Jump to content
Jamie_grieve

Thoughts and musings on the new defender

Recommended Posts

Looks to 'car' based rather than light truck load carrying ability in any circumstances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just come across these posted on a Facebook group, which look very much like a cat hurtling out of an already-open bag.

Still not sure though... and the liferaft canister on the side is an interesting touch :lol:

Actually belay that, I've just checked and R910400 is just over £50,000 at the present exchange rate. I am more sure than I was five minutes ago :o

 

760242797_SA1.jpg.a0c39e65cc04cd0db5f400065b179b5f.jpg

638099710_SA2.jpg.f80545f1e35448e7bcc6ff272271e9d5.jpg

1132976634_SA3.jpg.fba54452c678d0f3d1e028297c503a44.jpg

915957071_SA4.jpg.e56d0f29ddea4f22576b8d9efc4c56a5.jpg

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Well, Gerry got what he wanted all along - a rehashed version of the DC100. Rolling Eyes

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't like the solid upper side panel should be all glass or plain solid panel. rear lights look weird & to far in too.

probably look better in the metal.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

also bear in mind that new vehicle prices in ZA are about 15-30% more than in the UK.

Edited by Naks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't hate it. Don't love the looks from the side view though.

53 minutes ago, BogMonster said:

915957071_SA4.jpg.e56d0f29ddea4f22576b8d9efc4c56a5.jpg

That looks like it was photoshopped by the Renault intern.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know, I quite like it. It's not a Solihull defender, but that's not where JLR are, nor have they been for a very long time.

But it's a nice looking SUV, kind of like a Skoda yeti, and if it proves reliable, it should be a success.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not against it but not completely behind it. I think if the windows took a larger percentage of the side height it would look quite a lot nicer. Just looks a bit squat to me.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It should never have been called a Defender , it bears no resemblance to it at all , could have called it the clubman plus

2011-Mini-Cooper-S-Clubman-Review-20.jpg.64f89772b60d628b33a98876e9fa91fc.jpg

 

chuck a wheel on the back and there you go .

When the 110 was launched and then the 90 within a couple of years I bought a 2 year old factory V8 and enjoyed it for the whole time I had it . It felt like a natural evolution of the Series LR's and RRC 2 door that I previously had .

I understand things have changed and why it is what it is , but really cannot get behind it being called a Defender at all . I can't see anyone taking a 3 year old one of those to an ARC ( as it used to be called then ) CCVT national trial which I did with the 90 in standard trim , just 7.50-16 SAT's .

In todays SUV market I'm sure it will fit right in .

It is interesting that Jeep have the Rubicon in their current range , still a useable work/utility type with clear heritage .

Steve b

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm - the "110" looks sort of okay - not keen on the front end or that body coloured panel in the window line. Very much premium SUV though, not remotely a utility vehicle.

The "90" is ill proportioned, though. Looks like they designed the 110 first and then just chopped a bit out the middle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having reflected on it, while we have a lot yet to find out, I think it's going to have roughly got back to where the Discovery used to be before they made that look like a hearse. It ticks a lot of the boxes of the Discovery 2 successor which I might have bought to replace mine. But still not for £50k, which is twice what my Shogun cost with a 3.2L diesel. I don't think I need to see any more to see that it isn't a Defender, but it might fit in as a comfy SUV which is more rugged and capable than the crowd off road. Given that they do love their branding nonsense, it should have been introduced as a 'Discovery 4Work' or 'Discovery Utility' or some such, to sit alongside the styled-on-a-whoopee-cushion D5 and the new Freelander Discovery Sport. It would have been much better as a tough Discovery rather than a soft Defender.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Suspect both are longer wheelbase than we think, 

100 and 120, apparently.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nice photo in the dunes

normal_69705658_10157997327554363_250083

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

It should never have been called a Defender , it bears no resemblance to it at all , could have called it the clubman plus

 

 

chuck a wheel on the back and there you go .

When the 110 was launched and then the 90 within a couple of years I bought a 2 year old factory V8 and enjoyed it for the whole time I had it . It felt like a natural evolution of the Series LR's and RRC 2 door that I previously had .

I understand things have changed and why it is what it is , but really cannot get behind it being called a Defender at all . I can't see anyone taking a 3 year old one of those to an ARC ( as it used to be called then ) CCVT national trial which I did with the 90 in standard trim , just 7.50-16 SAT's .

In todays SUV market I'm sure it will fit right in .

It is interesting that Jeep have the Rubicon in their current range , still a useable work/utility type with clear heritage .

Steve b

I saw that "Mini" connection too.  Just a waste having the wheels sticking out that far too.

I had an original 110 V8 as a work truck for a while.  It was magnificent and ran rings around the Isuzu and Toyotas we also had at the time.  Functionally, the new Defender must surely run rings around that old V8?  We'll see.  Aesthetically, not so much.

I would be amazed if Land Rover hadn't looked hard at the Jeep range and aimed to top their Rubicon.  Again, we'll see!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, deep said:

I saw that "Mini" connection too.  Just a waste having the wheels sticking out that far too.

.............

I would be amazed if Land Rover hadn't looked hard at the Jeep range and aimed to top their Rubicon.  Again, we'll see!

I thought the 110 looked like a new mini clubman.

If they looked at the Rubicon, they looked away again pretty quickly. They’ve not strayed far from their current portfolio at all have they.

They’ve built a road focused luxury vehicle - with its selling point being that it has some capability through its electronics. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Anderzander said:

I thought the 110 looked like a new mini clubman.

If they looked at the Rubicon, they looked away again pretty quickly. They’ve not strayed far from their current portfolio at all have they.

They’ve built a road focused luxury vehicle - with its selling point being that it has some capability through its electronics. 

I agree, style-wise, they are going for a family look (sadly) and, yes, that could make it a better road car than the Rubicon and, yes, that is of a secondary interest to someone who is passionate about older Land Rovers.  Style isn't function, however.  Electronics work best if weight distribution, wheel travel and geometry are already good and that much we don't know yet.  LR know all that and I just can't imagine this thing not being seriously capable in a wide range of off-road situations - at least until a fuse or airbag blows!   (Thank goodness there will be a coil spring option.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My 109 has a clearsight ground-view system. I access it by rotating my swede 45 degress to the right and looking down. Very effective. 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Anderzander said:

@deep I hope you are right ..... my confidence in that is low.

I have plenty of confidence in off-the-shelf-but-with-decent-tyres ability but far less with durability.  And, good grief, a flippin' touch screen on rough roads!!  Really??  At least it should keep my right foot dry when it's raining.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I quite like the front and side. The rear lights look horrible though. Having spent time around the current crop of overlander recently it will fit right in have you seen the number of crew cab hap something or other with a rear canopy, roof tent and far to much money spent on them.

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

new teaser video:

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Close. But no cigar. Windscreen rake needs to be a bit steeper with driving position correspondingly further forward and smaller front door. I know why it is like it is but just messes with the proportions and ruins it for me. Also should have removable wheel arch extensions. If you are going to have flares like that, which mimic the old ones, but are naturally vunerable, then surely it would have made sense to make them bolt on parts. Would have looked much more retro too. Finally, the back end view just looks wrong, but could probably live with it. Engine line up and perfaormance stats seem pretty good mind
 

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