Monocoque for new Defender?

I'm still thinking it will be along the lines of the D3 coil spring subframe for the poverty/commercial pack with air suspension on a sports pack version.

IMHO, there will be a monocoque body but wagon, dual cab and single cab variants, to attract the commercial market sector and compete with HiLux etc.

But if 1958 mudguards don't bolt on, is it truly a next generation or merely a replacement??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lotz-A-Landies

...........

But if 1958 mudguards don't bolt on, is it truly a next generation or merely a replacement??

---

I don't think that there is any question. It will bear about as much relation to the real Landrover design that has now been made with modifications for almost seventy years as the current VW beetle has to the car that was produced with similar variations for more that fifty years.

And I rather doubt that the name Defender will live on - after all, Landrover had no hesitation in introducing 'Defender' as a name change with only relatively minor changes to the vehicle!

Regardless of what it is called, and regardless or whether it is aimed at the same market or designed to have the same capability, it will be a new design. That design is likely to be more closely related to the D3 platform (itself a new design owing little to previous designs) than to the existing Defender, but pushing the date back to 2018 does suggest that we may be looking at something entirely new (although in this case certain to share a lot with other models either then or in the future).

It is possible that the new 'Defender' will be the first of a series of new designs to follow the D5, which will be closely related, but have no significant relation to any existing designs.

John

Isn't the next Defender intended to be a family of vehicles based around the theme of durability? There are to be three families I understood: Range Rover, Discovery and Defender.

Sent from my GT-P5210 using AULRO mobile app

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DiscoMick

Isn't the next Defender intended to be a family of vehicles based around the theme of durability? There are to be three families I understood: Range Rover, Discovery and Defender.

Sent from my GT-P5210 using AULRO mobile app

---

I think those 'families' will be for marketing purposes. They say nothing about whether the basic platform is separate or not.

John

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lotz-A-Landies

...........But if 1958 mudguards don't bolt on, is it truly a next generation or merely a replacement??

---

So the current Ranger Rover shouldn't be called a Range Rover because the guards from a 1972 model don't fit?,or a VE Commodore isn't a Commodore because parts from a VB aren't bolt on? :confused:. Pat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PAT303

So the current Ranger Rover shouldn't be called a Range Rover because the guards from a 1972 model don't fit?,or a VE Commodore isn't a Commodore because parts from a VB aren't bolt on? :confused:. Pat

---

Point taken.

However, the iconic Land Rover shape has the unique status that guards and doors from a 1958 model will bold onto the 2015 model, 57 years so far, isn't that one of the reasons that it is iconic. What other vehicle has had that longevity with basically the same design.

Range Rover's classic design only lasted 25 years and the name has become a brand/marque and even JLR has acknowledged that Land Rover name is the iconic shape currently named Defender because they've removed the Land Rover name on the bonnet of the Discovery.

Holden and all the other things out on the road have an annual model change, and only rarely do panels continue for more than a couple of years. So its a poor example compared to the iconic shaped Land Rover. (I won't say Defender, because that name accounts for only 24 years of the design, who can tell me the difference between a 1990 110 and a 1991 Defender 110)

I bet what ever the Defender replacement is,it'll have styling q's from the current one,how does a carton sound?. Pat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PAT303

I bet what ever the Defender replacement is,it'll have styling q's from the current one,how does a carton sound?. Pat

---

I think you mean cues?

The ironic thing about that of course, is that the Defender "styling", designed for the Series 2 in the mid fifties, was not styled, strictly speaking. The stylist made some rather minor modification to the Series 1 shape (raising the waist, and adding a narrowing at this level and a slight taper above it), which had been designed with no reference to style at all, and was dictated solely by practicality and ease of production.

John

So you guys reckon one of THE design classics of all time wasn't designed? ...You really think it is all just pragmatic aluminium re-cycling? :Rolling:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JDNSW

I think you mean cues?

The ironic thing about that of course, is that the Defender "styling", designed for the Series 2 in the mid fifties, was not styled, strictly speaking. The stylist made some rather minor modification to the Series 1 shape (raising the waist, and adding a narrowing at this level and a slight taper above it), which had been designed with no reference to style at all, and was dictated solely by practicality and ease of production.

John

---

Although that said there were design elements in the tapering of the canopy/hard top sides to counteract the visual effect of the Series 1 where the hard tops looked a little like an upside down pyramid with the roof appearing significantly wider than the lower body.

Yes they were somewhat wider at the top but the perspective made it appear worse than it was.