Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 24

Thread: defender replacement: the benchmark (IMHO)

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    867
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Guys, don't confuse the spring rating with load carrying capability.

    Coils (whether linear or progressive) eventually bind when compressed too far (ask anybody who has found it necessary to fit airbags helper kits to the coil vehicles).

    Leaf springs can take a huge amount of punishment compared to coils before they over-extend and collapse. I have personally loaded a one-ton leaf-spring ute with more than a ton and had no issues. You can't do that with coils.

    Leaf springs also spread the load across two points on the chassis: having a single point of force can cause a chassis to break at that pivot point.

    But again this is a very emotional subject.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    13,786
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by jakeslouw View Post
    Guys, don't confuse the spring rating with load carrying capability.

    Coils (whether linear or progressive) eventually bind when compressed too far (ask anybody who has found it necessary to fit airbags helper kits to the coil vehicles).

    Leaf springs can take a huge amount of punishment compared to coils before they over-extend and collapse. I have personally loaded a one-ton leaf-spring ute with more than a ton and had no issues. You can't do that with coils.

    Leaf springs also spread the load across two points on the chassis: having a single point of force can cause a chassis to break at that pivot point.

    But again this is a very emotional subject.
    Coil suspension should hit the bump stops before the coils bind - otherwise the suspension has been incorrectly designed. Just as leaf springs should hit the bump stops before the spring inverts too far.

    I too have loaded both leaf-sprung and coil-spring landies beyond the GVM - but I am not sure what your point there is?

    The only (relevant) argument here about load carrying ability is that Leaves distribute the load over 2 points and coils 1 point. However that isn't a major issue that cannot be overcome by a properly designed chassis.

    The harshness of many leaf-spring suspensions probably induces a lot of stress on the chassis.

    I have owned both, and used both for load carrying, and I will take coil or air springs and a properly designed chassis over leaves.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    867
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Like I said, this is a very 50/50 subject. Personally I like leafs. And I've also load both up beyond GVM ratings.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    13,786
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by jakeslouw View Post
    Like I said, this is a very 50/50 subject. Personally I like leafs. And I've also load both up beyond GVM ratings.
    Exactly. It is more personal preference than a solid argument either way.

    Most heavy vehicles seem to have switched (or are switching) from leafs to air-springs.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    867
    Total Downloaded
    0
    OK, I unconditionally retract my previous statement......leafs are not necessarily better.

  6. #16
    VladTepes's Avatar
    VladTepes is offline Major Part of the Heart and Soul of AULRO Subscriber
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Bracken Ridge, Qld
    Posts
    16,055
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Maybe what you mean is "Leaf Sprung Landies are more FUN".
    It's not broken. It's "Carbon Neutral".


    gone


    1993 Defender 110 ute "Doris"
    1994 Range Rover Vogue LSE "The Luxo-Barge"
    1994 Defender 130 HCPU "Rolly"
    1996 Discovery 1

    current

    1995 Defender 130 HCPU and Suzuki GSX1400


  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    557
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Not sure if this has been posted elsehwere but here's the likely Defender replacement, a new Defender in 2015!

    Pictures can be found here:

    Revealed: New Defender | Land Rover

    I think the front end needs a bit more work...

  8. #18
    JDNSW's Avatar
    JDNSW is offline RoverLord Silver Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Central West NSW
    Posts
    29,511
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by tempestv8 View Post
    .....

    I think the front end needs a bit more work...
    Who cares about looks? This tells us nothing about the important things - chassis design, mechanicals, hose out floors, body types, that sort of thing. One thing for sure - that particular version will not sell many to Defender owners - how many 90s get sold? And the windscreen is raked too far and is not flat - can you imagine how hot it will be after being parked in the sun for a while?

    John
    John

    JDNSW
    1986 110 County 3.9 diesel
    1970 2a 109 2.25 petrol

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Bendigo, Vic
    Posts
    98
    Total Downloaded
    0
    i hope that landrover read these threads, cos this is where the truth is going to come from, sorry boys, your not even close to the mark with this one, all i can say is my defenders just shot up in value and so has everyother defender in the world.
    looks like a face lifted freelander, and i'm not sure you could ''DEFEND'' a country with one of these.
    ''rubbish'' thats my thought on it

    muddys1

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    pannawonica
    Posts
    234
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Thumbs down

    Looks like a Gaylander !

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Search AULRO.com ONLY!
Search All the Web!