Thread: Driver space in defenders

I'm still getting used to the handbrake at my left knee - the 130 has been moved to passenger well. I prefer it by my knee.

I've never had a problem in a Defender or 110 cab and I'm 6'3" must just be the wrong proportions.

Now the footwell in a Jag, there I have a problem. Claustrophobic feet.

I'd like to think the seat is poision so far to the Left, so when your drive offroad you can hang your head out the window and see your left front wheel placement?

Originally Posted by Nera Donna

I'd like to think the seat is poision so far to the Left, so when your drive offroad you can hang your head out the window and see your left front wheel placement?

Or so you can hang your head out, snap at passing branches and howl at the Cockies.

Simon

Originally Posted by eksjay

I am new to LR, and do not understand what is underneath the front seats. Why is there a bulkhead there? What is underneath the car in that section? Will this limitation be looked at in the next model???

Are the mud rails safe - particularly in an accident?

Are there any alternatives? Has anyone customised the front seats at authorised/accredited automotive seat specialists? What is the cost?

What kind of average height do the default seat settings cater for?

How is there a lack of shoulder room?

Why would LR bother putting in Recaros in their 60th Anniversary model when there are such limitations in seat travel????

To answer your questions you have to look at history of the body. The first Landrover in 1948 (known these days as a Series1 80") was essentially a copy of the first Jeep as far as dimensions go, (which in turn was dimensioned from the prewar Austin Seven). The seat box contained the petrol tank under the RH seat (like the Jeep) a tool box under the LH seat, and the transfer case plus PTO under the centre seat.

With the 86" in 1954 the current dimensions were pretty much set, and these provided considerably more fore and aft room for the driver. Now remember that in the early fifties, comfort was not expected in a work vehicle, and the men it was designed for grew up during the Great Depression, and literally were smaller than those who are about today. Elbow room was limited by the decision to make the Landrover a three seater from the start.

In 1958 the Series 2 appeared (actually designed probably about 1955). While the track was wider, the actual elbow room did not increase as the body narrowed at the waistline and tapered slightly above this. The body dimensions have not changed since. There are several reasons for this. From 1967 with the merger into Leyland, Rover was treated as a cash cow, as Landrover was the only part of the empire making money. While the purse strings were loosened slightly to allow the development of the coil sprung 110 and 90 in the early eighties, the money did not run to new tooling for the bulkhead, the most complex part of the body, and so the body width could not be changed. Since then, poor and decreasing sales of what became the Defender have not encouraged expenditure beyond what has been needed to meet legislative requirements or could be easily transferred from more popular models.

While the seat box, as mentioned above originally was needed to contain the fuel tank, transfer case and PTO plus a tool box, more recent models with the tank in the rear have usually had a tool box and the battery, plus, of course, the transfer case, under the seat box. It could be done away with, but it must be realised that it provides support for the floor and the seat by its box construction, and helps support the B pillar on wagons. Doing away with it would require considerable tooling, and the Defender uses far less tooling than a conventional type of body, so any substantial change represents a large proportion of the total tooling involved (most of which dates back to 1958 and has only had modifications since).

Elbow room was lost when the 110 went to windup windows instead of the sliding windows in 1984, and even more when the new pressed doors were introduced in 1987. It is a great pity that the body could not have been widened instead of fitting flares when the wider axles came with the coils, but it seems very unlikely that any changes will be made to body dimensions until the design is completely replaced. Changing the width of an existing design is a pretty major exercise, and has rarely been done by any manufacturer. The 6x6 Perentie Landrover has a wider body, but it should be noted that the cab is a completely new design, structurally quite different, far heavier, and has no structural parts (except doors) common to other 110/Defenders. And the chassis was also wider, simplifying the change. They were also quite expensive, but this could be justified as the whole vehicle was a specialist vehicle and sold at a price commensurate with this.

Personally I have never had a problem driving any Landrover, and find the 110 quite comfortable, and I am probably about average size 178cm, 93kg.

John

Originally Posted by abaddonxi

I'm still getting used to the handbrake at my left knee - the 130 has been moved to passenger well. I prefer it by my knee.

<snip>

Ditto. It holds my leg up.

Whenever I get out of the Patrol after a trip I have a dicky knee from my knee leaning over too far to the left.
The hand brake position in the Defender keeps the leg straighter and the plane of motion much better for clutch use, therefore I don't get a sore knee.

I'm fine with the handbrake too, for me it's where to put the right elbow when driving with the windows up, maybe I shouldn't have fixed the aircon?