2007 Defender

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.

--
Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!

"Austin Shackles"wrote
>>Well what are the outputs of the current engine?
>
> dunno, TDis are 111 bhp and 200 ft lb. But they're universally reckoned
> to
> be only just enough, and although the TD5 has bigger numbers, it's also
> reckoned not to be so useful off-road. The TDi disco is OK, it'll get to
> about 100 eventually, if you tune it right. But it struggles with the
> sort
> of loads it shoudl pull easily and pulling maximum weight it REALLY
> struggles, IME.
>
> The top-spec 2.4 transit duratorq has 140 ps and 375 Nm, which is I think
> about 270 ft lb without working it out again - it's a transient overboost
> thing, ISTR and would make a useful engine in the defender, the extra
> torque
> at full boot would be very useful for overtaking and also for pulling up
> banks on the motorway with a trailer on. Anything much less really isn't
> worth the effort - the 2.2 is defeintely down on torque compared to the
> TD5,
> and doubtless has the same trait of needing lots of revs.
>
The 2.2 Duratorq comes in three ratings but is only on the front wheel drive
vans mated to a 5 speed box...
a.. 85 PS/250 Nm
b.. 110 PS/285 Nm
c.. 130 PS/310 Nm
The 2.4 Duratorq comes in three ratings also, and for rear wheel drive, and
is mated to a 6 speed box....
a.. 100 PS/285 Nm
b.. 115 PS/310 Nm
c.. 140 PS/375 Nm
No doubt they can tune them for the Defender application, perhaps with more
torque.

--
Regards
Bob Hobden
17mls W. of London.UK

On or around Thu, 10 Aug 2006 23:40:53 +0100, "Bob Hobden" <[email protected]>
enlightened us thusly:

>The 2.2 Duratorq comes in three ratings but is only on the front wheel drive
>vans mated to a 5 speed box...
> a.. 85 PS/250 Nm
> b.. 110 PS/285 Nm
> c.. 130 PS/310 Nm
>The 2.4 Duratorq comes in three ratings also, and for rear wheel drive, and
>is mated to a 6 speed box....
> a.. 100 PS/285 Nm
> b.. 115 PS/310 Nm
> c.. 140 PS/375 Nm
>No doubt they can tune them for the Defender application, perhaps with more
>torque.

yeah, I found that list - I reckon the 2.4 looks more suited to the land
rover though, in top-spec tune, from that list.

While you can get the same figures from a smaller engine once you fit a
turbo, you can't easily get the same characteristics - in particular, you
can't get the same torque at low revs - although this may be more to do with
emission regs than engines - but I have a feeling that it's easier to get
low-rev torque from a bigger motor; also there's a balance to be struck
between efficiency (small engine working at 100% most of the time) and
longevity/reliability (larger engine working at 50% most of the time)

The other aspect to consider for 4x4s which *will* be used off road (as
opposed to the BMW X5 etc.) is controllability - you don't want great gobs
of torque coming in at 3750 rpm and bugger all below that - you want a good
wide torque curve, but also a relatively gentle increase on the torque
curve, so that you can control the output more closely off-road.

--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
Too Busy: Your mind is like a motorway. Sometimes it can be jammed by
too much traffic. Avoid the jams by never using your mind on a
Bank Holiday weekend.
from the Little Book of Complete B***ocks by Alistair Beaton.

On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 20:52:36 +0100, CraigB <[email protected]>
wrote:


>
> Well, I suppose I could live with a pregnant looking bonnet,

wonder if there's still facility for carrying a spare wheel


--
William Tasso

Land Rover - 110 V8
Discovery - V8

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

> On or around Thu, 10 Aug 2006 15:27:37 +0100, beamendsltd
> <[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:
>
> >> The new engine will be mated to a 6 speed gearbox.
> >
> >I hope to god it's nothing like the current Transit engine. I
> >hired one (18ft Luton) to move house on Friday. Though if felt
> >very free-revving, even when empty I was up and down the gearbox
> >something rotten to keep it moving an any sort of hill. Loaded,
> >it was gutless in the extreme, infact we got the clutch very hot
> >reversing into the drive at the new house on a very moderate
> >slope - about 20ft in all. I would have dreaded towing anything
> >heavy with it.
>
> might have been a gutless version of the engine though. The 2.4 comes in
> several levels of tune and the proposed transit one if it is indeed that
> would be equivalent to the top spec transit, which hire ones seldom are. as
> to overheating the clutch, well, provided they still have low box, that
> should solve that problem.
>

It was the posh engine - he doesn't have the lower spec ones (re-sale
value is the key part of a van hire business). I don't need low box
now, so I shouldn't need it now/then. It's just the wrong engine for
Defender, and indeed for a 3.5T van off the motorway if you intend
loading it!

> Mind, I reckon they're in danger of perpetuating the long-standing land
> rover disease of fitting too-small engines. They'd do better to use the 2.7
> V6 as per the disco 3.

It only has slightly better figures than the Td5, so wouldn't make
a lot of odds. What it needs is a long stroke to get the torque and
engine braking - top end is of little interest to working Defender,
except as a bonus. At least that's how I and most of our customers
who use the vehicle for work see it. As I've said before, the 300Tdi
is sorely missed.

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 Thu, 10 Aug 2006 19:31:04 +0100, "Bob Hobden" <[email protected]>
> enlightened us thusly:
>
> >
> >"Austin Shackles" wrote :
> >
> >> might have been a gutless version of the engine though. The 2.4 comes in
> >> several levels of tune and the proposed transit one if it is indeed that
> >> would be equivalent to the top spec transit, which hire ones seldom are.
> >> as
> >> to overheating the clutch, well, provided they still have low box, that
> >> should solve that problem.
> >>
> >> Mind, I reckon they're in danger of perpetuating the long-standing land
> >> rover disease of fitting too-small engines. They'd do better to use the
> >> 2.7
> >> V6 as per the disco 3.
> >
> >Well what are the outputs of the current engine?
>
> dunno, TDis are 111 bhp and 200 ft lb. But they're universally reckoned to
> be only just enough, and although the TD5 has bigger numbers, it's also
> reckoned not to be so useful off-road.

Not universally, by any means.

>The TDi disco is OK, it'll get to
> about 100 eventually, if you tune it right. But it struggles with the sort
> of loads it shoudl pull easily and pulling maximum weight it REALLY
> struggles, IME.
>
> The top-spec 2.4 transit duratorq has 140 ps and 375 Nm, which is I think
> about 270 ft lb without working it out again - it's a transient overboost
> thing, ISTR and would make a useful engine in the defender, the extra torque

But at what revs? That's the vital bit off-road and towing. It could have
500hp, but at 3000rpm it would be useless for the intended application.

> at full boot would be very useful for overtaking and also for pulling up
> banks on the motorway with a trailer on.

Neither of which is top priority for Defender, being able to get
out of the yard without burning out the clutch is far more important,
as is getting down the grassy, slippery slope without losing control.

> Anything much less really isn't
> worth the effort - the 2.2 is defeintely down on torque compared to the TD5,
> and doubtless has the same trait of needing lots of revs.

...... and is therefore completely useless for Defender, and
a libility off-road! Speaking personaly, I don't really want a
Td5 Defender (I'd have a new 300Tdi one tomorrow), and the new
engines figures rule one out completely. I can see an awful lot
of ex-LR customers round here, they aleady moan about the Td5.
Far from continuing any tradition, Ford have got it completely
wrong, unless they are relying on the "life style" market - which
judging by the new dash they are.

>

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]>
"Bob Hobden" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> "Austin Shackles"wrote
> >>Well what are the outputs of the current engine?
> >
> > dunno, TDis are 111 bhp and 200 ft lb. But they're universally reckoned
> > to
> > be only just enough, and although the TD5 has bigger numbers, it's also
> > reckoned not to be so useful off-road. The TDi disco is OK, it'll get to
> > about 100 eventually, if you tune it right. But it struggles with the
> > sort
> > of loads it shoudl pull easily and pulling maximum weight it REALLY
> > struggles, IME.
> >
> > The top-spec 2.4 transit duratorq has 140 ps and 375 Nm, which is I think
> > about 270 ft lb without working it out again - it's a transient overboost
> > thing, ISTR and would make a useful engine in the defender, the extra
> > torque
> > at full boot would be very useful for overtaking and also for pulling up
> > banks on the motorway with a trailer on. Anything much less really isn't
> > worth the effort - the 2.2 is defeintely down on torque compared to the
> > TD5,
> > and doubtless has the same trait of needing lots of revs.
> >
> The 2.2 Duratorq comes in three ratings but is only on the front wheel drive
> vans mated to a 5 speed box...
> a.. 85 PS/250 Nm
> b.. 110 PS/285 Nm
> c.. 130 PS/310 Nm
> The 2.4 Duratorq comes in three ratings also, and for rear wheel drive, and
> is mated to a 6 speed box....
> a.. 100 PS/285 Nm
> b.. 115 PS/310 Nm
> c.. 140 PS/375 Nm
> No doubt they can tune them for the Defender application, perhaps with more
> torque.
>

Not by much - torque is fundamental to the engine design, i.e. long
stroke gives torque, short doesn't. You can move the rpm it's created
at about a bit by tuning, but not funamentally.

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]>
"William Tasso" <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 20:52:36 +0100, CraigB <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
> >
> > Well, I suppose I could live with a pregnant looking bonnet,
>
> wonder if there's still facility for carrying a spare wheel
>
>

There isn't on the Td5 (officially). Though a new bonnet spare
wheen carrier was intoduced from 2A000000 on vehicles, that may
be for 300Tdi/2.5 Petrol's only and they forgot to mention it!

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]>
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.

I still think it looks horrid though!

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

On 2006-08-11, beamendsltd <[email protected]> wrote:

> 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.

Probably not, I suspect that it's just a parts-sharing thing. It
would help the Defender appeal more to the rufty-tufty school run
types though, over the last few years I've seen one or two articles
talking about the image of the Defender in terms of road-going
non-commercial users and how it intimidates even range-rover drivers
and so on. Nothing about what the vehicle can do, just about the
image of it.

--
Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!

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

> On 2006-08-11, beamendsltd <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > 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.
>
> Probably not, I suspect that it's just a parts-sharing thing. It
> would help the Defender appeal more to the rufty-tufty school run
> types though, over the last few years I've seen one or two articles
> talking about the image of the Defender in terms of road-going
> non-commercial users and how it intimidates even range-rover drivers
> and so on. Nothing about what the vehicle can do, just about the
> image of it.
>

Indeed. Clarkson saying they are the coolest vehicle to drive is
rather worrying ;-) I was accosted by a bloke in Leeds, in a sharp
suit, apparently sober - "Great motor - really cool - wow!". I'm
affraid I looked at him, then at my shed, then back at him -
completelty gobsmaked. I couldn't even come up with a witty retort.
I suspect my face suggested I was looking for the tree he had just
fallen out of......

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

On 2006-08-11, beamendsltd <[email protected]> wrote:

> Indeed. Clarkson saying they are the coolest vehicle to drive is
> rather worrying ;-) I was accosted by a bloke in Leeds, in a sharp
> suit, apparently sober - "Great motor - really cool - wow!".

I caused a few double-takes some time ago when my Defender was my
daily drive by hopping out of a snorkelled, rag-top red truck covered
in dents and mud while wearing a suit, tie, big overcoat and carrying
a briefcase. I certainly wasn't driving it for image purposes though,
I was too cheap to buy a more practical daily drive!

I've met a few defender drivers who've gone into the benefits of the
machine off-road but have never actually driven it off-road though,
but then that's the same with any make IME.

--
Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!

Richard Hi,

the dashboard vents most probably have been abandoned because of the new
facia's design and the A/C which most probably will be either standard or
available on all variants, maybe as an extra only on the entry level models.

The six gears gearbox is in fact a worrying characteristic since it may sign
the lack of torque at very low speeds.
On the other hand it is a good marketing tool since the Jeep Wrangler (which
is the Defender's main opposition in the North American market and in
several European markets) comes with a six speed manual box. The good thing
is that the gearbox to be used will most probably be either a Gertrag or a
ZF one so it will definately be more sturdy than the R380.
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
I have also heard worrying comments about the engine that will most probably
be fitted but we will have to wait and see what will the engine on the 2007
Defender will be and what its power and torque characteristics will be after
the LR mechanics will put their hands on it.

Hope the moving to your new house is now over and everything is back to
normal.

Take care
Pantelis

"beamendsltd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:f5543f544e%[email protected]...
> In message <[email protected]>
> "Pantelis Giamarellos" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > People Hi,
> >
> > in addition to the above,
> >
> > the windscreen flaps will be abandoned.
>
> I would really miss them - they are a must when laning or
> stuck in traffic for me.
>
> > The new engine will be mated to a 6 speed gearbox.
>
> I hope to god it's nothing like the current Transit engine. I
> hired one (18ft Luton) to move house on Friday. Though if felt
> very free-revving, even when empty I was up and down the gearbox
> something rotten to keep it moving an any sort of hill. Loaded,
> it was gutless in the extreme, infact we got the clutch very hot
> reversing into the drive at the new house on a very moderate
> slope - about 20ft in all. I would have dreaded towing anything
> heavy with it.
>
> Also, the hire bloke (a customer) told me that out of the
> 30 vehicles (all less than a year old) with that engine in
> in his fleet, 27 had had new engines and/or top end re-builds.
> The fuel pump has a plastic gear lubricated by the fuel, and if
> the fuel is interrupted for even a short time the gear breaks
> up and does "a timing belt" on the engine.
>
> Overall, it's exactly the wrong engine for a Defender, and
> I've no reason to suppose the new one will be any more approprite.
> In fact, the six speed box probably tells me all I need to know -
> no torque and therefore no engine braking.
>
> Defender RIP, yuppie truck here we come :-(
>
> >
> > Take care
> > Pantelis
> >
>
> Richard
>
> > "Bob Hobden" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > > According to Photos in today's Autocar, changes outside are a bonnet
bulge
> > > to accommodate the new 2.2ltr. 4 cylinder diesel engine
128bhp/228lbft.
> > > But inside a total redo, gone are the dash and heating controls we all
> > know
> > > and love to be replaced with a dash and centre consul identical to the
new
> > > Freelander with car like air vents and conventional heating controls
in
> > the
> > > centre.
> > > Forward facing rear seats replace the side seats too.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Regards
> > > Bob
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
> --
> www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk [email protected]
> RISC-OS - Where have all the good guys gone?
> Lib Dems - Townies keeping comedy alive

On or around Fri, 11 Aug 2006 16:45:58 +0300, "Pantelis Giamarellos"
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>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...

--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
In Touch: Get in touch with yourself by touching yourself.
If somebody is watching, stop touching yourself.
from the Little Book of Complete B***ocks by Alistair Beaton.

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

> On or around Fri, 11 Aug 2006 16:45:58 +0300, "Pantelis Giamarellos"
> <[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:
>
> >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'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

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]>
"Pantelis Giamarellos" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Richard Hi,
>
> the dashboard vents most probably have been abandoned because of the new
> facia's design and the A/C which most probably will be either standard or
> available on all variants, maybe as an extra only on the entry level models.
>

Still don't like it! It's part of the character of the vehicle. I
hate aircon, and as I'm inclined to drive with the window open, even
when very cold, it serves no useful purpose for me. I'd much rather
have the option - 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!

> The six gears gearbox is in fact a worrying characteristic since it may sign
> the lack of torque at very low speeds.
> On the other hand it is a good marketing tool since the Jeep Wrangler (which
> is the Defender's main opposition in the North American market and in
> several European markets) comes with a six speed manual box.

This model won't be on sale in the US apparently - no air bags
(fortunately).

> The good thing
> is that the gearbox to be used will most probably be either a Gertrag or a
> ZF one so it will definately be more sturdy than the R380.

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.

> 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

I'll have to assume that the Autocar repot has the wrong engine - the
one mentioned has less torque. Aside from that, more torque = less
gears, not more! I suspect the choice is down to off-the-shelf
engineering, i.e. "that will fit".

> I have also heard worrying comments about the engine that will most probably
> be fitted but we will have to wait and see what will the engine on the 2007
> Defender will be and what its power and torque characteristics will be after
> the LR mechanics will put their hands on it.

Not a lot - the basic design can't be altered.

>
> Hope the moving to your new house is now over and everything is back to
> normal.

Thanks for that - nearly done......... just another week of "We need
a......"

>
> Take care
> Pantelis
>

Richard

> "beamendsltd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:f5543f544e%[email protected]...
> > In message <[email protected]>
> > "Pantelis Giamarellos" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > People Hi,
> > >
> > > in addition to the above,
> > >
> > > the windscreen flaps will be abandoned.
> >
> > I would really miss them - they are a must when laning or
> > stuck in traffic for me.
> >
> > > The new engine will be mated to a 6 speed gearbox.
> >
> > I hope to god it's nothing like the current Transit engine. I
> > hired one (18ft Luton) to move house on Friday. Though if felt
> > very free-revving, even when empty I was up and down the gearbox
> > something rotten to keep it moving an any sort of hill. Loaded,
> > it was gutless in the extreme, infact we got the clutch very hot
> > reversing into the drive at the new house on a very moderate
> > slope - about 20ft in all. I would have dreaded towing anything
> > heavy with it.
> >
> > Also, the hire bloke (a customer) told me that out of the
> > 30 vehicles (all less than a year old) with that engine in
> > in his fleet, 27 had had new engines and/or top end re-builds.
> > The fuel pump has a plastic gear lubricated by the fuel, and if
> > the fuel is interrupted for even a short time the gear breaks
> > up and does "a timing belt" on the engine.
> >
> > Overall, it's exactly the wrong engine for a Defender, and
> > I've no reason to suppose the new one will be any more approprite.
> > In fact, the six speed box probably tells me all I need to know -
> > no torque and therefore no engine braking.
> >
> > Defender RIP, yuppie truck here we come :-(
> >
> > >
> > > Take care
> > > Pantelis
> > >
> >
> > Richard
> >
> > > "Bob Hobden" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > According to Photos in today's Autocar, changes outside are a bonnet
> bulge
> > > > to accommodate the new 2.2ltr. 4 cylinder diesel engine
> 128bhp/228lbft.
> > > > But inside a total redo, gone are the dash and heating controls we all
> > > know
> > > > and love to be replaced with a dash and centre consul identical to the
> new
> > > > Freelander with car like air vents and conventional heating controls
> in
> > > the
> > > > centre.
> > > > Forward facing rear seats replace the side seats too.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Regards
> > > > Bob
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk [email protected]
> > RISC-OS - Where have all the good guys gone?
> > Lib Dems - Townies keeping comedy alive
>
>

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

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 ;-)

--
Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!

"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.
Perhaps there will be a choice of engine to include the V6. One can but
hope.
--
Regards
Bob

Ian Rawlings 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 ;-)
||
|| --
|| Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!

I've now had three vehicles with aircon, and I keep a fairly close eye on
fuel consumption, and I can't say that having it on or off makes a
noticeable distance - certainly any change in consumption is more than
cancelled out by variations in terrain, speed, headwinds etc. I would guess
less than 1mpg.

--
Rich
==============================

I don't approve of signatures, so I don't have one.

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.

--
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)