The New Defender

Look, I may seem a tad fick & this all sounds very testical but I have never grasped the reasons behind lifting one's vehicle to the extent that some here wish to do & why it is so important to so do.
Seems to me you can lift the body 20' if you want but all the important "get you home mechanical stuff" will still remain the same ground clearance unless one fits ticker tyres &/or shove a bit of 3" x 2" under the body & then you may gain an inch or possibly two. Or 3, depends how it is placed.

Can someone please explain to me in words of one syllable the seemingly necessity to have the roof reach the sky?

A serious, but may seem a dopey question I know, but humour me a little please?

There is a photo somewhere probably REMLR, of a S2A 109" FFR (I think) it is where the body has been lifted so high probably by extended shackles, that it appears that it would topple over but the running gear ie. Diffs, Gearbox etc still appears to be the normal ride height for Bar Treads.

Maybe my geometry knowledge is not up to scratch.[bigsad]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 4bee

Look, I may seem a tad fick & this all sounds very testical but I have never grasped the reasons behind lifting one's vehicle to the extent that some here wish to do & why it is so important to so do.
Seems to me you can lift the body 20' if you want but all the important "get you home mechanical stuff" will still remain the same ground clearance unless one fits ticker tyres &/or shove a bit of 3" x 2" under the body & then you may gain an inch or possibly two. Or 3, depends how it is placed.

Can someone please explain to me in words of one syllable the seemingly necessity to have the roof reach the sky?

A serious, but may seem a dopey question I know, but humour me a little please?

There is a photo somewhere probably REMLR, of a S2A 109" FFR (I think) it is where the body has been lifted so high probably by extended shackles, that it appears that it would topple over but the running gear ie. Diffs, Gearbox etc still appears to be the normal ride height for Bar Treads.

Maybe my geometry knowledge is not up to scratch.[bigsad]

---

Approach angle, departure angle, under body clearance. Does help. The D2 did so much better with a mild 2 inch lift and with good shocks and springs handled well.

I won't be lifting my Triton. IFS so better left alone to play nicely at factory height.

But I am not a fan or big lifts for touring or road use 4x4s.

Cheers

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 4bee

Look, I may seem a tad fick & this all sounds very testical but I have never grasped the reasons behind lifting one's vehicle to the extent that some here wish to do & why it is so important to so do.
Seems to me you can lift the body 20' if you want but all the important "get you home mechanical stuff" will still remain the same ground clearance unless one fits ticker tyres &/or shove a bit of 3" x 2" under the body & then you may gain an inch or possibly two. Or 3, depends how it is placed.

Can someone please explain to me in words of one syllable the seemingly necessity to have the roof reach the sky?

A serious, but may seem a dopey question I know, but humour me a little please?

There is a photo somewhere probably REMLR, of a S2A 109" FFR (I think) it is where the body has been lifted so high probably by extended shackles, that it appears that it would topple over but the running gear ie. Diffs, Gearbox etc still appears to be the normal ride height for Bar Treads.

Maybe my geometry knowledge is not up to scratch.[bigsad]

---

I'm sure you know this stuff 4Bee[wink11]....

Bigger tyre is what gives the extra clearance under the diffs. With bigger tyres you might need more clearance under the guards to prevent rubbing so then you lift the body higher off the chassis.

With a vehicle like the new Defender there is no chassis, the running gear bolts onto a subframe which bolts onto the monocoque body. So, if the tyres you are fitting are too big and you need more clearance in the guards, you put some spacers in between the body and the subframes (simplistically speaking).

So in the example above fro the new Defender, adding 35" tyres and a 1" body lift will give 1.5" lift to clearance under the diffs and 2.5" improvement in rampover clearance...different to a traditional chassis where the clearance all round is only improved by tyre size and the body lift only contributing to clearance under the guards for the tyres.

If I've got any of that wrong someone will be sure to follow up[biggrin]

For me it would be leave it as standard as possible... 34"s max if needed.

Quote:

---

I'm sure you know this stuff 4Bee[wink11]....

---

Sean, you do me a complimentary dis-service. (huh?) [wink11] No I didn't, I suppose I was concentrating on the gear underneath, "what I calls your get you home ****". Your description makes sense but what a lot of old malarkey to go through! So, it all starts with a wankey tyre size & goes downhill from there? No pun intended.

I guess there are some that need this type of "improvement" in a day to day work capacity.

Thanks OZ Scott.

And yet with the exception of fording depth, my Haflinger with 23" tyres can go more places than just about any standard 4wd and is certainly a match for most 4wds with 35" tyres.

The reality is that most people who buy the new Defender or indeed and 4wd do not want to go to 35" tyres - maybe a small increase and a small lift maybe but not 35" - for sure the weekend warrior mudrunner might want 35" tyres and a 5" lift but the majority of 4wders dont need or want these - same as most D1s and D2s or older Defenders dont run 35" and still perform OK.

35" tyres are a niche sector and most owners will not be interested.

Garry

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SBD4

I'm sure you know this stuff 4Bee[wink11]....

Bigger tyre is what gives the extra clearance under the diffs. With bigger tyres you might need more clearance under the guards to prevent rubbing so then you lift the body higher off the chassis.

With a vehicle like the new Defender there is no chassis, the running gear bolts onto a subframe which bolts onto the monocoque body. So, if the tyres you are fitting are too big and you need more clearance in the guards, you put some spacers in between the body and the subframes (simplistically speaking).

So in the example above fro the new Defender, adding 35" tyres and a 1" body lift will give 1.5" lift to clearance under the diffs and 2.5" improvement in rampover clearance...different to a traditional chassis where the clearance all round is only improved by tyre size and the body lift only contributing to clearance under the guards for the tyres.

If I've got any of that wrong someone will be sure to follow up[biggrin]

For me it would be leave it as standard as possible... 34"s max if needed.

---

Agreed

Not wanting to get into a what size tyre is best debate, more the max legal limits of the new defender before engineering

Back to the subframe spacer question and using that as the suspension lift and legalities.

J Austin Fab has expressed interest in building smaller kits for the New Defender that his current 6inch kit for RRS, RRV, D5

Why would anyone put 35" tyres on the new defender?

33s are more than sufficient as there is no live axles. If you can't get over an obstacle with 33s and independent suspension you bought the wrong vehcile, should have bought a rubicon to go rock crawling.

The new defender looks like it will be an excellent tourer, 35s are for weekend play trucks not tourers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 1nando

Why would anyone put 35" tyres on the new defender?

33s are more than sufficient as there is no live axles. If you can't get over an obstacle with 33s and independent suspension you bought the wrong vehcile, should have bought a rubicon to go rock crawling.

The new defender looks like it will be an excellent tourer, 35s are for weekend play trucks not tourers.

---

Again this is not the place for a tyre size debate, thats been done to death a million times.

People can put whatever size tyre they want within legalities. Tyre size is a beauty is in the beer holder thing.

And no thats not the opinion of everyone, the US forums where most defenders will be sold are very interested in 35s as many are in OZ and other countries.

I dont know what size ill end up with, may be 33s, but most likely 34s hopefully on 18s if the aftermarket comes to the party with rims to fit the straight 6.

If 35s on the new defender are proven reliable by lucky8 or others over time and are engineerable OZ, i could put them on.. let's be real 35 they are only 1.5 inches lift over the standard tyre.

If 34s fit with no lift great, if they need a lift then what is the best lift, body spacers imo.

Are they a legal way to suspension lift under the 75mm laws, i think tech no, but maybe we could get an exemption for subframed cars added.

The other way is software, but you would have to raise bumpstops and you loose travel.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackrangie

Again this is not the place for a tyre size debate, thats been done to death a million times.

And no thats not the opinion of everyone, the US forums where most will be sold are all very interested in 35s as many are in OZ and other countries.

I dont know what size ill end up with, may be 33s, but most likely 34s hopefully on 18s if the aftermarket comes to the party with rims to fit the straight 6.

If 34s fit with no lift great, if they need a lift then what is the best lift, body spacers.

Are they a legal way to suspension lift under the 75mm laws, i think tech no, but maybe we could get an exemption for subframed cars added.

The other way is software, but you would have to raise bumpstops and you loose travel.

---

The yanks have a love for 35s on jeeps and HD trucks.

I just want to understand your logic for 35s on a mono built vehicle with independent suspension?
I'm not having a go but I just don't get the logic all id like to hear your reasoning?

My 110 was triple locked, yes triple locked( font, rear and obviously centre) with 33s, (even with the solid axles that the new one does not have) it went over everything that patrols on 35s struggled with due to their larger wheel track.

There are pros and cons to every modification, I see 35s as a massive con on the new defender as your basically going to throw out gearing, suspension etc and need to try and rectify it with lifts and the like, but tell me why I'm wrong please?

Again questioning out of curiosity and not having a go. [emoji2369]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 1nando

The yanks have a love for 35s on jeeps and HD trucks.

I just want to understand your logic for 35s on a mono built vehicle with independent suspension?
I'm not having a go but I just don't get the logic all id like to hear your reasoning?

My 110 was triple locked, yes triple locked( font, rear and obviously centre) with 33s, (even with the solid axles that the new one does not have) it went over everything that patrols on 35s struggled with due to their larger wheel track.

There are pros and cons to every modification, I see 35s as a massive con on the new defender as your basically going to throw out gearing, suspension etc and need to try and rectify it with lifts and the like, but tell me why I'm wrong please?

Again questioning out of curiosity and not having a go. [emoji2369]

---

As i said before I'm not interested in the tyre size argument, that has been done to death.

If you want 32s,33s,34s or 37s or 40s i dont care and im happy for you as long as you keep it safe for your application.

Make a new thread on it if you really want too.

If 34s fit with no lift great, if they need a lift then what is the best lift, body spacers imo.

Are they a legal way to suspension lift under the 75mm laws, i think tech no, but maybe we could get an exemption for subframed cars added.

The other way is software, but you would have to raise bumpstops and you loose travel.

Thoughts on this specifically? and no, subframe spacers don't throw any suspension out.