning about it, using plastic trim to take damage (stone chips etc.) that would usually start a steel panel rusting in no time. To this day it's hard to find rust on a Freelander, and aside from the awful chassis quality which seems common across the board, the P38, D2, FL2, etc. seem pretty resilient to rust.

[Snagger]

Is the vastly improved body longevity of the D2 compared to the D1/RRC not just down to far superior body panel prep and primers, though, John?  Looking at the missing panel on that pre-production Imposter photo, I'd say it's going to be a pretty nasty mud trap on those few vehicles that do venture off tarmac.  Their steel treatment is going to need to be very good, maybe even as far as using galvanised parts there, if rust isn't going to be a common issue.

[FridgeFreezer]

Impossible to know really - it's all gotten better in the 40-50 years since the original RRC platform was designed, just seemed like they cheaped out massively on chassis in later years.

I've got a few 1970's / 80's car mags I found where they are talking about 3-year-old cars having "only a few rust holes" as a positive thing so you've got to remember how the "good old days" really were. By comparison, you see more than enough 10+ year old cars running around these days without a spot of rust on them.

As for the Defender, I find it hard to believe they'd knowingly design a mud/rust trap into it, despite all the mickey taking here LR do still plan for all their stuff to be used off-road and design accordingly, even if they make more concessions to the modern market who are actually buying the things than the longbeards here would like.

[Ozzy50]

Long beards 🤣

err hang on ....

[Ozzy50]

You’re right though fridge , LR fixed the rotten bodies but sent the chassis the other way !

[Snagger]

4 minutes ago, Ozzy50 said:

Long beards 🤣

err hang on ....

That's a pretty serious mud trap right there! 😋

[FridgeFreezer]

1 hour ago, Ozzy50 said:

You’re right though fridge , LR fixed the rotten bodies but sent the chassis the other way !

I suspect that they're deemed sturdy enough to last the required lifespan with only the light dusting of satin black they took to giving them, just looks bl**dy awful to see a 3 year old truck with a brown rear crossmember!

Odd that the D1 chassis were fine and the body rotted whereas the D2 onwards the bodies were fine and the chassis crumbled, guess they changed their process!

[Ozzy50]

D1’s do go at the back end eventually, from the transfer box forward they never rot , the built in chassis lubrication system takes care of that 🤣

[Ozzy50]

3 hours ago, Snagger said:

That's a pretty serious mud trap right there! 😋

More like a fire hazard when welding 😬🔥

[Tanuki]

9 hours ago, Snagger said:

Their steel treatment is going to need to be very good, maybe even as far as using galvanised parts there, if rust isn't going to be a common issue.

I'm kinda hoping that Defender 3.0 will be structurally based more on aluminium-alloy and stressed-composite technology rather than the old-fashioned steel-chassis stuff.

Lighter, cheaper-to-manufacture-in-complex-shapes, better able to provide controlled deformation/energy absorption in high-speed collisions - and you do repairs using thermally/UV-cured adhesives rather than by welding.

Think 21st-century, rather than Victorian engineering.

 

[FridgeFreezer]

22 minutes ago, Tanuki said:

Think 21st-century, rather than Victorian engineering.

Careful, you'll get burned as a witch!

[Ozzy50]

1 hour ago, Tanuki said:

I'm kinda hoping that Defender 3.0 will be structurally based more on aluminium-alloy and stressed-composite technology rather than the old-fashioned steel-chassis stuff.

Think 21st-century, rather than Victorian engineering.

 

Now see here young man , we’ll have not if this modern talk around here .Next you’ll be wanting new fangled things like pneumatic tyres and electric headlights ! 

[Jamie_grieve]

3 hours ago, Tanuki said:

'm kinda hoping that Defender 3.0 will be structurally based more on aluminium-alloy and stressed-composite technology rather than the old-fashioned steel-chassis stuff.

Lighter, cheaper-to-manufacture-in-complex-shapes, better able to provide controlled deformation/energy absorption in high-speed collisions - and you do repairs using thermally/UV-cured adhesives rather than by welding.

Think 21st-century, rather than Victorian engineering.

 

Exactly.

I also hope and think the whole thing will be aluminium except the steel subframes which ought to be galvanised as recent protection on range rovers and discoveries has been very poor on these parts. The galvanising would allow the steel to play nicer with the aluminium too. I always thought a Lotus Elise would be a great basis for an off roader years ago as the bonded extruded aluminium chassis is so light yet so strong. 

I think Fridge is getting confused by what the' longbeards' actually want out of this thing. We want to see an extremely durable, capable, and repairable vehicle that above all is reliable.

We don't want to see a rebadged discovery 5 floorpan with no ground clearance, no wheel travel and a weak drivetrain relying on electronics to cross bad terrain with the mechanical and electrical problems that have plagued Land Rover and JLR for decades. Sadly I've yet to see anything at all from any of the press releases to address these fears.

I do disagree with the notion that 'longbeards' don't buy or influence the sale of new cars, particularly this one. I would suggest with the marketing that many urban buyers would not do so were it not for the image. Remember the Barry Crump hilux adverts anyone as a case in point?

One thing we can agree on is crash safety, A defender is a deathtrap on wheels compared to everything else made in the last 40 years. Nothing had such poor roll over or side impact protection. A child could design something better although I suppose 'we' (I put myself in the longbeards camp here, even though my beard is short) probably do worry about the amount of unnecessary plastic tat that will inevitably be hanging from the defender replacement and the vulnerability of critical components surely to be hidden by thin plastic and / or aluminium underbody 'protection'.
Talking of vulnerability, I was surprised at the total lack of support from the longbeards camp about the ridiculous placement of the exhaust!!

Edited June 3, 2019 by Jamie_grieve

[Snagger]

13 hours ago, Tanuki said:

I'm kinda hoping that Defender 3.0 will be structurally based more on aluminium-alloy and stressed-composite technology rather than the old-fashioned steel-chassis stuff.

Lighter, cheaper-to-manufacture-in-complex-shapes, better able to provide controlled deformation/energy absorption in high-speed collisions - and you do repairs using thermally/UV-cured adhesives rather than by welding.

Think 21st-century, rather than Victorian engineering.

 

Now that you say it, I think the chassis on the D5 and so this new model are aluminium, and likely the shell is too.

[Snagger]

10 hours ago, Jamie_grieve said:

 confused by what the' longbeards' actually want out of this thing. We want to see an extremely durable, capable, and repairable vehicle that above all is reliable.

We don't want to see a rebadged discovery 5 floorpan with no ground clearance, no wheel travel and a weak drivetrain relying on electronics to cross bad terrain with the mechanical and electrical problems that have plagued Land Rover and JLR for decades. Sadly I've yet to see anything at all from any of the press releases to address these fears.

Exactly.

I do disagree with the notion that 'longbeards' don't buy or influence the sale of new cars, particularly this one. I would suggest with the marketing that many urban buyers would not do so were it not for the image. Remember the Barry Crump hilux adverts anyone as a case in point?

True of direct sales influence, but sales also suffer if resale values are dire, and "longbeards" desire for a rugged and simple vehicle is what kept Defender resale values so high, especially older models.

One thing we can agree on is crash safety, A defender is a deathtrap on wheels compared to everything else made in the last 40 years. Nothing had such poor roll over or side impact protection. A child could design something better although I suppose 'we' (I put myself in the longbeards camp here, even though my beard is short) probably do worry about the amount of unnecessary plastic tat that will inevitably be hanging from the defender replacement and the vulnerability of critical components surely to be hidden by thin plastic and / or aluminium underbody 'protection'.
Talking of vulnerability, I was surprised at the total lack of support from the longbeards camp about the ridiculous placement of the exhaust!!

Beefed up door pillars and screen frame, or just an internal frame would have sufficed - Jeep did the latter as the Wrangler faced the same problem.  It worked for them, and isn't that expensive to mass manufacture or install on the line.

Sorry, replies not as neatly inserted as I'd like as I don't know how to split a quote into separate boxes!

[Cynic-al]

The plastic trim can be used to keep the aerodynamics and car park friendly look whilst the stronger chassis is set back for better clearance. The plastic can take the odd knock from going over stuff, especially if it's not painted, or it could even be designed to be removable by the enthusiasts to give them the clearance they desire at the cost of the look / efficiency. The mud traps on my old range rover were great openings which allowed the tyres to fling mud in, that could be covered meaning the only mud build up would be through submerging. If it was removable it could be washed out. Also land rover are big into gluing aluminium together so I expect that will feature. 

You could put hoops etc in to help roll over but then people will moan that they might want to turn their 7 seater into a pickup at some point in the future and that would get in the way.

I don't think you will get what you want from Land Rover I'm afraid, I think you just have to accept that.

[deep]

19 hours ago, Jamie_grieve said:

I do disagree with the notion that 'longbeards' don't buy or influence the sale of new cars, particularly this one. I would suggest with the marketing that many urban buyers would not do so were it not for the image. Remember the Barry Crump hilux adverts anyone as a case in point?

 

I am surprised those dreadful ads made it all the way to Lanarkshire.  I had thought they were New Zealand-only ads.  They were clever, entertaining and highly misleading bits of advertising, which had New Zealanders believing the Hi Lux was a good vehicle to take off road (many still do).  

Of course, it was all poppycock.  A friend of mine was involved in the making of one of them.  They anchored a massive bulldozer at the top of a steep hill near Mangaweka and winched the Hi Lux up.  Unlike in the famous Land Rover dam ad., they kept that winch cable hidden, which was highly misleading.  At that time, we ran both Land Rovers and Hi Luxes at work and, frankly, the Hi Luxes were embarrassing off-road (not to mention cripplingly uncomfortable).  Sadly, people with money in their wallets believed otherwise!

P.S. - I have a fairly long beard (haven't shaved for nearly forty years), so am an expert in what longbeards want...  We don't mind the pluses of modern technology at all but dislike the negatives.  Those include complexity for the sake of it (endless gimmicks); expensive-to-repair and/or vulnerable bodywork and fittings; reliance on computers to get you there and home again and "style" at the expense of functionality.  Land Rover have everything they need to create a vehicle this longbeard would start saving for but it won't happen.  Obviously, my influence is tiny.

Edited June 3, 2019 by deep
Addition

[Escape]

On 6/1/2019 at 12:53 AM, Badger110 said:

As for your good self buying new defender's in the past, may i ask why?   Nearly new for a reduced price i can see an attraction....but new from the showroom just doesn't make sense to me, especially with previous knowledge!

- because I liked the idea of having a car no one else had driven

- because a no-options new one was better value than the nearly new ones I could find, all loaded with gimmicks I didn't need or want. So I got to spend only on what I really wanted. Which as it turned out was rather a lot, but nothing commonly found on second hand vehicles. 

- because I could

[Happyoldgit]

Dilemma...

I have a fairly long beard at the moment

but

I have also bought new Defenders.

So errrrmmmmm.

 

[Jamie_grieve]

1 hour ago, Happyoldgit said:

Dilemma...

I have a fairly long beard at the moment

but

I have also bought new Defenders.

So errrrmmmmm.

No dilemma thus far, the defenders you have previously bought are perfectly suited to an individual with a long beard or at least in the 'longbeard' camp.
The dilemma will be when the replacement is eventually announced, (by which time you'l probably  be tripping over your beard) when you may have to adopt a more modern approach to facial hair, possibly a goatee or designer stubble to go with a man bun and other hipster paraphernalia.
I understand a hipster is someone who looks like a forestry worker but couldn't actually start or use a chainsaw, like someone who would want to be seen in a defender but with no idea what low range or difflocks are.

[landroversforever]

29 minutes ago, Jamie_grieve said:

I understand a hipster is someone who looks like a forestry worker but couldn't actually start or use a chainsaw,

Oh Jamie that properly creased me up!!    

[Cynic-al]

6 hours ago, Escape said:

- because a no-options new one was better value than the nearly new ones I could find, all loaded with gimmicks I didn't need or want. So I got to spend only on what I really wanted. Which as it turned out was rather a lot, but nothing commonly found on second hand vehicles. 

That was the one thing I liked about the VW buying experience. Usually to get the bigger engine and leather you have to suffer the auto lights, wipers, beepy things in the cabin, an auto gearbox etc. VW give you nothing, everything is extra!

6 hours ago, Escape said:

- because I liked the idea of having a car no one else had driven

My dad used to deliver new cars as a retirement job. They had to be specially trained to do Mercedes, they had to collect them from the docks and drive them to the customer. They weren't allowed above 60mph, they had to check everything with the finest detail to ensure there was no damage, they had to wear a mercedes coat etc etc. They'd turn up at the docks and some oik would bring it from the parking area on 2 wheels bouncing off all the kerbs red lining it on a cold engine. Your never the first to drive it 

 

Turns out the new defender is up to hunting lions https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/cars/article-7099637/Stunning-pictures-Land-Rovers-new-Defender-testing-Africa.html

[Bowie69]

Well that is a little more encouraging, some further details can be seen, and it is not all bad.

It is on air, for sure.

[Eightpot]

The photo's on that link - looking at #7 with one wheel in the air,  doesn't look like it's got much articulation or is it just me...🤔

[Escape]

Al, VW has gone the wrong way then. After seeing one on the Brussels motorshow earlier this year, I had a go at speccing an Arteon as a sensible car. It was basically either a poverty spec small engined one, or adding more useless gimmicks to an already overloaded and overpriced high end model with a decent engine (that was only available as an auto, so a definite no go).

And yes, I know you're never the first and the guys that move the cars in yards, ports etc either don't care or don't have the time to care. I should have put it between brackets... It still felt nice to do the first proper driving myself. I didn't even give the seller a change to bring the car to a dealer closer by or give the car a pre-delivery detail session. As soon as I got word my Defender was off the truck, I rang a mate and we were off to collect her. 8-)