Jump to content
Jamie_grieve

Thoughts and musings on the new defender

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, discomikey said:

How many failures have you ever seen of that particular shaft? 

I haven't seen any which is why I was asking you.

On 6/10/2019 at 9:52 PM, Jamie_grieve said:

Please tell us more about how strong or indeed weak any other parts of the D7U platform are given your extensive testing thus far.

 

I don't have the exposure to them as they don't exist in the fleets of any agencies in any developing countries where I work. That said, range rovers and discoveries definitely don't get the same abuse that defenders get. Same argument exists when it's well known that 90/110  half shafts break all the time yet the same cannot be said of the same parts in range rover classics and discovery ones in normal use. The only difference is the demographic of ownership and how they get (ab)used.

That being said, it's still a pretty weak defence when at the end of the day it's still the same pitiful diameter as a defender shaft which are known around the world, even by land rover enthusiasts, to be especially weak compared to those on other vehicles. I suppose they probably aren't going to be very hard worked in the SUV role compared to that of a utility vehicle.

As I said before with reference to the Ashcroft shafts, the metallurgy is almost inconsequential compared to the diameter. The one chance to move a weakness in the defender design beyond constraints based on 1930's Rover car diffs and they blew it. That on its own will be a deal breaker for some right there. Saying the D7U shafts are stronger than a defender shaft is like saying nothing at all, there are people with stronger knitting needles. I want to hear that they're stronger than a Nissan Patrol shaft.

Can we say that by continuing with the same tiny half shaft diameter as the defender that any measure of redundancy or 'over-enginneering' was not considered as part of the design brief?
If there's no redundancy in this critical part of the drivetrain, how confident are we that any redundancy exists in any other part of the vehicle let alone elsewhere in the drivetrain?  Surely not even JLR wants to see another epidemic of L322 type gearbox failures across the board or do they have other weaknesses intentionally built in for planned obsolescence?


 

In a situation where it really matters, and there are two cars, a Defender and a L663 both sat there, 100% standard and on road tyres. Im picking the 663 every single time.

I'm confused, what is an L633, if it's the defender replacement, what is an L851? Can you show us a picture? 

If it's the defender replacement you have access to, is there any good mechanical news at all that you can share for those few amongst us who would love to consider this vehicle for deployment in places that don't have access to a main dealer network? I'm sure you'll have all kinds of non disclosure and confidentiality obligations but I'm not sure at this stage all of the negative speculation is constructive, there must be something good you can share?

It would be nice to have something positive to be discussing that is more than just opinion by a vested interest saying how good something is.

Out of curiosity, do you know the ring gear diameter and the size and separation of the pinion bearings in the D7U platform? Are there rubber couplings or cv joints or what on the propshafts of the L663? Are there any grease nipples anywhere?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Gazzar said:

I think we can't get much more stuff out of the soil without GM, unless we plough the rainforests. Or, controversial, reclaim the Sahara (my favourite).

But wind and solar is doable. Sort of. 

One of the places I work is a large native forest reserve, which has had an astounding amount of restorative work over the last decade and a half and now has a booming population of native wildlife.  The windfarm people, somehow, got permission to put a lot of turbines in there (reeks of corruption but who can ever prove that?).  Already, acres of bush has been bulldozed for access tracks and worse is to come.  Some of the rare birds in there are known to be vulnerable to blade strikes.  Who knows what effect the noise will have on other species?  Even working around turbine noise is very unpleasant, not to mention the Nazi-like mentality to "safety".  The spin put out the company is how environmentally friendly they are and how many electric cars they will be able to power...

The fact is that electricity is not environmentally free - every means of production comes at a cost.  The push to electric cars is driven as much by money as anything else and there is a lot of smoke and mirrors involved.  The solution is for humanity to get less indulgent, to travel less and do in less wasteful ways but humanity doesn't want that.  Especially not the money-is-power types who push "development" along, with the view that environmental responsibility or long-term vision are annoyances that lawyers have to overcome.

Absolutely, there is a place for the electric vehicle (even an electric Defender) but it's equally not a case of fuel = bad and electric = good.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@deep it's a good point, but it's still better than if they'd bulldozed it to build a coal-fired plant there... electric's gotta come from somewhere and I'd rather have a wind turbine in my back garden than a traditional power station.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/15/2019 at 11:27 AM, FridgeFreezer said:

I'd rather have a wind turbine in my back garden than a traditional power station.

FF

I live in Scotland and there are hundreds if not thousands of the turbines on the hills and previously thought the way you do. 

That was until one day I was driving back from a client meeting and in a part of the country where the roads were overlooking a vast area of the country probably able to see both the east and west coasts as well as into the highlands. Everwhere I could see turbines which up until that point I had considered would not blight the landscape. 

At least an oil, coal or nuclear facility is relatively small scale and only blights one small area. The wind turbines are everywhere. Perhaps we should be covering entire roofs with solar panels, more attractive and less impactive. Either that or accept that there is a place for fossil fuels.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they legislated that all new home had to have south facing single pitch roofs with solar panels built in, we could get a long way very quickly, I reckon.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Bowie69 said:

If they legislated that all new home had to have south facing single pitch roofs with solar panels built in, we could get a long way very quickly, I reckon.

East and West facing roofs work as well. Even north facing can work but it isn't efficeint. I would be happy to design all new roofs to work that way. Current Scottish regulations mean in may cases my clients are having to install solar panels anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given there'll be very likely be an electric version, even if not on initial release, I think it kind of is...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Followed one of the shorty test cars today.  Having a closer look it seems the rear sides, roof and bonnet are heavily disguised with bolted on flat panels.  I guess it may have the rounded defender style shoulder-line (hence the disguised door waistline) defendery bonnet and sloping roof under all that board.  Might not be half bad underneath?  

20190616_150253.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Eightpot said:

Might not be half bad underneath? 

Steady now! :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, FridgeFreezer said:

Steady now! :lol:

Not half bad still means the other half is terrible though!  😄

Actually looking at those recent pics LR released from Kenya, they've removed the false sides and it's not actually showing much of an interesting line - unless its another bit of disguising..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/14/2019 at 4:41 PM, Jamie_grieve said:

I haven't seen any which is why I was asking you.

 

I don't have the exposure to them as they don't exist in the fleets of any agencies in any developing countries where I work. That said, range rovers and discoveries definitely don't get the same abuse that defenders get. Same argument exists when it's well known that 90/110  half shafts break all the time yet the same cannot be said of the same parts in range rover classics and discovery ones in normal use. The only difference is the demographic of ownership and how they get (ab)used.

That being said, it's still a pretty weak defence when at the end of the day it's still the same pitiful diameter as a defender shaft which are known around the world, even by land rover enthusiasts, to be especially weak compared to those on other vehicles. I suppose they probably aren't going to be very hard worked in the SUV role compared to that of a utility vehicle.

As I said before with reference to the Ashcroft shafts, the metallurgy is almost inconsequential compared to the diameter. The one chance to move a weakness in the defender design beyond constraints based on 1930's Rover car diffs and they blew it. That on its own will be a deal breaker for some right there. Saying the D7U shafts are stronger than a defender shaft is like saying nothing at all, there are people with stronger knitting needles. I want to hear that they're stronger than a Nissan Patrol shaft.

Can we say that by continuing with the same tiny half shaft diameter as the defender that any measure of redundancy or 'over-enginneering' was not considered as part of the design brief?
If there's no redundancy in this critical part of the drivetrain, how confident are we that any redundancy exists in any other part of the vehicle let alone elsewhere in the drivetrain?  Surely not even JLR wants to see another epidemic of L322 type gearbox failures across the board or do they have other weaknesses intentionally built in for planned obsolescence?


 

I'm confused, what is an L633, if it's the defender replacement, what is an L851? Can you show us a picture? 

If it's the defender replacement you have access to, is there any good mechanical news at all that you can share for those few amongst us who would love to consider this vehicle for deployment in places that don't have access to a main dealer network? I'm sure you'll have all kinds of non disclosure and confidentiality obligations but I'm not sure at this stage all of the negative speculation is constructive, there must be something good you can share?

It would be nice to have something positive to be discussing that is more than just opinion by a vested interest saying how good something is.

Out of curiosity, do you know the ring gear diameter and the size and separation of the pinion bearings in the D7U platform? Are there rubber couplings or cv joints or what on the propshafts of the L663? Are there any grease nipples anywhere?

663 is (or has been) the new defender designation for the last 5 or so years. 

I've not heard of L851 before, but that could be down to different body style offerings. The code relates to the BIW. 

 

I haven't measured the specifics in the differentials, but it's safe to say they are much sturdier than the early 1900's design rover diff, chunkier parts and bearings. Rear diffs often have an electronically preloaded plate diff, which you can lock pretty much solid. It works very well and has proven reliable. 

Front differential is open as standard but we fit our own centers into both these and the rear too in some cases so modification is certainly possible. 

The prop shafts are a UJ/CV mix. They are re packable, don't have a grease nipple on the CV's but the construction means if you really wanted to you could add them quite easily. 

Driveshaft CV's are pretty chunky too

 

All of this is easy to see if you get chance to look under a Range Rover, Sport or D5 so nothing to worry about from an NDA point of view. 

I'd also like to point out that although I have a lot of experience with the drivetrain, including engines and transmissions. I'm in no way involved in new defender development

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some pictures pulled from social media.
I'm totally pandering to the whole land rover marketing thing here, they wouldn't leave it parked up in public with the window open if they didn't want people to be looking at it.
This one's a 2 litre hybrid. Interesting it's charging up and not just using the engine to charge it.

I think they were also testing the articulation and self parking systems by the looks of it.

Alpine windows are there similar to those which other discoveries and some defenders had. 
I'm still whining about all the testing we've seen being done on silly low profile road tyres.

64551419_2329818443931278_4419911373564149760_n.jpg

64369942_2329818477264608_3889788069934530560_n.jpg

64374014_2329818537264602_7180026133008613376_n.jpg

64552434_2329818380597951_5752123573523185664_n.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Came across this wee clip the other day. It explains in a nutshell why I don’t believe  electronics and putting the brakes on to achieve forward motion are a substitute for good old fashioned diff locks and sensible tyres. 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jamie_grieve said:

Came across this wee clip the other day. It explains in a nutshell why I don’t believe  electronics and putting the brakes on to achieve forward motion are a substitute for good old fashioned diff locks and sensible tyres. 

Not exactly apples and apples tough is it? And how much of that is driver error - there appears to be nothing going on other than flooring the RR and hoping it moves, rather than a bit of rocking back/forth or other driving techniques to get out of the situation.

Most of those VW Synchros rock around on all-terrains, nothing stopping you fitting them to any vehicle.

And, again, the plural of anecdote is not data.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, FridgeFreezer said:

Not exactly apples and apples tough is it? And how much of that is driver error - there appears to be nothing going on other than flooring the RR and hoping it moves, rather than a bit of rocking back/forth or other driving techniques to get out of the situation.

Most of those VW Synchros rock around on all-terrains, nothing stopping you fitting them to any vehicle.

And, again, the plural of anecdote is not data.

It’s exactly apples and apples, two light 4x4’s trying to exit the overland expo.

The Range Rover driver is clearly modulating the throttle but the point is that in this situation of a completely level hard but slippy grass field the modern design has failed 100% completely and ye olde fashioned technology has not only triumphed but made the electrickery look foolish. How would the defender replacement on the same silly tyres be any different? 

The syncro with road tyres would still drive through there as the driver could modulate the throttle to find grip in a manner that is almost impossible at slow speeds with current generations of  traction control and auto gearboxes. They need slip to work. Remember they sense speed not torque.

judging by the Land Rover decals on the Range Rover it’s likely the driver has above average knowledge of the vehicle and where and how they are supposed to drive. I would also suggest in his defence that he doesn’t have the rim and tyre choice available to him to select a decent setup for those conditions.

You used a similar defence of the blue Range Rover in the Russian video where the driver was clearly experienced but was hampered by his vehicles poor basic prerequisites to climb the hill that most others ended up driving up. All cars looked to be standard with road tyres for that climb.

Low profile rubber bands with an all terrain pattern and fancy lettering are no substitute for tyres with a decent sidewall and smaller wheels. Anything with an aspect ratio below 80%, maybe 75 at a push if it’s over 34” ought to have no place on anything one would consider using off road within the small range of tyres available for our light 4x4’s. Large agricultural tyres have lower profiles in many cases but they are designed from the outset to be used at low pressures and designed for floatation. These low profile 4x4 tyres aren’t.

Your defence of electronics in leu of poor mechanical design is commendable but unfortunately for me at least, not convincing.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see how anything else on the same road tyres would do much better, I doubt a stock Defender would get further on low-profile road tyres especially with its open diffs - most likely it'd be sat spinning one or two wheels. The driver may be modulating the throttle but I don't see any back & forth, just gas & hope. At least if it was a slope the traction control would give you some control of where you landed, try sliding down a wet grassy slope in a "dumb" 4x4 and see how much more exciting it is!

You'll have to point out the bit in the Russian video where a stock 4x4 on road tyres gets further up that hill than the RR because I didn't see anyone make it, including the Ladoga Trophy G-Wagen on knobbly mud tyres? Hardly standard!

Also, no-one's stopping you fitting all-terrains, the factory fit what suits the average buyer but I don't see it's worth twisting your knickers over swapping tyres to suit your needs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We probably have to blame the motoring press for the low profile road-biased tyres.  Just about any review I've read/viewed in the last decade or more, from the non-specialist press (who often seem amazingly ignorant), has jumped on the Defender and other Land Rover vehicles, for not handling like their mums' hatchbacks.  Any negative press will be perceived as loss of sales, so they are obliged to make the Defender that goes to the press very much a grippy, easy-handling road car.    For the record, I find my 110 very easy to drive round town and on the open road.  I just don't drive it like I drive my little car (couldn't anyway...).

I have noted that the brake discs don't appear to fill the space in the rims completely, suggesting slightly saner rims, with thicker sidewall and better treaded tyres will be possible.

Really, we're not seeing any sort of van or pickup truck at this stage, just station wagons (estate cars for the Northern Hemisphere folk).  It's just not looking like a working vehicle.  Yet!

By the way, in that video Jamie-grieve posted, it looks pretty obvious that, had the vehicles been swapped around, the Range Rover would have been the one cruising past.  Definitely more grip on that side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the context of tyres, road-biased - I suspect that the preference of JLR to fit such tyres on their vehicles is related to speed-characteristics.

If you're producing a vehicle that has a top-speed of 120MPH or so, you need to fit it with tyres rated for service at such speeds. Not doing-so would leave you open to some serious legal-liability in the event of failure.

(Ford had to pay out a hell of a lot a couple of decades back because of tyre-specification-issues on their Explorers).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firestone_and_Ford_tire_controversy

How many "knobbly" M&S-style tyres are there which are rated for service at the sorts of speeds a Discovery, RR, "Defender 3.0" can cruise at on Autobahns etc?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Jamie_grieve said:

Remember they sense speed not torque.

that is completely untrue:

image.png.67009cd7b9524cc642907c622dc4c48f.png

the transmission takes hundreds if not thousands of factors into account to determine what it should be doing. and it does it bloody well. Now I'm not an auto guy. Much prefer using a manual gearbox but this particular transmission is about as good as they come. 

Ask  Jeep, Dodge, Audi, Bentley, Toyota, Iveco, etc etc.. the list goes on. 

22 hours ago, FridgeFreezer said:

Also, no-one's stopping you fitting all-terrains, the factory fit what suits the average buyer but I don't see it's worth twisting your knickers over swapping tyres to suit your needs.

Indeed. There are mud tyre options for all land rover wheel sizes. And nothing stops you fitting smaller rims. Granted, you can't currently fit 16's yet but then for what its worth I'd prefer 18"s than 16, not because I use my car as a chelsea tractor, but for the extra stability while towing. and you can still get as far on 18" wheels.

That wheel and tyre package would be selected for the 99% of the market who want above all else, good road manners and long tyre life. If you're that 1%, there are options. 

 

I have also been in a situation in a D4, on a wet grassy slope with a trailer on where I had to uncouple a series, on mud tyres and pull the trailer out. The D4 was on road tyres. 

we can all find and post as many videos or examples of the old cars winning, or the new cars. The internet is full of both, does it prove anything?

 

you could always go and buy a new Jimny if you wanted? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, discomikey said:

that is completely untrue:

image.png.67009cd7b9524cc642907c622dc4c48f.png

the transmission takes hundreds if not thousands of factors into account to determine what it should be doing. and it does it bloody well. Now I'm not an auto guy. Much prefer using a manual gearbox but this particular transmission is about as good as they come. 

Ask  Jeep, Dodge, Audi, Bentley, Toyota, Iveco, etc etc.. the list goes on. 

Indeed. There are mud tyre options for all land rover wheel sizes. And nothing stops you fitting smaller rims. Granted, you can't currently fit 16's yet but then for what its worth I'd prefer 18"s than 16, not because I use my car as a chelsea tractor, but for the extra stability while towing. and you can still get as far on 18" wheels.

That wheel and tyre package would be selected for the 99% of the market who want above all else, good road manners and long tyre life. If you're that 1%, there are options. 

 

I have also been in a situation in a D4, on a wet grassy slope with a trailer on where I had to uncouple a series, on mud tyres and pull the trailer out. The D4 was on road tyres. 

we can all find and post as many videos or examples of the old cars winning, or the new cars. The internet is full of both, does it prove anything?

 

you could always go and buy a new Jimny if you wanted? 

Thanks for that brief summary of every auto built in the last 20 years, I'm very familiar with them. The relevance to the traction control in my post is lost however. You can't use engine load from the map or tps or airflow meter or any combination of engine load sensors to know how the wheels are gripping a surface. Only a locking differential supplies the torque to the wheel with the most grip most of the time. 

If you think you can still get as far on an 18" tyre as you can with a 15" or 16" tyre when you're limited to a 33"-34" overall diameter then I'm afraid that you still have a lot to learn about off road driving. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, discomikey said:

you could always go and buy a new Jimny if you wanted? 

I've been a land rover enthusiast for 40 years, why would I do that?

Out of curiosity, how long have you been involved in the industry?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jamie_grieve said:

Out of curiosity, how long have you been involved in the industry?

id suspect long enough involved at this tech level to be able to form an opinion based on experience of the aformentioned platforms in harsh environments

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jamie_grieve said:

Thanks for that brief summary of every auto built in the last 20 years, I'm very familiar with them. The relevance to the traction control in my post is lost however. You can't use engine load from the map or tps or airflow meter or any combination of engine load sensors to know how the wheels are gripping a surface. Only a locking differential supplies the torque to the wheel with the most grip most of the time. 

If you think you can still get as far on an 18" tyre as you can with a 15" or 16" tyre when you're limited to a 33"-34" overall diameter then I'm afraid that you still have a lot to learn about off road driving. 

in the grand scheme for the mainstream consumer, is there much need for a tyre larger than 33/34" cant really say i see a need for it given that in reality there will be probably 1-2% of the overall sales which will want a bigger tyre than this,

 

to be fair i agree with @discomikey in relation to choosing a larger wheel to give more sidewall stability over a 15/16" tyre which in the current climate have almost dried up on availability, now in the numbers game, the uk tyre supply / demand pales into insignificance to the USA market

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Jamie_grieve said:



If you think you can still get as far on an 18" tyre as you can with a 15" or 16" tyre when you're limited to a 33"-34" overall diameter then I'm afraid that you still have a lot to learn about off road driving. 

 

35/12.50/18 big enough for you

https://www.tyresdirectuk.co.uk/product/radar-renegade-r7-35-12-5r18/

 

or even a 37" tyre
https://www.tyresdirectuk.co.uk/product/discoverer-stt-pro-3713-5r18-124k/

Edited by RedLineMike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We use cookies to ensure you get the best experience. By using our website you agree to our Cookie Policy