Will Defender be eliminated by "Regulations" in Aus?

[Pickles2]

I was reading an article recently which said that Defender would soon be affected by "new" regulations that would prevent any further new registrations in Aus?
Does anyone have any accurate info on this....or is it simply "myth & hearsay"?
Cheers, Pickles.

[tuesdayfox]

It wouldn't surprise me
I think it is a matter of time, really.

[Lotz-A-Landies]

It doesn't really matter, Land Rover has already stated that it plans to replace the Defender by 2016.

The Defender is a banned import in the USA because it doesn't have airbags and there are already cars in Australia that cant be registered in Victoria because they don't have airbags or stability control, so Defender is likely soon to follow.

[rijidij]

I think that's what killed off Defender sales in the United States, non compliance for things like airbags.
I'm sure the 'new' Defender, ie completely new design (2015 ?), will be fine.

Cheers, Murray

[JamesB71]

Im surprised the defender doesnt have airbags. It seems there is ample room to put them in on both sides. Is there another reason? Problems with them going off when you are offroad or something?

[Pickles2]

"E.S.C."?...Electronic Stability Control??....Is that the one?....Apparently Defender doesn't have it, but (all?) vehicles sold in Aus may soon have to have it, ...but I don't know the dates, or any specific details.
Cheers, Pickles.

[Lotz-A-Landies]

ESC should be able to be added because it is merely an added function using the ABS technology.

The airbags and progressive crumple zone passenger safety cells will be the big Defender killer.

[Dorian]

I don't have any specific documentation to point to but I'm pretty sure that the Defender can't be registered after a certain date in Australia (I thought mid 2015, from memory each state if slightly different) because of safety restrictions in that it cannot meet a minimum safety rating ( I think ANCAP 3). The defender's status as being able to register it as a light commercial has given it a reprieve for a few years.

In the US it also has had trouble meeting emission standards, but on that point they still manage to sell Jeeps, go figure!

As far as Airbags are concerned, I'm pretty sure that the driving position in the Defender is too close to the steering wheel to use airbags safely, I am led to believe there have been a number of cases in the US where the airbags have broken necks, but that may have something to do with seat-belt use. The ANCAP system also looks at what damage the vehicle does to pedestrians, as you can imagine the defender does well on that front.

[JamesB71]

As long as it isnt retrospective.....

[gruntfuttock]

As long as it isnt retrospective.....


I do not think it will be retrospective as this would set a precedence and any one with vehicles that do not meet current standards would be off the road. I.E. No old cars, No hot rods, No classic cars etc.

It would be for cars made from that date on

A friend of mine is going to register an old car, no blinkers, no wipers, two wheel rear brakes on bands around a drum, but as that is how it came out in 1920, that is the standards they will be using to register it. You could not expect to apply 2015 standards with all the regulations to an Austin 7 for example...mission impossible

[Lotz-A-Landies]

I do not think it will be retrospective as this would set a precedence and any one with vehicles that do not meet current standards would be off the road. I.E. No old cars, No hot rods, No classic cars etc.

It would be for cars made from that date on

A friend of mine is going to register an old car, no blinkers, no wipers, two wheel rear brakes on bands around a drum, but as that is how it came out in 1920, that is the standards they will be using to register it. You could not expect to apply 2015 standards with all the regulations to an Austin 7 for example...mission impossibleDon't put anything past the NSW RMS, the Council of Motoring Clubs reported on a case where a person was restoring a 1920s car that originally came to Australia as an engine/chassis and had the body built here. in the subsequent 80 odd years, the wood and metal body had died and a new one was constructed using the remnants of the original body as templates.

The RMS determined that it was a 2011 individually constructed vehicle and would need to meet 2011 ADR.

That was quite a battle the CMC had with NSW RTA/RMS.

[gruntfuttock]

Don't put anything past the NSW RMS, the Council of Motoring Clubs reported on a case where a person was restoring a 1920s car that originally came to Australia as an engine/chassis and had the body built here. in the subsequent 80 odd years, the wood and metal body had died and a new one was constructed using the remnants of the original body as templates.

The RMS determined that it was a 2011 individually constructed vehicle and would need to meet 2011 ADR.

That was quite a battle the CMC had with NSW RTA/RMS.

I would imagine that would fit about 99% of all restorations. I would imagine that the particular problem you are referring to would be a case of some pen pusher trying to be smart and cover his "lower spine"

[flagg]

As long as it isnt retrospective.....

It will be retrospective for some modifications. For example, I have to comply with some current ADRs (eg ADR V3 #79) for the installation of the turbo onto my Isuzu 110. 79 is emissions and crankcase ventilation. Open was OK in 86, and as such it is OK now in it's original form but now that I have modified the engine with a turbo to get engineering approval I have to comply with relevant current ADRs... so I have to have a closed provent system.

Obviously this example is different but goes to show that it isn't black and white.

[islu51]

MY14 was displayed at Frankfurt last week and the only obvious change externally...... it now says 'Defender' on the bonnet, but it is rumored to have ESC.... there were some pictures on twitter posted by a Journo but they have gone....

[Blknight.aus]

mandating ESC and ABS and all that acronym stuff is just stupid.

great while it works and idiots will drive to the limit of the system and then one day (probably sooner rather than later thank you all you build it cheaper and flog it for the same price bean counter dips) when some snot nosed brat who cant drive hooks into the same corner that hes taken a million times before like that gets a warning light on a dash hes not looking out that says "yeah buddy you're on your own now" they'll be off over the armco faster than I can say 'told ya"

[Cobber]

Obviously this example is different but goes to show that it isn't black and white.very true - you could have a car that does not have to comply with such ADRs as seatbelts and so on because it was built before the rules were introduced. However - and I think it's the same across Australia? - it still has to be within a 'maximum' decibel limit no matter how loud it was when it left the factory. So there is still certain rules you have to comply to.

I nearly couldn't get a vintage motorcycle registered because it was above the maximum decibels ... despite the fact it had no indicators, a headlight I could turn on and off, no pollution control ... in the end my saving grace was somebody rode past on a (new-ish) Harley that was nearly at the maximum on the decibel-o-meter thing even though it was 100 metres away. :eek:

:)

[newhue]

I don't think out little biddy market has a mention or even come into Land Rover's plans. It's what Europe are trying to achieve, and LR's interest in the US market. Australia follows in a delayed half interested manner.
I thought vehicle height, live axel performance which are both related to handling. Crush zones as mentioned for collision and those dreaded pedestrians, are all as much part of a upgrade as are traction control, airbags, and better emissions. Can't say I agree or like most of the upgrades, but I guess it all about the brainless world were all building.
One thing for sure I reckon, the new Defender will not be a 30 year purchase. It will have a limited life largely due to the costs of replacing electronics and air bags. Range Rovers, Disco's are paving the way. I believe all LR's are loosing the bonnet name and being replaced with the model name. Again RR have paved the way.

[460cixy]

mandating ESC and ABS and all that acronym stuff is just stupid.

great while it works and idiots will drive to the limit of the system and then one day (probably sooner rather than later thank you all you build it cheaper and flog it for the same price bean counter dips) when some snot nosed brat who cant drive hooks into the same corner that hes taken a million times before like that gets a warning light on a dash hes not looking out that says "yeah buddy you're on your own now" they'll be off over the armco faster than I can say 'told ya"


Totally agree. So many morons relying on this technology and a false sense of security

[Dorian]

mandating ESC and ABS and all that acronym stuff is just stupid.

great while it works and idiots will drive to the limit of the system and then one day (probably sooner rather than later thank you all you build it cheaper and flog it for the same price bean counter dips) when some snot nosed brat who cant drive hooks into the same corner that hes taken a million times before like that gets a warning light on a dash hes not looking out that says "yeah buddy you're on your own now" they'll be off over the armco faster than I can say 'told ya"

And instead of saying "Well that was an idiot thing to do" or "He should have learn't to drive an off road vehicle on Road". The road safety boffins will say "Lets legislate so these vehicles have to be made idiot proof, more expensive, more complex and less easily repaired by the owner"

[Lagerfan]

Totally agree. So many morons relying on this technology and a false sense of security

For those that haven't seen it check out Idiocracy (2006) - IMDb (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0387808/), not a great movie but a pretty good vision of the future :D

[gruntfuttock]

I would like to see all young drivers learn to drive in an old car, crash gearbox and mechanical brakes. They would quickly learn to "read the road" rather than let the car do it.

A Typical example of this was when I put my Audi in for a service in Switzerland, it had no abs etc etc and they gave me a demo car as replacement. Well the wife drove it up a mountain road (something like the roads on the west coast of Tasmania) and the best I could do in the old Audi up that road was 50/60km/h with the new one she was driving it up the same road at 85km/h. Now remember in Switzerland you get snow, ice etc. The panel beaters used to love the onset of winter

[FeatherWeightDriver]

I would like to see all young drivers learn to drive in an old car, crash gearbox and mechanical brakes. They would quickly learn to "read the road" rather than let the car do it.

Sigh - if only that were true. Shame that rules out most drivers under 30 these days.

[101RRS]

Arhhh - the good old days.

When I was learning to drive in the late sixites guys like you lot would have been saying I should have been learning to drive on cars that had rod operated brakes on the rear wheels only and mixture and timing controls on the steering wheel or better still the tiller.

Sorry the point is just not relevant.

Garry

[Lotz-A-Landies]

Have to agree with Garry

If we want to keep our kids alive and healthy, they should probably be driving the newest car in the family, the one with all the safety features. Just perhaps not one of the most powerful or hi-performance types.

Diana

[FeatherWeightDriver]

If we want to keep our kids alive and healthy, they should probably be driving the newest car in the family, the one with all the safety features.

Keeping them alive is one thing, and no-one will disagree with that.

Keeping them alive in spite of themselves is a whole other problem. All the technology in the world will not save a driver with the wrong attitude.

[Lotz-A-Landies]

Keeping them alive is one thing, and no-one will disagree with that.

Keeping them alive in spite of themselves is a whole other problem. All the technology in the world will not save a driver with the wrong attitude.And they will probably exclude themselves from the gene pool, hopefully without taking one of us with them. :(

[FeatherWeightDriver]

And they will probably exclude themselves from the gene pool, hopefully without taking one of us with them. :(

It is the second bit that worries me! ;)

[gruntfuttock]

Arhhh - the good old days.

When I was learning to drive in the late sixites guys like you lot would have been saying I should have been learning to drive on cars that had rod operated brakes on the rear wheels only and mixture and timing controls on the steering wheel or better still the tiller.

Sorry the point is just not relevant.

Garry


The point I am making is that whilst it is good to have all these safety items on the car, and they do save lives, may young people rely on them for their every day driving. While if you learn on a car that you have to read the road and drive accordingly to the conditions then when an accident does occur you will have a better chance of coming out the other side alive as the safety features are exactly that for safety, not a crutch or a tool to turn a bad driver into a good one.

I am not saying that all these safety features should not be available or be used. Just that learning on an earlier model will make you read the road better. I have seen first hand many many accidents where young people have been driving using the safety features as a normal driving tool and unfortunately the end result was generally not very nice.

I think it is great that we have all of these things to protect our lives, but at the end of the day no matter what you drive or just how many wheels you have on the road, it all boils down to a small amount of rubber in contact with the ground, and if you are driving like a bat out of hell and you hit a patch of ice, and the car ends up so far down a cliff that the rescuers have to think twice about how or if they are going to recover the body, let alone the car then I think a few hours learning on how to handle a car properly is worth the effort. (This example I saw first hand and I knew the driver who happened to have an attitude that these safety features are there to help him drive faster)

Isn't that what advanced driving schools are all about? Don't they disable the safety features on a car to show you how a car will react if these safety features are not on a car? They certainly are not for not using them, far from it, however driver awareness is probably much understated and it is not by giving someone a car that "will drive itself" (and this may happen sooner than we think) that somebody becomes a great driver.

You may disagree with what I have said and say it is "irrelevant" and that is your right and I respect that, I may not agree with it, but it is your opinion and you have every right to have it as I do mine.

Cheers

[gruntfuttock]

Have to agree with Garry

If we want to keep our kids alive and healthy, they should probably be driving the newest car in the family, the one with all the safety features. Just perhaps not one of the most powerful or hi-performance types.

Diana


I'll second that

[Pickles2]

Keeping them alive is one thing, and no-one will disagree with that.

Keeping them alive in spite of themselves is a whole other problem. All the technology in the world will not save a driver with the wrong attitude.
Exactly right mate.
I knew Brock very well, & as you'd all know, as well as being a racing driver, he was, for the majority of his career, involved with road safety...hense the .05 racing number.
Brock said, "If the driver hasn't got his brain in gear when he gets behind the wheel, nothing will make any difference".
And ya can have all the instruction, skill testing etc etc ya want, but the big thing is "ATTITUDE", which is where I say parental love/instruction/guidance or whatever ya wanna call it comes in. Some parents should take more interest in their kids, teach 'em about family values, being responsible etc. With the right attitude, things would be a lot better on our roads.
Cheers, Pickles.

[ozrob]

I have been browsing the Defender forums for some time, repaired Army 110's for 20 years, ride motorcycles since 1985 most of them with ABS,
My current drive is a Suzuki Grand Vitara...it has ABS, Stability Control (ESC) and Traction control as well as seat belts, and air bags.
I do not believe in the argument that having all these electronic safety aids makes you a worse driver because the nut behind the wheel will rely on these technologies as opposed to making them a better driver...you can't read the road 100% of the time...things happen that will affect the vehicles stability and cause the rear end to loose traction.
ESC is fantastic, it applies the rear breaks too point the vehicle too where the driver wants it to go, not where the forces of inertia want the vehicle to go.
Yes you can push the car harder in the dirt and rely on the stability control as an advantage, but when I buy a 110 defender next year i know i will not be able to drive the LR the same way as the Suzuki GV.
At the end of the day....these safety devices are there to save lives...if even once in 10 years they have done their job.
I have these constant arguments with motorcycle riders in the US who think removing the ABS on their motor cycles makes the bikes stop sooner....perhaps only in controlled breaking conditions...not for emergency stops when deer or roos jump out in front to you.
Does the technology make the vehicle safer for 90% or driving...yes
Can I disable the ABS & ESC when going off road...sure...just disconnect one of the ABS sensors, works well with the GV, not sure with the 110.

[tonic]

I was reading an article recently which said that Defender would soon be affected by "new" regulations that would prevent any further new registrations in Aus?
Does anyone have any accurate info on this....or is it simply "myth & hearsay"?
Cheers, Pickles.

A couple interesting points I can put to this was firstly when I went to get an e-tag here in QLD. They had defenders listed as commercial vehicles and I had a hell of time getting a private vehicle e-tag. A copper mate of mine in traffic said he remembered something in QLD regs about them been approved in QLD for registration without airbags as they are commercial due to their construction,towing and GVM stats, but can be registered for private use. We never followed it up so please don't challenge me.

The second point as many would know is the fact that they do not have recognised child restraint anchor points. I went through the rigmarole of have a Crab installed and a mod plate fitted. This also ties in with the commercial vehicle thing.

Just saying;)

[tonic]

Can I disable the ABS & ESC when going off road...sure...just disconnect one of the ABS sensors, works well with the GV, not sure with the 110.

Just take out the fuse I'm lead to believe.

[bee utey]

http://www.aulro.com/afvb/attachment.php?attachmentid=65786&stc=1&d=1379509038