The philosophical 2018 Land Rover Series VI / Defender / 'Icon'...

Thank you John. And therein lays our philosophical conundrum...what is Land Rovers motivation for a 'new Defender', other than middle class profiteering? And also our debate, as it is us who have a right to ask these questions and also to not necessarily just accept what might roll off the robotic production line with no soul. Surely if any fraternity has a right to voice their concerns or otherwise about messing with an icon, Land Rover devotees are among them.

...we are entitled to discuss the philosophy of our icon and in so doing to somewhat set its agenda. Perhaps collectively this had some bearing on a delayed 2018 release, perhaps not. Regardless, it remains the core question, as John and CuppBT have so eruditely identified; What is the PURPOSE of a new Defender? What actually, is its reason for being today? What is the philosophy that will continue to set Defender apart from all the others in an era of rampant homogenisation?

Dare I suggest, perhaps profit taking is not the role in the world, of an icon.

Who makes an iconic vehicle? Not the manufacturer, it is the users over decades.

I.e. The Wilkes boys didn't doodle in the sand a design answering the question "what would make an iconic vehicle"?

The makers build something they thought had a market, filled a present need, I.e. Sellable. The then present need was for a farm tractor that could be multitasked a bit.

Purchasers/users then exploited/adapted the vehicle for use in ways never conceived by the designers. Over decades it became iconic.

Whatever Land Rover build as a replacement for the Defender - they won't be building an icon. It may become iconic, in time. It may not.

Whatever they build will be as per the original - a vehicle to fill a specific market need, and turn a dollar.

Talk of rights to influence how a manufacturer messes with an icon is irrelevant. The icon has been put to bed. Hopefully what replaces the existing icon, will itself one day become an icon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tact

Your soft roader and small penises meme has gone flaccid. Probably a good thing though.

We should get more hard core philosophically speaking (in a philosophical thread): setting aside waffle and speculation around whether there will be latte holders in the new Defender, setting aside the likely penis size of owners...

Do you think, Pat, the new Defender will follow the technology philosophy to off-road capability? Ie will it give hardly any focus or thought to old school solid axles and articulation? Instead focus on superb traction control or torque vectoring "to get you there"?

---

What do I think?,I think you blokes should get a hobby and stop talking about something you know nothing about ;).As already posted over and over and over again Land Rover was going to make the defender on the T5 platform,the D3-4,that was dropped and the vehicle redesigned with live axles,the reason it's delayed till 2018.Maybe you should stop with the soft roader,not a real defender the sky is going to fall down bull**** and let Land Rover build the thing.Land Rover have been a success story for over a decade,first with Ford ownership and have continued to flourish under TATA and the fact that they have stopped and redesigned the defender means they are under no pressure,no carry over parts like the series to 110 days.Too often people on this and other forums think they know better than Land Rover,the fact they are in a position to design a clean sheet defender,like the latest L series RR's and next years alloy D5 shows otherwise,if I was you I would take the time to think about what they are making now,every model they make is the best in class,there's every reason to believe the defender will follow suit. Pat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PAT303

What do I think?,I think you blokes should get a hobby and stop talking about something you know nothing about ;).

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PAT303

As already posted over and over and over again Land Rover was going to make the defender on the T5 platform,the D3-4,that was dropped and the vehicle redesigned with live axles,the reason it's delayed till 2018.

---

Now there you go... The purpose of any discussion has been fulfilled. We who know nothing, now know what the new defender will be. Thanks for sharing. ;)

Neil and Pat. Take a bow. Right on the money. I was about to waffle on some more about Art and other fanciful stuff but it seems pointless now.:cool:

:eek::eek:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cuppabillytea

Neil and Pat. Take a bow. Right on the money. I was about to waffle on some more about Art and other fanciful stuff but it seems pointless now.:cool:

---

If design philosophy were all about pragmatism and markets, then yes take a bow (if your sources are correct that is). However I encourage you CuppaBT to take the art route because great design requires that in equal part. ...fear not the alpha male mechanical pragmatism that dominates this forum :eek: and go down the path of shadow, subtlety, nuance and what might best be described by the Japanese concept of wabi sabi.

As far as Icons being made and not born, that is a discussion that can't be so easily shut down... And one thing is for certain, shutting down discussion does not an Icon make.

You guys keep on with the wabi sabi. I will keep reading and commenting wherever I find it interesting.

Pat's told us the platform is D3/4 with live axles. Great! It doesn't shut down discussion. There are still a lot of questions to consider. Design or wabi sabi stuff to wax lyrical.

Must admit that I care more for whether it will come with flat floors and hose able interior. That on a live axle D3/4 chassis/running gear already sounds good.

Another thing I care about is illustrated in this (real) story: My 110DC has way less rear overhang than the typical toynisabitsu. One camping trip, hauling dead tree out of a gully and sawing it up for firewood, saw a buddy in a 'lux comment that my tray is too short to be useful compared to his 'lux.

My retort was that I am happy with my "factory bob job" (a reference to his earlier moaning about the overhang on his lux and his thoughts of bobbing the tail). Also commented that he will breach his (lesser) carrying capacity before his longer tray is full of logs.
(That last point was for Pat - what good is the extra length if you can't use it all!). :firedevil:

Have mentioned it before. Whatever the "new" eventually becomes it must include all of the modern "safety" bits ie:

• side intrusion bars,
• pre determined front and rear crumple rates,
• survivable space and roll cage.
• more and more airbags
• pedestrian friendly front end, etc etc;
• stability control, and the latest,
• automatic braking control, and
• any "driver aid/protector that a regulator or the "road safety industry" can think of in the meantime.

Of course as one adds the things mentioned above that means bigger springs, bigger brakes, more steel/strength, bigger (heavier) engine gear box etc. More "mass".



All of that is "mass" and compensating "more mass"; and in many ways that is why the FJ toyo thing and the Mini are the way they are, and not their 'retro' selves.


Cheers



RF

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tact

Now there you go... The purpose of any discussion has been fulfilled. We who know nothing, now know what the new defender will be. Thanks for sharing. ;)

---

The reason why the release has been pushed back to 2018 is because LR started over,they were going to build Icon on the T5 chassis but stopped,it wasn't what the market wanted.LR have put their specs forward for what they want the Defender replacement to be,to take on Toyota,return to North America,have live axles,different body styles and unmatched off road ability,all the things the current model has plus more.This has been done to death. Pat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rick Fischer

Have mentioned it before. Whatever the "new" eventually becomes it must include all of the modern "safety" bits ie:

• side intrusion bars,
• pre determined front and rear crumple rates,
• survivable space and roll cage.
• more and more airbags
• pedestrian friendly front end, etc etc;
• stability control, and the latest,
• automatic braking control, and
• any "driver aid/protector that a regulator or the "road safety industry" can think of in the meantime.

Of course as one adds the things mentioned above that means bigger springs, bigger brakes, more steel/strength, bigger (heavier) engine gear box etc. More "mass".



All of that is "mass" and compensating "more mass"; and in many ways that is why the FJ toyo thing and the Mini are the way they are, and not their 'retro' selves.


Cheers



RF

---

First decent reply so far,the extra mass is why Land Rover are changing to alloy chassis and body shells,I would not be supprised if Icon is released with a monocoque safety cell and seperate sub section for the 110/130 tray. Pat