Random Thoughts... [Automotive Edition]

Perc

Very Odd Looking Vehicular Object
Joined
Mar 31, 2008
Messages
5,038
Location
Finland
Car(s)
Insignia CT 4x4 CDTI Biturbo

I could totally see myself owning a new Defender. It’s chunky, practical and capable and also modern and high tech. I love it. I just wish they’d skipped the sideways hinged rear door.
 

Blind_Io

"Be The Match" Registered
DONOR
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
22,478
Location
Utah, USA
Car(s)
06 XTerra, '00 VFR800, '07 ST1300, '11 Multistrada
To me it seems like an LR4 with a bit more load carrying. It's still an overcomplicated luxury SUV and the standard 18" wheels tell me it more intended for pavement than trails.
 

argatoga

Can't Start His Wank
Joined
Oct 4, 2005
Messages
18,157
Location
Seattle
Car(s)
'13 Moto Guzzi V7, '08 Pontiac Solstice GXP
To me it seems like an LR4 with a bit more load carrying. It's still an overcomplicated luxury SUV and the standard 18" wheels tell me it more intended for pavement than trails.
It looks like it can do quite a bit off roading. The reviews show it can handle those duties quite well. Most people won't be taking it on trails, so they want to make it appealing to them at the same time. My old Disco 1 suffered on-road from the solid axels. I'm amazed so many soccer mom's bought the thing.

Rover is having its cake and eating it too with the technology in the new Defender. If the tech breaks while off road, you're SOL however.

If someone wants something more durable and modifiable there's always the Wrangler.
 

93Flareside

Döner Kebab enthusiast
DONOR
Joined
Jul 20, 2009
Messages
17,955
Location
42 miles outside of Chicago
Car(s)
‘18 VW Golf GTI, '87 Mercury Colony Park

I could totally see myself owning a new Defender. It’s chunky, practical and capable and also modern and high tech. I love it. I just wish they’d skipped the sideways hinged rear door.
I agree with @Blind_Io as it's a tougher LR4, but is that such a bad thing? It's what the LR4 should have been. 6L/100km is really good for a brick I think.
 

Matt2000

An Unfortunate Discovery
DONOR
Joined
Feb 17, 2006
Messages
15,081
Location
Escaped cows, Englandshire
Car(s)
2020 Tesla Model 3, 1990 Discovery 1 Bobtail
Yeah it's a better alternative to the ugly ass new Discovery, I think that the design actually shares as much with the D1 and D2 as it does with the Defender. Look at it that way and there's a lot to like. I wouldn't want to abuse one off road because of the expensive panels but these guys from a parts/accessories manufacturer in this country got one and took it green laning.


Hardly a test of off road ability but probably more than most will see. I feel sorry for the paint.
 

Blind_Io

"Be The Match" Registered
DONOR
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
22,478
Location
Utah, USA
Car(s)
06 XTerra, '00 VFR800, '07 ST1300, '11 Multistrada
I agree with @Blind_Io as it's a tougher LR4, but is that such a bad thing? It's what the LR4 should have been. 6L/100km is really good for a brick I think.
Hold on a second, I never said it was tougher than an LR4 - because it isn't. The only thing it has over the LR4 is greater payload. It's still riding on a fragile air suspension that, when it fails (and it will fail) the vehicle will default to it's lowest ride height and be essentially suck wherever it happens to be. The wheels are too large at 18" to do anything other than mild grass-and-gravel, you can't air down the low profile tires for sand, rocks, or mud without risking a snakebite puncture or a damaged wheel. The vehicle is too complex and relies too heavily on computer systems and sensors to operate - even my Xterra had the 4WD and rear diff disabled by a frayed wire, imagine how much this thing will freak out when it can't talk to all the sensors?

The problem is that Land Rover already has multiple vehicles that are overlapping each other too much - and despite what Land Rover claim, the Defender is no more a descendant of the last Defender as the current generation Pathfinder is the descendant of the original.

This defender has oversized rims, air suspension (notoriously unreliable for off road use), and an entire Best Buy of electronic farkles - any number of which will essentially disable the vehicle when they break. There is no more utility here than a Range Rover, no more off road ability than a Range Rover, and it will see about as much off road use as a Range Rover. I bet that my battered old Xterra will go more places more reliably than the new Discovery - it will break less, cost less to repair, and collect less damage along the way. It will also do it at 1/10th the price.
 
Last edited:

73GMCSprint

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2007
Messages
978
Location
Southern UT, USA
Car(s)
1973 GMC Sprint, Buick 455/TH400; 1994 Jeep XJ 4.0
It looks like it can do quite a bit off roading. The reviews show it can handle those duties quite well. Most people won't be taking it on trails, so they want to make it appealing to them at the same time. My old Disco 1 suffered on-road from the solid axels. I'm amazed so many soccer mom's bought the thing.

Rover is having its cake and eating it too with the technology in the new Defender. If the tech breaks while off road, you're SOL however.

If someone wants something more durable and modifiable there's always the Wrangler.
There's off road, and there's Off Road. All the manufacturers like to brag up their off road chops, but for those who need Off Road, LR and similar brands haven't been a consideration since the (real) Defender. For true Off Road ability you have to be able to rely on the hardware and not have to hope the tech gizmos can get you through.

Off course, there are trade-offs in ride quality/luxury/etc. but I have to roll my eyes anytime luxo SUVs pretend to be something they aren't.
 

Matt2000

An Unfortunate Discovery
DONOR
Joined
Feb 17, 2006
Messages
15,081
Location
Escaped cows, Englandshire
Car(s)
2020 Tesla Model 3, 1990 Discovery 1 Bobtail
Yeah they keep pushing upmarket without providing a replacement at the bottom. Unfortunately these days nobody expects them to and they're basically a lost cause in that respect. This goes back to the time when farmers were replacing their knackered (often due to rust) Defenders with Japanese pickups as they were far cheaper.

The Freelander used to be a viable utility vehicle when it was new, now most people wouldn't think of using a Disco Sport or Evoque as a work van.
 

killpanda

wants to fondle your manboobs
Joined
May 22, 2004
Messages
5,003
Location
Stuck in France
My parents just took delivery of their new Puma!

The first impressions are really good. It feels quite a bit more high end than their old C-Max did, and sportier to drive too.
They didn't go for the ST-Line version, the bigger wheels and "harder" suspensions made it a little bit unconfortable. They did take most of the useful options though, like the fully digital dash, blind spot alert system, radar cruise-control, lane keep assist, heated seats and steering wheel, rear-view camera, etc. The only thing missing from the ST-Line is the colour matched wheel arches, which I thought would bother me more than it actually does, maybe due to the gray paint that they chose.

It's about the same dimensions as the C-Max, just about 20cm shorter, but it feels like a smaller car to drive, more nimble and somehow easier to see out of and park. Being 200kg lighter than the C-Max helps the acceleration and will help at the pump too.

The mild-hybrid system is interesting. I can't really feel it working under acceleration, although you know it's doing something since you can follow its current status in the dashboard, but the regenerative breaking is quite noticeable when letting go of the accelerator, which I find to be a good thing since I like not to use the breaks much in many situations like downhills and it gives some much-needed engine-break to the 1.0l EcoBoost engine.



IMG_3425.jpeg
IMG_3438.jpeg
 
Last edited:

Blind_Io

"Be The Match" Registered
DONOR
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
22,478
Location
Utah, USA
Car(s)
06 XTerra, '00 VFR800, '07 ST1300, '11 Multistrada
Neither is useful off road unless you are doing off road racing. You want the lowest gears, the lowest end torque, and locking diffs. A stock FJ-80 with factory lockers will out-climb any 700+ BHP vehicle with open diffs where I wheel.

More throttle and more power is how you destroy vehicles off road.
 

Matt2000

An Unfortunate Discovery
DONOR
Joined
Feb 17, 2006
Messages
15,081
Location
Escaped cows, Englandshire
Car(s)
2020 Tesla Model 3, 1990 Discovery 1 Bobtail
Can't deny that I actually like the look of that. The V8 soundtrack would be nice but they could've done better on the torque, with an off road vehicle that's far more important as @Blind_Io said.

I mean I'd least like the chance to drive one to destruction on an off road course...
 

Crazyjeeper

NickGyver
DONOR
Joined
Nov 29, 2006
Messages
7,965
Location
Dallas, TX
Car(s)
F150, CJ7, Mustang GT, Tenere, Griso
450 torques is more than enough for any offroading.

I'm more concerned that someone at FCA thinks that Dana 44s are enough axle for 37" tires with that power level. Yeah, I know the rear is an upgraded version with a slightly larger ring gear but north of 400ft lb I'd like to see a 60, especially with that tire size.
 

argatoga

Can't Start His Wank
Joined
Oct 4, 2005
Messages
18,157
Location
Seattle
Car(s)
'13 Moto Guzzi V7, '08 Pontiac Solstice GXP
Neither is useful off road unless you are doing off road racing. You want the lowest gears, the lowest end torque, and locking diffs. A stock FJ-80 with factory lockers will out-climb any 700+ BHP vehicle with open diffs where I wheel.

More throttle and more power is how you destroy vehicles off road.
Why climb when you can dig? It'll make it to China before you get to the top of the trail. :p
 
Top