BogMonster Posted September 9, 2013 Share Posted September 9, 2013 The Puma is nothing new IMHO. I spent 15 years in the business and they haven't changed that much. Good and bad ones, with massive differences between fit and finish and paint quality in vehicles built within hours or days of each other. I bought my last one by wandering around the yard, deciding I wanted a green one if possible, and looking at each individual stock vehicle to see which one was best screwed together, and then listening to the engine to make sure it wasn't a bag of bolts. I ended up with a fairly decent example, which has never leaked except through the sliding side windows in the back when you pressure wash them, which leak on every single vehicle in that situation. Nor has my wife's 110 ever leaked, nor did my old 90, so "they all leak" is a fallacy, they only leak when some idiot apprentice has screwed the panels on lopsided or the seals are misplaced/damaged, or you point a 1500psi pressure washer straight at the door seal. The mechanicals never do well when it's driven by an idiot who can't change gear, which is probably >70% of the driving population these days, because you need to think about gearchanges rather than slam bang, even on a Puma, and there are good and bad ones to start with. I've driven some shockingly bad Pumas, and some very good ones. Rustproofing went downhill in the late 90s / early noughties when they stopped coating the chassis properly, and the early Td5s had a monster corrosion problem with cappings and general paint peeling. We saw a 130 built in about 2002 with three distinctly different shades of paint on adjacent panels (wing, bulkhead and door). Thinking back, I reckon Defender quality 'peaked' (if you could call it that) in about 1997 model year, once they fixed the timing belt and gearbox issues of the early ones, and just occasionally you find a low-mileage gem that's been stored in a garage. After that they have really been on a steady decline, with a few blips for better or worse. The basic design is not fundamentally flawed, it just isn't suited to modern production techniques and consequently is probably built in a rush when what is needed is to take your time to get everything right, I fully understand why that doesn't make any business sense. I've often thought it would be nice to be able to start with a box of all new bits and build one myself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simonr Posted September 9, 2013 Share Posted September 9, 2013 Someone suggested that JCB should make a replacement for a Defender! I think that's a fantastic idea! On the basis that a new backhoe digger is about double the cost of a Defender - they could probably make something that competes head on for price. I'd be more convinced by the build quality - and by the coolness of driving a JCB to work! Si Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CwazyWabbit Posted September 9, 2013 Share Posted September 9, 2013 Would it only be available in yellow though Si? I to actually like that idea (maybe not the yellow but the idea of a JCB built Defender-esque vehicle) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill van snorkle Posted September 9, 2013 Share Posted September 9, 2013 Would it only be available in yellow though Si? I to actually like that idea (maybe not the yellow but the idea of a JCB built Defender-esque vehicle) Shall we start a petition among true Land Rover enthusiasts around the world to present to JCB to convince them of how much business sense it makes to build a working type 4wd for rural and industrial users etc. A scaled down JCB Fastrac would do just fine.It would be the very first,and last brand new vehicle that I ever purchased. Bill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anderzander Posted September 9, 2013 Share Posted September 9, 2013 Wonder what happened to this: http://m.autoblog.com/2006/07/27/hmuv-military-grade-4x4-being-developed-by-jcb/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anderzander Posted September 9, 2013 Share Posted September 9, 2013 Looks like they built it .... http://www.jcb.com/hmee/files/JCB_Full_Line_Military_Brochure.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill van snorkle Posted September 9, 2013 Share Posted September 9, 2013 Wonder what happened to this: http://m.autoblog.com/2006/07/27/hmuv-military-grade-4x4-being-developed-by-jcb/ If as the article states, that it dwarfs a Humvee, then it is likely too large for Defender style duties, and cost more than my house. The other problem I forsee is that JCB have employed an ex LandRover factory boffin as part of the design team ! Keep those types well away the project for heavens sake !!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ballcock Posted September 9, 2013 Share Posted September 9, 2013 At over 22' long and over 9' wide it might have trouble on some green lanes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anderzander Posted September 9, 2013 Share Posted September 9, 2013 Yes but they could scale it down for us !! And if they've already made the new 101 ...... ??? Surely the 90 is just around the corner ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anderzander Posted September 9, 2013 Share Posted September 9, 2013 You know what - I think we should have a go at drafting a letter to JCB ......? You guys could collectively put a brilliant letter together. I guess we'd basically say - have you noticed land rover is about to abandon its roots, discontinue the defender, and give us a car for shopping. We think there is a market for x y z and we think you are the people best placed to meet it. Vent our spleens if nothing else - and who knows ! lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smallfry Posted September 9, 2013 Share Posted September 9, 2013 Sorry to hear about the problems that some of you guys have, BUT I do not understand why anyone would even WANT carpet in a Defender. Its just not what its about. It was originally intended to take in water big time, so as not to float away during deep wading, so it would be hard to engineer that out of what already exists, when watertight was never the intention. You could run any of the old diesels fully submerged, right up to the 300TDI. Personally, I would be very reluctant to even attempt it with a TD5, and even more so with one of the Ford engines. They were not purpose designed for this type of usage. The general build quality has been hit and mostly miss for years, and the body and chassis corrosion is all down to unsuitable materials and cost cutting. Another example, Bulkheads. Why is it that all the major manufacturers use galvanized/zinc coated steel sheet for their bodywork, and yet Land Rover cannot ? For the extra money it would cost (minimal) look at all the hassle a dissatisfaction it would save. And they still claim that 75% of Lnad Rovers ever made are still in use. Yeah Right. , Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill van snorkle Posted September 9, 2013 Share Posted September 9, 2013 And they still claim that 75% of Lnad Rovers ever made are still in use. Yeah Right. , What they don't tell you, is that many of them are still in use as chicken coops or rats nests ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simonr Posted September 9, 2013 Share Posted September 9, 2013 You know what - I think we should have a go at drafting a letter to JCB ......? You guys could collectively put a brilliant letter together. I agree! I imagine the MOD would be interested in a decent mass produced vehicle too. Let me start: Dear JCB, Si Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BogMonster Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 And they still claim that 75% of Lnad Rovers ever made are still in use. Yeah Right. , It's apparently correct, if misleading, there was an article about it in a mag a few years back. Consider the age range profile of the vehicles and the annual production rate, 75% of all the vehicles ever made have probably been made in the last twenty years, so it's not a silly claim. It was only after the first Discovery came out that they hit the big time, and the Freelander and subsequent plastic junk built quickly on that. I've no idea what proportion of Land Rovers built are actually S1/2/3/90/110/Defender but I bet it's about 10% at most. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill van snorkle Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 I agree! I imagine the MOD would be interested in a decent mass produced vehicle too. Let me start: Dear JCB, Si I'll add to that. Dear JCB,orl us ova ear at lr4x4.com,av bin torkin, an wee orl fink yaw tractas an diggers an fings is reely cool like... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deep Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 At over 22' long and over 9' wide it might have trouble on some green lanes. Actually, that pamphlet has deliferate mistakes in it. The wheelbase is 115 inches (not much more than a Defender) and the overall width is under 8 feet. They seem to have worked on 10 inches in the foot! At least Land Rover seems to have real mathematicians... Don Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bowie69 Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 Yes, Land Rover just have problems with equivalence, 90 != 93... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill van snorkle Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 Yes, Land Rover just have problems with equivalence, 90 != 93... No those are just the build tolerances for the chassis! Anywhere between those two dimensions is near enough. As long as the difference left to right side doesn't exceed one inch, "she'll be right mate". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tacr2man Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 Its been sad to watch over the years, as the Land Rover ethos in the defender has been gradually diluted , with bling "improvements" rather than investing in durability/quality. They failed time and again to fit a big enough engine, unlike L/Crsr, apart from the V8 , The stage 1 V8 was a revelation when i bought one compared with owning the the current then series111 . Since the change from 90/110 to defender its got worse and worse, to the point where they have a 2.2 van engine that is too tall to fit properly , big bulge in bonnet, and no spare wheel can be carried there ! Thinner panels, reduction, or elimination of decent galvanizing, when as previously posted they should be increasing the galv. They have engineered as if its another car , so stuff is finite life , enough they hope to get it thru warranty , when the "image buyer" will go and buy another high spec toy . I kept looking at my 110 and couldnt see an advantage in going newer when I see the corrosion in TD5 et al . Its still on the unpatched original chassis , original doors, and doesnt leak, and I am just updating by fitting the engine they should have fitted the M57 BMW diesel ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deep Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 Yes, Land Rover just have problems with equivalence, 90 != 93... ...and 130=127! But at least they admitted it at the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deep Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 Its been sad to watch over the years, as the Land Rover ethos in the defender has been gradually diluted , with bling "improvements" rather than investing in durability/quality. They failed time and again to fit a big enough engine, unlike L/Crsr, apart from the V8 , The stage 1 V8 was a revelation when i bought one compared with owning the the current then series111 . Since the change from 90/110 to defender its got worse and worse, to the point where they have a 2.2 van engine that is too tall to fit properly , big bulge in bonnet, and no spare wheel can be carried there ! Thinner panels, reduction, or elimination of decent galvanizing, when as previously posted they should be increasing the galv. They have engineered as if its another car , so stuff is finite life , enough they hope to get it thru warranty , when the "image buyer" will go and buy another high spec toy . I kept looking at my 110 and couldnt see an advantage in going newer when I see the corrosion in TD5 et al . Its still on the unpatched original chassis , original doors, and doesnt leak, and I am just updating by fitting the engine they should have fitted the M57 BMW diesel ! I remember being dumbstruck when I was driving across Australia in 2004. Somewhere in the middle I came across a bloke whose job was to maintain a fleet of Defenders for some fire force. He was telling me stories of twisted axles and plastic end caps on the axles which didn't make sense at the time. That didn't sound like a proper Salisbury axle at all! Yup, seriously bad cost-cutting. To be fair, though, problems in the fleet weren't confined to Land Rovers. Tough conditions. I know very little about the relative strength of the transmission/axles etc on the new Discoverys. Does Land Rover have something decent in the cupboard they could adapt for the future? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill van snorkle Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 I know very little about the relative strength of the transmission/axles etc on the new Discoverys. Does Land Rover have something decent in the cupboard they could adapt for the future? The only decent component Defender (Pretender) have in the cupboard IMO is the LT230 transfercase. Others reckon the latest incarnation of the R380 gearbox isn't too bad. That's about it I'm afraid. Not much to show for 65 odd years of development hey ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ally V8 Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 I have just left a 110 Hicap on my ramp to drain its oil for first service.Its a 2011 model,living a gentle life,lady owner towing the odd horse box etc. It doesnt bode well when the first problem you encounter is that the bonnet release wont work..... Underneath I was shocked at the amount of rust around the chassis,axles and all fittings.Looks like the black poster paint they use on the chassis has been watered down even more,not sure ALL of it got any in the first place. Needs stripping down and galvanising.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carlosbeldia Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 I have a 88" Series and a 110" TD5. The TD5 is completly rusted (I accept I never protected it, but is too much compared with my Series). Talking about the differences between these, a Toyota friend of mine told me he has exactly the same difference between his FJ40 and his newer (2003) FZJ70. We went to the conclusion that maybe the problem is all this new ECU connections (cathodic corrosion?), just an idea..... If it worths, his 4.5 Toyota Chassis is worst than my Defender, and he used to wash it every week, so when compared with their equals (being equals only Toyota 70, Nissan Y60 and Uaz whatever...) I suppose we are not so bad in terms of corrosion... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bowie69 Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 I think it is likely down to quality of steel used in all honesty, look at the RRCs, up until about 1988 they survived very well, then change in steel, but nothing else and anything 1989-1994 just flakes before your eyes, well the bodywork anyways. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.