Thread: Disco vs. Defender?

Originally Posted by gusthedog

[snip]

Often wildlife, particularly wombats, deer and large roos round here, has the potential to crash you into things. My missus has been to way to many crashes where people have died due to poor car safety for us to have not to have a 'plastic' vehicle designed to protect its occupants.

[snip]

I've had more hits than Elvis in the Deefer, the secret to surviving an animal impact is not to swerve (unless it's large cattle, horses, camels, then pray and I don't believe in a deity as such)

Plenty of big roos and Wallaroos too where a steel bullbar is your friend.

I have planted so many roos in the last 12 months its not funny the last time I hit 3 in the space of about a kilometre only damage so far was a bent drag link soon to be coverd by steering gaurd

At the end of the day a 110/130 is a work/commercial biased vehicle, it's built with a massive box section chassis, springs biased towards load carrying and fitted with Light Truck construction tyres. It's built to work.

A Disco is a family wagon with a distinct on road orientation that is very capable off road.

I'm not really sure why this is so hard to grasp ?

Do you want to carry loads over tough terrain and not worry too much about a scratch or panel damage yet still do it with roadholding, ride and handling two notches above the direct opposition ?

Buy a Defender.

Or do you want to cover long distances in absolute comfort over indifferent roads with the family safely ensconced within ?

Buy a Disco.


Ultimately it appears the Disco boys keep needing to justify their purchase with "it's as good/better than a Defender" whereas the 90/110/130 crowd don't seem to need to justify anything.

Says it all really

Originally Posted by rick130

Ultimately it appears the Disco boys keep needing to justify their purchase with "it's as good/better than a Defender" whereas the 90/110/130 crowd don't seem to need to justify anything.

Says it all really

Or could it be that to own a leaky, rattly, unsafe four wheel drive you have to be oblivious to alternatives?

Road safety comes down to the driver IMO.

It doesn't matter what you drive if you do not concentrate on the task at hand.

for example, do you trust the traffic lights to control traffic, or do you trust your eyes? e.g. I was taught young to always check traffic was stopping regardless of having the green light.

I never tail gate, I never speed, I am forever taking notice of drivers on cross roads, I'm continually checking my mirrors, and always assuming that everyone else is an idiot driver (I assume they will run that orange light, will change lanes without indicating, will cut me off, will not slow down when approaching round-a-bouts, will be on the phone, will have the stereo up full bore, will swerve at the slightest provocation, will tailgate and the safest thing is to get out of their way...will not merge correctly, will speed, be drunk or on drugs, etc etc)

to me what I am driving, crumple zones or not, is the least of the things keeping me safe.

Being high up with 360 degree vision means I can do the things that do keep me safe and a 110 does that better than most.

Originally Posted by gusthedog

Crush by design transfers the inertia of a crash into the vehicle, not the occupants. A steel roll cage would be great under 30kph.

[snip]

I'll be sure to tell every race sanctioning organisation in the world and their safety committees that they have it all wrong with the substantial roll cages/safety cells they all mandate


Yes, they all use crushable structures too, you need something to absorb the massive energy inherent in a large hit (other than the human body) but a roll cage works extremely well at higher speeds/impact energies too, and if designed properly, particularly with multiple hits.

I could always wear my Simpson Shark helmet in the Deefer for better head protection than any side airbag will give

(In all seriousness I'd hate to have a side hit in the Defender, the upper seat belt bolt on the B pillar will centre pop the drivers temple IMO)

Originally Posted by rick130

At the end of the day a 110/130 is a work/commercial biased vehicle, it's built with a massive box section chassis, springs biased towards load carrying and fitted with Light Truck construction tyres. It's built to work.

A Disco is a family wagon with a distinct on road orientation that is very capable off road.

I'm not really sure why this is so hard to grasp ?

Do you want to carry loads over tough terrain and not worry too much about a scratch or panel damage yet still do it with roadholding, ride and handling two notches above the direct opposition ?

Buy a Defender.

Or do you want to cover long distances in absolute comfort over indifferent roads with the family safely ensconced within ?

Buy a Disco.


Ultimately it appears the Disco boys keep needing to justify their purchase with "it's as good/better than a Defender" whereas the 90/110/130 crowd don't seem to need to justify anything.

Says it all really

Originally Posted by gusthedog

Or could it be that to own a leaky, rattly, unsafe four wheel drive you have to be oblivious to alternatives?

Sigh.

Originally Posted by rick130

I'll be sure to tell every race sanctioning organisation in the world and their safety committees that they have it all wrong with the substantial roll cages/safety cells they all mandate


Yes, they all use crushable structures too, you need something to absorb the massive energy inherent in a large hit (other than the human body) but a roll cage works extremely well at higher speeds/impact energies too, and if designed properly, particularly with multiple hits.

I could always wear my Simpson Shark helmet in the Deefer for better head protection than any side airbag will give

(In all seriousness I'd hate to have a side hit in the Defender, the upper seat belt bolt on the B pillar will centre pop the drivers temple IMO)

I'm only assuming here but I would think Defender roll cages would differ substantially from racing car roll cages.