RE: 'The toughest, most capable Land Rover ever'
Discussion
300bhp/ton said:
Please don't change the facts. You clearly said all pickups are £40k plus. I just posted to counter that showing the Ranger is available from £22k.
And if you are correct the 1/3 of the best selling pickups aren't the top £40k model, then surely that is still a lot of cheaper pickups?
I have to assume that you’re in some way deficient - cannot be bothered to explain the same (obvious and simple) points indefinitely. And if you are correct the 1/3 of the best selling pickups aren't the top £40k model, then surely that is still a lot of cheaper pickups?
NomduJour said:
Manufacturers do durability testing at the 'Ring because it's very tough on a car - not necessarily about handling.
They do it because it's good publicity. Really a race track is a race track, they could have used any and simply done more laps to cover the required distance.The 'Ring might be a motoring enthusiasts mecca. But it doesn't do anything special that can't be done elsewhere, apart from the media attention.
300bhp/ton said:
BathyThermo said:
I'm quite sure you're well aware of the existence of pedestrian protection regulations, which is clearly what the leaper was referring to when he said a design from years ago would fail relevant vehicle tests.
As Jeep, Mercedes, Suzuki and others have demonstrated. The vehicle can still be styled like previous models and still meet the regulations and be perfectly legal. You're having us on, no one is this ridiculous
NomduJour said:
Seriously? Do you actually read the things you write?
Yes I do, I'm not sure that others always do however.NomduJour said:
Ford, VW, Toyota etc have funding, manufacturing facilities, market access, parts and dealer networks and the rest the likes of which JLR could never compete with.
I understand there are bigger companies, but what has that to do with being unable to compete? JLR only need to sell enough to make profit and grow. They don't have to try and crush other companies or send them out of business.Ford, at least certain parts of Ford have struggled with cashflow many times. As I'm sure others have also. Big companies also means big waste as a rule.
And besides all of the above co-develop with others. The Ford Ranger is a Mazda for instance!
I really do not comprehend how you think JLR have no ability to build and sell cars????
Do you honestly think they only have 2 sheds in the Midlands and a handful of guys assembling cars with hand tools?? JLR might not be the size of some other companies. But nor are they the smallest either.
Also your logic is baffling. You say they can't afford to make or build or sell something like a Defender. Yet the same company seems quite able to sell niche product sports and luxury cars, which require dealer network and manufacturing. Despite companies like Mercedes and BMW being much bigger.
NomduJour said:
I understand the Defender was finally killed off because it was financially unviable to make it Euro 6 compliant
We know that can't be true as the same engines and gearboxes are used in the Ranger and Transit.I will watch with interest as this model is launched. In ten years, when the third iteration is released, I might be tempted. To buy the ten year old one, that is. I certainly amn’t put off by the suspension setup or electrical aids. All fun to learn. Just like the old bolt together ones, it is a case of scratching one’s head and having a cup of tea in front of YouTube to fix most issues.
300bhp/ton said:
There are probably more parts than you think and certainly enough that you can't just dismiss them and claim they are totally different vehicles. Yes some of the bits are "evolution" of a part, but the underlying item is often of the same basic design.
For example, diffs are fully interchangeable albeit with different ratios. At least until they went to 24 spline. But you can still fit a 2016 2.4 Puma diff in the rear axles of a 1958 Series II if you so wish.
I see, so my experience doesn't count for anything, then. I must have just not noticed all the bits from my Series parts horde (which I had to autojumble away once I switched to coilers because they were no longer any use) which would have fitted. If a part has 'evolved' so you can no longer fit an older part in its place, then it's not the same part. Jesus. For example, diffs are fully interchangeable albeit with different ratios. At least until they went to 24 spline. But you can still fit a 2016 2.4 Puma diff in the rear axles of a 1958 Series II if you so wish.
I never said that a 90/110 was 'totally different' to a Series. You're right, in that the former is an engineering update of the latter's design. But it was a very thorough reworking. The 90/110 was much, much more than just 'a coil-sprung Series'.
I actually thought when I wrote this "shall I mention the final drives, which are mechanically interchangeable but have different ratios, so they are not strictly like-for-like?" and I decided not to because it was unneccesarily pedantic. Learnt my lesson, there.
300bhp/ton said:
I think this must have been very specific to a couple of people you knew. I've been around Land Rovers all my life and involved in farming and trialling and I don't recall this at all. Maybe in the mid 1980's it would have been rare to see a 90 at a trial, but mostly due to cost and newness. But mid 2000's??? Nope, the vast majority of trials vehicles in the Land Rover world were 90's by then.
Very possible, and I never said it was a majority view or even commonplace. They were a minority, but they existed. NomduJour said:
Andy20vt said:
It will compromise off road ability.
"Off road ability" is a very broad church, but I'm pretty sure they've thought about it in any case.Bigger steps will be independent suspension and no steering box. Something the electronics can mostly hide for the average punter and road tests. But long term more dedicated or extreme off road use will show the design weaknesses.
Anyhow, we know exactly how it will go on and off road. Almost the same as a Disco 3/4 as it appears to be based on that design.The D3 will cruise happily at speed and has moderate off road ability. But a D3/4 is still a long way behind a Defender 90 off road in terms of raw ability and off road durability.
Oilchange said:
I am very much looking forward to seeing the new car in the flesh although I suspect it will be overpriced.
Pipe dream at the mo but I am toying with either a Defender or a Disco 4 at some point.
Do you mean proper Defender? If so, the Defender and D4 are miles apart in ability and ownership experience. They are both awesome vehicles IMO. But I'd own either for completely different reasons and for completely different uses.Pipe dream at the mo but I am toying with either a Defender or a Disco 4 at some point.
In fact, most traditional Defender owners would have likely also owned a D4 or similar also. They complement each other, while ultimately offering little real world cross over.
As another poster mentioned. the JLR range currently has loads of very capable D4 alternatives. So if you want an SUV you are covered with lots of choice. But what they don't have is a proper 4x4. If the new Defender is just an SUV I struggle to see how it fit the range or why you'd buy it over the others, unless it's purely on a looks basis?
Andy20vt said:
Oh yeah I forgot about all those farmers wanting to tow their sheep trailers to set a good laptime round the Nurburgring! 
The problem here is that you're apparently assuming that by testing it around the Nurburgring that it will no longer people capable of towing sheep trailers when they aren't at the Nurburgring plonker!NomduJour said:
Just curious, but what are you saying looks good? The styling, the fact they are at Moab or something else?I'm glad they are testing it, but Moab is the off road equivalent to the Ring, and certainly for anyone in America. JLR were only there for marketing reasons, there are quite literally a million other places on the planet they could have used to test the vehicle. Which they have been using, as these aren't generally media hot spots. But if the launch is as close a JLR claim, this use at Moab will be PR, as apart from tweaking spring rates or something computer based, it's way too late in the development life cycle to be making changes to the design.
NomduJour said:
How does everything to do with the new Defender act as a sort of homing beacon for simpletons? Don't remember anything this bad since the GT-R was new.
That's quite rude, considering it is just people who don't agree with your point of view. Or are you including yourself in your statement 
300bhp/ton said:
Just curious, but what are you saying looks good? The styling, the fact they are at Moab or something else?
I'm glad they are testing it, but Moab is the off road equivalent to the Ring, and certainly for anyone in America. JLR were only there for marketing reasons, there are quite literally a million other places on the planet they could have used to test the vehicle. Which they have been using, as these aren't generally media hot spots. But if the launch is as close a JLR claim, this use at Moab will be PR, as apart from tweaking spring rates or something computer based, it's way too late in the development life cycle to be making changes to the design.
You're a seasoned dynamics engineer as well as an IT Farmer?I'm glad they are testing it, but Moab is the off road equivalent to the Ring, and certainly for anyone in America. JLR were only there for marketing reasons, there are quite literally a million other places on the planet they could have used to test the vehicle. Which they have been using, as these aren't generally media hot spots. But if the launch is as close a JLR claim, this use at Moab will be PR, as apart from tweaking spring rates or something computer based, it's way too late in the development life cycle to be making changes to the design.
BathyThermo said:
Wait, I thought you didn't get the point? Couldn't possibly understand it. Then you changed it to all cars from any one manufacturer looking the same? Now you know the answer?
You're having us on, no one is this ridiculous
What are you on about?? Someone posted (not me) that all LR products look the same, someone else said it was to meet current tests..You're having us on, no one is this ridiculous
I asked what tests force a car maker to style all their cars the same.
Do keep up at the back.
300bhp/ton said:
Anyhow, we know exactly how it will go on and off road. Almost the same as a Disco 3/4 as it appears to be based on that design.The D3 will cruise happily at speed and has moderate off road ability. But a D3/4 is still a long way behind a Defender 90 off road in terms of raw ability and off road durability.
What you say is correct, however that is unlikely to matter to the majority of new buyers - it will not affect sales. Indeed, it's improved on-road performance and ergonomics is likely to make it more appealing.For anyone who's going to spend circa 40k on a new vehicle it's off-road ability will be more than sufficient.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff