RE: Land Rover Defender 110 Heritage: Driven

[BrownBottle]

Woeful, just kill it already.

I'd rather have bad Aids than use one as daily transport.

[lostkiwi]

Max_Torque said:

lostkiwi said:

Max_Torque said:

RoverP6B said:

So what is involved in making a Defender go, steer and stop acceptably?

Replacing the entire chassis and suspension with an independent set up. Funnily enough, exactly what JLR did with the Disco3 onwards.....


(the unsprung mass on a defender is huge, and the steering box hopeless, and as it rolls (or hits bump...) it steers (due to the leading/trailing arm setup). You can sort of make them handle, but not without completely destroying the, already poor, ride quality)

What a load of tosh. Yes the unsprung mass is high but to change to independent suspension is not the answer as that compromises the off road capabilities by reducing ground clearance. As for poor ride quality they are fine as long as they aren't fitted with HD springs. The steering box is also fine and as was mentioned previously does its job admirably even if they are a little prone to weeping oil.
The entire setup of axles, chassis and steering is almost identical to an RRC and Discovery 1 - the only difference being wheelbase and spring rates and a lighter direct mounted body on top yet no one is saying the RRC rides badly.....

the IRS models have more static ground clearance than the beam axle models (because the diff is tucked up in the subframe, not stuck at wheel CL height!

The reason a classic RR has an ok ride quality (and it's only "ok" by modern stds) is because it's got jelly soft suspension and small tyres. They handle like an elephant on a skateboard, just with more body roll.........

If JLR could have got the beam axled system to a modern level, they would have done that, but they couldn't (as that would mean breaking the laws of physics) so they sensibly took a small reduction in off road ability (although i'd argue that's more to do with the longer wheelbase, addition of things like low sills, front spoilers and large front read overhangs to improve interior space) for a MASSIVE improvement in on-road manners.

Yes they have more static clearance but as soon as a wheel hits a bump the live axle increases the clearance under the diff head whereas the independent setup reduces clearance.
The major strength of the Defender is the amount of articulation of the suspension. If you look at a defender on an 'axle twister' section of terrain the wheels follow the ground remarkably well. Contrast that with any independent system where it lifts wheels and pitches all over the place. To maintain traction the wheels have to contact the ground and that's the Defenders strength. The only way they can get an independent suspension system to work off road is via the use of complex electronics coupled to locking front and rear differentials - none of which the Defender has (aside from both now having traction control).

Even the much lauded Land Cruisers can't compete for here ability on an equal footing (they like G-wagens and others) need locking rear diff as a minimum to maintain parity off the tarmac.

The Defender was designed as a simple and easy to fix all terrain workhorse and in that respect its been remarkable. Its not the best on road but it was never meant to be. That said they are certainly more than adequate on road and are better than most of the usual 'never had one/never driven one but still have an authoritative opinion' brigade on PH are making out.

[skyrover]

RoverP6B said:

So what is involved in making a Defender go, steer and stop acceptably?

Firstly you make sure that the steering components are in good condition and not worn.

Defenders often suffer heavy abuse with minimal maintenance and it can have a big effect on how the car drives.

Make sure it has anti-roll bar's fitted.

Many early ones did not have them fitted from the factory, and they also hurt off-road performance, but as this is on-road we are talking about you will need them/. Upgraded ones are available.

Fit a smaller steering wheel or a quick ratio steering box.

If you want the best steering feel fit a steering box without power steering, although you may regret it when doing a 3 point turn with a heavy trailer.

Fit progressive lowered springs which are now becoming available on the aftermarket.

Fit a return to center steering damper

Fit stiff polybushes

Fit 30mm wheel spacers to increase the track

Remove the roof and fit a soft top to lower center of gravity

Fit a stonking great V8

Fit wide, road biased tyres with 18 inch wheels

Now you have a truck which thinks it's a sports car

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CLwxsjxYQU


and some standard defender's running the slalom

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kcaGKDh-ts

Edited by skyrover on Thursday 19th November 20:44

[anonymous-user]

lostkiwi said:

The major strength of the Defender is the amount of articulation of the suspension.

Which has (pretty much) nothing to do with what sort of axles are used, and everything to do with the roll stiffness applied by the chassis tuning. Early RR's and Defenders, pre approx 1990 had no Antiroll bars, and very soft springs, and they had reasonable articulation. Later models had ARBs added, and these cut articulation massively (As you would expect) In fact, so much was lost that JLR spent a lot of time, money and effort on active ARB systems for the later models, that can have a low cross axle stiffness when required, but stiffen up hugely on the road (even using hydraulic, active, ARB systems)

If you put a later defender, with the fixed ARBs (needed to prevent it rolling around on the road) on an axle twister, you'll find the articulation is actually pretty poor, and that something like a D4 with the active ARBs has signficantly more articulation! (and then has electronic cross axle diffs to help out)

[skyrover]

of course you can just buy and fit a quick release ARB kit like most serious off roaders do

[300bhp/ton]

Max_Torque said:

RoverP6B said:

So what is involved in making a Defender go, steer and stop acceptably?

Replacing the entire chassis and suspension with an independent set up. Funnily enough, exactly what JLR did with the Disco3 onwards.....


(the unsprung mass on a defender is huge, and the steering box hopeless, and as it rolls (or hits bump...) it steers (due to the leading/trailing arm setup). You can sort of make them handle, but not without completely destroying the, already poor, ride quality)

Well that's a load of nonesense. Funny how you bleat such rubbish and so often. Are you sure you are an engineer?

[lostkiwi]

Max_Torque said:

Which has (pretty much) nothing to do with what sort of axles are used, and everything to do with the roll stiffness applied by the chassis tuning. Early RR's and Defenders, pre approx 1990 had no Antiroll bars, and very soft springs, and they had reasonable articulation. Later models had ARBs added, and these cut articulation massively (As you would expect) In fact, so much was lost that JLR spent a lot of time, money and effort on active ARB systems for the later models, that can have a low cross axle stiffness when required, but stiffen up hugely on the road (even using hydraulic, active, ARB systems)

If you put a later defender, with the fixed ARBs (needed to prevent it rolling around on the road) on an axle twister, you'll find the articulation is actually pretty poor, and that something like a D4 with the active ARBs has signficantly more articulation! (and then has electronic cross axle diffs to help out)

Articulation will always be better with a live axle due to the point about which the suspension pivots. In an independent suspension system the pivot point is typically outboard of the centre line of the vehicle at the point where suspension arms connect to the bodywork. With a live axle the point about which the axle pivots is the opposite wheel. In theory the live axle can therefore have double the travel of the independent suspension system. On the Defender the longitudinal location arms restrict travel but this is easily rectified for competition use.
Comparing active and normal ARBs is like comparing apples and pears and really not relevant. It does reinforce my point that to get the D4 as good as the Defender they had to first cripple the Defender with ARBs and then develop a complex electronically controlled automatic system.

One other compromise on an independent suspension system is the lower suspension arm and associated ball joint becomes vulnerable to impact as it sits below the centreline of the hub, and the driveshaft also becomes vulnerable as its no longer surrounded by a protective tube.

If you've ever driven deeply rutted trails used by independently suspended vehicles and live axles vehicles you can see the marks left by each quite clearly. The independent suspension vehicle takes the edges off the ruts, the live axle vehicle leave a depression on the top of the rut where the diff head contacts.

Edited by lostkiwi on Thursday 19th November 21:15

[300bhp/ton]

Max_Torque said:

lostkiwi said:

The major strength of the Defender is the amount of articulation of the suspension.

Which has (pretty much) nothing to do with what sort of axles are used, and everything to do with the roll stiffness applied by the chassis tuning. Early RR's and Defenders, pre approx 1990 had no Antiroll bars, and very soft springs, and they had reasonable articulation. Later models had ARBs added, and these cut articulation massively (As you would expect) In fact, so much was lost that JLR spent a lot of time, money and effort on active ARB systems for the later models, that can have a low cross axle stiffness when required, but stiffen up hugely on the road (even using hydraulic, active, ARB systems)

If you put a later defender, with the fixed ARBs (needed to prevent it rolling around on the road) on an axle twister, you'll find the articulation is actually pretty poor, and that something like a D4 with the active ARBs has signficantly more articulation! (and then has electronic cross axle diffs to help out)

This is mostly wrong too. Have you actually even been within 10 foot of a Land Rover?

ARB's were optional on Defenders. My uncle has a 3 year old 2.2 Puma without them.

An ARB might limit travel a bit. But the live axle still works wonders and beats pretty much any production independent system on any production 4x4 SUV. Why do you think the Jeep Wrangler JK still uses live axles.

The D3/4 RRS only work off road due to cross linked air suspension. So as to simulate a live axle. But they still suffer reducing ground clearance under suspension compression.

Base models used normal coil springs on D3's and are comparatively crap off road because of it.

Individual wheel travel isn't quite the same thing as suspension flex off road either. As most independent systems are unlikely to fully compress one wheel while fully extending the opposite one. And if you watch any vids of D3/4's off road you'll see they still lift a wheel a lot.

D4's also don't have "cross axle diffs" either. Not that any such thing exists. They have an abs traction control system that brakes individual wheels. (There is an optional rear locker, but is pretty rare outside the Land Rover Experience vehicles). This system is very good and really the main thing that allows the modern LR's too off road as they do, as it will keep all 4 wheels spinning. But this same traction control system has been on Defenders since the Td5, Disco2's and post 99 p38a Range Rovers.

[hidetheelephants]

DonkeyApple said:

I don't think Defenders do, but Classics and the Classic based Discos (1&2) have steering dampers. They can leak or bushes wear and that buggers the feel.

Both of my defenders had steering dampers, no idea if they're standard though.

skyrover said:

If you want the best steering feel fit a steering box without power steering, although you may regret it when doing a 3 point turn with a heavy trailer.

It's not too bad provided you keep everything in the steering system in good nick, retain the gigantic OE steering wheel and don't fit tyres wider than the OE 7.50x16R. Still heavy for parking though.

[anonymous-user]

Nice to see all the usual PH "experts" getting the wrong end of the stick as always........

[lostkiwi]

Max_Torque said:

Nice to see all the usual PH "experts" getting the wrong end of the stick as always........

er... Pot, kettle, black...

[skyrover]

hidetheelephants said:

Both of my defenders had steering dampers, no idea if they're standard though.

Yes they are fitted as standard although a return to center damper+spring is a common upgrade

hidetheelephants said:

It's not too bad provided you keep everything in the steering system in good nick, retain the gigantic OE steering wheel and don't fit tyres wider than the OE 7.50x16R. Still heavy for parking though.

Agreed... plenty of grease seems to be the key.

I've got no power steering on my 1983 V8 110 and the steering feel is surprisingly good for what it is.

Edited by skyrover on Friday 20th November 05:40

[Derek Chevalier]

Max_Torque said:

If you put a later defender, with the fixed ARBs (needed to prevent it rolling around on the road) on an axle twister, you'll find the articulation is actually pretty poor, and that something like a D4 with the active ARBs has signficantly more articulation! (and then has electronic cross axle diffs to help out)

I was going to make the same point - quite surprising how rubbish articulation is on a modern defender.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1NcDw5FW7oU

[DonkeyApple]

Derek Chevalier said:

Max_Torque said:

If you put a later defender, with the fixed ARBs (needed to prevent it rolling around on the road) on an axle twister, you'll find the articulation is actually pretty poor, and that something like a D4 with the active ARBs has signficantly more articulation! (and then has electronic cross axle diffs to help out)

I was going to make the same point - quite surprising how rubbish articulation is on a modern defender.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1NcDw5FW7oU

Certainly by the time you've made the modest adjustments that make it massively more road capable you have lost a lot of what makes it better than most off-road.

[lostkiwi]

Derek Chevalier said:

I was going to make the same point - quite surprising how rubbish articulation is on a modern defender.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1NcDw5FW7oU

And of course a D4 is so much better...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avh5fm7eDns

The thing is a Defender is easy to improve off road (either disconnect the ARB of fit the unlocking ones available from 3rd party companies). A D4 on the other hand.....

[RoverP6B]

This whole IRS vs live axle thing strikes me as a lot of guff. The live axle guys spout about how superior their preferred technology is, because it improves articulation - but, while one wheel goes down, the opposing one is thereby pulled up - so you lose traction on the other side... whereas IRS can enable both to gain traction simultaneously. Perhaps IRS doesn't allow quite as much suspension travel, but, unless you plan to trailer your live-axle 4x4 to your off-road location of choice, driving something IRS-equipped, you need a compromise between off-road capability and comfort both on and off-road, and that's where the IRS is going to win. If you try and make the live axle car handle on the road, it's going to lose comfort and off-road ability. There's probably no such thing as a car that's supremely capable and comfortable both on and off road, but the Range Rover is about as close as you're going to get.

[kbf1981]

lostkiwi said:

Derek Chevalier said:

I was going to make the same point - quite surprising how rubbish articulation is on a modern defender.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1NcDw5FW7oU

And of course a D4 is so much better...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avh5fm7eDns

The thing is a Defender is easy to improve off road (either disconnect the ARB of fit the unlocking ones available from 3rd party companies). A D4 on the other hand.....

This last point.

It is easy to make a Defender into anything you want it to be. It's massively versatile, as well as being hugely tough and easy to fix should you ever break it - which is why it's been so popular as an expedition vehicle. Great off road, easy to adjust to whatever terrain you anticipate or whatever needs you have of the vehicle, and simple to upkeep even without access to modern tools.

[skyrover]

RoverP6B said:

This whole IRS vs live axle thing strikes me as a lot of guff. The live axle guys spout about how superior their preferred technology is, because it improves articulation - but, while one wheel goes down, the opposing one is thereby pulled up - so you lose traction on the other side... whereas IRS can enable both to gain traction simultaneously. Perhaps IRS doesn't allow quite as much suspension travel, but, unless you plan to trailer your live-axle 4x4 to your off-road location of choice, driving something IRS-equipped, you need a compromise between off-road capability and comfort both on and off-road, and that's where the IRS is going to win. If you try and make the live axle car handle on the road, it's going to lose comfort and off-road ability. There's probably no such thing as a car that's supremely capable and comfortable both on and off road, but the Range Rover is about as close as you're going to get.

Yes independent suspension technically superior for day to day on-road driving however it simply can not compare with live axle offroad.

This is why toyota offers it's 70 series land cruiser with optional live axle or independent front end.

In fact even a simple British greenlane can tip you onto your side with independant suspension as it lacks the articulation and terrain following behaviour of a live axle.





Watch this video of Ultimate Adventure week in the USA to see how live axles behave offroad

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n31sUxlvLVk

Edited by skyrover on Monday 23 November 08:21

[skyrover]

Here is a video showing why not enough articulation is a bad thing

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHOHEQRVnpE

Bear in mind this vehicle DID have a live axle setup, but was likely running springs that were too stiff (yellow springs are typically heavy duty) and of course the Defender's front end has relatively poor articulation compared to the rear.

[AW111]

skyrover said:

In fact even a simple British greenlane can tip you onto your side with independant suspension as it lacks the articulation and terrain following behaviour of a live axle.

I have driven off road a lot, and never yet seen a lane tip a car over - in my experience it is the driver who does that.


I can see the fun of driving an antique land rover, and a few of my friends have them, but LR selling antiques as new "heritage" vehicles is taking the piss, IMO. If you want an old landy, buy an old landy, not a new faux old landy.

Landrovers were once the off-road vehicle of choice for a large part of the world, so in a manner that typifies the British car industry, they said "ok, that's good enough, why bother improving or modernising it", and punched out the same product for 2 or 3 decades past it's use-by date. Add in hopeless unreliability by 1980's standards, and it is no surprise that they lost almost all of the workhorse market to the Japanese.

Several of my friends are into serious outback off-roading, ie crossing deserts, and reliability is critical : none of them drive
Landrovers (or Jeeps) on those trips.

But throw around the words "heritage", "classic", and "icon", and some people will buy anything, and defend it past all rationality.