2012 Defender Details released

[islu51]

2012 Land Rover Defender Updated with New 2.2L Turbo Diesel and Additional Option Packages - Carscoop (http://carscoop.blogspot.com/2011/08/2012-land-rover-defender-updated-with.html)

[Blknight.aus]

linked from the OP article

Land Rover Rumored to Reveal New Defender Concept in Frankfurt - Carscoop (http://carscoop.blogspot.com/2011/08/land-rover-rumored-to-reveal-new.html)

and from there


must find a way to make the new Defender a credible rival that can command higher prices without losing its legendary character.

wouldnt the smart thing to do be to make it competitive and cheaper? and how about easy to maintain while we're at it.

and



like the 4x4 it intends to replace, it must be versatile and reliable enough to adapt to army use.

I happen to know of a vogon run country thats going to be selling a bunch of landies that fit that bill, do you want to tell them or shall I?

[rick130]

The Poms will love the low mounted alternator, ideal for mud and creek crossings

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2011/08/937.jpg

[KarlB]

Doesn't seem that different to the current 2.4, as I would expect. It is essentially the same Ford derived engine:

http://assets.config.landrover.com/v2116u/lr/gb/l316/001br/engprimary_gb_l316_001br_a-24d.jpg

Cheers
KarlB
:)

[PAT303]

It's in the same spot as the 2.4,about 3 feet from harm. Pat

[scarry]

wouldnt the smart thing to do be to make it competitive and cheaper? and how about easy to maintain while we're at it

They,that is the manufacturers, never ever listen to the guys who work on these things,& everything that has to be "updated"becomes MORE complicated & more expensive:(

And we are all paying for it,they don't give a rats,it's just sell,sell,sell& more bling factor while we are at it.

[Fluids]

... but the semi-utilitarian truck we all wish for has been outlawed by legislation that demands levels of saftey & compliance that cannot be avoided in the design & manufacture of the product ... :(

I mean, if it hasn't got ABS, DSC, TC, ESC, F&R F/S Airbags, blah, blah, blah .... IT ISN'T SAFE TO DRIVE ! :angel:

... or so they say. Pretty soon they'll have us all riding around in Johny Cabs :p

It is because of this, that it will never be what you'd hoped it could be :(

[sashadidi]

wouldnt the smart thing to do be to make it competitive and cheaper? and how about easy to maintain while we're at it.


A slightly cynical view of a unofficial Land rover repairer here is maybe that also they (land rover and all other car makers)want you to depend on them for the servicing etc via computer software etc only available at the dealers so they can get added value out of charging you for their software via the dealer who have accepted a lower margin on selling the car but are told they can make it up by charging you a massive amount of money to hook up the computer to test you car each service or any time you have a problem thereby by passing the average old bush mechanic or do it your self person. It s a new business model for the car manufacturers and he might have a point I think. :(

[KarlB]

From mother's mouth: NEW DIESEL ENGINE POWERS THE CLEANEST EVER DEFENDER FOR 2012 (http://www.newsroom.jaguarlandrover.com/en-in/land-rover/news/2011/08/lr_def_12my_media_kit_120811/)

Cheers
KarlB
:)

[Blknight.aus]

A slightly cynical view of a unofficial Land rover repairer here is maybe that also they (land rover and all other car makers)want you to depend on them for the servicing etc via computer software etc only available at the dealers so they can get added value out of charging you for their software via the dealer who have accepted a lower margin on selling the car but are told they can make it up by charging you a massive amount of money to hook up the computer to test you car each service or any time you have a problem thereby by passing the average old bush mechanic or do it your self person. It s a new business model for the car manufacturers and he might have a point I think. :(

I have no problem with electronics in the engine and computers managing them, Yes its a rorte to have the diagnostics cost so much BUT like everything give it half a generation and someones cracked it and the things are cheap, with laptops getting more powerfull all it takes is someone to come out with a breakout box and your laughing.

I'm referring to Getting to stuff. The engine bay in a deefer is big enough to do circle work with a road train, its physically larger than the one in a series and I can stand in a series engine bay (and a tdi deefer) with the engine still in place to work on it. The new engine is the same capacity as the S2.25D and the TDI300 yet I bet like the Ford defender its going to be jammed in way up the back and tilted over so you cant get to anything easily, all the sub components (like the clutch slave + starter) will be stuck in hard to get to places.

I could understand that on something like a rangie where youve got a V6 and every mod con under the sun hanging from the engine and hydaulic this and pnuematic that to help you drive it like a go kart but Cmon, Its a deefer the heritige is that its utilitarian, you can hose it out, it goes from a-b regardless of whats between the 2 and its easy to work on.

[frantic]

How can you hope to sell a larger figure of defender's for a premium when it's equiped with the POVERTY pack engine from the ranger and the ranger gets what the defender should have A 3.2L TD5!!!!!!! :mad:( Ive started a thread on this in general chat).
The ranger td5(they call it a TDCi l5)is 3.2l with 147kw and 470nm of torque ,the ranger poverty pack 2.2td is 110kw and 375nm. The ranger will more than likely be built in thailand so be far cheaper than the U.k defender with all those letters than landrover love, TC,abs, HDC, etc.
Ford Australia - The All-New Ranger - Performance (http://www.ford.com.au/servlet/Satellite?c=DFYPage&cid=1248902909068&pagename=wrapper&site=FOA)
I wonder if it's a stroked/bored version of the TD5 they shot 3.5 years ago?

Landrover should put in a decent marketplace competitive engine in the defender to be taken seriously when they say they want to increase sales. Jeep wrankeler gets a merc 2.8td, toymotor troopy gets a de-tuned 4.4 td, their prado/lux both get a 3.0td , niss and mit both have a 2.5 with around 140kw

[Lotz-A-Landies]

...
... Landrover should put in a decent marketplace competitive engine in the defender to be taken seriously when they say they want to increase sales. Jeep wrankeler gets a merc 2.8td, toymotor troopy gets a de-tuned 4.4 td, their prado/lux both get a 3.0td , niss and mit both have a 2.5 with around 140kwThe problem is that Jaguar-Land Rover is considered a European manufacturer and under Euro Environmental laws (which calculate emmissions across total volumes of all models in the range) and without a micro-car to offset the greenhouse emissions of the larger Jaguars/L322/RRS/D4 the Freeloader and Defender have to be crippled by small capacity engines. The Thai assembled Ford Ranger is not calculated in Ford's European production, so they can put anything they want in it.

The best hope for us to get a larger capacity engine in the Defender is for production to be based out of India or elsewhere in Asia. So your choice will be a micro engine UK built Defender or an Indian built Defender with an Indian built diesel.

[frantic]

But landrover are owned by tata the makers of the nano, the sub $3k car with a 623cc engine!! this would easily make up for a 3.2 td in a defender selling 50-100k units a year, compared to the planned 1 million nano's:eek:

[RVR110]

From mother's mouth: NEW DIESEL ENGINE POWERS THE CLEANEST EVER DEFENDER FOR 2012 (http://www.newsroom.jaguarlandrover.com/en-in/land-rover/news/2011/08/lr_def_12my_media_kit_120811/)

Cheers
KarlB
:)

From that webpage: "A new, full acoustic engine cover replaces the previous splash cover, reducing radiated engine noise and improving driving refinement"

I was just thinking the other day that my Puma could really do with some improved driving refinement... the kind you get from an engine cover. And now I find that Land Rover were listening - how good is that!
I wonder if I can get one and retrofit it?

[Lotz-A-Landies]

But landrover are owned by tata the makers of the nano, the sub $3k car with a 623cc engine!! this would easily make up for a 3.2 td in a defender selling 50-100k units a year, compared to the planned 1 million nano's:eek:But nano is not made/assembled in the UK or elsewhere in the EU so it may as well be a Ford Ranger made in Thailand. If it created any offsets at all it would only be for those sold in the EU and one wonders how efficient it would be against EU competitors like the smart car. And. If the Nano was included, you would also have to include the rest of the Tata production and you can bet most are not very efficient, or are already calculated in the FIAT figures for the engine manufacturing joint venture.

[inside]

the Freeloader and Defender have to be crippled by small capacity engines.
Agree the Defender needs a bigger engine. The FL2 crippled??? You must not have driven a diesel one, not lacking in the engine department at all.

[LRO53]

Here's a brief history from what I understand happened over the last 2 decades.

Land Rover stopped making engines in 2006 at the Solihull Plant. Where the Td5, 300Tdi was still underproduction. The Td5 and 300Tdi was the last "Rover" Engines.

It was started in 1993 when "Rover Group Ltd" was still owned by BAE systems. Solihull actually was Tooled to produce both the L Series Diesel and Td5 on the same line. This all fell apart when BMW refused to develop the Td4 and Td6 "Storm" Engines leaving only the Td5 which was already signed off for the coming Disco2 leaving BMW no choice to continue. BMW supplied the Camshaft and Split fractured Conrods for the Td5 which inturn identical ones were used for the L Series Diesel. Seeing development on the Td4 and Td6 was haulted the Range Rover L322 and Freelander facelifts devloped under BMW used BMW engines and the Rover 75 also used a BMW Diesel. (Which came back to haunt Rover)

Come the sale to Ford - Rover Group was split off and sold to to the Phoenix consortium. Now under Ford Ownership Land Rover Released the Disco 3 (All ford diesels) FL2 again Ford/PSA Diesels joint venture, and RR Sport (ford diesels) Defender finally as we know got a Ford engine in 2007 just before the sale which was the 2.4L Tdci Puma ZSD Engine in 2011 with the upcoming EU5 standards and the End-Of-Line for the 2.4 as the Transit was no longer having a 2.4 as an option. The 2.2L Tdci Puma ZSD Engine was the only option. If they had sold a year earlier perhaps we would all be driving EU5 Td5 engines with DPFs!

During this time Rover Group or now MGR "MG Rover" were busy developing there New G-Series engine which was an heavy refinement to the L-Series with Common Rail Direct Injection. Sadly for poor old rover they lost all there R&D team to Ford/Land Rover due to the fact the Gaydon, Warwickshire Design and Company HQ went to Land Rover. Also another blow to Rover was that the Td5 Project "Storm" stayed with LR so the grand plan of having 3 engines of 2.0L 2.5L and 3.0L for the "Suite of Rover Group products Cars and 4x4" was a distant memory of the early 1990s.

All Rover had to work with into the 2000s was a L Series. The the BMW engine still in the 75 they had to get it out due to the fact BMW was charging a absobantat amount for the engines and for a company that was trying to recover this was not good. The G-Series was a unbelievable step with Siemens Common Rail Direct injection. The G-Series was signed off for Production and almost 99.9% of tooling was completed in 2005 when only a few weeks later the company went bank rupt.

The chain reaction that started all of this was BMW

On a positive side

Land Rover is planning to get back into engine development in the next 2 years we are likely to see the opening of a UK Engine Factory. So no they won't be made in India.
They are seriously trying to cut there ties with Ford much like the issues Ford had trying to cut there ties with BMW. Which is going to be very very hard considering that alot of the components used in the Disco3 platform are ford. Even the wheel hubs are ford!

Also the Rover name is owned by JLR not the Chinese so with Tata looking at making cars in england. What would be the best name to use? Tata? It's almost certainty to be Rover.

Future Tata-JLR products could benefit from ‘Joint engine development program’ | IndianCarsBikes.in (http://www.indiancarsbikes.in/auto-news/future-tatajlr-products-benefit-joint-engine-development-program-45697/)

[Lotz-A-Landies]

Thanks LR053

It all makes a lot of sense, but doesn't auger well for a larger engined Defender if they build the new engines in the EU (something we have been asking for since the Series Land Rovers in the 1960's) and the only decent results were the V8 started in the Stage 1 and the 4BD1 engined Stage 1 & 110 we built in Oz.

BTW I was wondering why the Chinese were using the name Cherry and not Rover.

Diana

[LRO53]

Yes a larger engine defender would be nice, As you know the only real reason's for such small engines is the emissions standards of Europe. Don't forgot you could still by a 300Tdi Rest of World spec upto 2006 only real reason it stopped was the of Td5 Dash, Gearbox, Gearbox tunnel, Seatbox, Bulkhead(Firewall) finished in 2007 as well.

(Brand New 300Tdi Defenders)
New Land Rover Defender 110 Station Wagon 5 door, RHD // EX ARMY vehicles for sale Land Rover (http://army-uk.info/equip_f.php?ID=339)

Yes the Chinese bought all the tooling for the Rover 25, 45 and 75 and shipped it back to china from the Longbridge Factory. They are sold as Rowe's in China.

They also got the K Series and L Series Engines tooling and Cad drawings, From what i understand they also got Rovers secret successor to the Rover 200,400 25/45 vehicles. This vehicle was in pre production stage but Rover did not have the money to bring it into production as it should of be launched a whole 3 years before they went bankrupt.


The thing BMW did not know in all of this is that Rover Post 1948 could not survive on it's own, This was apprant right from when the Land Rover came out in 1948. Rover needed Land Rover and Land Rover needed Rover

[frantic]

So from what your saying , ford shut down the td5/tdi300 plant and appears to have shipped some of the tooling to thailand for the td5.
I guess we will wait and see how many /if any engine parts are compatible.

[Bush65]

From that webpage: "A new, full acoustic engine cover replaces the previous splash cover, reducing radiated engine noise and improving driving refinement"

I was just thinking the other day that my Puma could really do with some improved driving refinement... the kind you get from an engine cover. And now I find that Land Rover were listening - how good is that!
I wonder if I can get one and retrofit it?
After that, please don't stop thinking that your Puma could really do with a 3.X litre engine and stronger drive train. ;)

[Yorkshire_Jon]

Interesting... But why the fasination with bigger engines and how much bigger?

Dont get me wrong, I dont want smaller, greener or any of that rubbish, but 2.5L - 3.0L would be ideal. I really cant see the fascination with BIG engines:confused: (Now gearing on the other hand, yep, defo needs sorting, admit the Puma is a massive step forward there.)

Lets not forget, a slightly tuned TD5 can easily munch its way through clutches, props, diff's and half-shafts if driven moderatley hard / when heavily loaded.

To put a bigger engine in will really only benefit the driver by producing more torque, the very thing that kills the above mentioned items. Therefore, to maintain reliability all the drivetrain would need to be upgraded also. LR simply wouldnt invest the $$$ in a simple vehicle refresh. We need to wait for the Defender replacement before we can hope to see any torquier engines as standard.

Personsally Id love to see the new 3.0L D4 drivetrain in the Defer replacement and some proper noise reduction, and I dont mean a free pair of ear-muffs with every purchase!

Jon

[PAT303]

The defender needs 4'' added to it's cabin width,a 3ltr four cylinder T/D,hypiod diffs with stronger axles/half shafts.Thats it,people can mod from there. Pat

[frantic]

The problem is york-john LR and in particular defender production is being managed by accountants who have killed the defender by trying to save money. If they spent around (in mass production money) $3000 aus they could have a vehicle that would be competitive and make more sales.
Stronger axles/cv for every defender would cost about 1/2 ashcroft/great basin/lucky8 in mass production, a 3.2td5 from ford or the 2.7tdv6 about $500-1000 difference to the 2.2, flog the crash can and duel front airbags of the 94-5 disco to have it and you will be able to compete head to head with the japanese utes and sell to fleets. Instead someone in LR would suggest these upgrades and get shot down by an accountant saying no way at current production levels

[jakeslouw]

Frantic is spot on: if LR stuffed the TDV6 into the Defender the problem would be solved.

My crikey, everybody and their dog are doing that conversion these days, there are virtually plug & play kits on the shelf.

But LR hides behind some carbon tax or some such crap. Despite the fact that the TDV6 engines are all being built by Peugeot and Renault IN EUROPE......

So they are just letting some bean counter kill the defender based on what?
Surely not on development costs, the engines are done & dusted! The ECUs and TCUs are there, the transmissions are there.
So they have to upgrade the axles and drivetrain slightly? My heck, stronger stuff is available off the shelf from Borg Warner and other independent third parties all over the world.
Toyota, Nissan and other Japanese manufacturers buy from one common supplier most of the time, so why not Tata?

Nope sorry, I fail to see a clear argument for the current engine limitations in the Defender. I think it's plain short sightedness.

I'll be happy to debate this with anybody who can come with a proper rebuttal.

[Blknight.aus]

simple, you dont need a huge engine and there are tax breaks for utility vehicles based on engine capacity in a lot of countries.

in euro land its often less than 100Ks from town to town (and in some places you can cross a country in that distance) on roads that are not as straight as most of ours.

the defenders stock suspension is not really up to "spirited" driving on road so you dont really need the power there and off road, youve got the lowest low range out of the box in an offroader so why do you need the big donk there?

hell I remember when a 2.25 naturally aspirated petrol 4 pot was all you really needed to get the job done. the same power that that donk used to produce can now be made from a 500cc 3 pot turbo diesel.

need a big engine, nope, Quite happy back here with an Na 2.25 diesel thanks. (not that thats going to stop me stuffing in a turbo 3.9 with more boost than the tyre pressures into frankenrover)

[jakeslouw]

"simple, you dont need a huge engine and there are tax breaks for utility vehicles based on engine capacity in a lot of countries."

So why do the Fords, Nissans et al utilities come with bigger motors?
They're lighter, have less GVM, but the Defender that is rated at 3.5T GVM wouldn't be able to pull that comfortably?
And the TDV6 is 2.7 and hardly HUGE.

"in euro land its often less than 100Ks from town to town (and in some places you can cross a country in that distance) on roads that are not as straight as most of ours."

So now LR only makes cars for Europe? No wonder it's showing declining sales.

"the defenders stock suspension is not really up to "spirited" driving on road so you dont really need the power there and off road, youve got the lowest low range out of the box in an offroader so why do you need the big donk there?"

To maintain a safe, economical cruising speed while loaded. As for spirited driving: most current generation ECUs can record/measure road speed, so speed limit the vehicle. BMW does it already, as do most car manufacturers.
As for the suspension: it's the same basic suspension as used on the Land Cruiser 105, rated at 180kmh, so that's a rubbish argument. A BMW can do 250km/h, but not necessarily around a corner designed for 90km/h. If you try it, you're a fool. If you try the same with a Defender at 140km/h, you're still a fool.

"hell I remember when a 2.25 naturally aspirated petrol 4 pot was all you really needed to get the job done. the same power that that donk used to produce can now be made from a 500cc 3 pot turbo diesel."

Hell I remember when 90km/h was really fast because we had no highways, but what's your point?

"need a big engine, nope, Quite happy back here with an Na 2.25 diesel thanks. (not that thats going to stop me stuffing in a turbo 3.9 with more boost than the tyre pressures into frankenrover)"

So why no OPTIONAL detuned, lower tech TDV6 with variable vane turbos and maybe smaller injectors for the Defender? I guarantee you Land Rover won't be able to satisfy demand.

And as mentioned, add a driver's and passenger's airbag, some interior roll-cage strength (side impact bars behind the sills, stronger steel pillars, door impact bars), and you'll satisfy most of the safety concerns.

Sorry, no convincing points there.

[LRO53]

Frantic is spot on: if LR stuffed the TDV6 into the Defender the problem would be solved.

But LR hides behind some carbon tax or some such crap. Despite the fact that the TDV6 engines are all being built by Peugeot and Renault IN EUROPE......


I think the only problem with the TDV6 is the high cost per unit compared to the ZSD Series Puma Engine 2.2L. If you want the TDV6 you are going to have to pay high end Disco and Range Rover Prices

Keep the 4 banger and keep Freelander prices!

Also the TDV6 is not made in France it's made in Dagenham outside london, This factory also makes Engines for the 2012 Ford Territory Diesel and they are shipped to Australia where they are tuned and tested before being fitted.

Defender is only just making a profit on each unit now, 2006-07 was a massive cost cutting operation on the defender cheaper parts were sourced etc more plastic etc. Also the engine which was a high cost low volume engine was ceased (Td5) As they were only making enough for the Defender and this was not viable.

[Blknight.aus]

"simple, you dont need a huge engine and there are tax breaks for utility vehicles based on engine capacity in a lot of countries."

So why do the Fords, Nissans et al utilities come with bigger motors?
They're lighter, have less GVM, but the Defender that is rated at 3.5T GVM wouldn't be able to pull that comfortably?
And the TDV6 is 2.7 and hardly HUGE.

because they dont market those engines in the same areas as the defender does. the first break point for most engine capacities is the 2.5L mark factory fit a bigger engine as standard and the price rises exponentially as you cant bring the vehicle in at the same taxing bracket. The TDV6 also costs more in the first place. so that's an exponential price increase. Once you put a trailer on you're limited to 100KPH. What are you a tractor puller or something? got to get their fastest and heaviest? the tdi300 with a 5 speed is quite happy with about 6t hanging from it, and the 2.2tdci beats that on torque and power and its got an extra cog in the box to help it along as well.

"in euro land its often less than 100Ks from town to town (and in some places you can cross a country in that distance) on roads that are not as straight as most of ours."

So now LR only makes cars for Europe? No wonder it's showing declining sales.


"the defenders stock suspension is not really up to "spirited" driving on road so you dont really need the power there and off road, youve got the lowest low range out of the box in an offroader so why do you need the big donk there?"

To maintain a safe, economical cruising speed while loaded. As for spirited driving: most current generation ECUs can record/measure road speed, so speed limit the vehicle. BMW does it already, as do most car manufacturers.
As for the suspension: it's the same basic suspension as used on the Land Cruiser 105, rated at 180kmh, so that's a rubbish argument. A BMW can do 250km/h, but not necessarily around a corner designed for 90km/h. If you try it, you're a fool. If you try the same with a Defender at 140km/h, you're still a fool.

IF you cant drive it at high speeds why power it to do so? as for a safe economical driving speed, in most cases given the brickonamics of the defender thats going to be about 80KPH loaded or unloaded. If you want to go faster why not get an american designed vehicle, they have plenty of straight roads but cant build light auto diesels worth a damn.

"hell I remember when a 2.25 naturally aspirated petrol 4 pot was all you really needed to get the job done. the same power that that donk used to produce can now be made from a 500cc 3 pot turbo diesel."

Hell I remember when 90km/h was really fast because we had no highways, but what's your point?

with less than 1/4 of the capacity you can now make the same amount of power

"need a big engine, nope, Quite happy back here with an Na 2.25 diesel thanks. (not that thats going to stop me stuffing in a turbo 3.9 with more boost than the tyre pressures into frankenrover)"

So why no OPTIONAL detuned, lower tech TDV6 with variable vane turbos and maybe smaller injectors for the Defender? I guarantee you Land Rover won't be able to satisfy demand.

because if you tried that on you'd have to have additional parts stock, possibly tooling at the factory and being Euro X complient on emmissions means you cant just detune any more doing so generally blows the NOX emissions out the window

And as mentioned, add a driver's and passenger's airbag, some interior roll-cage strength (side impact bars behind the sills, stronger steel pillars, door impact bars), and you'll satisfy most of the safety concerns.

Sorry, no convincing points there.

not for you perhaps but definately for the sales people

[solmanic]

In my opinion, Landrover's biggest mistake would be trying to target the recreational off-road market with the new Defender AT ALL.

IT NEEDS TO BE A COMMERCIAL VEHICLE.

They need to strip off all the "comfort pack" BS and focus on delivering a 4x4 utility - van - work platform. Small, cheap & reliable engine with best-in-class fuel economy and a drivetrain you could mate to a nuclear explosion without breaking. The ability to get from 0 to 100km/h only without holding up traffic - not at light speed - but gearing that gives it the ability to tow the moon out of its orbit if necessary.

However... the problem is that the last thing they want is guys in muddy site boots tramping into their clean, shiny dealerships and scoffing down free lattes. So I guess that idea's ****ed.

[scrambler]

"hell I remember when a 2.25 naturally aspirated petrol 4 pot was all you really needed to get the job done. the same power that that donk used to produce can now be made from a 500cc 3 pot turbo diesel."

Hell I remember when 90km/h was really fast because we had no highways, but what's your point?

I have a book in front of me ("Australia through the Windscreen" by William Hatfield) with the following quote "On a straight stretch of concrete past Ryde on the Great North Road, I proved for myself the maker's assertion that the job would do sixty [mph]. After that the needle was mostly below forty." Mind you, it does follow with "Less than twenty miles from the Sydney G.P.O. you can look off the road at country absolutely untouched since the coming of the white man." 1932. The car was a Hillman Minx of "10hp" (Wikipedia says 30bhp and 1185cc). He drove it around Australia in conditions that most would now regard as "off-road" nearly all the way. ("And the surfaced road ends about twenty miles out [of Toowoomba].") Had the steering strengthened en route, no breakdowns, 2wd.

2.25L pfffft :p

[Barra1]

In my opinion, Landrover's biggest mistake would be trying to target the recreational off-road market with the new Defender AT ALL.

IT NEEDS TO BE A COMMERCIAL VEHICLE.

They need to strip off all the "comfort pack" BS and focus on delivering a 4x4 utility - van - work platform. Small, cheap & reliable engine with best-in-class fuel economy and a drivetrain you could mate to a nuclear explosion without breaking. The ability to get from 0 to 100km/h only without holding up traffic - not at light speed - but gearing that gives it the ability to tow the moon out of its orbit if necessary.

However... the problem is that the last thing they want is guys in muddy site boots tramping into their clean, shiny dealerships and scoffing down free lattes. So I guess that idea's ****ed.

Well said and I totally agree.:)

Is it possible the LR Dealers who really don't want blokes in work gear and muddy boots scoffing a meat pie as they crawl in, under and around the vehicles in the showrooms - is it possible that one day they'll realise these blokes are/have been wearing a pathway in all the Toyota Dealerships buying utes, traybacks and troopies - all work vehicles.

[PAT303]

LR have the Range Rover,the new thing,Freelander,RRS,D4 they don't need another family/road type 4wd.The defender is what it is and it's never tried to be anything else,a solid vehicle for the outdoors,thats the way it should stay. Pat

[JDNSW]

........

And as mentioned, add a driver's and passenger's airbag, some interior roll-cage strength (side impact bars behind the sills, stronger steel pillars, door impact bars), and you'll satisfy most of the safety concerns.

Sorry, no convincing points there.

It is unlikely that it is possible to fit airbags in the dash - there is simply not room. Side impact bars and sill bars are probably possible, as are stronger pillars - but they add weight and have to be separately structurally verified for each body type (and added weight means the attach points might need modification etc). All this would cost, and is almost certainly not justifiable on a platform that is the same dimensions as were set in 1954, when not only were Englishmen suffering from food shortages through the Depression and two world wars (and hence significantly smaller), but the idea of comfort in a utility vehicle had not arrived (for example, heaters were rarely fitted to Landrovers until they became compulsory in the 1970s - Holdens did not even have a heater as a factory option until about 1960). The Defender should have been widened to bring the body out to the outside of the flares when the 110 was designed. They thought about it but decided that the cost of tooling for the wider firewall could not be justified. (These are still being built on tooling that was mostly made for the Series 2!). And it needs more length in the passenger area as well, which really means a new design, not a modification of the existing one.

John

[jakeslouw]

I think let's realise why Toyota makes a killing:

They provide a model with a standard basic body and chassis (Hilux) and then have a dozen optional models.

That's why they whack the market.

Why has the Defender become so one-dimensional? Because all it has done is reduce their potential target market. Nissan lost HUGE market share when they dropped the D22 Hardbody to concentrate on the F-Alpha platform: too upmarket, too posh, not enough choice.

At one stage, the Series 3 could be bought with a choice of FOUR engines:

2.25 Litre - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia@@AMEPARAM@@/wiki/File:SI_base_unit.svg" class="image"><img alt="SI base unit.svg" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c8/SI_base_unit.svg/75px-SI_base_unit.svg.png"@@AMEPARAM@@commons/thumb/c/c8/SI_base_unit.svg/75px-SI_base_unit.svg.png 73 hp (54 kW) Inline-four engine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia@@AMEPARAM@@/wiki/File:Ford-I4DOHC-engblock.jpeg" class="image"><img alt="" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/46/Ford-I4DOHC-engblock.jpeg/220px-Ford-I4DOHC-engblock.jpeg"@@AMEPARAM@@commons/thumb/4/46/Ford-I4DOHC-engblock.jpeg/220px-Ford-I4DOHC-engblock.jpeg (Petrol)
2.25 Litre - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia@@AMEPARAM@@/wiki/File:SI_base_unit.svg" class="image"><img alt="SI base unit.svg" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c8/SI_base_unit.svg/75px-SI_base_unit.svg.png"@@AMEPARAM@@commons/thumb/c/c8/SI_base_unit.svg/75px-SI_base_unit.svg.png 62 hp (46 kW) Inline-four engine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia@@AMEPARAM@@/wiki/File:Ford-I4DOHC-engblock.jpeg" class="image"><img alt="" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/46/Ford-I4DOHC-engblock.jpeg/220px-Ford-I4DOHC-engblock.jpeg"@@AMEPARAM@@commons/thumb/4/46/Ford-I4DOHC-engblock.jpeg/220px-Ford-I4DOHC-engblock.jpeg (Diesel engine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia@@AMEPARAM@@/wiki/File:Tatra018.jpg" class="image"><img alt="" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/99/Tatra018.jpg/220px-Tatra018.jpg"@@AMEPARAM@@commons/thumb/9/99/Tatra018.jpg/220px-Tatra018.jpg)
2.6 Litre - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia@@AMEPARAM@@/wiki/File:SI_base_unit.svg" class="image"><img alt="SI base unit.svg" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c8/SI_base_unit.svg/75px-SI_base_unit.svg.png"@@AMEPARAM@@commons/thumb/c/c8/SI_base_unit.svg/75px-SI_base_unit.svg.png 86 hp (64 kW) I6 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straight-6) (Petrol)
3.5 Litre - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia@@AMEPARAM@@/wiki/File:SI_base_unit.svg" class="image"><img alt="SI base unit.svg" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c8/SI_base_unit.svg/75px-SI_base_unit.svg.png"@@AMEPARAM@@commons/thumb/c/c8/SI_base_unit.svg/75px-SI_base_unit.svg.png 91 hp (68 kW) V8 engine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia@@AMEPARAM@@/wiki/File:Aero4G11.jpg" class="image"><img alt="" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/42/Aero4G11.jpg/220px-Aero4G11.jpg"@@AMEPARAM@@commons/thumb/4/42/Aero4G11.jpg/220px-Aero4G11.jpg (Petrol)

(Source: wikipedia et al)

So why now one engine when even the Disco, RR and RR Sport have multiple options?

So I agree with Solmanic and Pat on this: LR are trying to redesign the Defender into something it never was and should never be.

But hey, we can go round and round on this argument. I still haven't seen a logical reason provided for why LR is being so short-sighted on this model. Blacknight has approached this from a purely European/local view, but the point is LR need a global vision of their target market if they want to sell big numbers.

Face it, the Toy LC pickup has taken over from the LR Defender as the vehicle of choice in Africa: there are literally hundreds of thousands of the things. Previously it was a Series haven. There are still Series Land Rovers behind literally every tree and khaya across Africa.

[PAT303]

Trouble is LR don't give a stuff about Oz,as does Nissan.LR are intersted in America so the defender will be made to suit that market not ours and Nissan have made the Patrol for the UAE which is why it has a V8 petrol with no diesel,the middle east is the Patrols biggets market and Nissan made the vehicle they wanted.Stupid thing is the ute market in Oz is worth more than LR's total yearly production so the defender if made right could be sold by the thousands,I'm really keen to see the Amorak figures,my moneys on demand well exceeding supply. Pat

[scrambler]

Perhaps we can wait to see the vehicle. While LR are interested in the North American market, there's a heap of Jeepers there and true off-road capacity is still valued. I doubt they want to canibalise their own sales of D4, F2, so pure "family" won't be the segment. And while 20,000 sales annually is not brilliant I don't imagine they want to lose them and start again in a different market sector with the same brand. So commercial users will need to be catered for. I'm seeing 78 series meets Amorack with some Wrangler on the side. Don't forget that even the Wrangler is offered as a no-frills commercial/military model.