Why? Vehicle construction has come a very long way and there is no reason a UniBody constructed vehicle couldnt be stronger, lighter and more rigid or have better longevity than a body on chassis...
Keep an open mind...
From the US Publication "Automotive News"
http://www.autonews.com/article/2015...-defender-back
Defender: Land Rover's least expensive range will be the revamped Defender, which hasn't been sold in the United States for years. The redesigned Defender family will be sold here, but it isn't clear whether every variant will make it overseas.
According to reports, the Defender will be launched in 2018, and there will be five variants, including two two-door models, a four-door with a long wheelbase, and two- and four-door pickups.
The Defender will move to unibody construction but maintain its off-road capabilities.
Not sure where they are getting their information from but it appears our hopes / assumptions for a D4 chassis based Defender may be dashed.
The article also says that in the US Market the next iteration of the LR4 (as its known over there" will be called the "Discovery". How novel.
If the idea of a unibody 'Defender' comes to fruition, perhaps they'll called it the "Surrender".![]()
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
Why? Vehicle construction has come a very long way and there is no reason a UniBody constructed vehicle couldnt be stronger, lighter and more rigid or have better longevity than a body on chassis...
Keep an open mind...
Exactly, i believe the only reason that the D3/4 carries extra weight is because it was designed to be monocoque but for whatever reason they went with a chassis instead.
MY08 TDV6 SE D3- permagrin ooh yeah
2004 Jayco Freedom tin tent
1998 Triumph Daytona T595
1974 VW Kombi bus
1958 Holden FC special sedan
Whenever Land Rover bring out a new model it is usually light years ahead of what everyone else in the industry is doing, so expect the new 'Defender' to be vastly different (as it is now) from the cart sprung, drum braked, part time 4x4 utes flooding the market.
This could well include a monocoque construction. Or it could be something we haven't even thought of.
IIRC the reason was that it wasn't able to withstand the stresses of real off road Land Rovers have made their name off and they didn't want it to be another soft roader like the X5 BMW etc.
Won't the new Discovery be on the aluminium chassis same as the Range Rovers (excluding the Evoque)
You won't find me on: faceplant; Scipe; Infragam; LumpedIn; ShapCnat or Twitting. I'm just not that interesting.
Wouldn't monocoque be more expensive to repair though, and easier to write off?
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
You won't find me on: faceplant; Scipe; Infragam; LumpedIn; ShapCnat or Twitting. I'm just not that interesting.
Problem with unibody design is the fact that most parts if the vehicle are part of the integrity of vehicle. I would think your windscreens and quarter glassed wouldn't like corrugations and a damaged sill would be a big cause for concern. Bolt on bits would be practically non existant apart from a bull bar or tow bar.
Might see a dealer spec nudge bar. Suspension would need to be more supple. I can see a biturbo auto driveline in the crystal ball too. No low range just an extra 2 low gears in slushbox... ..
| Search AULRO.com ONLY! |
Search All the Web! |
|---|
|
|
|
Bookmarks