Land Rover Enthusiasts
Author
Discussion

R5GTTGaz

Original Poster:

7,897 posts

250 months

Sunday 26th October 2008
quotequote all
Just a puzzling thought really, up our way we have a lot of off road venues and of course at the weekend everyone is out having a go.

One thing I just could get my head round was some guys had Land Rover Defenders like this one below



Now I know that its not my car / truck and they can do what they like but.......

........they were only using them to tow trailers with scabby Discoverys on, the Defenders were absolutely concours not a speck of mud on them at all, yet they had spotlights, winches, snorkels and other stuff like shovels attached to the bonnet. It just made me think that why bother having the Disco, surely you would want to use the mega high spec defender and actually get some use out of it, all they do is use them as tow cars :S

Weird.

(Probably not as weird as posting on PH about it, but weird nonetheless)

ewenm

28,506 posts

275 months

Sunday 26th October 2008
quotequote all
That's the Tombraider edition isn't it? Sadly doesn't come with Angelina...

BigLepton

5,042 posts

231 months

Sunday 26th October 2008
quotequote all
It's very simple - Defenders are very expensive used, Discoverys are very cheap, therefore they off-road a cheap Disco and have a nice Defender as their everyday car which loses far less value than a Disco would.

Personally I hate trailer queens and always drove my 90 V8 to events, went everywhere the trailer queens did and then drove home! smile

Bushmaster

27,584 posts

309 months

Sunday 26th October 2008
quotequote all
Over here all that extra kit would actually come in useful. But for serious terrain the bit it is attached too really should be a Toyota!

wink

BigLepton

5,042 posts

231 months

Sunday 26th October 2008
quotequote all
ewenm said:
That's the Tombraider edition isn't it? Sadly doesn't come with Angelina...
No, it's the actual one from the film. The Tomb Raider edition LR was far less interesting.

BigLepton

5,042 posts

231 months

Sunday 26th October 2008
quotequote all
Bushmaster said:
Over here all that extra kit would actually come in useful. But for serious terrain the bit it is attached too really should be a Toyota!

wink
You'd have to attach a hell of a lot of kit to get your Prado over terrain a stock 90 can manage. You'd certainly have to remove those side-steps. . . . . . wink

Bushmaster

27,584 posts

309 months

Sunday 26th October 2008
quotequote all
BigLepton said:
Bushmaster said:
Over here all that extra kit would actually come in useful. But for serious terrain the bit it is attached too really should be a Toyota!

wink
You'd have to attach a hell of a lot of kit to get your Prado over terrain a stock 90 can manage. You'd certainly have to remove those side-steps. . . . . . wink
You are probably right, in theory the LR should do better, but in practice out in the boonies reliability is the thing! Might see about getting a winch and snorkel fitted through, taking it up a river soon so could be useful!


superlightr

12,920 posts

293 months

Sunday 26th October 2008
quotequote all
clearly not been to the right pay and play sites. Full spec G4 defender and we go everywhere at the pay and play and drive home.

Olf

11,978 posts

248 months

Sunday 26th October 2008
quotequote all
Always used to be that a 100" chassis was better than a 90 or 110. That's what ranger rovers were always popular as off road trialers and I presume why discos have taken on the mantle.

bigTee

5,546 posts

251 months

Sunday 26th October 2008
quotequote all
selling a series 3 ex SAS lightweight if anyone interested!!!!!!!!!!

Alfa_75_Steve

7,489 posts

230 months

Sunday 26th October 2008
quotequote all
bigTee said:
selling a series 3 ex SAS lightweight if anyone interested!!!!!!!!!!
That'll be pink, right?

Gayer!

biggrin

Olf

11,978 posts

248 months

Sunday 26th October 2008
quotequote all
Alfa_75_Steve said:
bigTee said:
selling a series 3 ex SAS lightweight if anyone interested!!!!!!!!!!
That'll be pink, right?

Gayer!

biggrin
He said a lightweight. Not a pinkie.

BruceV8

3,325 posts

277 months

Sunday 26th October 2008
quotequote all
Olf said:
Always used to be that a 100" chassis was better than a 90 or 110. That's what ranger rovers were always popular as off road trialers and I presume why discos have taken on the mantle.
I think it was as much down to the economics as anything else. Back in the 80s when 90s & 110s were new(ish) the only affordable way for a lot of people to get a coil sprung Land Rover was to build one on a Range Rover chassis. Few people do this now because coil sprung LRs are affordable and old Discoverys are as cheap as chips, so whats the point? I think a 90 would be better than a 100" chassis due to the shorter wheelbase giving a better break over ramp angle.

Olf

11,978 posts

248 months

Sunday 26th October 2008
quotequote all
BruceV8 said:
Olf said:
Always used to be that a 100" chassis was better than a 90 or 110. That's what ranger rovers were always popular as off road trialers and I presume why discos have taken on the mantle.
I think it was as much down to the economics as anything else. Back in the 80s when 90s & 110s were new(ish) the only affordable way for a lot of people to get a coil sprung Land Rover was to build one on a Range Rover chassis. Few people do this now because coil sprung LRs are affordable and old Discoverys are as cheap as chips, so whats the point? I think a 90 would be better than a 100" chassis due to the shorter wheelbase giving a better break over ramp angle.
Some quick googling backs up my understanding but I hear what you say about better availability of coil sprung chassis:

"The 100 inch chassis is considered the most stable length for off road rallying whilst maintaining good manoeuverability."

http://www.4allfours.co.uk/supercharged.htm

BruceV8

3,325 posts

277 months

Sunday 26th October 2008
quotequote all
Olf said:
BruceV8 said:
Olf said:
Always used to be that a 100" chassis was better than a 90 or 110. That's what ranger rovers were always popular as off road trialers and I presume why discos have taken on the mantle.
I think it was as much down to the economics as anything else. Back in the 80s when 90s & 110s were new(ish) the only affordable way for a lot of people to get a coil sprung Land Rover was to build one on a Range Rover chassis. Few people do this now because coil sprung LRs are affordable and old Discoverys are as cheap as chips, so whats the point? I think a 90 would be better than a 100" chassis due to the shorter wheelbase giving a better break over ramp angle.
Some quick googling backs up my understanding but I hear what you say about better availability of coil sprung chassis:

"The 100 inch chassis is considered the most stable length for off road rallying whilst maintaining good manoeuverability."

http://www.4allfours.co.uk/supercharged.htm
Fair enough. smile I like leaf sprung Land Rovers anyway. Coil springs? Comfort? Pah - thats for softies! wink

Olf

11,978 posts

248 months

Sunday 26th October 2008
quotequote all
BruceV8 said:
Olf said:
BruceV8 said:
Olf said:
Always used to be that a 100" chassis was better than a 90 or 110. That's what ranger rovers were always popular as off road trialers and I presume why discos have taken on the mantle.
I think it was as much down to the economics as anything else. Back in the 80s when 90s & 110s were new(ish) the only affordable way for a lot of people to get a coil sprung Land Rover was to build one on a Range Rover chassis. Few people do this now because coil sprung LRs are affordable and old Discoverys are as cheap as chips, so whats the point? I think a 90 would be better than a 100" chassis due to the shorter wheelbase giving a better break over ramp angle.
Some quick googling backs up my understanding but I hear what you say about better availability of coil sprung chassis:

"The 100 inch chassis is considered the most stable length for off road rallying whilst maintaining good manoeuverability."

http://www.4allfours.co.uk/supercharged.htm
Fair enough. smile I like leaf sprung Land Rovers anyway. Coil springs? Comfort? Pah - thats for softies! wink
I never found leaf springs uncomfortable in my 2a. If you want uncomfortable leaf springs try a suzuki jeep. Not enough weight, used to pogo down the road!

bigTee

5,546 posts

251 months

Monday 27th October 2008
quotequote all
Olf said:
Alfa_75_Steve said:
bigTee said:
selling a series 3 ex SAS lightweight if anyone interested!!!!!!!!!!
That'll be pink, right?

Gayer!

biggrin
He said a lightweight. Not a pinkie.
yeh, i said lightweight, not a pinkie.

Gayer!!!!

hehe

10 Pence Short

32,880 posts

247 months

Monday 27th October 2008
quotequote all
The first time I drove in over a year was with some Landrover nutter friends the other week. Luckily one of them has an uncle who owns a substantial piece of fell near, including a river bed and quarry, near where we live.

I still cannot believe where and how those Land Rovers would go. Driving along the rocky-as-hell riverbed as my first driving experience in a long time was interesting, to say the least.

GKP

15,099 posts

271 months

Monday 27th October 2008
quotequote all
Leaf springs? Coil springs? What are these bent bits of metal of which you speak?

BruceV8

3,325 posts

277 months

Monday 27th October 2008
quotequote all
GKP said:
Leaf springs? Coil springs? What are these bent bits of metal of which you speak?
I give you the gospel accordingto OLLR (Old Leaf sprung Land-rovers):

http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/daveslandyandngstuff/

A Boingy is a coil sprung Land Rover.