2007 Defender

On or around Fri, 11 Aug 2006 16:51:04 +0100, beamendsltd
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>Time will tell - the R380's problem was the deletion of the two cross
>drilled holes in the transfer gear (as a Cost-Down excercise, they
>were present on the prototypes, so I'm told) - the actual box is
>pretty sturdy.

when did they do that? These would be the 2 holes they had to drill in the
gear when people started complaining that their landy had no drive 'cos the
splines had worn out, I assume, after trying sundry other fixes that didn't
really work?
--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
Beyond the horizon of the place we lived when we were young / In a world
of magnets and miracles / Our thoughts strayed constantly and without
boundary / The ringing of the Division bell had begun. Pink Floyd (1994)

In message <[email protected]>
Ian Rawlings <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 2006-08-11, beamendsltd <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > I can see the sense of having it as standard in, say, South Africa,
> > but over here it's a waste of fuel, and at current prices that
> > really does matter!
>
> ISTR that aircon on recirculation being shown to be as costly on fuel
> as the extra drag created by driving with the windows down. Obviously
> that would depend on mean speed, as the air con will produce a more or
> less constant drag while aerodynamic drag from windows will go up with
> your speed.
>
> Also not sure whether the figures would still work for a vehicle that
> never had any aerodynamics to ruin in the first place ;-)
>

I can't see windows being open or not making any odds to a Defender,
as aerodynamic it isn't, but you can hear the engine hesitate when
switching aircon on. As I seem to spend most of my time waiting
at traffic lights, both fixed and temporary, these days, I'd put my
money on the aircon being far more costly! Plus it's just something
else to go wrong ;-)


Richard
--
www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk [email protected]
RISC-OS - Where have all the good guys gone?
Lib Dems - Townies keeping comedy alive

"beamendsltd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:19ad9f544e%[email protected]...
> In message <[email protected]>
> Ian Rawlings <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On 2006-08-10, CraigB <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> > Well, I suppose I could live with a pregnant looking bonnet, but that
>> > dash
>> > .....EWWWYUUUCK!
>>
>> I'd imagine it's more to do with parts sharing than owt else, the
>> Defender's a marginal model so making it share as much as the rest of
>> the line is going to make it cheaper. It'll appeal to those who buy
>> the thing as a pose-wagon too, which seems to be the biggest market.
>>
>> > WTF is the idea behind making everything appealing to mum's and kids in
>> > cities?
>>
>> 'cos they're the ones who are going to spend the cash and buy a new
>> car every few years. Car manufacturers don't really worry about
>> appealing to the market who buys a car and keeps it for 6 years or so,
>> and those of us who would rather cut an arm off than buy a new car can
>> go hang as far as they're concerned.
>>
>
> According to our local main agent the vast majority of Defenders
> (except 90 Station Wagons) still go to commercial users and they
> never see them again. Whether the dash would make any odds to them
> I don't know. A lot of them used to atomatically buy a Defender
> (Land Rover in those days), but got dissillusioned during the
> 2.5TD years, tried that Jap altrnatives, got seriously disilusioned,
> came back to LR after the 200Tdi had proved itself and are currently
> back in the new Defender by default mode. Most of them view the
> vehicle as tool for a job, just the same as a tractor or van, so are
> probably more worried about the lack of a middle seat than what the
> dash looks like.
>


Most main dealers only sell a couple of Defenders a month these days. The
bottom has dropped out of the Defender market and even hard pressed farmers
have gone elsewhere in droves. Defender has gone past the point of no return
and no amount of tweaking the dash and an engine transplant will get the
market back. This is what comes from a pitiful lack of investment in the
product over more than twenty years.
All those Eastern pick-ups are a lost sale for Land Rover. Anyone blind to
this reality must have their heads buried shoulder deep in sand.
I'll just keep my '84 110HCPU going for as long as practical before buying
something with air-bags and a bit of room in the cab. Since it is a tool for
a job, I'm not worried if it is scrapped in 12 years rather than 24 as long
as it is civilised and does the job required of it. If a Hi-Lux or similar
is good enough for the Taliban then it is certainly good for me
mechanically. I quite fancy a Nissan but knowing me I will probably end up
with a rare TDI300 HCPU. Knock some sense into me someone before I buy
another Defender!

Huw

"Huw" <hedydd[nospam]@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>Knock some sense into me someone before I buy another Defender!

The sensible thing to do is to buy another defender ..... and then give it
to me.

Steve

On or around Fri, 11 Aug 2006 17:47:47 +0100, "Bob Hobden" <[email protected]>
enlightened us thusly:

>
>"Austin Shackles" wrote >
>>>I have also heard (from my source in LR Greece who has advised me of the
>>>changes of the 2007 Defender, and he has seen it with his own eyes in the
>>>factory) that the change to a six gears manual box was required because of
>>>the increased torque of the engine
>>
>> 's more likely that it's the same box they use in the transit. There's
>> talk
>> of a factory 4x4 transit - having made a FWD and RWD one, there shouldn't
>> be
>> too much to do - mind, I think the FWD vans are transverse engine; but the
>> front transmission parts and hubs and so forth all exist, so all they need
>> is a transfer box and a separate front diff... and oh look, we can use the
>> same t-box as for the land rover...
>>
>That was my point Austin, the smaller 2.2 ltr Duratorq engine/gearbox is a
>front wheel drive transverse fitment with 5 gears so I can't see it being
>the one put inline in the Defender if spy's say it's got 6 gears.
>
>The most powerful 2.2 Ltr is ..128bhp /228lbft the most powerful 2.4 Ltr is
>..138bhp/276lbft
>
>One hopes it will be the most powerful bigger unit provided it's tuned
>properly for a Defender... plenty of low down torque, flat torque curve, and
>the 6th gear is a motorway cruise gear only.

see my treatise on the subject of off-road control and engine
characteristics...

Actually, I reckon there's some mileage in having an "off-road" and
"on-road" setting for the engine tuning - I think they went part-way towards
this on the TD5, altering the throttle response when in low box?

On-road, a nice flat torque curve as wide as possible is good and fine
control at the lower end is not really relevant. Off-road you want a slower
pedal response and you don't really want all the torque coming in with a
bang, as this can lose you traction by inadvertently applying too much extra
go at the wrong moment.
--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
"It is a characteristic of the human mind to hate the man one has injured"
Tacitus (c.55 - c.117) Agricola, 45

In message <[email protected]>
Austin Shackles <[email protected]> wrote:

> On or around Fri, 11 Aug 2006 16:53:17 +0100, beamendsltd
> <[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:
>
> >That's certainly a possibility, though Ford's last excursion into
> >the 4x4 Transit world wasn't exactly a great success. Apparently,
> >the suffered from having the wrong engines... :-0
>
> I think they mainly suffered from being a conversion using different axles
> and suchlike and thus costing enormously more than the basic 2WD one, such
> that only government agencies could afford 'em. ISTR that the county
> conversion almost doubled the price of the van.
>
> later ones with the Di or TDi engines aren't bad, although underpowered when
> fully laden, but then that's what you were just complaining about on the one
> you hired
>
> Not sure about the comments about higher-revving engines, BTW - it all
> depends on what gearing they equip it with. If the engine produces little
> torque at (say) 1000 rpm compared with a TDi, but produces plenty at 2000
> rpm then provided the CONTROL of the engine is there it's not a problem
> except to traditionalists who can moan about how in the old days you had
> engines that would pull tree-stumps at idle.
>
> what's really needed is progressive pedal-to-performance, rather than an
> all-or-nothing setup; which should be easier to achieve on a fly-by-wire
> system - simply a matter of selecting the appropriate throttle pots
> (probably it wants a non-linear set such that you get finer control up to
> (say) about 3000 revs and then the last half-inch or so goes from there to
> flat-out).
>
> but the thing about control off-road is really only a matter of setting it
> up right. If it's the case that a TDi pulls nicely at 1500 rpm in low-2 at
> 8 mph, say, but the ford engine requires 2300 rpm to achieve the same
> torque, then all that's needed is suitable gearing so that the ford-engine
> variant does 8 mph in low-2 at 2300 rpm.
>
> Of course, there's every chance that it won't be equipped suitably, but
> that's not a fault of the engine, but of the design team and marketing
> types. Same applies to your problem about reversing the van up the drive -
> if you were overheating the clutch (because, presumably, you had to slip it
> to make the thing go slowly enough) then it means that it's got an
> inappropriately high reverse gear. Get similar problems with the TDi disco
> - high reverse is way to fast for precise trailer reversing (or reversing up
> steep slopes), for example, leading to excessive clutch-work, this is mainly
> due to the high transfer ratios that TDi discos have, to make 'em quieter at
> motorway speeds. But on the disco you have the option of dropping into low
> box to get a nice slow, controllable reverse. What the transit needs is
> sensible reverse gear, or just possibly, 2 reverse gears if you decide that
> it's desirable to be able to do 25 mph backwards. Personally, in a van, I
> see no need to be able to reverse fast - you've never got enough visibility
> to do so safely.
>
> So, provided they keep the low box on the "new" defender and provided the
> ratios are suitable, I don't really see a problem.
>

Sorry to say I have to disagree 100% with all of the above. I'll leave
it at that rather than risk a falling out!

Richard

--
www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk [email protected]
RISC-OS - Where have all the good guys gone?
Lib Dems - Townies keeping comedy alive

In message <[email protected]>
Austin Shackles <[email protected]> wrote:

> On or around Fri, 11 Aug 2006 16:51:04 +0100, beamendsltd
> <[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:
>
> >Time will tell - the R380's problem was the deletion of the two cross
> >drilled holes in the transfer gear (as a Cost-Down excercise, they
> >were present on the prototypes, so I'm told) - the actual box is
> >pretty sturdy.
>
> when did they do that? These would be the 2 holes they had to drill in the
> gear when people started complaining that their landy had no drive 'cos the
> splines had worn out, I assume, after trying sundry other fixes that didn't
> really work?

It was pre-production. The cross drilling was (apparently) deleted
for full procuction as a cost cutting measure on the LT77. This
was, amazingly, allowed to continue into R380 production. The
aftermarket has put the holes back (except for very early boxes,
for which an oil thrower is available from the aftermaket),
I've not seen a Genuine Parts version recently to know if LR have.
I worked for the manager responsible at another motor manufacturers,
and lets say he didn't seem to see admiting mistakes as a good
career move.
The above might seem incredible, but another manufacturer I worked
for had a brake problem that led to their largest customer refusing
to use any of his fleet. An ex-machanic, with no engineering training
and zero understanding of hydraulics was tasked to solve the
problem. Accidentaly, an conterctor who really did understand
hydraulics was brought in for another project and took an interest
in the brake problem. It took him about 20mins to find the problem.
Guess what - it was 2 cross-drilled holes again! A trawl through
the paper work found that it was again a cost-down excersize,
the descision being made by..... a manager, not a hydraulics
engineer. When you work in such environments, it's easy to see
why we have no industry left.

Richard

--
www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk [email protected]
RISC-OS - Where have all the good guys gone?
Lib Dems - Townies keeping comedy alive

In message <[email protected]>
"Huw" <hedydd[nospam]@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:

>
> "beamendsltd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:19ad9f544e%[email protected]...
> > In message <[email protected]>
> > Ian Rawlings <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> On 2006-08-10, CraigB <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Well, I suppose I could live with a pregnant looking bonnet, but that
> >> > dash
> >> > .....EWWWYUUUCK!
> >>
> >> I'd imagine it's more to do with parts sharing than owt else, the
> >> Defender's a marginal model so making it share as much as the rest of
> >> the line is going to make it cheaper. It'll appeal to those who buy
> >> the thing as a pose-wagon too, which seems to be the biggest market.
> >>
> >> > WTF is the idea behind making everything appealing to mum's and kids in
> >> > cities?
> >>
> >> 'cos they're the ones who are going to spend the cash and buy a new
> >> car every few years. Car manufacturers don't really worry about
> >> appealing to the market who buys a car and keeps it for 6 years or so,
> >> and those of us who would rather cut an arm off than buy a new car can
> >> go hang as far as they're concerned.
> >>
> >
> > According to our local main agent the vast majority of Defenders
> > (except 90 Station Wagons) still go to commercial users and they
> > never see them again. Whether the dash would make any odds to them
> > I don't know. A lot of them used to atomatically buy a Defender
> > (Land Rover in those days), but got dissillusioned during the
> > 2.5TD years, tried that Jap altrnatives, got seriously disilusioned,
> > came back to LR after the 200Tdi had proved itself and are currently
> > back in the new Defender by default mode. Most of them view the
> > vehicle as tool for a job, just the same as a tractor or van, so are
> > probably more worried about the lack of a middle seat than what the
> > dash looks like.
> >
>
>
> Most main dealers only sell a couple of Defenders a month these days. The
> bottom has dropped out of the Defender market and even hard pressed farmers
> have gone elsewhere in droves. Defender has gone past the point of no return
> and no amount of tweaking the dash and an engine transplant will get the
> market back. This is what comes from a pitiful lack of investment in the
> product over more than twenty years.
> All those Eastern pick-ups are a lost sale for Land Rover. Anyone blind to
> this reality must have their heads buried shoulder deep in sand.
> I'll just keep my '84 110HCPU going for as long as practical before buying
> something with air-bags and a bit of room in the cab. Since it is a tool for
> a job, I'm not worried if it is scrapped in 12 years rather than 24 as long
> as it is civilised and does the job required of it. If a Hi-Lux or similar
> is good enough for the Taliban then it is certainly good for me
> mechanically. I quite fancy a Nissan but knowing me I will probably end up
> with a rare TDI300 HCPU. Knock some sense into me someone before I buy
> another Defender!
>
> Huw
>
>

Ahem! - Defender sales are at a peak (25,000). It's even profitable
again. The 2 main dealers in this area sell a lot more than a couple
a month - each! Far from declining, Defender ownership is on the
up in these parts - big time - and must be nationaly, by definition.
There are wide variations from area to area certainly - but that's
down to dealers attitude rather than the product. In Cheshire you
don't see many - in Derbyshire you keep tripping over them.

Richard

--
www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk [email protected]
RISC-OS - Where have all the good guys gone?
Lib Dems - Townies keeping comedy alive

Steve wrote:
> "Pantelis Giamarellos" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>People Hi,
>>
>>in addition to the above,
>>
>>the windscreen flaps will be abandoned.
>>The new engine will be mated to a 6 speed gearbox.
>>
>
>
> But is it going to have the oomph to pull itself and a useful trailer
> without having to drop down to 3rd every time it sees a hill?
>
> Steve
>
>

Hi,

local salesman claimed, the 2007 Defender comes with independent
suspension. I hope he was lying. Perhaps he tried to trick me to buy one
of his two SE models, loaded with all imaginable bells and whistles. I
use 4x4 mainly as a tractor, so it's hard to utilize all those air cons,
6cd changers, alloy wheels, body coloured trims, you name it. For me it
should start, pull and last.

Looks like bureaucracy in Brussels an market prospects in US managed to
ruin another fine piece of equipment.

Cheers,
Kalev

Kalev Kadak wrote:
> Steve wrote:
>> "Pantelis Giamarellos" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>
>>> in addition to the above,
>>> the windscreen flaps will be abandoned.
>>> The new engine will be mated to a 6 speed gearbox.
>>
>> But is it going to have the oomph to pull itself and a useful trailer
>> without having to drop down to 3rd every time it sees a hill?
>
> local salesman claimed, the 2007 Defender comes with independent
> suspension. I hope he was lying. Perhaps he tried to trick me to buy one

Um... For those of us to whom anything bonnet and below is a mystery,
why would independent suspension be a bad thing?

On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 08:46:55 +0100, beamendsltd
<[email protected]> wrote:

> ...
> In Cheshire you
> don't see many - in Derbyshire you keep tripping over them.

Parking skills are better in Cheshire?

--
William Tasso

Land Rover - 110 V8
Discovery - V8

On or around Sat, 12 Aug 2006 08:20:44 +0100, beamendsltd
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:
>
>Sorry to say I have to disagree 100% with all of the above. I'll leave
>it at that rather than risk a falling out!

no need to fall out. that lot was my opinion, and we're all entitled to our
own opinions. But the problem you had with reversing the van was
undoubtedly because it's got too high a reverse gear, and I have myself
noted this on TDi discos when moving a big trailer - but on them you always
have the option of using low-reverse.

for some reason, modern vehicles are equipped with a reverse gear that means
it'll do about 30 flat out in reverse, a trait for which there's hardly ever
any need, and as a result, when you want to reverse upslope at about 2 mph,
you have to do it at less-than-idle speed and slip the clutch.

--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
"There are three sorts of people in the world - those who can count,
and those who can't" (Anon)

On or around Sat, 12 Aug 2006 11:46:58 +0100, Torak <[email protected]>
enlightened us thusly:

>Kalev Kadak wrote:
>> Steve wrote:
>>> "Pantelis Giamarellos" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>
>>>> in addition to the above,
>>>> the windscreen flaps will be abandoned.
>>>> The new engine will be mated to a 6 speed gearbox.
>>>
>>> But is it going to have the oomph to pull itself and a useful trailer
>>> without having to drop down to 3rd every time it sees a hill?
>>
>> local salesman claimed, the 2007 Defender comes with independent
>> suspension. I hope he was lying. Perhaps he tried to trick me to buy one
>
>Um... For those of us to whom anything bonnet and below is a mystery,
>why would independent suspension be a bad thing?

It wouldn't, necessarily. it would depend on how it's done. It might even
be better than a live axle - live axles are not the perfect answer to
everything - high unsprung weight and poor ground clearance under the diff,
for 2 reasons.

for really extreme off-road, you might find it hard to get as much
articulation, and it's probably a more difficult proposition to modify.

It all rather depends on how the suspension is done.
--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
"Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose"
Alphonse Karr (1808 - 1890) Les Guêpes, Jan 1849

Austin Shackles wrote:

> It wouldn't, necessarily. it would depend on how it's done. It might even
> be better than a live axle - live axles are not the perfect answer to
> everything - high unsprung weight and poor ground clearance under the diff,
> for 2 reasons.
>
> for really extreme off-road, you might find it hard to get as much
> articulation, and it's probably a more difficult proposition to modify.
>
> It all rather depends on how the suspension is done.

When Toyota made the move from live to independent front suspension on
the 4WD Hilux their NZ sales dropped to virtually nothing. The
independent ones were significantly less capable off road and no better
mannered on road. It took Toyota 9 months or so to reintroduce a live
axle model and they instantly regained their position as best selling
vehicle in it's class.

I really hope LR don't make the same mistake, but I think it's highly
likely that they will, and almost a certainty that having made the
mistake they won't rectify it.

--
EMB

In article <[email protected]>, EMB <[email protected]> wrote:
>Austin Shackles wrote:
>
>> It wouldn't, necessarily. it would depend on how it's done. It might even
>> be better than a live axle - live axles are not the perfect answer to
>> everything - high unsprung weight and poor ground clearance under the diff,
>> for 2 reasons.
>>
>> for really extreme off-road, you might find it hard to get as much
>> articulation, and it's probably a more difficult proposition to modify.

Dunno. It doesn't seem to have hurt Steyr-Puch much that way. Haflingers
and Pinzgauers haven't struck me as being limited in wheel articulation,
though I have to admit that I've not tried measureing one.

>I really hope LR don't make the same mistake, but I think it's highly
>likely that they will, and almost a certainty that having made the
>mistake they won't rectify it.

A lot of the Really Serious Off-Road Stuff (Steyr-Puch, Tatra - that
sort of thing) has always used independent suspension, so I'd have thought
the hope should be that if L-R go for independent suspension they
should be resourced to do it properly, rather than using off-the
-shelf bits from elsewhere in the F*rd empire. Of course, all this
may be moot if - as suggested in some of the finance pages last week
- Land-Rover and Jaguar may be sold to GAZ. If so, I guess at least
it's an outfit that knows about off-road machinery:

http://members.aol.com/brimiljeep/WebPages/GAZWWIIJeepPage.html

--
Andy Breen ~ Not speaking on behalf of the University of Wales, Aberystwyth
Feng Shui: an ancient oriental art for extracting
money from the gullible (Martin Sinclair)

On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 12:32:46 +0100, Austin Shackles
<[email protected]> scribbled the following nonsense:

>On or around Sat, 12 Aug 2006 08:20:44 +0100, beamendsltd
><[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:
>>
>>Sorry to say I have to disagree 100% with all of the above. I'll leave
>>it at that rather than risk a falling out!
>
>no need to fall out. that lot was my opinion, and we're all entitled to our
>own opinions. But the problem you had with reversing the van was
>undoubtedly because it's got too high a reverse gear, and I have myself
>noted this on TDi discos when moving a big trailer - but on them you always
>have the option of using low-reverse.
>
>for some reason, modern vehicles are equipped with a reverse gear that means
>it'll do about 30 flat out in reverse, a trait for which there's hardly ever
>any need, and as a result, when you want to reverse upslope at about 2 mph,
>you have to do it at less-than-idle speed and slip the clutch.

I always use low box when reversing with a trailer.

Been driving a 7.5 tonne Marecedes truck (bored during my summer
holiday....) and that has such a stupid reverse gear it is unreal,
tickover reverse is nearly 10 mph, which is very interesting backing
onto docks at depots!!!

Having said that, 60 in 6th gear is pulling about 1300rpm, which could
make for interesting top speed as it red lines at 3000....
--

Simon Isaacs

"Bad officials are elected by good citizens who do not vote"
George Jean Nathan (1882-1955)

ROT13 me....

On 2006-08-12, Andrew Robert Breen <[email protected]> wrote:

> Dunno. It doesn't seem to have hurt Steyr-Puch much that way. Haflingers
> and Pinzgauers haven't struck me as being limited in wheel articulation,
> though I have to admit that I've not tried measureing one.

Given that I own both a Defender and a Pinzgauer I finally have
something I can speak relatively authoritatively on ;-)

Given what I've seen, I'd say the Pinzgauer definately has a little
less axle articulation than a stock Defender, and also behaves worse
under axle-twisting situations when unladen than a Defender will.
With the pinzgauer, if you drive a front wheel up onto a boulder,
without a load in the rear the opposite side rear will not compress
much, meaning that the vehicle will tilt to one side and lift wheels
much more readily than the Defender will. The Defender will roll the
body less by compressing the opposite-side rear suspension.

The pinzgauer and haflinger make up for this by having portal axles
and differential locks, which means my pinz, about the same size and
weight as a modern Disco 3, can go over the bumps better than a 90,
let alone the 110 that I already own. If you turn off the diff locks
though it lifts wheels readily and grinds to a halt quite quickly.
The haflinger is apparently better off-road than a series landy, with
the same caveat, as long as it has the diff locks on. There is almost
no room at all on the pinzgauer or haflinger to upgrade the suspension
in any way.

Steyr-Puch also designed the Mercedes G-Wagen, another vehicle that is
criticised for lack of suspension articulation, but more than makes up
for it by having the diff locks although no portal axles or
independent suspension this time.

> A lot of the Really Serious Off-Road Stuff (Steyr-Puch, Tatra - that
> sort of thing) has always used independent suspension,

I've never been entirely sure where independent suspension is better
than a live axle. One area that it gains is that you can avoid having
the axle hanging down under the chassis much more easily than with a
live axle, also they're usually better at soaking up the bumps at
speed than a live axle. Two disadvantages though are that my pinz
loses 4 inches of ground clearance if you fully load it, and you lose
ground clearance again if one wheel is pushed up by a bump, in both
situations a live axle would maintain ground clearance.

Another area that independent suspension has an advantage over live
axles surprised me; simplicity. I'd have thought that a live axle
would be simpler than independent suspension, but the pinz and
haflinger show how independent suspension can be incredibly simple
indeed and also well protected against knocks and dirt.

--
Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!

In article <[email protected]>,
Ian Rawlings <[email protected]> wrote:
>On 2006-08-12, Andrew Robert Breen <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Dunno. It doesn't seem to have hurt Steyr-Puch much that way. Haflingers
>> and Pinzgauers haven't struck me as being limited in wheel articulation,
>> though I have to admit that I've not tried measureing one.
>
>Given that I own both a Defender and a Pinzgauer I finally have
>something I can speak relatively authoritatively on ;-)

/excellent stuff snipped/

Thanks for that - I've learned a lot there.

>Another area that independent suspension has an advantage over live
>axles surprised me; simplicity. I'd have thought that a live axle
>would be simpler than independent suspension, but the pinz and
>haflinger show how independent suspension can be incredibly simple
>indeed and also well protected against knocks and dirt.

Same goes for Tatra's big stuff, too: half-axles pivoting on the
central spine of the chassis.

Sounds like there are trade-offs, with beam axles having advantages
in some respects and independent suspension in others. I'm
not against the idea of a Landy with independent suspension per
se, but it's got to be supsension designed to do the job that a
Landy's suspension needs to do, not just something handy from the
parts bin.

--
Andy Breen ~ Not speaking on behalf of the University of Wales, Aberystwyth
Feng Shui: an ancient oriental art for extracting
money from the gullible (Martin Sinclair)

On 2006-08-12, Andrew Robert Breen <[email protected]> wrote:

> Same goes for Tatra's big stuff, too: half-axles pivoting on the
> central spine of the chassis.

That's the way the pinz does it. The pinz differentials were designed
by the same chap who did the Tatra ones, and he threw the rule-book
out, they are odd indeed. I have a spare diff that I'll be putting on
mine to replace the fairly-new-but-cracked diff that's on there now,
once that's off I'll be pulling it apart just to play with the
innards, it's a nice design.

> Sounds like there are trade-offs, with beam axles having advantages
> in some respects and independent suspension in others.

Always true.

> I'm not against the idea of a Landy with independent suspension per
> se, but it's got to be supsension designed to do the job that a
> Landy's suspension needs to do, not just something handy from the
> parts bin.

TBH I doubt any new redesigned Defender will be what the off-roaders
want, most farmers just don't need excellent off-road ability, a
toyota pick-up with big tyres will do for most of them. The military
appear to be looking elsewhere for their vehicle needs too.

--
Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!

On or around Sat, 12 Aug 2006 14:18:00 +0100, Simon Isaacs
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 12:32:46 +0100, Austin Shackles
><[email protected]> scribbled the following nonsense:
>
>>On or around Sat, 12 Aug 2006 08:20:44 +0100, beamendsltd
>><[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:
>>>
>>>Sorry to say I have to disagree 100% with all of the above. I'll leave
>>>it at that rather than risk a falling out!
>>
>>no need to fall out. that lot was my opinion, and we're all entitled to our
>>own opinions. But the problem you had with reversing the van was
>>undoubtedly because it's got too high a reverse gear, and I have myself
>>noted this on TDi discos when moving a big trailer - but on them you always
>>have the option of using low-reverse.
>>
>>for some reason, modern vehicles are equipped with a reverse gear that means
>>it'll do about 30 flat out in reverse, a trait for which there's hardly ever
>>any need, and as a result, when you want to reverse upslope at about 2 mph,
>>you have to do it at less-than-idle speed and slip the clutch.
>
>I always use low box when reversing with a trailer.
>
>Been driving a 7.5 tonne Marecedes truck (bored during my summer
>holiday....) and that has such a stupid reverse gear it is unreal,
>tickover reverse is nearly 10 mph, which is very interesting backing
>onto docks at depots!!!
>
>Having said that, 60 in 6th gear is pulling about 1300rpm, which could
>make for interesting top speed as it red lines at 3000....

I assume it's limited either by a limiter or by lack of power... but 's
like I say, for some reason, reverse gears are silly-high. might be
cost-cutting, use the same gear as first with an idler chucked in, rather
than a separate ratio.

the bigger wagons have high and low boxes, some of 'em, I recall shunting
artics with twin splitters, and the low reverse is just as good as it is on
a landy, specially when reversing a 40' box trailer.

--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
"Remember that to change your mind and follow him who sets you right
is to be none the less free than you were before."
Marcus Aurelius Antoninus (121-180), from Meditations, VIII.16