Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 72

Thread: New 2018 Defender to share D5's Aluminium monocoque body.

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Bunbury, WA
    Posts
    2,507
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by stealth View Post
    Does this sound like there will be a cab/chassis ute available? Doesn't to me.
    A rear subframe would deal with that. I would think that to build a full monocoque utility style body would be near impossible anyway as there is not enough "meat" in the rear section to provide the strength required.

    Sent from my Nexus 7 using AULRO mobile app

  2. #22
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    4,842
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by stealth View Post
    Does this sound like there will be a cab/chassis ute available? Doesn't to me.
    There has been mention from time to time that there will be THREE different ranges/levels of Defender?
    Pickles.

  3. #23
    JDNSW's Avatar
    JDNSW is offline RoverLord Silver Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Central West NSW
    Posts
    29,508
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by cjc_td5 View Post
    A rear subframe would deal with that. I would think that to build a full monocoque utility style body would be near impossible anyway as there is not enough "meat" in the rear section to provide the strength required.

    Sent from my Nexus 7 using AULRO mobile app

    But, for example, some time back, Holden (and others) were able to produce a trayback and cab/chassis based on a fully monocoque sedan design. It can be done.

    John
    John

    JDNSW
    1986 110 County 3.9 diesel
    1970 2a 109 2.25 petrol

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    The new Gold Coast, after ocean rises,Queensland
    Posts
    13,204
    Total Downloaded
    0
    interesting....what model was that?

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Brisbane,some of the time.
    Posts
    13,886
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by ramblingboy42 View Post
    interesting....what model was that?
    Definitely wasn't the HG to HZ model run,or the WB.

    Maybe a Ford?

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Bunbury, WA
    Posts
    2,507
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Did the commodore tray backs run a full chassis like the older HZ et all or a rear sub frame?

    Sent from my Nexus 7 using AULRO mobile app

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    501
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by JDNSW View Post
    But, for example, some time back, Holden (and others) were able to produce a trayback and cab/chassis based on a fully monocoque sedan design. It can be done.

    John
    But could you do that with aluminium? I coudn't imagine it would be strong enough.

  8. #28
    DiscoMick Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Pickles2 View Post
    There has been mention from time to time that there will be THREE different ranges/levels of Defender?
    Pickles.
    Pretty sure I've read about there being a single-cab, dual-cab and wagon, but I don't have a link right now.

  9. #29
    Tombie Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by stealth View Post
    But could you do that with aluminium? I coudn't imagine it would be strong enough.


    Why? Twice the thickness, 2/3 the weight and just as strong.

  10. #30
    JDNSW's Avatar
    JDNSW is offline RoverLord Silver Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Central West NSW
    Posts
    29,508
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by stealth View Post
    But could you do that with aluminium? I coudn't imagine it would be strong enough.
    Properly designed, an aluminium structure can be just as strong as a steel structure.

    The critical property in any practical structure such as a car body is Young's Modulus (for practical materials). This is the factor that is relevant in Euler buckling, which is the failure mode of relatively long narrow structures in compression, such as the top of a chassis rail where the load is between front and rear wheels. Interestingly, for all practical materials (except some exotic ones- e.g carbon fibre), this property is proportional to the specific gravity of the material. This means that everything else being equal, steel and aluminium structures would be the same weight.

    But everything else is not equal - a lot of the bits of the body have a minimum thickness requirement to cope with minor damage and corrosion - for the same strength, aluminium is about three times as thick, so a lot of it can be made the thickness needed for strength rather than this minimum thickness. And it is still likely to be stiffer than the steel part, simply because it is still perhaps twice as thick - and the dimensions come into the formula as well.

    Consider, for example, the chassis of a Series Landrover. Except for a few reinforcing spots, it is all made of the same thickness metal, this being the minimum feasible thickness to sustain minor damage and corrosion - if it were made of aluminium, it would not have to be three times as thick - probably the top and bottom of the rails maybe twice as thick, sides the same thickness (an engineering calculation to decide), and a lot lighter - but significantly more expensive.

    John
    John

    JDNSW
    1986 110 County 3.9 diesel
    1970 2a 109 2.25 petrol

Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Search AULRO.com ONLY!
Search All the Web!