RE: 'Hard Top' returns to Land Rover Defender

[sisu]

Sixpackpert said:

camel_landy said:

sisu said:

If you look at the body shell of the cutaway version there is no solid floor. So you are sticking a wooden europallet on a folded seat instead of a loadliner in a Van or a Pickup that you can hose out.

I'd suggest LR have done the same as with previous commercials and covered the void with a fairly substantial board, with a non-slip coating and tie-down points.

M

This ^^^

Well this is what you get. This is pretty much every estate car. The only load partition you get is for the dog behind the seats.
As I said the reality of what you are going to be doing with it and the dream is not the same

[Sixpackpert]

sisu said:

Sixpackpert said:

camel_landy said:

sisu said:

If you look at the body shell of the cutaway version there is no solid floor. So you are sticking a wooden europallet on a folded seat instead of a loadliner in a Van or a Pickup that you can hose out.

I'd suggest LR have done the same as with previous commercials and covered the void with a fairly substantial board, with a non-slip coating and tie-down points.

M

This ^^^

Well this is what you get. This is pretty much every estate car. The only load partition you get is for the dog behind the seats.
As I said the reality of what you are going to be doing with it and the dream is not the same

I think that is more of a case that Land Rover haven't changed the image from the standard version IMHO. They only have the front seats. There will be a load guard up against the front seats and no rear seats in order to qualify it as a commercial vehicle. As per the Disco Commercial.

Edited by Sixpackpert on Tuesday 30th June 11:02

[davesrighthere]

Such a shame it's built in Nitra, Slovakia and not Solihull.

[cognac1979]

The amount of bhing and arguing is absolutely hilarious/ridiculous! Land Rover have launched the commercial version which I'm sure will appeal to their target market. For my needs I have always found vans the way forward, but that's for my needs. If others have different needs that this vehicle will meet then happy days. No need for people to get their knickers in a twist.

[A.J.M]

oldtimer2 said:

camel_landy said:

That's a name I've not heard for a while...

The Vehicle Dependant Expedition Guide (Desert Winds Publications) should be essential reading for anyone planning an expedition.

...and congrats on the new purchase. It might be worth starting a new thread with real life feedback.

M

He mentioned his interest in the 90 hardtop to me when I told him I was getting the new Defender when ordering his latest edition of 4x4 driving. In it he has added a new 33 page section on Expedition Basics which covers many topics and is packed with practical advice. He certainly knows what he is talking about. I believe his Expedition Guide is out of print at the moment.

That’s very interesting, in a genuine way.
I’ve got a couple of his books. Quiet for a Tuesday is a fantastic read.

Is he still using his G wagon as he got fed up with the issues on his 300tdi defender and sold it having used Land Rover products for years.

If he’s considering going back to LR stuff and this new Defender then it must tick the boxes for long range unsupported off road driving.

[chestersantana]

I grew up with a Series 2a, and it was the vehicle I learnt to drive in during the 1980s. I like the new Defender, pastiche or not, the original was compromised in many ways and so will this be. Any car that tries to do more than 3 things usually is. Somehow, I think (and hope) that the new landy won't feature in the school run fleets. The Range Rovers and have got that space nailed. The only thing I want is a BONNET MOUNTED SPARE WHEEL. Lots of reasons why it should not have one, I'm sure. But in my eyes they look great.

[oilit]

300bhp/ton said:

gt6 said:

Well that looks a big improvement on the standard defender, suspect it will be a strong seller. Not sure how they have done it but looks wise it seems to be closer to the original look.

Reckon a lot of you must be looking at different photos to me. Either that or your rose tinted specs are very hazy.

These look nothing like the traditional Defender.



Simply covering in the rear side windows will not make the one on the right resemble the one on the left

The 'load area' (length of) behind the rear wheels looks smaller on the new one than the old one - do we think that is the case?

[ettore]

sisu said:

Sixpackpert said:

camel_landy said:

sisu said:

If you look at the body shell of the cutaway version there is no solid floor. So you are sticking a wooden europallet on a folded seat instead of a loadliner in a Van or a Pickup that you can hose out.

I'd suggest LR have done the same as with previous commercials and covered the void with a fairly substantial board, with a non-slip coating and tie-down points.

M

This ^^^

Well this is what you get. This is pretty much every estate car. The only load partition you get is for the dog behind the seats.
As I said the reality of what you are going to be doing with it and the dream is not the same

That’s not the commercial version.

[DoubleD]

It seems like some people would rather just let the Defender die.

[Earthdweller]

The lwb with rear seats and a load area would be ideal for me, the perfect family vehicle and load carrier

As a two/three seater van, I’d rather have a van and a separate family car

We have access to a Berlingo van with a hitch and I have an X3 as the family car

Living out in the middle of nowhere and having to lug wood, turf and allsorts having one vehicle that could do both would be ideal

[Bill]

oilit said:

The 'load area' (length of) behind the rear wheels looks smaller on the new one than the old one - do we think that is the case?

Hard to say, I think it's mostly due to the tiny rear doors on the old one.

[loveice]

Mr.Jimbo said:

drpep said:

Not to be all negative-nancy but they seem to be trying very hard to legitimize this current defender on the merits of it's predecessor.

The reality is, it's not as capable an off-roader, and the only real option on that front is the Jeep Wrangler Rubicon (front and rear lockers, solid front and rear axle), and maybe a Mercedes g-wagen albeit at a significant additional cost.

This probably isn't a bad car, but it's a pastiche of it's predecessor and personally I don't think it deserves to wear that badge. Evoque++? sure. Defender it ain't.

Why isn't it as good off road? Genuinely interested - unless you're rock crawling in Utah I think 95% of people would get a lot further in a new Defender than a Jeep Rubicon due to the terrain response and the car doing the diff locking/wheel braking for you. It has locking centre/rear and a brake modulated front open diff.

That aside, apart from approach angle, the Defender beats the Rubicon for departure angle and break over too.

For a very skilled off road driver I can see a manual-everything car like the Rubicon or an old Defender modded to have diff locks etc would probably go further, but realistically that's a very small % of people. The best bit about the Rubicon is it comes on proper tyres - better than the Wranglers offered on the Defender I'd wager but I bet a whole lot worse in road manners, which I imagine the Defender is compromised on between peformance and road manners.

I thought the model in LR range that has electronic everything and automatic everything in order to be as off road capable in 95% of situations as a proper off roader like Rubicon should be the RR of the past or the Discos. And the truth is that LR has already got those models in its current range that can achieve what you described. Then, what's the position within the current range for Defender? Surely, the option left is how Defender has always been and continue learning from the competitors in order to improve and being competitive, that is being able to manually operating off road related mechanical parts rather than automatically operating electronic parts.

My point is very simple, if by being able to achieve 95% of what Rubicon, G-Class Pro or the 70 series LC can do off road is what needed to justify the existence of this new Defender, then why bother to spend millions creating it at the first place? D3/D4 could've done it 15 years ago and current D5 no doubt can achieve that goal too. I mean if you put a set of KO2s on the full fat RR, I'm sure that goal can also be achieved. So, what's the point of this new Defender if that's the argument been used over and over?

No doubt this Defender will sell globally, but at what cost? What will the sell figure be for the current D5 and its facelift model when this Defender sells well? Should the competitor of Defender be LR's own Dico? Or should they be G-Class, Rubicon, 70 series LC or to certain extend Prados and the upcoming Brunco?

[camel_landy]

sisu said:

Sixpackpert said:

camel_landy said:

sisu said:

If you look at the body shell of the cutaway version there is no solid floor. So you are sticking a wooden europallet on a folded seat instead of a loadliner in a Van or a Pickup that you can hose out.

I'd suggest LR have done the same as with previous commercials and covered the void with a fairly substantial board, with a non-slip coating and tie-down points.

M

This ^^^

Well this is what you get. This is pretty much every estate car. The only load partition you get is for the dog behind the seats.
As I said the reality of what you are going to be doing with it and the dream is not the same

I suspect it'll be more like this D4 Commercial:





M

[Ed.]

Are there really enough artisanal bakers and dog groomers to justify this?
Any current pickup drivers who see this as a viable option or is this just a marketing exercise to help family car sales?

[J4CKO]

DoubleD said:

It seems like some people would rather just let the Defender die.

Well, no, I think they would rather it fitted in with their view of how it should be, which would be pretty much the previous Defender, maybe a slightly new wheel design and a screen to moan about.

But, JLR, as is their folly, make stuff that people who actually buy the cars want to buy, not blokes that describe everything that has gone before as "Proper" and anything available now as "Junk". Its scary, the world carries on around you, and nobody at JLR consulted you !

It happens every time, The Mini, The Supra, the Puma etc etc. Same with Films, like the Ghostbusters one from a few years back, it wasn't great but it didnt "Ruin my childhood"

Things change, the old Defender was a pure off roader, it was bloody hard work on road and nobody wants that if they are spending all that money and the opinions of the "One Life, live it" types dont really matter as they dont buy them until they are a minimum of 20 years old by and large.

What happens is initial horror, lots of grumbling then we all get used to stuff, then grudgingly accept it, get used to it, maybe even like it ready for a another round of whinging when it gets replaced.



I wonder if anyone who is about 35 now, will say that when BMW release a new Mini, will they moan about it not being a proper Mini like the R53 ?

[camel_landy]

loveice said:

My point is very simple, if by being able to achieve 95% of what Rubicon, G-Class Pro or the 70 series LC can do off road is what needed to justify the existence of this new Defender, then why bother to spend millions creating it at the first place? D3/D4 could've done it 15 years ago and current D5 no doubt can achieve that goal too. I mean if you put a set of KO2s on the full fat RR, I'm sure that goal can also be achieved. So, what's the point of this new Defender if that's the argument been used over and over?

There's a bit more to it than that, as it's not _just_ about off-road prowess. There will be a huge variety of use cases, ranging from the extreme to benign.

The old T5 platform (D3/D4) was very capable but also VERY heavy.
...and whilst there is the D5 commercial, I would suggest that's where the top-end overlaps into a 'Luxury' commercial.

Don't forget the different wheelbase lengths too, which the other vehicles don't have.

There are lots of reasons for this car and I'm sure LR would not have spent that money in development without doing their homework.

M

[300bhp/ton]

camel_landy said:

...because everything you say has already been done to death. You are not bring anything new to the conversation.

We're bored of it.

M

So what have you brought to the conversation that is new? It seems you are also only posting the same old moaning at anyone who doesn't like the new Defender and literally berating them for it.

And for the record, I've never once said I don't like the physical vehicle. Nor have I said it isn't capable.

[wst]

Ed. said:

Any current pickup drivers who see this as a viable option or is this just a marketing exercise to help family car sales?

Seems like it competes for the attention of the pickup users who always leave the truck topper on... which in this climate makes more sense than in Arizona or somewhere.

[David87]

For me this is the Defender to have. Problem is though, why not just buy a pickup truck?

[300bhp/ton]

biggles330d said:

Why can't people just see it for what it is?

Yes why? It is clearly a Discovery in design, concept, ethos and market placement. That they are simply branding as a Defender in the belief it will sell better.

It's a simply truth, but one that some fanboys and blinkered folk seem unable to accept. No idea why, this fact hardly detracts from the physical vehicle. I can only presume these people feel all butthurt (Americanism...) that the Defender they desire, just isn't a real one and is a little like fake tan, to which they don't want to admit to.

And again for the record. I'd have one. But not as a Defender replacement, I'd have one instead of a Disco/RR. I'd still own a Defender type vehicle side by side with it.

And I do find it odd, that if they really wanted people to believe it as a spiritual successor to the Defender, why didn't they make it more "Defender" like and less "Discovery looking".