Landrover Design Philosophy

**JDNSW** · 28th November 2006, 08:20 PM

This thread was prompted by the discussion on the suitability of the D3 for remote areas. Leading on from that are a few thoughts about the design philosophy of the various Landrovers.

If we go back to 1948, Rover was a quite successful manufacturer of cars aimed at the upper middle class, but they found themselves in trouble due to the situation in the UK after the war - for those who don't know the story, there was a shortage of sheet steel, so it was rationed to car manufacturers on the basis of how many cars they exported; and Rover had never been export oriented. So they came up with the Landrover, which was aimed at export, used minimum sheet steel (which meant they could use the steel allocated on the basis of Landrover exports to make normal cars for domestic sale), and because it was only intended as a stopgap measure, was designed to be built with minimum tooling (which had the unintended side effect of making it very easy to modify, both by the factory and the owner, and easy to repair).

The Landrover was far more successful than anyone had anticipated; in fact they were unable to increase production enough to meet demand until the mid seventies - when falling demand due to competition began to cause problems. By the end of the fifties Landrover was not only acceptted by Rover as permanent, but was in fact providing most of their income. Unfortunately, by the time troubles started in the mid seventies the company had become part of Leyland, and since the Landrover was about the only profitable part of Leyland, it had to prop up the rest of the empire.

In 1970, the Rangerover had appeared, designed before Leyland had any influence, its design was very heavily influenced by the existing Landrover, and can be seen as a descendant of it - solid axles, conventional layout, ladder box chassis, alloy body panels. But while it was aimed at the US market (which it was never initially sold in because of the cost of meeting emissions controls that had come in while it was being designed), the people who were buying it were Rover's traditional UK upper middle class.

In 1983 the 110 and later the 90 appeared, direct descendants of the original Landrover, but with modified Rangerover mechanicals. meanwhile, the Rangerover was moving upmarket, and by the late 1980s Landrover found that they had flagging sales of the Rangerover due to increased competition and high prices, and almost disastrously low sales of the 90/110 as most buyers worldwide moved to (mainly) Landcruisers and Hiluxes. This situation prompted the Discovery, which was simply a Rangerover chassis and mechanicals, minus most of the bells and whistles, with a more modern nd much cheaper to build body - and again aimed squarely at Rover's traditional market. But still a direct descendant of the original Landrover.

Then came the next new design, the P38A - and it really was a new design
although it looks quite similar to its predecessor and designed to do anything it could only better, but not necessarily the same way. Aimed like the Rangerover it replaced at the luxury market.

The Disco 2 was a substantially redesigned Disco 1, still a direct descendant of the original Landrover. But the Freelander was again a completely new design, that owed more to Rover car design than it did to previous Landrovers, and again aimed at the traditional Rover market, a little lower than the Disco 2, but mainly a less "offroad" version.

The current Rangerover was again a new design, with relatively little carrying over from the P38A and nothing except 'styling cues' from the Classic Rangerover.

Then the Disco 3, another completely new design, owing very little to any of its predecessors. The Freelander 2 is a refurbished Freelander, but again with no connection to the original Landrovers.

So Landrover currently has four basic designs - Freelander, Disco 3 (including RR Sport), Rangerover and Defender. And of these, the only one that is a direct descendant of the original Landrover is the Defender. The others are all modern, recent designs, aimed at the UK middle to upper class, whereas the Defender is a utility vehicle, whose basic design was thrown together in haste and desperation in 1947-8 and modified by experience subsequently. It is the odd man out; it was designed for 1940s small scale production techniques, which give the design many of its attractions, but make economical production today with the body fitting tolerances expected by today's buyers almost impossible. (And very difficult to meet current and expected safety standards and room and comfort expected today) Given these considerations it is very hard to see the Defender continuing in production in its current form, except possibly in a third world country.

I expect to see either a concerted effort by Ford to capture the utility market from the Japs by a new design that owes more to Ford than Landrover but is designed for mass production, or an effective abdication of this market, and a replacement that is a rebadged D3 in the same way that the H2 is a rebadged (and restyled) Suburban. (or possibly just dropping the defender entirely)

Comments welcome!

John

**Michael2** · 28th November 2006, 08:37 PM

I posted this on another discussion ('07 Defender) but have cut & pasted it here.

Land Rover Special Vehicles (when they existed) were very good at making bespoke Defenders. That "made to order" market is too delicate an enterprise for a motoring conglomorate (FORD), but is still a viable business.

Once they're out of production and their patents expire, I'm sure some enterprising Chinese business man will set up his factory to pump them out. It will probably be an online thing :

Enter your country - this option selects applicable ADRs or similar so that tyres, seatbelts, lights etc comply with the market the vehicle is being exported to.

Select

wheelbase
body type
seats (number & style)
colour
wheels & tyres
engine
transmission (manual / auto) sub categories
accessories
shipping mode
enter credit card details for deposit

The factory starts building your car, 2 days later you get an email with pics of your new Land Rover. Complete transaction via EFT, Credit Card or Online Easy Finance.

**Jojo** · 28th November 2006, 09:11 PM

Thanks for your post, John!
I absolutely share your opinion. I was, in fact, about to write a similar post. That is probably the reason why I am somewhat disappointed with today's Landrover vehicles. Somehow LR seems to have lost its roots somewhere on the way between different ownerships and marketing decisions.

What will the future bring? Only cars designed for bringing in big bucks? Will there be a choice of, set's call them "classic", models in the line up? Then the customer will have the choice. Right now this choice is rather limited, I'm afraid.

**dmdigital** · 28th November 2006, 09:35 PM

Good post John and I totally agree with you. The motor vehicle is evolving and embracing the computer age.

**jonesy63** · 28th November 2006, 09:45 PM

Ah, the good old days... when you could slap a car together with surplus aluminium, pop rivets... and not have to worry about pollution, performance or keeping those pesky SHARE HOLDERS happy.

Welcome to the real world - big corporations are ONLY out for a buck.

Regarding computers or electronics in cars - I don't get what the fuss is about! Take your old school Defender/Discovery - add sensors to monitor certain settings and take appropriate actions. Are the mechanical parts any different between old and new cars? Not at all! There seems to be an inference that solid cars with electronics are more likely to snap than solid cars without electronics.

Maybe it is my electronics background... maybe it is my age... but I appreciate the performance, economy and reliability electronics provides.

Regarding "classic" models being available - take a look at the market... new VWs, new Minis, PT Cruisers, etc. It is the lazy way to design cars drawing on the aging populations recollections of... the good old days.

Cheers,
Rob

**Bigbjorn** · 28th November 2006, 09:55 PM

Originally Posted by JDNSW

for those who don't know the story, there was a shortage of sheet steel, so it was rationed to car manufacturers on the basis of how many cars they exported; and Rover had never been export oriented.
John

Phil. Irving mentioned this in his autobiography. The quota was based on pre-war exports. He said there were companies with quotas who had been bombed out of existence during the war, and no longer manufacturing. he said his employers ( and no doubt others) were able to buy the rationed material from these companies.

**dobbo** · 28th November 2006, 10:11 PM

Originally Posted by Michael2

I posted this on another discussion ('07 Defender) but have cut & pasted it here.

Land Rover Special Vehicles (when they existed) were very good at making bespoke Defenders. That "made to order" market is too delicate an enterprise for a motoring conglomorate (FORD), but is still a viable business.

Once they're out of production and their patents expire, I'm sure some enterprising Chinese business man will set up his factory to pump them out. It will probably be an online thing :

Enter your country - this option selects applicable ADRs or similar so that tyres, seatbelts, lights etc comply with the market the vehicle is being exported to.

Select

wheelbase
body type
seats (number & style)
colour
wheels & tyres
engine
transmission (manual / auto) sub categories
accessories
shipping mode
enter credit card details for deposit

The factory starts building your car, 2 days later you get an email with pics of your new Land Rover. Complete transaction via EFT, Credit Card or Online Easy Finance.

Personally I cannot wait for this to happen, at least then you could get a vehicle to fulfill all your needs, it's a shame LR aren't willing to do it anymore, there's nothing stopping a few aussies with the right financial backing from doing it though

**Michael2** · 28th November 2006, 11:12 PM

Originally Posted by JDNSW

...I expect to see either a concerted effort by Ford to capture the utility market from the Japs by a new design that owes more to Ford than Landrover but is designed for mass production, or an effective abdication of this market, and a replacement that is a rebadged D3 in the same way that the H2 is a rebadged (and restyled) Suburban. (or possibly just dropping the defender entirely) ...

When FORD took over Land Rover, the Special Vehicles went to LFPV (Land Rover Ford Project Vehicles) which, from looking at their website was more than 50% Land Rover biased. The www.landrover.com international site had a link to LFPV if you scrolled down the list of countries.

Now the whole job has been out sourced to Conrico www.conrico.com and there hardly seems to be a mention of Land Rovers. In the LFPV site, under armourned vehicles, FORD offered demountable armour for Defenders, that is armour that could be fitted from one vehicle to the next, as the owner upgraded their Defender. These were aimed at journalists as well as military and political entities in war zones. They also offered several configurations of ambulances. Look up armoured vehicles in the Conrico site and there's a lame picture of a Ford Mondeo or something, and the blurb tells you that they can supply Land Cruisers and G-Wagens.

I think FORD are abdicating their Land Rover (Defender) commitment.

As for dobbo's suggestion that we could do it here, yes we can. We can probably start with a refurbished vehicle program - using existing chassis numbers and building a vehicle to order. The next phase would be to get the approval / lisencing to build new chassis and components. There are plenty of ideas, now to find a venture capitalist.

**JDNSW** · 29th November 2006, 06:28 AM

Jonesy63:-
Ah, the good old days... when you could slap a car together with surplus aluminium, pop rivets... and not have to worry about pollution, performance or keeping those pesky SHARE HOLDERS happy.

The original Landrover was built purely to keep shareholders happy - the fact that it was so popular was an accident, but this only made the shareholders happier!

Welcome to the real world - big corporations are ONLY out for a buck.

And the red tape and competition worldwide has increased to where ONLY big corporations can make cars - and even they are mostly losing money.

Regarding computers or electronics in cars - I don't get what the fuss is about! Take your old school Defender/Discovery - add sensors to monitor certain settings and take appropriate actions. Are the mechanical parts any different between old and new cars? Not at all! There seems to be an inference that solid cars with electronics are more likely to snap than solid cars without electronics.

Maybe it is my electronics background... maybe it is my age... but I appreciate the performance, economy and reliability electronics provides.

The problem with electronics is not that they are not effective, but that the way they are implemented is to make the cars dependent on dealers, which combined with the lack of dealers makes them much less useful in remote areas. There is, as I have said before, no technical reason why all in car electronics could not have self diagnosis - almost all problems are minor, usually sensors or wiring, the problem is diagnosis. This is by contrast with mechanical problems where the diagnosis is usually easy but repairs often more difficult.

Regarding "classic" models being available - take a look at the market... new VWs, new Minis, PT Cruisers, etc. It is the lazy way to design cars drawing on the aging populations recollections of... the good old days.

I agree, and this is exactly what I see happening to the Defender, the only question being whether it is based on a Ford or D3. But nobody is using a "new" Mini or VW etc for their original purpose (low cost basic transport), and similarly a "new" Defender would not address the original market for its ancestors (and the market the Defender was aimed at in 1990) - primarily rural, mining and military utility transport.

With the exception of the Defender Landrover has abandoned its original market, and reverted to the traditional Rover market, and they are making the Defender fit closer to this market as well. This is exemplified by the fact that all the data we have seen on the 2007 Defender is the 90 and 110 wagon. In this country the most popular utility vehicle is the (single or dual)cab/chassis with a tray - and it is not even clear whether this will be available!

john

**Bigbjorn** · 29th November 2006, 08:06 AM

Originally Posted by jonesy63

.

Maybe it is my electronics background... maybe it is my age... but I appreciate the performance, economy and reliability electronics provides.
Cheers,
Rob
:

Well, I do not appreciate the unreliability of electronics. I have been held up roadside on numerous occasions since my first electronic ignition car in circa 1971. My experiences with my current late model Falcon workhorse are well documented elsewhere on this site. These stoppages would not have occurred in a points and carburettor car, which incidentally can be diagnosed and repaired roadside. Electronic failures usually mean a tow to a dealership or adquately equipped workshop. Fun when you are 1100 k's from home with a car on trailer behind. Even more fun when you are 200k's southwest of Winton between Tonkaroo and Coorabulka. The electronic failures, unreliability, undiagnosability and unrepairability of electronic systems are the reasons why I am driving a mechanical injection diesel.

Thread: Landrover Design Philosophy

Thread Tools

Landrover Design Philosophy

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions