2007 Land Rover Defender Revealed! - Photos and Pics.

[matbor]

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/

ALL HERE -> http://rovering.squarespace.com/journal/2006/8/22/2007-land-rover-defender-revealed.html (http://rovering.squarespace.com/journal/2006/8/22/2007-land-rover-defender-revealed.html)

[hiline]

i love the blue color :D :D

and how smick is that dash :D :D


now when can i place my order :D :D

[Pedro_The_Swift]

looks like its joined the corporate family,,
no defender badge!!!


love the two bug eyes!!!:D

[Captain_Rightfoot]

I don't think there is enough there to make me upgrade :o

[CraigE]

All good except the retarded 90kw Ford 2.4 diesel. About time at least a 150kw diesel was standard in Land Rovers. Put in the TDV6 or the rummored V10 diesel and I would buy one. Even a decent Cummins or Detroit diesel would be better and a 6spd auto option would be great. Does the Defender really need a lower ratio 1st gear??:eek:
Still will have a gork if they bring any to the local dealer.
:confused: :confused:

[boggo]

Cant say I'm overly impressed either

[TuffRR]

The piddly little Ford diesel sounds like a step backwards.

And there is a big gap between 1st and 2nd gear ratios in low range.

But i do like the new dash.

[Phoenix]

I like that B)

[Martin]

You can find even more photos here...

http://www.lroimages.zoomshare.com/1.shtml/07%20Defender

[ak]

I agree 90 kw bit of a disappointment, may not measure up to well against toyo's new 4 door 78 series V8 diesel. Oh well have to wait for the all new build model sometime around 2009 plus I think.

[Tusker]

But will it run on biodiesel???

The transit engine smells like a stopgap..

You'd be pinged off buying one & have the V10 released a yr or two later..

REgards
Max P

[Phoenix]

more pics here as well

http://carscoop.blogspot.com/2006/08/official-2007-land-rover-defender.html

[Maggot4x4]

I want one

[Defender200Tdi]

I like the dash and almost everything else about it, but as everyone else has said, the engine is a major dissapointment. The fuel tank too, still just 75 litres, com'on Landrover, we don't all live in Europe with a service station on every street corner.:mad:

Paul

[JamesH]

Can anyone hazard a guess at how much better that 2.4/6 speed combo will be compared to my 2.5Tdi in general drivablility? I know you are underwhelmed with the engine and you have put me off too but it probably is a step forward on the Tdi, surely?

Still dark about the vent flaps.

[ak]

Maybe LR are trying to find a engine that is a little more built proof that the TD5. Power to power the TD5 and this new thing would be about the same in a defender, would it not?

[Phoenix]

Ok, so the power isn't that much more, torque is a little up isn't it? I wouldn't be knowcking one back just for that, and the 6 speed should be good, especially if the top gear is 20% taller than the old 5th gear.

Interested to see what the economy figure will be though.

[101RRS]

Ho Hum - suppose new car sales of Defender in Australia might go from 10 a month to 11 a month - I think we are flogging a dead horse.

Sorry Guys and Gals

In 2007 it has gotta be better than this.

Gazzz

[boggo]

Maybe LR are trying to find a engine that is a little more built proof that the TD5. Power to power the TD5 and this new thing would be about the same in a defender, would it not?

Talk to any courier that owns a transit diesel,and they will tell you to run a mile,not very reliable at all,I'm told.I agree with Tusker,a stop gap maybe?Bring on a volvo engine I say

[Phoenix]

Interesting boggo, i've actually heard the reverse!

[Michael2]

I like the 6 speed.
I hate the bonnet
I like the 6 speed
I dislike the dash
I like the 6 speed
I'm confued about such a tiny engine.

A TDV6 & 6 speed would give people a good reason to upgrade.

Imagine, anyone with anything to tow would be buying a TDV6 Defender, especially with a 6 speed auto for the grey nomads & their vans.

It's the same marketing mistake as the Freelander, they released a new car with a tiny engine. By the time they introduced the power upgrade, the cars reputation was stuffed.

[crump]

I think I'll just buy a bonnet off one and fit it to mine, no one will notice the difference.;)

[stevo68]

Dependent on the engine, I love it, especially yhe 7 seat set up, perfect for my situation, I wonder if you could have the retro fitted into a current fender. I think they could well pick up some extra market share with this one as it isnt as utilitarian as previous models, its not as upmarket spec inside as a disco, it sits between the 2 in some respects. From a laymans point of view in terms of fenders, from a professional point of view with a marketing background. Id get one :)

Regards

Stevo

[boggo]

Interesting boggo, i've actually heard the reverse!

That doesn't surprise me Phoenix,one bad apple................

[Frenchie]

At least give us the option of a bigger motor. Toyota are putting a 4.4L V8 twin turbo diesel into the next Troopie with 5 doors and proper seating. I know that power isn't everything but a tiny Transit engine will look pathetic to anyone shopping for that sort of vehicle.

I also like the 6-speed, but why not the auto??

Also hate the bonnet, don't mind the dash and the improved climate control sounds good.

I reckon they have just lost a lot of sales from current Defender owners like myself who were considering an upgrade. And face it, that is their main market.

[sumo]

Softend the look, that engine is it turbo intercooled?, has more torque than the td5 and 300tdi, Hmm 2.4 l though not a big engine.

Sumo:D

[scrambler]

I'd get one if I had the money. I'm only just in the process of upgrading from a 3.5 Stage 1 and the new one has significantly better seating arrangement, dash has come into the new millenium in a great leap (guess that means only small tweaks for next 30 years then?) and torque to die for. OK, so it's squeezed out of a small motor, but all you TD5 owners seem to think you can leave much larger-engined cars in your wake so I don't think that's a big issue. Power is much less of an concern IMHO, esp with the 6 speed box.

Where does it sit in the Aus market? It doesn't. They make much more money out of this market selling the high-tech toys and I really don't think they're interested in the commercial market. I think we're lucky to have the Defenders sold here at all. Just check the NZ LR site and compare with the Oz one - they obviously sell Fenders there. Perhaps time for some reverse migration?

Steve

[ak]

At least give us the option of a bigger motor. Toyota are putting a 4.4L V8 twin turbo diesel into the next Troopie with 5 doors and proper seating. I know that power isn't everything but a tiny Transit engine will look pathetic to anyone shopping for that sort of vehicle.

I also like the 6-speed, but why not the auto??

Also hate the bonnet, don't mind the dash and the improved climate control sounds good.

I reckon they have just lost a lot of sales from current Defender owners like myself who were considering an upgrade. And face it, that is their main market.

That's exactly what I was talking about above in regards to Toyota!

LR make me wonder at times. They are on a winner with the D3 and RRS and they go and do something like that with the defender.

Wonder what the price will be, I better not get started on that I won't be able to stop:wasntme:

[p38arover]

Talk to any courier that owns a transit diesel,and they will tell you to run a mile,not very reliable at all,I'm told.I agree with Tusker,a stop gap maybe?Bring on a volvo engine I say


BACKBONE OF BRITAIN, OR IS IT?

A review by 01709andy14 (http://www.ciao.co.uk/Member__01709andy14_5796227) on Ford Transit (http://www.ciao.co.uk/Ford_Transit__5154590)
December 4th, 2005


The new ford transit 2.4 duratorq they say is the backbone of britian, or is it? As an independant motor vehicle repairer looking after a fleet of 250 transits I see more of the good and bad points of the van than most, even seeing the after sales from the customers side and not just what Ford say.

Now the the good bits.
The new transit comes in a multitude of guises with different engine sizes, lengths, roof heights and front or rear wheel drive.This one is the 2.4 long wheel base, semi high roof, rear wheel drive.{try saying that after 4 pints}.The load space is 3399 mm long , can cope with upto 1600kg , will take 4 euro pallets or 8x4 boards........................................OH god i'm fed up with this specification tripe, whats it like ?

The van itself is a far better van than the old 2.5di bone shaker that we all know. The driving position is excellent and you would be forgiven for thinking you were driving a car. If your van is empty and there is a rain cloud on the horizon then be warned they can be a bit tail happy as the 2.4 turbo engine produces a fair amount of power. The van has quite a few good points which I won't go into. Your local ford dealer will tell you this as he is planning his next holiday on your money. The best bits are the fact that when you load the van it seems just as quick as it is when its empty, and also that 100,000 mile or 3 year warranty.

And now here we go with the bad bits.

RELIABILITY!! Working on these vans day in day out I have seen some pretty poor what can only be described as build quality.
ie: engine failure at 1500 miles
turbo failure at 200 miles
5 vans from a batch of 10 requiring new diesel pumps in the first 3 months . Thats just a few from the top of my head.
All this from the backbone of britian and a multi million pound company, what is ford playing at , thank god for that 'bumper to bumper' 100,000 mile warranty.

AFTER SALES!! Vans by their nature have to be on the road to be earning money. Should your new van require repair under warranty get ready for a bit of a wait. Some examples I have seen are 5 days for a pump, 3 weeks for an engine and even 2 days just to get it looked at!!

WHAT AFTER 100,000 MILES? The Transit (http://www.ciao.co.uk/Ford_Transit_5075130_4) can be some what expensive to repair with it's common faults.

Things to look for if buying second hand are:
Vibration on clutch pedal when stood in traffic {faulty fly wheel at a cost of around £600}
Intermittent loss of power on motorway or poor starting{faulty diesel pump at around £1800}
Noisey timing chain and poor oil pressure{new engine!!!}

CONCLUSION
Overall I think the transit IS a very good van, however my advice would be to buy one with about 40k on it to iron out those problems from new but still have a fair bit of warranty left and then renew it before 100k.

Would I buy One?? Possibly!!

Do I run one?? No (overladen 200K Renault that never lets me down).




Ford Transit (rear-wheel drive) 2.4 Di upto 2002
Problem: Repeated premature clutch failure and possible damaged dual mass flywheel.
Solution: A revised final drive ratio (5.13) rear axle should be fitted. This will reduce the top speed of the vehicle, but will aid in situations such as a steep hill with full load, preventing repeat clutch failure.


Interesting.

Ron

[dmdigital]

I have to have a say on this....

Nice 1st gear should help crawl out of a lot. But why not the TDV6 or the rumoured Volvo motor. OK Torque and KW are up on the Td5 and I'm sure you'll be able to reprogram the ECU but it's still a small engine. Seating looks greatly improved, but I'd want to sit in one and see how the seats and dash was, 'cause it looks more of a cosmetic change in someways. You'd think they could have also done something with the handbrake too.

Also I do wonder why it doesn't appear to have Airbags in the wheel and dash (I'm not saying I want to see them in a Defender). The photos don't show any SRS symbols etc. I would have that that legislation would have caught up with the Defender on this one and made it manditory.

Oh and I bet you won't be able to get this serviced at anywhere except the few and far between Land Rover delalers with TestBook!

Still it makes me think should I hold off trying to get a second hand Td5 90 or not! They probably won't ship the 90 version to Australia anyway:(

[Ace]

I like it, i am glad they didnt realy change its looks that much, it was a new interior that was desperately needed, a pitty about the engine though. Matt

[edddo]

i'd be interested if they have made it comfortable for over 6 footers. Havent heard good things about the transit motor tho, but at least it would still be economical and maybe they have ironed out some bugs-lets hope so. Power wise if its better than the td5 its good enough for me.

[JDNSW]

It is unfortunate, but Australians are (in general) very much sold on "nothing beats cubic inches" despite the fact that once you supercharge an engine the actual capacity of the cylinders becomes irrelevant, particularly talking diesels. (And you can use a lot more boost when the engine was designed from the start with supercharging in mind than when it was added as an afterthought)
Hence this lack of capacity will definitely hamper sales here. But if the performance is there, it will make little difference in the long run. The biggest problem faced has nothing to do with the vehicle itself, but with Landrover's woeful dealer network. This is shown up graphically by the member here who had to have his Defender shipped back from (Newman was it?) to Perth for what turned out to be a throttle potentiometer. This is the sort of thing that will hit sales, not the engine capacity.
The softer interior, while it may not help sales to repeat buyers, will sell them to a lot of people who just found the Defender too spartan for them (or their wives did). And what else are the repeat buyers going to buy? One would hope they have figured out how to make the doors a bit thinner (and hence more room), but I rather doubt it.
Overall I suspect the changes make for more sales. Of course, we can all think of how they could have done things better, but the route chosen will probably reduce the manufacturing cost of the Defender, and hence hopefully the selling price - which will be one of the major influences on sales numbers.
John

[bluetongue]

.... I don't why everyone is complaining about the engine size.... how is 90kw in the 2,4 ford different to the 90kw in the current fender???

.... six speed, who cares about auto.... bring it on.... for me this is a big enhancement

new dash, plastic bits.... I like the look of my 2000 dash. Simple and retro.... but the new one looks fine and my wife will probably be happier which means I sleep more soundly at night

....

I will definately check it out...

... Scott

[bluetongue]

... And if they come out with the full colour-coded body like those glamour shots show --- I will probably buy one!

[DirtyDawg]

I don't like the swanky dash, but I would have one even with the mini-me diesel engine:confused:

[harro]

My 02MY Xtreme has spent weeks in and out of the dealership with trivial issues.
Every time I go on corrugations the CD player falls out, loose door handle, clock face fell out, backdoor central locking stopped working, aircon vent fell in, trasfer case oil leak, rear pinion seal oil leak, I could go on and it hasn't even got 40,000k on the clock. The point being if someone else can do a better job of building them at least give them a chance.
I love the girl but sometimes................:(

[dmdigital]

It is unfortunate, but Australians are (in general) very much sold on "nothing beats cubic inches" despite the fact that once you supercharge an engine the actual capacity of the cylinders becomes irrelevant, particularly talking diesels. (And you can use a lot more boost when the engine was designed from the start with supercharging in mind than when it was added as an afterthought)
Hence this lack of capacity will definitely hamper sales here. But if the performance is there, it will make little difference in the long run. The biggest problem faced has nothing to do with the vehicle itself, but with Landrover's woeful dealer network. This is shown up graphically by the member here who had to have his Defender shipped back from (Newman was it?) to Perth for what turned out to be a throttle potentiometer. This is the sort of thing that will hit sales, not the engine capacity.
The softer interior, while it may not help sales to repeat buyers, will sell them to a lot of people who just found the Defender too spartan for them (or their wives did). And what else are the repeat buyers going to buy? One would hope they have figured out how to make the doors a bit thinner (and hence more room), but I rather doubt it.
Overall I suspect the changes make for more sales. Of course, we can all think of how they could have done things better, but the route chosen will probably reduce the manufacturing cost of the Defender, and hence hopefully the selling price - which will be one of the major influences on sales numbers.
John

I couldn't agree more with your comment about cubic capacity. I live in a town full of cruisers and nissans and hear lots about how woeful a small engine is. But then I get half the fuel consumption and have just as much torque!

As for there dealership etc... my closest TestBook/Dealer is now 1100km away thanks to LRA's cut back on dealerships and total removel of service agents. At the time it happened I wrote 2 letters to LRA which I can say were either never received, ignored or they could just not be bothered responding to. But I do get their junk mail on the new D3 etc...if only I could get it serviced!

[solmanic]

Of course there is the possibility that LR are putting out a bit of mis-information here, maybe lowering everybodys' expectations a bit before they announce the option of a Jaguar/TVR V8 engine. At the very least I am optimisic that when the official release comes the TDV6 will be the engine of choice.

Don't really see the point of the bonnet bump - if they are serious about the 90kW 4-pot engine then maybe it should be slightly concave.

...and yes, I am going to mis the air vents too, but maybe they are just a bit too worried about morons leaving them open during a river crossing and drowning the copious electrics in the new gadgetty dash.

[dullbird]

well trust me when we buy ours at the end of 2007/2008 you are all going to want one:)

and i can't believe your all moaning about the engine size.....:D so what there work horses not drag cars, and besides have any of you driven a transit engine, some one said any courier will tell you to run a mile.....but.....i haven't driven one my self but i have known plenty of people that have including ian and the engines DO take some abuse......and never heard complaints of bad unreliabilty.......

tranist are very popular in the uk because they can take a thrashing....

a 4.4l twin turbo troopy hey............you will still pass it on a rock climb in your little measly 2.4 waving and saying like my new plastic dash;)

[bluetongue]

...and yes, I am going to mis the air vents too, but maybe they are just a bit too worried about morons leaving them open during a river crossing and drowning the copious electrics in the new gadgetty dash.

... bugger, that means that there'll be no more possibility of water leaking on your accelerator foot while driving in rain :cool:

[Captain_Rightfoot]

Our car is still very new (not even 20k on it), and this new one has nothing really in it that would make me want to trade up. I'll reserve final judgement until I drive one... but that's how I feel at the moment.;) Even if it was a corker I couldn't justify a change when ours is so new anyway.

Having said that, if I was in the market there is nothing there that would stop me either :)

[JDNSW]

... bugger, that means that there'll be no more possibility of water leaking on your accelerator foot while driving in rain :cool:
I would not bet on that - I've got plenty of wet feet ...... and they have NEVER been due to leaks from the vents (one of the passenger's wet feet bits was, so it can happen). My most frequent leak on to feet is along the thread of the bolt holding the windscreen hinge. This must be a high pressure area, and the sealing is woeful - relies on a sealing surface about 1mm wide. I don't know if this has improved in the last twenty years, but as long as the windscreen is separate from the bulkhead (and it must be for some body styles) doing away with the vents won't do away with the possibility of wet feet. And even then I would not bet on it - I think one of my current problems is the gasket on the pedal assembly!
John

[Phoenix]

I've been trying to think of an argument against this cubic inches thing for a long time, and I think I found a reasonable example of why it's how you use it that matters.

I went to steamfest at sheffield earlier this year where they had tractor pulling. Some of these pulling tractors have 2 monster v8 engines with huge horsepower. 100's of horsepower. They scream, whine and moan down the track pulling the sled. The old diesel tractors in the stock section with maybe 40 hp hook up and just slowly chug down the track without a stress in the world. They also hooked an old steam traction engine up to the sled at one point. official hp is 2 hp I think. It didn't even miss a beat crawling it's way along the track, never even looked stressed.

[dobbo]

It's a step backwards in my book. No vents, one less cylinder, inclusion of a dashboard. The only thing I like is the bonnet bulge which could this mean a V8 petrol option at a later date?

[D110V8D]

Wholly ****!! It's got a tacho!:eek:

[dobbo]

Personally I think if they grafted a D2 disco interior into a current model Fender that would be a car for me, for life.

[Martin]

I wonder how many comments are from current Defender owners? I see a couple are. I for one am a current fender owner (99MY xTreme), and I am stuck between loving the sparse old fashioned interior, and longing for something just a little more comfy.

Really I should not expect to have the door hinge drip on my foot while I am driving. I should expect to get really cool when I put on the air conditioner, and have it blowing somewhere other than at the back of the steering wheel. I should not have to get underneath each month and check for oil leaks or bolts for tightness. But I do because it’s a Landrover.

I do like the dash – it looks rugged enough. I will miss the vents – I love them. The engine? Dam – I just got used to finding my way around this one.

My father has a transit van with the ford engine back in the UK, and has not had any trouble with it. I asked about oil leeks and he stared at me blankly – apparently new cars don’t leak oil anymore.

I want the TD5 engine left in, and the new dash mounted. I don’t mind the bonnet, and don’t care for fangled colours – my next one will be white.

But all in all would I buy one? Yes of course. Why? Because it is a Landrover, and the alternatives just aren’t there for me.

(Hold on – the 4 door jeep Wrangler unlimited is on its way to Australia next year with the 500nm common rail diesel engine – I may just re-consider that last comment, especially as it’s likely to be $15,000 cheaper.)

[Captain_Rightfoot]

I don't have to worry about our fender leaking... it doesn't rain in Queensland!

[maggsie]

The first question my wife asked: " Have they increased the legroom?
I like the new facia, other internal stuff, plus the external appearance still retains the Defender identity.
Don't like the idea of a smaller capacity engine, would have been happier if they used the TDV6 or used the non-electronic 2.8L. Better still have the option for either engine, it would suit a lot of people who operate in remote locations. Keep the fuel clean, oil and water up to scratch on the non electronic version and you would have ( dare I say it) a reliable Defender. It would be on my shopping list next year.
Definately not happy with the handbrake lever still in the same bloody place!
Maggsie

[Tusker]

And will the door catch be shielded??

My car has ripped the belt loop in just about every pair or trousers I have!

[rangieman]

i could live with that and im a current defender owner :p

[BigJon]

As for there dealership etc... my closest TestBook/Dealer is now 1100km away thanks to LRA's cut back on dealerships and total removel of service agents. At the time it happened I wrote 2 letters to LRA which I can say were either never received, ignored or they could just not be bothered responding to.

With a Dealer in Darwin and one in Alice, which one is 1100 km away from you?

[dobbo]

As for there dealership etc... my closest TestBook/Dealer is now 1100km away thanks to LRA's cut back on dealerships and total removel of service agents. At the time it happened I wrote 2 letters to LRA which I can say were either never received, ignored or they could just not be bothered responding to. But I do get their junk mail on the new D3 etc...if only I could get it serviced!

Believe it or not
Back in the late 70's early 80's my father in law lived up there. When his Landy broke he just drove it down to the tip and picked up another one literally drive one in park it get in a dumped one and drive it home.
This is the dead set truth

[noddy]

And will the door catch be shielded??

My car has ripped the belt loop in just about every pair or trousers I have!

HeHeHe...I was out the other night in Kimba in a brand new pair of swanky 'britches' and I got hooked on the door latch...suspended momentarily and the a loud rip.....bugger! Would make a great ad!

I am worried about that new gear knob....looks like a marital aid....;)

[bluetongue]

Definately not happy with the handbrake lever still in the same bloody place!
Maggsie

... how can anyone not like that???

* Cold steel against your leg in winter
* Hot (or let's say luke warm) steel against your leg in summer
* Dent in your leg all year round

... I've been driving my mother-in-laws subaru liberty all week... the one main thing that I cannot get used to - reaching down far forward to grab and pull the handbrake!


... Scott

[dobbo]

I am worried about that new gear knob....looks like a marital aid....;)

thats so the Ford executive designers can go ........................... in there tough looking SUV.

I'm sorry they've wrecked it for me, it looks wussy. I might have to get the bosses permission to buy one of the last real Fenders before it comes out.

[LRHybrid100]

where do I send my deposit?

buy one, run it for a while then put in the TDV8 / ZF 6 speed from the new Rangie.

SO whats your problem? One of the BIG points of a LR is you can easily customise them.

my 10c worth

LRH

[Bigbjorn]

It is unfortunate, but Australians are (in general) very much sold on "nothing beats cubic inches" despite the fact that once you supercharge an engine the actual capacity of the cylinders becomes irrelevant, particularly talking diesels. (And you can use a lot more boost when the engine was designed from the start with supercharging in mind than when it was added as an afterthought)
Hence this lack of capacity will definitely hamper sales here. But if the performance is there, it will make little difference in the long run. The biggest problem faced has nothing to do with the vehicle itself, but with Landrover's woeful dealer network. This is shown up graphically by the member here who had to have his Defender shipped back from (Newman was it?) to Perth for what turned out to be a throttle potentiometer. This is the sort of thing that will hit sales, not the engine capacity.
The softer interior, while it may not help sales to repeat buyers, will sell them to a lot of people who just found the Defender too spartan for them (or their wives did). And what else are the repeat buyers going to buy? One would hope they have figured out how to make the doors a bit thinner (and hence more room), but I rather doubt it.
Overall I suspect the changes make for more sales. Of course, we can all think of how they could have done things better, but the route chosen will probably reduce the manufacturing cost of the Defender, and hence hopefully the selling price - which will be one of the major influences on sales numbers.
John

My engine specification for an out back 4wd as opposed to a private school, pony club, ballet lessons 4wd is a 4 or 6 cylinder diesel, minimum 5 litres, all cast iron including the water pump, gear driven pushrod overhead valves, open combustion chambers, in-line mechanical injection, naturally aspirated. This removes all the points of added maintenance & potential failure found with electronic injection and engine management systems, aluminium heads and water pumps, rubberband cam drives, and turbochargers. In other words an engine from a medium truck, a true industrial long life low stressed engine. European manufacturers, in spite of all their hype & PR spin still have no idea of the heat, dust, bad roads, even the shaking vehicles get on our highways, and distances routinely encountered in Australia. This is why the line haul truckies voted with their bums and their cheque books from the early sixties on, when import & foreign exchange restrictions changed and North American trucks became much more readily available in OZ. I recall a then prominent Euro. truck maker being requested as a matter of urgency by their Aust. operation, for a 400hp prime mover to have any chance of staying in the market place. The reply was that no truck could conceivably require such power. Another one had their first Australian sale into road train service and did not know what a bull bar was, and supplied the unit with oil bath air cleaners. An outback 4wd should also have easily removed rubber mats, not carpets so you can blow or hose it out. Doors should be aluminium of minimum size for access, with full length piano hinges. Light doors ,well retaind, dont sag, & dont cause cracks around the door openings. Seating & legroom should be sized to fit full grown adult North European descent males, with size 12 boots, not Mediterranean or Asian dwarfs in ballet slippers.

[sumo]

Being a transit motor sureley a ford dealership in outback areas could be of some assistance if a engine prob occured?

Sumo:D

[JDNSW]

My engine specification for an out back 4wd as opposed to a private school, pony club, ballet lessons 4wd is a 4 or 6 cylinder diesel, minimum 5 litres, all cast iron including the water pump, gear driven pushrod overhead valves, open combustion chambers, in-line mechanical injection, naturally aspirated.(snip)

Problem with that specification is the size and weight. The 4BD1 engine as in my 110 is the closest Landrover have ever come to your specification, and even though it is under four litres it is easily the heaviest engine ever factory fitted in a Landrover, and also fills the engine bay pretty well. Not that I'm complaining, but I have problems wondering where you are going to put the extra 25% engine capacity while maintaining the ruggedness you want.
John

[Bigbjorn]

Problem with that specification is the size and weight. The 4BD1 engine as in my 110 is the closest Landrover have ever come to your specification, and even though it is under four litres it is easily the heaviest engine ever factory fitted in a Landrover, and also fills the engine bay pretty well. Not that I'm complaining, but I have problems wondering where you are going to put the extra 25% engine capacity while maintaining the ruggedness you want.
John

I have also got a County-Isuzu. Perhaps a few inches in the wheelbase and the track is necessary. This will also help with the interior room. I like simplicity, repairability, reliability, and totally dislike any electronic system whose failure will disable the vehicle. I have had too many. I firmly believe an electronic failure will cause a tragedy in a remote location. This is inevitable. Foundry technology has come a long way in the last forty years and thin wall castings of the high grade irons have been a reality since the late sixties. What I call the "Early English Vertical School of Engine Design" is way obsolete. Compact, lighter, engine designs are possible. An in-line engine also leaves plenty of room around it to fit in things like compressors ( air & A/C), alternators, power steering pumps, fuel & air filters, etc. etc. and room to get the hands and spanners in. I worked at Leyland Truck & Bus when they were the LR/RR distributors and we all knew that the principal problem with LR/RR's was that the Poms refused to put a decent sized engine in them.

[JDNSW]

I have also got a County-Isuzu. Perhaps a few inches in the wheelbase and the track is necessary. This will also help with the interior room. I like simplicity, repairability, reliability, and totally dislike any electronic system whose failure will disable the vehicle. I have had too many. I firmly believe an electronic failure will cause a tragedy in a remote location. This is inevitable. Foundry technology has come a long way in the last forty years and thin wall castings of the high grade irons have been a reality since the late sixties. What I call the "Early English Vertical School of Engine Design" is way obsolete. Compact, lighter, engine designs are possible. An in-line engine also leaves plenty of room around it to fit in things like compressors ( air & A/C), alternators, power steering pumps, fuel & air filters, etc. etc. and room to get the hands and spanners in. I worked at Leyland Truck & Bus when they were the LR/RR distributors and we all knew that the principal problem with LR/RR's was that the Poms refused to put a decent sized engine in them.

There are a number of problems with increasing the wheelbase and track, although as you point out there are multiple advantages in it. Everything else remaining similar it would result in a significant increase in mass of what is already a fairly heavy vehicle, and reduce the handiness of a vehicle that is already a bit of a problem in tight parking spaces for example. I'm not sure that the Isuzu falls into the "Early English Vertical School of Engine Design" but maybe that is not what you meant.

I share your distrust with electronics, but perhaps not for quite the same reasons - the problem is not that they are more likely to fail (in fact the evidence suggests they are not) but that if they do fail, it is virtually impossible to find out what the problem is, let alone fix it (although the actual problem may just be a dirty connection), without a dealer on tap. While an electronic failure may very likely cause a tragedy in a remote location, to put this in perspective there have been any number of such tragedies caused by old fashioned mechanical failures.

I do not have your problem with turbocharged engines - I would point out that they have been used reliably in aircraft service for over fifty years, and almost as long in earthmoving equipment for example, so I don't think they have any inherent shortcomings. While an engine whose original design power is increased by turbocharging will usually be less reliable or durable or both, if an engine is designed (properly) for it from the outset, I do not see a problem, and the resulting engine will be smaller, and lighter than the equivalent unboosted engine. (talking diesels here, by the way).

Because the Australian view is that large engines are necessary, this has always hampered Landrover sales here since they started to have any real competition. But the real problem was never the engine size, but the available power and Landrover's failure to respond to customer demand, both in this and other areas. When it was Rover, you had to have sympathy for them, because they were capital strapped, but it is hard to feel any sympathy for Leyland (who are the ones who lost most of the market here anyway) because they treated Landrover for years as a cash cow without putting anything back in until it was too late (without an enormous effort) as far as the Australian market was concerned. And since the Leyland era there has been little improvement - for example dropping the 110 when the Disco was introduced, not bringing in the 90 because it might compete with the Disco, dropping half their dealers recently, a parts service that is markedly less effective than what you can get from the independents. And so on.
John

[Bigbjorn]

There are a number of problems with increasing the wheelbase and track, although as you point out there are multiple advantages in it. Everything else remaining similar it would result in a significant increase in mass of what is already a fairly heavy vehicle, and reduce the handiness of a vehicle that is already a bit of a problem in tight parking spaces for example. I'm not sure that the Isuzu falls into the "Early English Vertical School of Engine Design" but maybe that is not what you meant.

I share your distrust with electronics, but perhaps not for quite the same reasons - the problem is not that they are more likely to fail (in fact the evidence suggests they are not) but that if they do fail, it is virtually impossible to find out what the problem is, let alone fix it (although the actual problem may just be a dirty connection), without a dealer on tap. While an electronic failure may very likely cause a tragedy in a remote location, to put this in perspective there have been any number of such tragedies caused by old fashioned mechanical failures.

I do not have your problem with turbocharged engines - I would point out that they have been used reliably in aircraft service for over fifty years, and almost as long in earthmoving equipment for example, so I don't think they have any inherent shortcomings. While an engine whose original design power is increased by turbocharging will usually be less reliable or durable or both, if an engine is designed (properly) for it from the outset, I do not see a problem, and the resulting engine will be smaller, and lighter than the equivalent unboosted engine. (talking diesels here, by the way).

Because the Australian view is that large engines are necessary, this has always hampered Landrover sales here since they started to have any real competition. But the real problem was never the engine size, but the available power and Landrover's failure to respond to customer demand, both in this and other areas. When it was Rover, you had to have sympathy for them, because they were capital strapped, but it is hard to feel any sympathy for Leyland (who are the ones who lost most of the market here anyway) because they treated Landrover for years as a cash cow without putting anything back in until it was too late (without an enormous effort) as far as the Australian market was concerned. And since the Leyland era there has been little improvement - for example dropping the 110 when the Disco was introduced, not bringing in the 90 because it might compete with the Disco, dropping half their dealers recently, a parts service that is markedly less effective than what you can get from the independents. And so on.
John

I wasn't referring to the Isuzu in that comment although it is a pretty bulky engine. I was referring to the general run of English engines that were tall and heavy, Jaguar, BMC, Rover, Rootes, Rolls-Royce B series, were all guilty of making heavy bulky engines that didn't really put out in proportion to their swept volumes. A major problem with the British motor industry was paternalism, a hangover from colonial times. They thought they knew best, would not listen to their overseas distributors and particularly not to the customers. Some, like the motor cycle builders, made what they could, or what they had, and expected the overseas distributors to sell them against Jap. bikes that didn't leak oil, had self-starters, went well. etc. An example was the accusation made by head office to Leyland Aust., that we were submitting false warranty claims on Range Rovers, as the failures could not be duplicated at the proving grounds. It appears the poms got in their tweeds, loaded the Purdys and Harrods hampers and trundled gently out to the grouse moors, whereas we uncouth colonials belted p--s & pick handles out of the vehicles, and broke the diffs., and gearboxes. An oft repeated complaint made by LR customers from the wide open spaces was the poor cruising speed of the Series 3. When you live 100 miles or more from town, or you regularly drive from Townsville to Mt. Isa, and the Patrol or Cruiser will cruise at 70mph and the LR is busy at 55, then you look at the Ricegrinders. it was Leyland UK who told their Aust. operation that no truck needed 400 horse power. Rover chose to build the aluminium Buick/Olds V8 at only 3.5 litres when GM had built it at up to 5 litres and even turbocharged it. I have no problems with turbochargers per se, I owned and drove turbocharged trucks for years. It is just that they are an unecessary complication on a passenger/ light goods vehicle. Heavy truck engines need to be pressurised to get the requiiste power out of them. A 600hp naturally aspirated diesel would be far too heavy & bulky. Turbos are an added cost to make & buy, to maintain, and to fit under the bonnet. Keep it simple, sancho. We are talking bush vehicles here.

[JDNSW]

I wasn't referring to the Isuzu in that comment although it is a pretty bulky engine. I was referring to the general run of English engines that were tall and heavy, Jaguar, BMC, Rover, Rootes, Rolls-Royce B series, were all guilty of making heavy bulky engines that didn't really put out in proportion to their swept volumes. A major problem with the British motor industry was paternalism, a hangover from colonial times. They thought they knew best, would not listen to their overseas distributors and particularly not to the customers. Some, like the motor cycle builders, made what they could, or what they had, and expected the overseas distributors to sell them against Jap. bikes that didn't leak oil, had self-starters, went well. etc. An example was the accusation made by head office to Leyland Aust., that we were submitting false warranty claims on Range Rovers, as the failures could not be duplicated at the proving grounds. It appears the poms got in their tweeds, loaded the Purdys and Harrods hampers and trundled gently out to the grouse moors, whereas we uncouth colonials belted p--s & pick handles out of the vehicles, and broke the diffs., and gearboxes. An oft repeated complaint made by LR customers from the wide open spaces was the poor cruising speed of the Series 3. When you live 100 miles or more from town, or you regularly drive from Townsville to Mt. Isa, and the Patrol or Cruiser will cruise at 70mph and the LR is busy at 55, then you look at the Ricegrinders. it was Leyland UK who told their Aust. operation that no truck needed 400 horse power. Rover chose to build the aluminium Buick/Olds V8 at only 3.5 litres when GM had built it at up to 5 litres and even turbocharged it. I have no problems with turbochargers per se, I owned and drove turbocharged trucks for years. It is just that they are an unecessary complication on a passenger/ light goods vehicle. Heavy truck engines need to be pressurised to get the requiiste power out of them. A 600hp naturally aspirated diesel would be far too heavy & bulky. Turbos are an added cost to make & buy, to maintain, and to fit under the bonnet. Keep it simple, sancho. We are talking bush vehicles here.

Yes, I have to agree with just about everything you say - except that your comment about the need for a turbocharger on a passenger/light goods vehicle. If you try to get the power you want for such a vehicle from a simple, rugged unblown diesel, you end up with a much heavier than necessary vehicle, with all that results in for cost, running costs etc.

In the mid 1960s I was working in the Simpson Desert - I had my own Landrover there, but the company was using Internationals and Landcruisers. After the first six months the Inters were replaced by more Landcruisers, which were performing quite well despite their shortcomings (which are interesting considering the reputation they have today) - awful electrics, seats which collapsed under the weight of Westerners, upholstery that lasted only months in the sun, leaked water and dust everywhere, some models (FJ45V) the bodywork fell to bits and had the worst ride of any vehicle I've ever driven, appalling steering and very mediocre brakes, very poor fuel consumption - as little as 6mpg on the highway as a result of the effect of sand on the carburettors, only three gears, only semifloating axles.
But! Toyota listened to customers complaints, and shortcomings were rapidly acted on, and meanwhile the ability to cruise at 70-80mph even if you had trouble keeping it on the road made up for a lot. (As a matter of interest, one of our subcontractors used Patrols - despite the even bigger engine they were always having problems, commonly a broken front axle housing.)
And meanwhile, Rover (who at that stage could not make enough Landrovers to keep up with demand) ignored the demands from Australia, which would probably have been for a (much) bigger engine, preferably a six, a decent size fuel tank, and synchromesh on all four gears, or at least the top three. At least Landrover offered a diesel, which Toyota did not, although it was even more inadequate on power

[Bigbjorn]

Yes, I have to agree with just about everything you say - except that your comment about the need for a turbocharger on a passenger/light goods vehicle. If you try to get the power you want for such a vehicle from a simple, rugged unblown diesel, you end up with a much heavier than necessary vehicle, with all that results in for cost, running costs etc.

In the mid 1960s I was working in the Simpson Desert - I had my own Landrover there, but the company was using Internationals and Landcruisers. After the first six months the Inters were replaced by more Landcruisers, which were performing quite well despite their shortcomings (which are interesting considering the reputation they have today) - awful electrics, seats which collapsed under the weight of Westerners, upholstery that lasted only months in the sun, leaked water and dust everywhere, some models (FJ45V) the bodywork fell to bits and had the worst ride of any vehicle I've ever driven, appalling steering and very mediocre brakes, very poor fuel consumption - as little as 6mpg on the highway as a result of the effect of sand on the carburettors, only three gears, only semifloating axles.
But! Toyota listened to customers complaints, and shortcomings were rapidly acted on, and meanwhile the ability to cruise at 70-80mph even if you had trouble keeping it on the road made up for a lot. (As a matter of interest, one of our subcontractors used Patrols - despite the even bigger engine they were always having problems, commonly a broken front axle housing.)
And meanwhile, Rover (who at that stage could not make enough Landrovers to keep up with demand) ignored the demands from Australia, which would probably have been for a (much) bigger engine, preferably a six, a decent size fuel tank, and synchromesh on all four gears, or at least the top three. At least Landrover offered a diesel, which Toyota did not, although it was even more inadequate on power

When I started at Leyland Truck & Bus they had just taken over LR/RR distribution and we were selling Series III and the first mark of Range Rover. A very few 110 forward controls were still around. Here in Qld we only got three station wagons in the first 18 months. Our reps would take orders for Range Rovers without being able to give any idea as to when delivery might take place, what colour, whether or not it would have power steering or cloth seats. When we got a batch of RR's, the Sales Supervisor would start 'phoning the oldest order to ask if they still wanted one. The bulk of sales were 109 with 4cyl. petrol engines and dropside bodies, to primary producers and Govt. depts. The few 110F/C's sold mainly to bee-keepers. The little diesel engine was noteworthy for its fuel economy and ability to accelerate from low rpm's (unladen). One mining company replaced its petrol cruisers with diesel LR's and saved staggering sums on fuel. Toyota did not have a diesel cruiser variant at the time.and almost no mining coy. employee had a diesel vehicle so fuel theft virtually ceased. My memory of new Series III was that they too had very ordinary steering & brakes, even by the standards of the time. Interesting, your comment on Patrol's front housings. They had become unpopular in black soil areas as being quite nose heavy, after a bit of rain they would sink their snouts deep into the black muck where other better balanced vehicles could (mud)dle through. We sold a few LR's to a French coy. working in the sandhills of Western Q. and their staff were divided on the merits of short or long wheelbase. Some said the shorties got their noses and tails stuck in the bottoms of the dips and others said the long ones bellied out on the top of the dune. Suppose it depends on where you prefer to be digging. With a few exceptions the dealer network was hopeless, mostly BMC dealers with no acceptable product left to sell and grabbing desperately for something to pay the bills. Or multiple franchise operations that could not service any of their lines properly. Generally they were the least desirable of available dealers in a country town. Only a few had been LR dealers prior to Truck & Bus taking over distribution. I was asked once if a particular dealer in a Qld. country town would take on another franchise. I told my boss that he would have to extend the premises to carry another sign. He sold everything from rabbit traps, barbed wire, ammunition and chemicals to a range of cars, trucks, farm machinery and huge tractors. One dealer used to boast he had the biggest dealership in the West. He had bought a WW2 aircraft hangar and put it up behind his office and parts counter for a workshop & warehouse. I asked him if he had trouble getting planning permission from the council because it was a bloody eyesore. He replied that he didn't bother to ask.

[spudboy]

Quite a lot of posts mention the dropping of the front vents, but I've seen photos with them still there!

http://www.lroimages.zoomshare.com/album/07%20Defender/images/96157c10022286246c2069d492ccc39f_11562535980/%3aalbum?css=/lib/style/trebuchet.css&css=/lib/style/type_album.css

and

http://www.lroimages.zoomshare.com/album/07%20Defender/images/070669e354c12e004aed90f032f38429_11562535520/%3aalbum?css=/lib/style/trebuchet.css&css=/lib/style/type_album.css

[dobbo]

Well bugger me

[JDNSW]

Interesting your comments on the steering and brakes of the S3. Compared to even cars of that time they would have been fairly ordinary - steering slow and relatively heavy (improved with radials - which were almost unheard of, although see below), but compared to the mid sixties Landcruiser they were notably better. The early Landcruisers had the steering drag link going onto the side of the track rod, which meant that every time the load on it reversed, the track rod twisted as far as the track rod ends allowed. In addition, the steering relay, which like the Landrover had the link from the steering box avove the link to the track rod, had the bearings only about an inch apart, which meant when they wore, as they inevitably did in a few thousand miles, the whole thing tilted every time the load reversed, giving even more free play.
I actually had a diesel 2a 109 when I was working in the Simpson Desert. And, following the company lead I fitted it with radial tyres, which performed better in the sand. Also improved matters on the road when I finished there.

At least one company I am aware of replaced their Landcruisers with Landrovers (can't remember whether petrol or diesel) with the intention of reducing the fatality rate.

You have to remember that in the sixties at least Landrover had a dealer network - Toyota didn't, but they were still able to take the market from Landrover, at least partly because Landrover were unable to supply vehicles, as you point out. And as you may remember, the first Landcruisers were imported by Thiess after they were unable to buy Landrovers at any price, since Australia's quota for the next couple of years had just been sold to the Army.
John

[scrambler]

Quite a lot of posts mention the dropping of the front vents, but I've seen photos with them still there!


But do they open or are they more attractive versions of the blanked-out spaces on airconditioned One Tens?

Steve

[dobbo]

But do they open or are they more attractive versions of the blanked-out spaces on airconditioned One Tens?

Steve

I don't know I had another look at the dash and cannot possibly see any way of opening them from the inside plus there is no visible hinges on the outside unless they are automaticly opened with the air con but thats a different problem alltogether.

They should have left it the way it is you cannot improve on raw perfection

[scrambler]

Just a thought out of left field. What IS that bonnet bulge doing there? Is it for an intercooler? Or is the Ford engine actually shorter and they've done a Lada/ early Subaru and mounted the spare directly above the motor? Might explain why there's no mounts on the bonnet itself.

Steve

[Bigbjorn]

Interesting your comments on the steering and brakes of the S3. Compared to even cars of that time they would have been fairly ordinary - steering slow and relatively heavy (improved with radials - which were almost unheard of, although see below), but compared to the mid sixties Landcruiser they were notably better. The early Landcruisers had the steering drag link going onto the side of the track rod, which meant that every time the load on it reversed, the track rod twisted as far as the track rod ends allowed. In addition, the steering relay, which like the Landrover had the link from the steering box avove the link to the track rod, had the bearings only about an inch apart, which meant when they wore, as they inevitably did in a few thousand miles, the whole thing tilted every time the load reversed, giving even more free play.
I actually had a diesel 2a 109 when I was working in the Simpson Desert. And, following the company lead I fitted it with radial tyres, which performed better in the sand. Also improved matters on the road when I finished there.

At least one company I am aware of replaced their Landcruisers with Landrovers (can't remember whether petrol or diesel) with the intention of reducing the fatality rate.

You have to remember that in the sixties at least Landrover had a dealer network - Toyota didn't, but they were still able to take the market from Landrover, at least partly because Landrover were unable to supply vehicles, as you point out. And as you may remember, the first Landcruisers were imported by Thiess after they were unable to buy Landrovers at any price, since Australia's quota for the next couple of years had just been sold to the Army.
John

The only radial tyres I remember seeing then on LR's were Michelin Sahara fitted as an afterthought at customer request, and the Michelin Wintertread pattern whichwas standard on RR's. Standard equipment on LR's
were 6.00 x 16 on 88's, 7.50 x 16 on 109's, 8.25 x 16 on110F/C's. All were either military bar tread or all purpose lug. Goodyear Custom Hi-milers were popular for the beach. My recollection of Toyota's taking of the market, in Qld. anyway was because they were cheap and would cruise at a reasonable speed. if you want to break into a market-place, cut the price to well below your competitors and aim at the rural market. Cockies are cheap by nature and will buy what is cheapest. I know this may offend any cockies out there but it is the unfortunate truth proven time & again. Just look at all the crap brands that did this. Then when you have broken the competition you can up your prices.

[JDNSW]

The only radial tyres I remember seeing then on LR's were Michelin Sahara fitted as an afterthought at customer request, and the Michelin Wintertread pattern whichwas standard on RR's. Standard equipment on LR's
were 6.00 x 16 on 88's, 7.50 x 16 on 109's, 8.25 x 16 on110F/C's. All were either military bar tread or all purpose lug. (snip).

When we started operations in the desert the Landcruisers and Inters were fitted with 900x13 sand tyres, can't remember the brand. One of our key trucks, an Inter B160 was fitted with Michelin Sahara, I think 1200 x 20, and those were so effective we looked at other radials and some of the Landcruisers were fitted with Unisteel tyres, Goodyear from memory. I got a set (I remember they were very expensive) and put them on my Landrover. They probably contributed to my getting up to 36mpg on the trip back to Sydney via Port Augusta and Broken Hill later on.
You are right about tyres though, standard on Landrovers woould have been sizes as you say with Dunlop RTMs the most common. Ican't remember seeing any civilian Landrovers with bartreads though.
John

[Ace]

Just a thought out of left field. What IS that bonnet bulge doing there? Is it for an intercooler? Or is the Ford engine actually shorter and they've done a Lada/ early Subaru and mounted the spare directly above the motor? Might explain why there's no mounts on the bonnet itself.

Steve

The intercooler might be up there, but i would like to see an opening in the bonnet like the 3.0L patrol to get some more air in there to cool it.

God i hope the spare aint in there like a suby, i cant really see it fitting though. Matt

[bluetongue]

The intercooler might be up there, but i would like to see an opening in the bonnet like the 3.0L patrol to get some more air in there to cool it.

God i hope the spare aint in there like a suby, i cant really see it fitting though. Matt

Now there's a good idea ;)
Nothing better and tougher lookin than a hooter-hole in the bonnet

[dullbird]

has any one noticed on the one of the links that a heavy duty version is avaliabe, is that suspension upgrade or a chassis upgrade, may be we get a chance of getting a wolf chassis

[dobbo]

Has anyone else noticed the similarity between the bonnet bulge and the XR8 bonnet bulge

[LoadedDisco]

I like the dash and almost everything else about it, but as everyone else has said, the engine is a major disappointment. The fuel tank too, still just 75 litres, com'on Landrover, we don't all live in Europe with a service station on every street corner.:mad:

Paul

Yep I agree both the fuel tank and engine are unsatisfactory.
Other than those two let down points the new fender is great.

[bluetongue]

I don't know I had another look at the dash and cannot possibly see any way of opening them from the inside plus there is no visible hinges on the outside unless they are automaticly opened with the air con but thats a different problem alltogether.

They should have left it the way it is you cannot improve on raw perfection

When I got my water leaks fixed a few weeks back the guy was telling me that LR at one stage welded up the vents, don't know for sure, but he thinks sometime in the late 90's, maybe on the early td5's or late 300 tdi's???

He also reckons that everyone complained to LR big time, which is why the later and current models still have opening vents.

If there is one thing I love about the fender, it is those vents.... I'm not one for aircon anyway, always prefer to get natural air into the car. Added plus with the defender is you get to hear the td5 purring.

[JDNSW]

When I got my water leaks fixed a few weeks back the guy was telling me that LR at one stage welded up the vents, don't know for sure, but he thinks sometime in the late 90's, maybe on the early td5's or late 300 tdi's???

He also reckons that everyone complained to LR big time, which is why the later and current models still have opening vents.

If there is one thing I love about the fender, it is those vents.... I'm not one for aircon anyway, always prefer to get natural air into the car. Added plus with the defender is you get to hear the td5 purring.

Vents were welded up on Landrover 110 fitted with factory airconditioning from their introduction in about 1983 probably until replaced by the Defender in 1989, possibly not quite that long - and I think the Australian importers started fitting after market aircon earlier to keep the vents rather than importing the ones with factory aircon - which was pretty woeful anyway, even when it did work.
John

[LRHybrid100]

Bonnet bulge is due to the fitment of the new motor - the stroke is that much longer than the Tdi & Td5!!! Hence the torque!!!

LRH

[rick130]

Bonnet bulge is due to the fitment of the new motor - the stroke is that much longer than the Tdi & Td5!!! Hence the torque!!!

LRH

variable vane turbo might have something to do with the torque, as well ;)

[DEFENDERZOOK]

without reading all 5 pages of this thread so far....
has anyone noticed the handbrake for 2007......?

yes.....its still in exactly the same ruddy spot......!!

[Deffy]

Yes, I have it looks the same, so does the indicator and wipers switch!!!

[Pedro_The_Swift]

where would you silly buggars be without that handbrake?:whistling:

but oh! THAT bulge---:woot:

[Bigbjorn]

Problem with that specification is the size and weight. The 4BD1 engine as in my 110 is the closest Landrover have ever come to your specification, and even though it is under four litres it is easily the heaviest engine ever factory fitted in a Landrover, and also fills the engine bay pretty well. Not that I'm complaining, but I have problems wondering where you are going to put the extra 25% engine capacity while maintaining the ruggedness you want.
John

Toyota, Nissan, and the Americans don't seem to have any trouble fitting big (4.0+ litres & bulky) engines. A medium size Cummins is an option in Dodges. In my time at Leyland Truck & Bus, I once sighted a Series III in for service, with a Perkins 6-354 neatly installed. Same car also had HQ Holden power steering box. Chrysler Aust. Hemi Six 265's were becoming quite common in older LR's once the swap gained Dept. Transport approval. Terrific performers too. Mexico Chev. 5 litre (petrol) truck engines were also fitted with suitable camouflage and creative numbering as Holdens, with which they were virtual twins in external appearance, just a little bigger all around. I once sighted a 4-53 Detroit in one but it was unregistered, a property vehicle.

[JDNSW]

Toyota, Nissan, and the Americans don't seem to have any trouble fitting big (4.0+ litres & bulky) engines. A medium size Cummins is an option in Dodges. In my time at Leyland Truck & Bus, I once sighted a Series III in for service, with a Perkins 6-354 neatly installed. Same car also had HQ Holden power steering box. Chrysler Aust. Hemi Six 265's were becoming quite common in older LR's once the swap gained Dept. Transport approval. Terrific performers too. Mexico Chev. 5 litre (petrol) truck engines were also fitted with suitable camouflage and creative numbering as Holdens, with which they were virtual twins in external appearance, just a little bigger all around. I once sighted a 4-53 Detroit in one but it was unregistered, a property vehicle.

You've come back from 5 to 4+, and the Toyotas and Nissans are bigger and heavier. And as for the Americans, we are into a different class altogether - they NEED a bigger engine, but often won't fit between the trees. I would love to see the S3 with a Perkins six in it, but it would be very nose heavy. The petrol engines you quote are significantly lighter than similar capacity diesels.
John

[Bigbjorn]

You've come back from 5 to 4+, and the Toyotas and Nissans are bigger and heavier. And as for the Americans, we are into a different class altogether - they NEED a bigger engine, but often won't fit between the trees. I would love to see the S3 with a Perkins six in it, but it would be very nose heavy. The petrol engines you quote are significantly lighter than similar capacity diesels.
John

The Toyota and Nissan offerings are quite heavy & bulky in relation to their displacement. Most Jap. engines seem to be. An up-to-date fresh design using all the advantages of CAD-CAM to reduce unwanted metal and spaces, modern thin wall casting foundry technology, the improvements in machine tools & their cutting tools should result in a lighter and more compact engine. Understood the petrol examples quoted are lighter than most diesels but they are excellent examples of compact lightweight engine design. The Chrysler Hemi Six block is only 1/4" longer than a red Holden, much more compact & lighter than an equivalent Falcon, and it was designed in the sixties. The Mexico Chev. is likewise not much larger overall than a red Holden. Compare the red Holden & Hemi Six with a Rover F-head six as used in LR's, or the Jaguar 3.4/4.2 as good against poor examples of design from many years ago and now should be able to be improved upon. As to overall size of the package, remember we are going to lengthen & widen the vehicle so as to fit real people in. Anyway the difference between a 4+ liter engine and a 5 litre should be no more than bore & stroke measurements.

The Series III with Polly Perkins installed was nose heavy, hence the HQ power steering. The owner was quite pleased with it in all respects, as I recall. it was registered for road use but there were virtually no restrictions on engine swaps then. I don't know where, or what sort of use it got. Probably would not have been much use on soft sand or wet black soil, but most 4wd's then only spent about 5% of their time , or less, actually in 4WD. Most LandRovers were bought by primary producers or Govt. Depts. Range Rover seemed to be bought by Doctors. The property LR with 4-53 Jimmy installed was a bloody pig. Noisy in the extreme, nose heavy without power steering, but went very well. Handling was ,shall we say, of a total understeer persuasion. It was a very, very, worn & battered IIA which had spent its entire life on a property down the Diamantina from Winton. Used as a workhorse with regular trips to the nearest pub and occasionally into Winton. It was de-registered when the Police in Winton expressed a desire not to see it in town again until extensive renovation had been done. The jimmy came out of a piece of mobile plant which had otherwise disintegrated. These two stroke Detroits commonly outlived their original homes.

[JDNSW]

The Toyota and Nissan offerings are quite heavy & bulky in relation to their displacement. Most Jap. engines seem to be. An up-to-date fresh design using all the advantages of CAD-CAM to reduce unwanted metal and spaces, modern thin wall casting foundry technology, the improvements in machine tools & their cutting tools should result in a lighter and more compact engine. Understood the petrol examples quoted are lighter than most diesels but they are excellent examples of compact lightweight engine design. The Chrysler Hemi Six block is only 1/4" longer than a red Holden, much more compact & lighter than an equivalent Falcon, and it was designed in the sixties. The Mexico Chev. is likewise not much larger overall than a red Holden. Compare the red Holden & Hemi Six with a Rover F-head six as used in LR's, or the Jaguar 3.4/4.2 as good against poor examples of design from many years ago and now should be able to be improved upon. As to overall size of the package, remember we are going to lengthen & widen the vehicle so as to fit real people in. Anyway the difference between a 4+ liter engine and a 5 litre should be no more than bore & stroke measurements.

The Series III with Polly Perkins installed was nose heavy, hence the HQ power steering. The owner was quite pleased with it in all respects, as I recall. it was registered for road use but there were virtually no restrictions on engine swaps then. I don't know where, or what sort of use it got. Probably would not have been much use on soft sand or wet black soil, but most 4wd's then only spent about 5% of their time , or less, actually in 4WD. Most LandRovers were bought by primary producers or Govt. Depts. Range Rover seemed to be bought by Doctors. The property LR with 4-53 Jimmy installed was a bloody pig. Noisy in the extreme, nose heavy without power steering, but went very well. Handling was ,shall we say, of a total understeer persuasion. It was a very, very, worn & battered IIA which had spent its entire life on a property down the Diamantina from Winton. Used as a workhorse with regular trips to the nearest pub and occasionally into Winton. It was de-registered when the Police in Winton expressed a desire not to see it in town again until extensive renovation had been done. The jimmy came out of a piece of mobile plant which had otherwise disintegrated. These two stroke Detroits commonly outlived their original homes.
I agree with you on the possibility of designing a much improved low stress large capacity engine using modern tooling and design methods. However, I rather doubt it will be done, since the same methods can produce a turbocharged engine with identical performance (and durability) which is much smaller and lighter and quieter. Unfortunately your and my (and a few other's) desire to see a modern diesel without electronics is very unlikely to be met, since it is very much easier (and cheaper) to meet fuel consumption and environmental requirements by doing as much as possible in software.

Your comment about the noise level of the Jimmy equipped Landrover reminds me of an early GM equipped Hummer - notice on the top rail of the windscreen in front of the driver "Hearing protection MUST be worn". Says it all.

I don't think I go along with lengthening and widening the current Defender - I could agree to widening it to the mudguard spats, but the main problem with width in the current Defender is the thickness of the doors - it should be possible to reduce the thickness of these to those of the early 110s or even the sliding window doors - which are all that is really needed anyway in this type of vehicle anyway. Lengthening it raise parking problems, although you could live with a few inches.
Either change, however, loses one of the significant pluses of the Defender compared to its competitors - commonality of parts with earlier models (OK, it is certainly not complete commonality, but there are a lot of parts that can be used at a pinch going back to 1958 - just used a 1963 rear window in my 1986 110, for example, until I got a new one, and I could have used the whole door).

[rick130]

bloody hell Brian, a 6-354 Perkins is a fair lump of a thing !
The FIL's White tractor had a 6-354T in it, and that was a reasonble lump of a tractor for these parts.

A couple of the blokes on the Pirate board (US based) have or are fitting small Cummins (4BT, 6BT ?) to some Landy's, but it appears things are a lot more relaxed regarding vehicle mods in most states there.

[rangieman]

i drove a mates G60 many years ago he had a perkins 6-354 in it and a 5 speed crash box out of a studebaker 6x6 man that was a beast


i had to tow his tipper with bobcat in that back and all his acc around the back of doncaster if any one knows that area its up and down (hilly)


well it worked out i towed 16 tons with that G60 what afeat it was oh it was none tubo aswell :D

[Phoenix]

A little back on topic, I read an article about the upgraded defender which is intended to be produced untill at least 2010, and one of the changes being made would be updated engines

We know about one, I wonder what No2 will be? maybe the TDV6 or TDV8, just to give that hump a good reason to be there?

Maybe even that tasty V10 :cool:

[solmanic]

Like I said - the Landrover-TVR V8 hybrid which is used in the Bowler Wildcat would be a good start.

[Phoenix]

Sure would be, except that it's based on an engine land rover no longer make, but it would be nice, heck, a bowler would be nice :cool:

[Bigbjorn]

bloody hell Brian, a 6-354 Perkins is a fair lump of a thing !
The FIL's White tractor had a 6-354T in it, and that was a reasonble lump of a tractor for these parts.

A couple of the blokes on the Pirate board (US based) have or are fitting small Cummins (4BT, 6BT ?) to some Landy's, but it appears things are a lot more relaxed regarding vehicle mods in most states there.

Old Polly Perkins is not really all that big which is quite unusual for Pommy engines of any era. Perkins always seemed to have a better grasp of reality compared with most of the rest of the British Motor Industry. SeriesIII were easy to fit longer engines to, as there was a good bit of space between the front guards in front of the grille so Polly was stuck a bit further forward than Soilihull's design crew envisaged for an engine position. There were a couple of Perk 4-236's, and a 4-154 running around Qld in LR's also. The 4-53 engined 2A was a home job done on the property some time after the vehicle was de-registered. It had been derelict for some time when a front end loader died and someone decided the little Jimmy would fit the old LR. A very agricultural ( maybe pastoral?) conversion with no attention to sound deadening and an exhaust pipe that ran straight up in the air, no muffler or bonnet. It did keep working for some years though, humping men and gear around the bores and windmills.

[Bigbjorn]

[QUOTE=JDNSW]I don't think I go along with lengthening and widening the current Defender - I could agree to widening it to the mudguard spats, but the main problem with width in the current Defender is the thickness of the doors - it should be possible to reduce the thickness of these to those of the early 110s or even the sliding window doors - which are all that is really needed anyway in this type of vehicle anyway. Lengthening it raise parking problems, although you could live with a few inches.

Really, A LR Station Wagon is not a very big car. Shorter in wheelbase and overall length than a Holden/Falcon/Valiant, which our American cousins called "compact cars". Say, an extra 8-10 inches in the wheelbase, 6" in width, would give the necessary room for a decent sized engine, plus some leg & hip room. Then lift the body 2-3 inches off the rails so the transmission hump can be narrowed, move the handbrake to a central position, and the foot room problem is solved.

[JDNSW]

[QUOTE=JDNSW]I don't think I go along with lengthening and widening the current Defender - I could agree to widening it to the mudguard spats, but the main problem with width in the current Defender is the thickness of the doors - it should be possible to reduce the thickness of these to those of the early 110s or even the sliding window doors - which are all that is really needed anyway in this type of vehicle anyway. Lengthening it raise parking problems, although you could live with a few inches.

Really, A LR Station Wagon is not a very big car. Shorter in wheelbase and overall length than a Holden/Falcon/Valiant, which our American cousins called "compact cars". Say, an extra 8-10 inches in the wheelbase, 6" in width, would give the necessary room for a decent sized engine, plus some leg & hip room. Then lift the body 2-3 inches off the rails so the transmission hump can be narrowed, move the handbrake to a central position, and the foot room problem is solved.

One of the attractions of the Defender is that it IS slightly smaller than its direct competitors - and copying the competitors is not always a good idea, particularly with fuel prices increasing and unlikely to come down very much in the near future, if ever. I agree with you that Landrover has over the last thirty or more years lost a lot of their market because of lack of engine power, I don't think that increasing the overall size of the vehicle to allow fitting of a BIGGER engine is either a) a good idea, or b) at all likely to happen. Certainly I agree that increased power is probably a good idea, but this does not necessarily mean a bigger engine. Unless the ownership changes remarkably I can't see another engine being designed specifically for Landrover, and I can't see the sort of engine you envision being designed for any vehicle in the future - sorry.
John

[Bigbjorn]

[QUOTE=Brian Hjelm]

One of the attractions of the Defender is that it IS slightly smaller than its direct competitors - and copying the competitors is not always a good idea, particularly with fuel prices increasing and unlikely to come down very much in the near future, if ever. I agree with you that Landrover has over the last thirty or more years lost a lot of their market because of lack of engine power, I don't think that increasing the overall size of the vehicle to allow fitting of a BIGGER engine is either a) a good idea, or b) at all likely to happen. Certainly I agree that increased power is probably a good idea, but this does not necessarily mean a bigger engine. Unless the ownership changes remarkably I can't see another engine being designed specifically for Landrover, and I can't see the sort of engine you envision being designed for any vehicle in the future - sorry.
John

Who knows what the next change of ownership (of LR) will bring. Ford are rumoured to be seeking a sale or sales of Volvo-Jaguar-Land Rover. I do think making them bigger is a bloody good idea. I am 6'1", big frame (xxxl shirts, 105 kilos.), size 12 shoes, and sick of cars I have to put on like an overcoat, and, once in, have no room to move. I have modified the drivers seat of my 86 County -Isuzu to be 1 1/4" higher and 2" further back. If my current workhorse, a late model Falcon ute, had any less room at the drivers seat, I couldn't drive it. My wife had a Ford Escort auto. which had simply nowhere for my left foot to go if I drove it. I had to sit with my left knee bent and my left foot under my right leg.This explains my comments re cars designed to fit Mediterranean & Asian dwarfs. Having come from a family that ran mail contracts around theWinton district for three generations I am a great fan of simplicity and reliability, not to mention fixability. My uncles would regularly say that the American cars with their big slow-revving engines made the mail contracts viable, and that anyone who used British or European cars in the outback soon went broke.

[JDNSW]

[QUOTE=JDNSW]

Who knows what the next change of ownership (of LR) will bring. Ford are rumoured to be seeking a sale or sales of Volvo-Jaguar-Land Rover. I do think making them bigger is a bloody good idea. I am 6'1", big frame (xxxl shirts, 105 kilos.), size 12 shoes, and sick of cars I have to put on like an overcoat, and, once in, have no room to move. I have modified the drivers seat of my 86 County -Isuzu to be 1 1/4" higher and 2" further back. If my current workhorse, a late model Falcon ute, had any less room at the drivers seat, I couldn't drive it. My wife had a Ford Escort auto. which had simply nowhere for my left foot to go if I drove it. I had to sit with my left knee bent and my left foot under my right leg.This explains my comments re cars designed to fit Mediterranean & Asian dwarfs. Having come from a family that ran mail contracts around theWinton district for three generations I am a great fan of simplicity and reliability, not to mention fixability. My uncles would regularly say that the American cars with their big slow-revving engines made the mail contracts viable, and that anyone who used British or European cars in the outback soon went broke.

I'm not quite as big, but still not small. But to improve the space in a vehicle does not mean you have to make it bigger - I am struck every time I go from my County into the 2a how much roomier the 2a is, largely due to the smaller transmission tunnel and thinner doors. And the big slow revving engines of a generation ago produced a power weight ratio that would be simply unacceptable today, together with fuel consumption that would also be unacceptable. And the major reason for the economics of American rather European cars for mail contracts was that they were designed for the sort of conditions they experienced - which the European cars were not. The engine was only a small part of this. I am afraid that we will not see big, slow revving engines again, but there is no inherent reason why modern light weight engines cannot be both reliable and fixable, even if not big or slow revving, or even simple (for example, there is NO reason why a test book cannot be incorporated in every vehicle together with a display that tells you exactly what is wrong).
As to what will happen if the ownership changes - as you say - nobody knows, but it is a reasonable guess that any new engines will not be specifically designed for Landrovers, and that their design will be dictated by the same factors that influence the current engines - emissions rules, EU requirements for an ECU, fuel economy requirements, competition with other engines for size, weight, vibration, noise, driveability and manufacturing cost. But a return to the style of engine of a generation ago is not going to happen.
John

[Bigbjorn]

[QUOTE=Brian Hjelm]

I'm not quite as big, but still not small. But to improve the space in a vehicle does not mean you have to make it bigger - I am struck every time I go from my County into the 2a how much roomier the 2a is, largely due to the smaller transmission tunnel and thinner doors. And the big slow revving engines of a generation ago produced a power weight ratio that would be simply unacceptable today, together with fuel consumption that would also be unacceptable. And the major reason for the economics of American rather European cars for mail contracts was that they were designed for the sort of conditions they experienced - which the European cars were not. The engine was only a small part of this. I am afraid that we will not see big, slow revving engines again, but there is no inherent reason why modern light weight engines cannot be both reliable and fixable, even if not big or slow revving, or even simple (for example, there is NO reason why a test book cannot be incorporated in every vehicle together with a display that tells you exactly what is wrong).
As to what will happen if the ownership changes - as you say - nobody knows, but it is a reasonable guess that any new engines will not be specifically designed for Landrovers, and that their design will be dictated by the same factors that influence the current engines - emissions rules, EU requirements for an ECU, fuel economy requirements, competition with other engines for size, weight, vibration, noise, driveability and manufacturing cost. But a return to the style of engine of a generation ago is not going to happen.
John

You can't make doors thinner because they are filled up with selling tools, such as electric locking & electric windows. You can't skinny up the trans. tunnel as the drivetrain needs to be big & strong to take the load. So the package has to be made bigger. I would like to see the traditional LR station wagon rear door made full width ( or almost) so you can get things like sheets of plywood in. The standard sheet of plywood was once the design criterion for station wagons in the U.S. A full-width tailgates option would be nice for carrying long stuff with the lower tailgate down, a la Holden/Falcon/Valiant station wagons. Folding side steps should be standard at least on the front doors. Not long ago I had a giggle watching a petite woman getting into her hoisted up and sand tyred 4WD. It really was an effort for her, sticking a foot up onto the elevated sill, grasping the steering wheel and seat squab, and hauling herself up. Modern cars have been filled up with what GM used to call "comfort & convenience options" & we in the trade called "selling tools" only these un-necessary items are now standard equipment lifting the price and the weight. I, for one, don't need electric windows, electric locking, electric mirrors, heated seats with electric positioning, carpets, cruise control, on-board talking computers. Nice to have, but I can live without radio/CD/DVD players, air conditioning, electric road maps. I do like demisters and heated mirrors. My wife never uses the heater in car, and I mean NEVER, she simply does not like what she feels is "stuffiness". I rarely use the heater, usually to warm up the interior and clear the windscreen on an early am start in winter. I like external metal sunvisors, weather shields, hard wearing washable cloth (not velour) seat facings (absolutely necessary in our climate), decent sized mud flaps, round headlights, replaceable lenses in tail, side, and indicator lights as opposed to complete & grossly overpriced assemblies, light bulbs should be able to be changed without removing the lamp assembly, or removing umpteen screws and trim pieces to access the bulb holder. To change the RH low beam bulb in my Falcon ute requires taking out the battery, which also is necessary to use the headlight adjuster. You then put jumper leads from the battery on the ground to the battery leads to turn on the headlights for adjustment. Listening to the customers followed up by intelligent design is the way to go. The Japs were once good at this but have dropped back to the field with success. The bloody paternalistic poms never listened to anyone and blithely went on making what they always did or could.

[Martin]

Quite a lot of posts mention the dropping of the front vents, but I've seen photos with them still there!


Yes but they dont appear to open any more, as there is no level to open them internally any more....

[Gavo]

I am wondering when the badge will turn blue?

[JDNSW]

I am wondering when the badge will turn blue?

Well, it only turned green fairly recently - both my Landrovers and all the derelict ones I have, all have black badges. So a change from green to Blue won't bother me any more than the change from black to green.
John

[p38arover]

I am wondering when the badge will turn blue?

Maybe it won't.

It seems that there has been a offer for Ford's PAG from a Jac Nasser (the Aussie who once headed up Ford). See http://www.leftlanenews.com/2006/08/25/ford-may-sell-luxury-brands-to-former-ceo/

Equally, there is a rumour that Ford may be either looking at buying Rover or selling Land Rover - it may be just the name they are buying since SAIC want to buy the Rover brand name from BMW for 16 million Euros. However, Ford has first rights to the name so it might be forced to buy he name to protect their investment in LR. See http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/5276500.stm

JCB (earth moving equipment) in the UK is interested in buying Jag but doesn't want Land Rover which they see as a loss maker. See http://www.leftlanenews.com/2006/08/24/jcb-boss-wants-to-buy-jaguar/

Ron

Ron

[p38arover]

I see on the Top Gear website that there are eight very cool cars, in fact sub-zero cars.

One is the Defender.

See http://www.bbc.co.uk/topgear/coolwall.shtml

Ron

[LRHybrid100]

Funny that JCB dont want LR - their new Boss is Ex LR Boss!!!

LRH