|
Trommel
10,512 posts
128 months
|
jbi said: Depends on the kind of off-roading you plan on doing.
Independent is better for high speed Desert or pre-runner off-roading, while live axle is better for rock crawling
Live axles are also stronger and will take more of a beating, while offering superior suspension travel. No, it depends on how the suspension is designed (and ultimately an independent system could offer more travel side-to-side than a solid axle). In any case how many people are going to buy a new 4x4 to go desert racing or extreme rock-crawling?
|
|
|
jbi
Original Poster
5,294 posts
73 months
|
Trommel said: No, it depends on how the suspension is designed (and ultimately an independent system could offer more travel side-to-side than a solid axle).
In any case how many people are going to buy a new 4x4 to go desert racing or extreme rock-crawling? If this was the case the 4x4 community would have embraced independent suspension systems. The simple fact is... they have not. You can engineer an independent system to mimic the live axle, as land rover have done with their trick air suspension, but rugged and reliable this is not. Nor is it friendly to user modification.
|
|
|
SrMoreno
133 posts
15 months
|
Good news. Given that the DC100 is reportedly substantially wider than the Defender, I'm sure lots of Land Rover's current customer base would be unhappy about having to widen hill tracks and bridges.
|
|
|
Trommel
10,512 posts
128 months
|
jbi said: You can engineer an independent system to mimic the live axle, as land rover have done with their trick air suspension, but rugged and reliable this is not. Nor is it friendly to user modification. No question that it's easier to modify a solid axle to gain articulation, but that is more a reflection of the lack of off-road bias in the design of most independent suspension set-ups. Ultimately you wouldn't want to mimic a live axle anyway given that it has to be mounted to the body/chassis at either side which in itself limits articulation. Fact is that for the vast majority of users (business, commercial and domestic) the advantages of independent suspension massively outweigh those of live axles.
|
|
|
300bhp/ton
26,483 posts
59 months
|
P I Staker said: Yes it is fairly poor, from what I've seen though the traction control works very well to get round this but its no replacement for actually having wheels on the ground. The air sprung ones actually have great articulation as they can simulate a live axle off road. Traction control is good as demonstrated by the Freelander can truly keep a vehicle moving even with only a few wheels on the ground. But this doesn't help stability and it's not how you'd want to go rock crawling in places like Moab. Also for a workhorse there's a good case that such a setup only adds un-needed complexity and increased cost.
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
Watchman
1,959 posts
114 months
|
Fish said: Watchman said: Defenders are massively overrated, even for the extreme stuff. The current Disco will go anywhere a Defender will go, and places a Defender won't, all on less-extreme tyres.
As a platform, the Disco should have been used for the new Defender, only simplified with coil springs. It should have the previous generation 2.7 TD V6, updated to address the problems inherent, and it needs a 6-speed manual with fixed torque distribution for simplicity.
However, I think LR are onto the right thing with a smaller/lighter/cheaper car. Sorry disagree.. The new Disco is too heavy and too wide. It's poor downhill on snow/ice because of weight. A defender will get through gaps where the disco can't, they also tend to sink in fields. However I do agree they need a replacement for the defender.. I'm glad you challenged me... I have experience of some offroad days where my friend's Disco would go places Simex-tyred jacked-up truck-cab Defenders couldn't. At one obstacle, a metre deep mud slurry, the aforementioned truck-cab was stuck in front of us and had to be winched out. The Disco drove in no problem. My friend stopped in the same place where the Defender had been, chatted to the marshall, then drove out. No dramas. I am definitely one who believes that correct tyres solve at least 80% of the "problems" but the Disco makes such good use of its fairly normal-looking road tyres, it's totally uncanny. On a very icy road, we tried it with all TC switched off and is truly is a behemoth - scary - a bit like the Eurofighter which could not stay in the air if not for its computers, however with the TC and all other controls switched on, it could not be made to lose traction at all. We've been to the LR show's off road course for a few years and originally we'd get applauded for taking the Disco around the circuit but these days other people have cottoned onto how good they are and it's less of an unusual sight now. In fact one of the marshalls at the last event commented on how there was no "sport" in taking one around because it could be driven through the window-high water with the kids sitting in the b ack watching Bob-the-Builder on the DVD screen, scarcely aware of what we were attempting to do. Still, I believe there is a market for a lightweight "proper" 4X4 that relies more on old-school tyres and less on technology. Something cheaper to buy and so simple that it can be kept running on a normal budget but it doesn't have to be the current Defender just b ecause it's already out there. It has far too many deficiencies. I'm also curious as to whether they really are still selling brand new ones. There's certainly a healthy 2nd hand market for them but are people really paying the £30+K that LR is asking for them?
|
|
|
pits
4,383 posts
59 months
|
tbc said: i am still amazed that mountain rescue, goat herders and explorers continue to use Defenders
Land Rovers are by far the most unreliable cars to be developed
give me a Hilux / Land Cruiser any day I think because the Defender is rated to tow a lot more than a Hilux, and they are very cheap and simple to work on, everything on them can be had for near peanuts. For example I bought a new rear door for mine the other day, with a load of fixings and other bits and bobs £130, Prop shaft £90 or so, indicators and rear lights etc I replaced all mine for £28, body panels are cheap and you can just essentially rivet them on. Top of that, get a galv chassis and there is very little that is going to rust or corrode. That said they are stupidly overpriced, a 110 XS station wagon is £32k a 90 starts at £21k, and then you add everything on and you can get up to £40k on a Land Rover
|
|
|
Gaspode
2,684 posts
65 months
|
pits said: they are stupidly overpriced, a 110 XS station wagon is £32k a 90 starts at £21k, and then you add everything on and you can get up to £40k on a Land Rover I know what you mean, in terms of what you get for the money, but actually the fact that they retain their values so well would indicate that they are not overpriced at all, since if they were the residuals would be low. They are priced the way they are because the market will stand it. There are cheaper (and many would say better) alternatives out there, and yet there is clearly a strong demand for them from people who want them.
|
|
|
Watchman
1,959 posts
114 months
|
pits said: and they are very cheap and simple to work on, everything on them can be had for near peanuts.
For example I bought a new rear door for mine the other day, with a load of fixings and other bits and bobs £130, Prop shaft £90 or so, indicators and rear lights etc I replaced all mine for £28, body panels are cheap and you can just essentially rivet them on. I could not agree more. I had Caterhams (plural). Part for them are stupidly expensive. When my bro got into Landys I couldn't believe how cheap aftermarket upgrade parts were. pits said: Top of that, get a galv chassis and there is very little that is going to rust or corrode. I agree again. As much as I find them anachronistic these days, as a toy they're fun. Find one with a galv chassis conversion and you can pretty much keep it running indefinitely.
|
|
|
300bhp/ton
26,483 posts
59 months
|
Trommel said: P I Staker said: Ooh, that sounds like something they have had on the Defender for years.  But it needs IRS (at least) for better road manners. You can have excellent articulation with independent suspension - the reason most don't is likely down to stiff springs and fixed anti-roll bars. It certainly doesn't need IFS, even now they handle perfectly fine and the ride is no worse than many modern hatches on low profile rubber. And you'll never on a production replicate the flex or articulation of a live axle without doing something costly like the Disco's air suspension. Just look at how many places in the US offer solid axle swaps on everything from Hummer H3's to Toyota pickups. Yet you never see places swapping on IFS onto any of the other trucks. Not to mention any trucks that have gone IFS have far worse off road performance because of it, e.g. An IFS Dakota is pants off road compared to a live axle 2500 Ram, despite the Ram being bigger and heavier.
|
|
|
300bhp/ton
26,483 posts
59 months
|
Trommel said: P I Staker said: They might be miles ahead but what I mean is, is that really of a high priority considering the vehicles purpose They're just not very pleasant to travel anywhere in and the competition is better, so it's a high priority I'd say. mat777 said: I'm sorry, but independant suspension simply will not beat beam axles on seriously rough terrain, and also gives far less ground clearance due to the wishbones etc. Poeple thing modern disco's etc are amazing off road because they can traction control their way up a grassy hill. but give them some properly rough stuff or really gloopy mud and a defender will leave them for dead As above, independent suspension is capable of giving as much if not more articulation than solid axles and suspension arms are hardly a real ground clearance issue when compared with the fixed metal bar of a solid axle. Driving through mud is down to tyres and diff locks/traction control. 1. You really need to go visit pirate4x4.com because for 99.99% of the time IFS will not get near the travel of a half descent live axle set up. 2. With IFS as the suspension compresses you lose ground clearance under the suspension arms and the diff. This remains constant with a live axle. The defenders biggest selling attribute is its off road ability, fitting it with IFS using coils WILL deminish this ability for no real gain.
|
|
|
matthias73
1,673 posts
19 months
|
Sorry to pose such a bone question, but whats the diference between the 90 and the 110?
Do they use the same basic engine?
|
|
|
Trommel
10,512 posts
128 months
|
300bhp/ton said: It certainly doesn't need IFS, even now they handle perfectly fine and the ride is no worse than many modern hatches on low profile rubber If it's fine, why has everything else (with the exception of the Japanese third-world-specials, G-Class and the Wrangler) moved on to IFS? Defenders may not be as bad as you'd expect something ancient with two live axles to be, but that's not saying much. In fact, why do all the people who used to buy them now buy twin-cabs? 300bhp/ton said: And you'll never on a production replicate the flex or articulation of a live axle without doing something costly like the Disco's air suspension Maybe not, but there is no need. Whenever I have got stuck in a Land Rover, it hasn't been because I didn't have a 4 inch lift kit, relocating hooks, rock sliders, fiddle brakes and two winches. All Defenders have anti-roll bars nowadays too, so no extreme articulation there. 300bhp/ton said: Just look at how many places in the US offer solid axle swaps on everything from Hummer H3's to Toyota pickups. Yet you never see places swapping on IFS onto any of the other trucks. Not to mention any trucks that have gone IFS have far worse off road performance because of it, e.g. An IFS Dakota is pants off road compared to a live axle 2500 Ram, despite the Ram being bigger and heavier. What American rock-crawlers do to look like the toughest guy in the car park is up to them. Fact is that independent suspension can offer both off-road ability far in excess of what buyers need and better on-road manners. Not everyone thinks the Offroaders sketch from the Fast Show was a documentary.
|
|
|
P I Staker
2,318 posts
25 months
|
matthias73 said: Sorry to pose such a bone question, but whats the diference between the 90 and the 110?
Do they use the same basic engine? The difference is the wheel base, the 90 has roughly a 90" wheelbase and the 110 a roughly 110" wheel base. The 130 has almost a 130" wheel base too.
|
|
|
EDLT
14,580 posts
75 months
|
Trommel said: What American rock-crawlers do to look like the toughest guy in the car park is up to them. Funny you should say that, there are a few "lets off road" spec defenders/discos around here and they are very clean.
|
|
|
matthias73
1,673 posts
19 months
|
P I Staker said: matthias73 said: Sorry to pose such a bone question, but whats the diference between the 90 and the 110?
Do they use the same basic engine? The difference is the wheel base, the 90 has roughly a 90" wheelbase and the 110 a roughly 110" wheel base. The 130 has almost a 130" wheel base too. Facepalm. I knew there were difering sizes, having been around many in olive paint, but I always assumed it meant engine power. Thank you for being so patient, I'm actually going to have a quick wikipedia of them, quite interesting things, as it transpires
|
|
|
pits
4,383 posts
59 months
|
Gaspode said: I know what you mean, in terms of what you get for the money, but actually the fact that they retain their values so well would indicate that they are not overpriced at all, since if they were the residuals would be low. They are priced the way they are because the market will stand it. There are cheaper (and many would say better) alternatives out there, and yet there is clearly a strong demand for them from people who want them. I agree, but they are silly expensive for what they are, even if they were cheaper they would hold their value Watchman said: pits said: and they are very cheap and simple to work on, everything on them can be had for near peanuts.
For example I bought a new rear door for mine the other day, with a load of fixings and other bits and bobs £130, Prop shaft £90 or so, indicators and rear lights etc I replaced all mine for £28, body panels are cheap and you can just essentially rivet them on. I could not agree more. I had Caterhams (plural). Part for them are stupidly expensive. When my bro got into Landys I couldn't believe how cheap aftermarket upgrade parts were. Yep the steering box went in mine was thinking I was going to get viciously bummed for a new one, think it was like £180 or something, pita to fit, but not that hard. I think it also helps that whilst everything is cheap, it is also fairly easy to fit, the only really annoying bits is, heaterbox and snorkel, steering box and exhaust manifold...Other than that it is fairly easy, taking the bonnet off also helps. pits said: Top of that, get a galv chassis and there is very little that is going to rust or corrode. I agree again. As much as I find them anachronistic these days, as a toy they're fun. Find one with a galv chassis conversion and you can pretty much keep it running indefinitely. With a galv chassis really it is just mechanicals that will need doing and really there isn't much to go wrong there if you keep them maintained, grease your shafts and UJs regular etc
|
|
|
P I Staker
2,318 posts
25 months
|
matthias73 said: P I Staker said: matthias73 said: Sorry to pose such a bone question, but whats the diference between the 90 and the 110?
Do they use the same basic engine? The difference is the wheel base, the 90 has roughly a 90" wheelbase and the 110 a roughly 110" wheel base. The 130 has almost a 130" wheel base too. Facepalm. I knew there were difering sizes, having been around many in olive paint, but I always assumed it meant engine power. Thank you for being so patient, I'm actually going to have a quick wikipedia of them, quite interesting things, as it transpires They work very well too, much better then those Japanese pickups.
|
|
|
jbi
Original Poster
5,294 posts
73 months
|
Watchman said: I'm also curious as to whether they really are still selling brand new ones. There's certainly a healthy 2nd hand market for them but are people really paying the £30+K that LR is asking for them? The Defender has never been a volume seller, but consistently sells around 25,000 to 30,000 units a year.
|
|
|
300bhp/ton
26,483 posts
59 months
|
P I Staker said: matthias73 said: Sorry to pose such a bone question, but whats the diference between the 90 and the 110?
Do they use the same basic engine? The difference is the wheel base, the 90 has roughly a 90" wheelbase and the 110 a roughly 110" wheel base. The 130 has almost a 130" wheel base too. Pedant mode. A 90 actually has a 92.9" wheelbase, a 110 a 110" wheelbase (assuming it's been welded up straight  ) and a 130 has a 127" wheelbase.
|
|
