2007 Defender Details announced

[GBMUD]

Nope sorry(depending on your point of view) I think the wheel boxes are still there. A heap more pics here

2007 Defender

I did a lighten, brighten & sharpen on the pic with the seat folded up. 12row down, 1st column. Sure looked like seat boxes to me. Not only will you have your outside leg cocked around at an angle but that thigh will be sitting on a dirty great piece of hinge mech. Yuk!!!

I see what you mean. Not as clear in the picture Kevin posted above.

Chris

[dottythe90]

I can't make out the end of the high/low ratio stick on the pictures, but with the introduction of the new gearbox and hinted at mods to the transfer box, are they still providing diff-lock ? - or are they going to rely solely on traction control ?

STEVE

[Stephen337]

I can't make out the end of the high/low ratio stick on the pictures, but with the introduction of the new gearbox and hinted at mods to the transfer box, are they still providing diff-lock ? - or are they going to rely solely on traction control ?

STEVE

Its pretty clear in this one

[dottythe90]

Its pretty clear in this one

Thank Gawd for that............there had been rumours that they wouldn't fit it

[Ex Member]

A decent set of gearbox ratios at least for the first time in history.

They really need more ponies (at least as an option) to sell this outside of the UK.

The interior (although not a big deal to us) should really help sell it to the "normal" people.

[Steve King]

Has it got a galvanised chassis, bulkhead & cappings, stainless hinges & bolts?

Didn't think so, bloomin' cheapskates!

[Log]

I hope that bonnet bulge is reinforced, cos it looks like a handy place to step on if you want to get up onto the roof from the front. Oh!, sorry!, I forgot. This has been designed to 'look' like a Land Rover. Not actually be one.

Cheers

Log

[davidlandy]

I hope that bonnet bulge is reinforced, cos it looks like a handy place to step on if you want to get up onto the roof from the front. Oh!, sorry!, I forgot. This has been designed to 'look' like a Land Rover. Not actually be one.

Cheers

Log

I wonder how it would look with chequer plate on it!

are there any under bonnet, and underneath piccys anywhere?

[Ex Member]

are there any under bonnet, and underneath piccys anywhere?

No, becuase we don't want to get depressed about what we might find.....

[Guest MJG]

I hope that bonnet bulge is reinforced, cos it looks like a handy place to step on if you want to get up onto the roof from the front. Oh!, sorry!, I forgot. This has been designed to 'look' like a Land Rover. Not actually be one.

Cheers

Log

Great post Log........

of course this is a 'real' Landrover, altering the bonnet a bit, fitting a decent dash, a decent motor/transmission does not stop this being a 'real' Landrover - give it a couple of years and we will be clambering for one......even on to the roof.....

[bill van snorkle]

Great post Log........

of course this is a 'real' Landrover, altering the bonnet a bit, fitting a decent dash, a decent motor/transmission does not stop this being a 'real' Landrover - give it a couple of years and we will be clambering for one......even on to the roof.....

I haven't felt the urge to put on my new model LandRover clambering shoes since 1986. This one doesn't do it for me either.

Bill.

[Ex Member]

That is certainly true Bill, but what else is there (new and unmodified) that is better than a 90 off road? Maybe a G wagon, but they cost twice as much.

[bill van snorkle]

That is certainly true Bill, but what else is there (new and unmodified) that is better than a 90 off road?

Better only whilst the diffs/axles/ cv's/gearboxes/driveshafts stay together.

I am afraid that I can never forgive LandRover for dropping the Salisbury diff and substituting the P38 diff in later 110 Pretenders. Was that a final admission that LandRovers were never really intended for serious offroad use?

Bill.

[Ex Member]

But the sad fact is that other makes break just as readily for the most part. I wheel with new and also heavily modified Jeeps all the time and stock they have as many things break as the Rovers. I've seen a suspension link bracket pull a chunk of the chassis off on a Rubicon. A rubicon needs a good $10k thrown into it to match my stock 90.

One hard core cruiser guy I wheeled with in OZ did 3 axles, a t. case, a gear box and an engine in less than 12 months. The Patrols may be the strongest stock, but the new ones are way to big to fit down the tracks and have carp clearance stock. All I did for 4 years in OZ was pull Patrols off of things.

And Bill if youe were REALLY turned off of the brand, you would be building up other brands and not spending your time hanging out on the Rover forums...... Everyone else in OZ is running Nissans, why not you?

[bill van snorkle]

But the sad fact is that other makes break just as readily for the most part. I wheel with new and also heavily modified Jeeps all the time and stock they have as many things break as the Rovers. I've seen a suspension link bracket pull a chunk of the chassis off on a Rubicon. A rubicon needs a good $10k thrown into it to match my stock 90.

One hard core cruiser guy I wheeled with in OZ did 3 axles, a t. case, a gear box and an engine in less than 12 months. The Patrols may be the strongest stock, but the new ones are way to big to fit down the tracks and have carp clearance stock. All I did for 4 years in OZ was pull Patrols off of things.

Yes I am afraid that I am probably still living in the past a bit (1986) when 4wds were still built to work and placed function ahead of form.

Apparently with current Pretenders you can no longer pull Patrols off things without the risk of pulling things(the rear crossmember) off the Pretender itself.

Bill.

[BogMonster]

Yes I am afraid that I am probably still living in the past a bit (1986) when 4wds were still built to work and placed function ahead of form.

Apparently with current Pretenders you can no longer pull Patrols off things without the risk of pulling things(the rear crossmember) off the Pretender itself.

Bill.

The crossmember criticism is true enough (can speak from personal experience there) ... but most of the rest of it hasn't changed much, the back diffs on 110s and 130s are not as strong as they used to be but that is the only bit of the drivetrain. My personal opinion having driven rather a lot of them is that the assembly quality of some components (transfer boxes and diffs) is not as good as it used to be, but it is the same basic part.

[bill van snorkle]

The crossmember criticism is true enough (can speak from personal experience there) ... but most of the rest of it hasn't changed much, the back diffs on 110s and 130s are not as strong as they used to be but that is the only bit of the drivetrain. My personal opinion having driven rather a lot of them is that the assembly quality of some components (transfer boxes and diffs) is not as good as it used to be, but it is the same basic part.

The back diffs/axles/driveflanges are not as strong or long lasting as before.The CV joints and inner axles are not as strong as before. The propshafts and UJ's are the same size as series 1's. The gearbox by any other name is still a 77mm gearbox. compare that to 95mm for the original 4spd 110's or 85mm for the first 5 speeds.The LT230 transfercase looks the same on the outside but in the quest for quietness the gears that formerly had big beefy teeth have given way to gears with more fragile superfine mesh teeth. The bodywork and some of the chassis, particularly 130's are nowhere near as strongly built as say 1986 models for example.They don't galvanise anything anymore because they forgot the reason why you galvanise mild steel components that are in direct contact with aluminium. They barely paint any of the chassis components anymore. I have seen 1 year old Pretenders with almost bare rusting metal rear crossmembers.

I would say that the lack of drivetrain strength would not be as big a concern in the relatively soft, damp conditions that you would get in the Falklands, or even in the UK for most part. But in the generally dryer, rockier and less manicured conditions of OZ and Africa etc, transmission strength has been LandRovers main failing,and IMO the reason why people and organisations that use 4wd's for work opt for Nissans and Toyotas.

Bill.

[Log]

I'm with you there Bill. Most of the 'improvements' they have made to Defenders in the last 20 years have, in my opinion, been detrimental to the vehicle's 'go anywhere' qualities.

Cheers

Log

[GBMUD]

Tell you what Luddites; vote with your feet and do not buy a new Defender. That will have Landrover worried, how many of you were planning, seriously, to buy a new Defender last week, before you saw the revisions? I thought so.

Now, wonder how many people have seen the forward facing seats, 20th century dash, 6-speed box, working heater and other refinements and are considering buying one next year. People who would not have considered such an agricultural machine previously.

I have said it before and I will repeat it; Landrover do not give a flying monkey's gonads what you guys think. They care not if you will want to buy one when they are 10 years old and maintain it with County pattern parts. What is in it for them? They need to sell and maintain new units.

Landrover have not made these changes just to keep the designers and engineers occupied, they have made them because their market research says that is what people want to buy. I understand that Defender is a net money looser anyway - the cost of labour intensuve production exceeding the cost of automated RR production - they only keep the Defender on because they are such a good advertising tool. I suppose that this means that they are not in a position to offer more expensive, more powerful engines, super strong transmissions, galvanised chassis etc. as the price will skyrocket and loose even more money as the price of a car has to be competetive and therefor is more or less fixed.

If, as some of you are suggesting, the competition is so much better, go buy one.

[/rant]

Chris

[Guest mr_wuffles]

Errr no! the Defender makes good money for Land Rover and Land Rover is about the only one in the ford group thats making money with recent sale successes like the Freelander being best selling european suv for a good few years and new hits Like the new Disco and Range Rover. Jaguar is in the pits and there is talk of them throwing Land Rover in with it to sweeten the deal. Have you not read the papers recently?

[GBMUD]

Have you not read the papers recently?

No. And if I had, I doubt that they went into model specific profit contribution. My information may be out of date these days.

Chris

[BogMonster]

The back diffs/axles/driveflanges are not as strong or long lasting as before.The CV joints and inner axles are not as strong as before. The propshafts and UJ's are the same size as series 1's. The gearbox by any other name is still a 77mm gearbox. compare that to 95mm for the original 4spd 110's or 85mm for the first 5 speeds.The LT230 transfercase looks the same on the outside but in the quest for quietness the gears that formerly had big beefy teeth have given way to gears with more fragile superfine mesh teeth. The bodywork and some of the chassis, particularly 130's are nowhere near as strongly built as say 1986 models for example.They don't galvanise anything anymore because they forgot the reason why you galvanise mild steel components that are in direct contact with aluminium. They barely paint any of the chassis components anymore. I have seen 1 year old Pretenders with almost bare rusting metal rear crossmembers.

I would say that the lack of drivetrain strength would not be as big a concern in the relatively soft, damp conditions that you would get in the Falklands, or even in the UK for most part. But in the generally dryer, rockier and less manicured conditions of OZ and Africa etc, transmission strength has been LandRovers main failing,and IMO the reason why people and organisations that use 4wd's for work opt for Nissans and Toyotas.

Bill.

Actually they do galvanise things like the body cappings nowadays, they just paint them as well. Galv body cappings were reintroduced in (I think) 2002.... and I've not seen one with corrosion problems on the cappings since then, compare that to the early Td5s which were terrible.

Rear crossmembers on the last couple of years production don't rust as badly as they used to, though I agree with you that the deletion of the black sticky goo they used to put on the chassis was a bad move. Mine is 2.5 years old and a couple of the screws on the back crossmember are rusty but that is all. No rust on the chassis that I have noticed.

Granted a lot less people do it these days since we have roads, but if you think somebody tackling a swamp with 11.5" wide tractor tyres fitted, flat out in 3rd low range diff lock with the right hand pedal welded to the floor and fountains of **** going up twice the height of the vehicle isn't hard on the drivetrain then you obviously haven't seen some of the boys round here I know one vehicle that has had nine transfer boxes in its life, which partly supports your view that they aren't strong enough but it is mainly due to extreme abuse!

For me, the biggest backward step was the introduction of electronic engine management because that was the point at which the vehicle could not be fixed pretty much anywhere with basic tools, but that is partly due to customer demand for more refined/powerful engines and mostly due to emissions law - so blame the Government for that!

As Chris pointed out though, Land Rover probably don't really care what people who aren't likely to buy the vehicles are saying, they are interested in the folks who buy the vehicle and those who keep it for about the first three years.

I think it's a nice update and while I'll reserve judgement until its been out for a year or so, I may well buy a 110 crewcab by about the end of next year, finances permitting of course. I wish they were going to carry on building the Tdi for people like us with no regulations, but sadly there's not enough places like this left these days to make it viable for probably only a thousand or so vehicles a year. All good things come to an end I suppose, but it says a lot for the upgrades that the vehicle it will be replacing of my two is more likely to be the Discovery than the 90, because the new one might actually be comfortable and have a heater now

[dollythelw]

Landrover have not made these changes just to keep the designers and engineers occupied

they have engineers and designers????????

Ford is a commercial organisation - they need to shift product. Otherwise we would still be on cart springs .... oh yes, sorry Fridge..

[GBMUD]

My greatest concern is not with the electronicization of the engine but the possibility of too many body electrics - central locking, door sensors, leccy windows, leccy dashboards and bits etc.

[dollythelw]

I dont mind all of that - my worry is the tie in between all the systems, it makes sense for a road car but not a heap off road, if theres a central canbus or opto running the show then life will get very entertaining later in the vehicles life - essentially rendering oldies beyond ecomomical repair and making them disposible..

all in all what every manufacturer strives for