Thread: 2007 Land Rover Defender Revealed! - Photos and Pics.

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

Originally Posted by 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

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.

Originally Posted by Brian Hjelm

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

Originally Posted by 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

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

Originally Posted by Ace

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

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

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

Originally Posted by Defender200Tdi

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.

Paul

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