Thread: Which is better Off Road a D3/4 or a late model Defender? ... Puma 110

Originally Posted by jon3950

I can't see how comparing vehicles in essentially standard trim hobbles the Defender. That implies you need to substantially modify the Defender to make it any good which is clearly not true.

Its great that a Defender is easier to modify, but its irrelevant to this discussion.

The cost of the Disco is also irrelevant as you are paying for a lot of stuff that is not related to off-road ability - like airbags.

These factors may mean the Defender is a better choice for some but they don't effect off-road capability in standard form.

Cheers,
Jon

Exactly.

Originally Posted by LandyAndy

All in good fun mate.
I just went on a fishing trip with a soon to be brand new Defender owner and new D4 owner.Judging on his culinary skills and tastes he should have bought a D4.US 2 D4 owners didnt bring the italian coffee and coffee machine He WAS a D2 V8 owner
Andrew

Totally brother.
Now you're talking my language! 👍 😊 He's welcome to join the Defender realm in my book, quality over quantity, pragmatic, excellent taste by the sound of it. ...What kind of coffee machine? 😜

Originally Posted by jon3950

I can't see how comparing vehicles in essentially standard trim hobbles the Defender. That implies you need to substantially modify the Defender to make it any good which is clearly not true.

Its great that a Defender is easier to modify, but its irrelevant to this discussion.

The cost of the Disco is also irrelevant as you are paying for a lot of stuff that is not related to off-road ability - like airbags.

These factors may mean the Defender is a better choice for some but they don't effect off-road capability in standard form.

Cheers,
Jon

Contrary view: I think it's fair to talk about the price difference and what could be added to a defender for the value of the price difference.

Why? Because the OP is being a little unfair (or illogical) to start with the proposition "since there is little price difference, let's compare stock for stock". When the Defender that is close to a base disco price is not at all a "stock" defender. The defenders at that price point are limited edition specials.

So if "similarly priced vehicles" is a key part of this comparo - then option up truly "stock" defender until price points are similar. Of course a new defender with that much money thrown at it will certainly out-perform off-road against a stock Disco of similar price. That's a no brainer and really of no profit to consider further.

Or.... If truly intended to be a "stock to stock" comparo then remove the "similarly priced" comments and acknowledge that there is a huge price difference, yet not a lot of difference between the vehicles and their off-road performance in stock trim.

The OP specified a comparison of off-road prowess. So all the extra cost of the disco relevant to airbags and comfort must still be taken into account as it is not really adding to the off-road prowess of the disco - thus this added cost is a waste when it comes to the OP's comparo purposes.

The stock defender does not impose this added cost, delivers similar or perhaps better off-road performance (keep comfort and road handling out as its excluded by OP).... So Defender wins given the OP's comparo parameters.

Originally Posted by jon3950

I can't see how comparing vehicles in essentially standard trim hobbles the Defender. That implies you need to substantially modify the Defender to make it any good which is clearly not true.

Its great that a Defender is easier to modify, but its irrelevant to this discussion.

The cost of the Disco is also irrelevant as you are paying for a lot of stuff that is not related to off-road ability - like airbags.

These factors may mean the Defender is a better choice for some but they don't effect off-road capability in standard form.

Cheers,
Jon

No a 10% increase ,as stated by OP Terry,for the d3/4 tyre size is not standard trim, it's an engineering report in Nsw.
All I'm saying is give the defender the same parameters in percentage and not even saying $$$ wise. ( p.s you know the airbag equiped d1-2 was close in price to the defender new and we all know that 32 in rubber on a 19 in rim will cost 50% more than a 35 in tyre on a 15/16 in rim))
Give both equal, up 10% tyres, strengthening required and in the d3/4 can't you fit a bit of equip to fool air suspension to give a "lift" ? The difference between that and a set of + 50-75mm springs plus longer travel shocks/mounts is?

You would be referring to goe rods or llams - under $100 for former about $600 for latter (guys correct me if I'm wrong)
And unlike a spring / body lift you can easily revert to stock road height when you are not off-roading

Originally Posted by roverrescue

I'm sure that emotion will always be of more significance than capability when making these comparisons however;

One terrain which would show a big difference in your vehicle comparison is tea tree swamp land. Weight is your enemy... Power just sends you deeper... An extra 500kg is more than enough to sink your day... An extra tonne will certainly send you south. The extra weight of the disco with the lower ground clearance will end in winching.

Steve

I'd almost agree if Lara wasnt heavier than my D4 is in touring spec

In base spec the Defender and D4 are probably similar off road, except for the Discos 19 inch tyres, which are more easily punctured than the Defender's 16s. But the Disco costs about 30k more to get a similar result. Spend 30k on the Deefer and the Disco wouldn't keep up, I reckon. Would a stock D4 stay with this?


Sent from my SM-G900I using AULRO mobile app

Offroad is so subjective...

On the Maralinga trip I'm running next year post Melrose I can assure you the Defenders will be the handicapped vehicles on the rough roads....

So touring rough corrugated outback (offroad) the D4 will be far superior.

Clambering rocks - depending on the precise composition and layout the Defender is a likely winner...