Thoughts and musings on the new defender

[Anderzander]

Sorry - need to keep up and keep my glasses on .. 

[Escape]

9 hours ago, Anderzander said:

Sorry - need to keep up and keep my glasses on .. 

That makes 2 of us.

Though I was right, it's not a standard Defender. 😛

[Snagger]

On 6/15/2021 at 5:09 PM, FridgeFreezer said:

Oh I vastly prefer buttons but the Defender interior is at least minimally cluttered - some manufacturers seem to think the more stuff you cram in the better and manage to create dashboards that still have a bl**dy awful touchscreen or three but also a load of buttons and knobs around the place that look like they were fired out of a cannon at the dash and installed where they landed.

The Defender dash reminded me a bit of proper old Volvos where there only a few buttons and they were very clear and simple.

Funnily enough, I was looking at the dashboards of modern Volvos in their showroom a few days ago while I waited for the serviced apartment to finish repairing my XC90’s aircon (not a luxury here, I can assure you - average of 42 at the moment but hit 52 one day two weeks ago).  Anyway, I had the same thought - they all have an iPad sized touch screen and few real controls.  That means far too much time looking in to adjust the radio, AC, navigation or whatever else.  As well as impractical, they are DANGEROUS.  It’s sad to see Volvo, renowned for its safety ethos, go down this route, but it’s what idiot customers expect now, and they won’t sell cars if they don’t follow suit.  
 

My 2014 Volvo has no such nonsense, with adequately tactile controls on the dash.  My only control complaint on the car is electronic related, though - the automatic headlight fipunction is as stupid as it gets; if the automatic function is on, then yes, it’ll switch on the headlights when it gets dark.  But it doesn’t activate in dusky conditions, fog, rain or sand storms.  So it’s useless and forms a bad habit.  But worse than that, if the automatic feature is on, then it inhibits manual activation of the headlights and tail lights via the dash switch, and that is potentially lethal.  We leave the auto function off at all times; it’s just too dangerous.  The trouble is that the service technicians keep reactivating it each service.  As Admiral Ackbar wisely exclaimed, “It’s a trap!” 😆😆

[Snagger]

On 6/16/2021 at 1:54 AM, FridgeFreezer said:

As a software guy, these days it's all so insanely complicated that by the time it hits the dealers it's already out of date, and complex software is never bug-free - when you had a single ECU running on an 8-bit micro with 64k of RAM you could take the NASA approach and a small team could quite easily prove it totally reliable under all possible circumstances.

These days the dashboard is running some custom variant of Linux plus several huge software stacks for the graphical interface and multimedia etc. and probably more power than a home computer of not so many years ago, with millions of lines of code you can never truly get all the bugs out of it (Microsoft have never stopped updating Windows in the last 40 years after all).

Unfortunately it's the way of all things - you've got Tesla updating cars over the internet and turning off features or even reducing your battery power like a bad iPhone update so I guess we should be grateful JLR aren't going too mad with it all.

So true.  My cars are simple, but I see this problem in extremist at work.  The updates and fixes are painfully slow to arrive, typically five years or more, because of the testing and validation process, and because that is all so expensive, most issues are left for years with bulletins published telling us about known problems and how to deal with them until enough isssues are identified that they decide to do another “blockpoint”.  But it’s like playing whack-a-mole.  Each update causes more new problems than it fixes.  I’d rather they adopt a policy of making systems less automated and less interconnected - you might have to operate more things manually, but they go wrong less and interfere less with other systems that way.

[JeremySteel]

Sounds like where I work. We're so slow that the Micros and FPGAs will be obsolete before we get something out

Cars are a right mix. All the firmware that does the important stuff driving/safety functions is absolutely fine. All the annoying glitchy stuff revolves around infotainment. And that's the flashy stuff that showroom customers and magazine reviewers gush over. I suspect development, validation and reviewing of that sort of thing is rushed through so that it can be shoved into the car asap. Then it ends up so bloated and unwieldy that it, as you say, affects other fancy things.

The SOTA updates over the last few months have sorted most issues. My software/firmware glitches, other than occasional lagginess, simply relates to logging into Landrover Incontrol from the car. And, after I moaned about it, I wondered if I ever would use it. 'No' is the answer I suspect.

Putting that trivia aside the car is great. Comfortable on-road and superb traction in the mud etc.

Edited June 21, 2021 by JeremySteel

[missingsid]

9 hours ago, JeremySteel said:

Sounds like where I work. We're so slow that the Micros and FPGAs will be obsolete before we get something out

Due diligence,

A previous US company I worked for fancied buying startups. They bought a company that had created a world leading network data switch, largest capacity and speed for $13m.

Being a US startup the 3 main members had not paid themselves or had holidays for years, my company did not include their retention in the purchase so they legged it ASAP. It turned out the product was still in FGA format and not ASIC therefore just a prototype with the most expensive development work yet to be completed!

[deep]

These turned up on Fbook today.  The long-awaited 130!  Might need a lift so it doesn't look too much like a hearse...

[western]

Should of made it as a 2 or 4 door pick up body, that C pillar is still huge. 

[elbekko]

Full-size 'murica machine.

Would be nice to see that as a pick-up.

[landroversforever]

Interested to see it without the covers. I think it's got some potential. Certainly be nice to see it as a double cab type pickup but I really can't see that happening.

[ThreePointFive]

Any details on how the difference in space has been used to configure the interior? Just trying to work out the whole point really.

[landroversforever]

1 minute ago, ThreePointFive said:

Any details on how the difference in space has been used to configure the interior? Just trying to work out the whole point really.

It is a bit of a strange one. I can only guess that its a bit more leg room for the 3rd row and then some boot space behind? 

[Jamie_grieve]

The 130 really shows how much Jerry screwed up the defender design in my opinion, by losing all the parallel lines and boxyness of the original, this looks more and more like a Nissan patrol or any generic SUV to me. There's not a single thing I can see in that 130 even as a homage or a nod to the old one which identifies it as a Land Rover.
I also think they should have been named after their wheelbase instead of some feeble acknowledgement to a past that doesn't exist and give them an identity of their own to build on as they develop and mature and possibly carve out their own niche. I do wonder what the wheelbase of the 130 is, it would be ironic if it was actually 130".
Without the pseudo camouflage to make it stand out I doubt it would have attracted a second glance by anyone other than the invited press.

 

[Bowie69]

20 minutes ago, Jamie_grieve said:

I do wonder what the wheelbase of the 130 is, it would be ironic if it was actually 130".

It's the same as the 110, just a longer body.

So it is now just a model designation with no real meaning behind it.

[Peaklander]

I have been meaning to post these. Both seen on Mull a week or so ago. I had to park next to the first one, just for comparison. 

[L19MUD]

1 hour ago, Peaklander said:

I have been meaning to post these. Both seen on Mull a week or so ago. I had to park next to the first one, just for comparison. 

Good to see them both being used properly too!

[Peaklander]

The roof tent was more like a roof marquee but I didn’t snap it from the correct angle. 

[Retroanaconda]

Surely as they're not buried up to the door sills in a quarry mud hole or fitted with a cherry picker, they can’t possibly be ‘being used properly’? 

The 130 looks a good option for those needing the extra space. The third row seating on the 110 is not very generous at all and only really of use for small children or short journeys. 

[ThreePointFive]

2 hours ago, Peaklander said:

I have been meaning to post these. Both seen on Mull a week or so ago. I had to park next to the first one, just for comparison. 

Both cars doing exactly the same job, that's perfect. Let's be honest, for 95% of us these are leisure vehicles and used for this purpose.

Yours looks really tidy.

[deep]

It's interesting to see a few people immediately suggest a pick-up version of the "130".  I guess there might be a market for a more luxurious version of an American sized double-cab pick-up?  Surely the inevitable price would limit that.  It might happen anyway as it was promised a long time ago.  The promise went quiet but I'd bet there are working models lurking somewhere anyway.  I just can't see a pick-up version of 110 or 130 being anything but fugly.  A 90 version might be okay.  If you are pricing your working truck like LR would, it can't be fugly or nobody will buy it.

Both 110 and 130 share the same 120 inch wheelbase.  It's just a model designation so no big deal.  Old 90s had a 93 inch wheelbase and old 130s had a 127 inch wheelbase anyway.  The bigger the number, the longer the car and that's good enough, isn't it?

Personally, if I ever ended up in the position of having to buy a new generation Defender (not a fan of the excess of technology), I'd be opting for the 130 and I wouldn't care if it had any seats behind the front row at all.  I use my Land Rovers as vans, campers and dog transport and the more room the better.  There must be a decent market for a roomier body.  Not just people wanting some practical luggage space in a three row configuration but also anybody who wants to carry four or five people and a decent amount of gear for work, expedition or whatever.  It's probably only going to be an extra foot or so of length but it's in the most needed place.  I actually see it as a less compromised 110 but I don't live in a city, where length would be an issue.

This could make a pretty decent ambulance too.  It just opens up the Defender to quite a large part of that old market.  If only they weren't obsessed with space-wasting monocoques and offered a cab and chassis option!  Oh well, that boat sailed a long time ago.

[Jamie_grieve]

2 hours ago, deep said:

 The bigger the number, the longer the car and that's good enough, isn't it?

Yes and no but that's not what I meant. I think they should have called the short one a 100, the medium one a 120 and yeah, the long one needs something else but something that gives them their own identity instead of sharing it with something unrelated from a different century. 

[Jamie_grieve]

6 hours ago, Retroanaconda said:

Surely as they're not buried up to the door sills in a quarry mud hole or fitted with a cherry picker, they can’t possibly be ‘being used properly’?

Exactly!! 

[Jamie_grieve]

2 hours ago, deep said:

This could make a pretty decent ambulance too.  It just opens up the Defender to quite a large part of that old market.  If only they weren't obsessed with space-wasting monocoques and offered a cab and chassis option!  Oh well, that boat sailed a long time ago.

I disagree, in an urban environment you'd be better with a van based ambulance and in an off road scenario then reliability is king, there's no way any agency could justify the support these would need and the price of them.  I'm not a fan of the very short travel suspension and the way it lurches around from one wheel to the next which would be very uncomfortable for patients in certain conditions. There's really not a lot of room in the back for setting it up as one either. I think if Toyota ever stopped making the 70 series then the Grenadier would be a more suitable vehicle as it's being designed from the outset to be modified and the basic layout is far more suited to durability in a harsh environment. 

Edited June 22, 2021 by Jamie_grieve

[Snagger]

19 hours ago, deep said:

These turned up on Fbook today.  The long-awaited 130!  Might need a lift so it doesn't look too much like a hearse...

Wow!  They made a fat pig even uglier!  The aesthetic balancing of the Pretender has been off from the start - as much as I hate McGovern, I do credit him with making the RRS, Velar and Ewok look very stylish, but not this model.  But the proportions of this 130 are well off,  and there is no need to make the C and D pillars so huge - not only does it mean having tiny windows and poor light (or view from the folding seats), but also severely restricts the size of aftermarket side lockers that could be fitted in the window spaces.  I think the 130 should alway be fitted with the recovery rings, too - it’ll need them with that break over angle.

[missingsid]

5 hours ago, Jamie_grieve said:

Yes and no but that's not what I meant. I think they should have called the short one a 100, the medium one a 120 and yeah, the long one needs something else but something that gives them their own identity instead of sharing it with something unrelated from a different century. 

Could be worse, the reborn Triumph motorcycles (which are doing very well) used the old nomclementure T100  T120 but in as far as I can see a meaningless mixed up way with the old names, just to keep nostalgia.