Compare 90 to 110

Hi guys,

I have next to zero driving experience of reasonably modern Defenders, so I don't really know what to expect from them on the road. I'm actually looking for a 110, but there's a really smarmy dealer nearby who has a 90 available for test drives. If I try that car - how much will it tell me about what to expect from a 110 ? (assuming all other things being equal, tuning, tires, condition..)

Cheers,

dabac

Hi Dabac Can be very different . Tyre sizes Turning circle Ride Roadholding Carrying capacity. These are a few of things that can be different. Others are just the same. Engine amd gearbox Front end to bulkhead. ------------BB.

The main difference that you will notice between the 90 and the 110 are that the 110 is less bouncy on poor (read most of them round here) road surfaces. Other than that there is not much in it on the road, obviously the 110 is longer so is not quite as easy to park, and the 90 is ultimately better at extreme off road use. The 110 uses a little more fuel, but it's only a couple of MPG down on the 90. You can't put small children in the side-mounted seats (even with booster cushion) under the new laws so the 110 obviously has the advantage there with the second row of seats.

Ok, so I found a 110 CSW -06 available as a rental, made a reservation for half a day and went off. Did about 200 miles on mixed roads(no off-road though, the thought of getting stuck somewhere, alone and in a rental was quite discouraging...)

Anyhow, despite the fact that my current car has had most of its soundproofing ripped out of it due to corrosion issues(except for the bits that fell out by themselves after having rusted their way through the sheet metal...) the Defender still came across as considerably noisier than expected.
This car had the full-sized basket-like roofrack on, so I'm wondering if a car without that would have been noticeably quieter?

Also, all other things being equal, would a 90 be quieter than a 110?

Then there was the fuel consumption. As far as I'm concerned I was driving rather gently, in no particular hurry anywhere. I did have it up to 70 MPH, but nothing that I'd consider dramatic. But when I filled it up at return the fuel consumption turned out to be 20-30% higher than the numbers quoted in the official sales brochure, so now I'm wondering:

A) a sales people lying to us customers even about such obvious and easily controllable things like MPG?

or:
B) is that what you can expect when you're trying to get even an unloaded Defender to follow the traffic pace?

or
C) was it something that had much to do with this specific vehicle, the roof rack for instance?

It handled rather well in keeping up with the general traffic flow, and I was delighted by visibility and driving position.

you can easily do more than 20% off the normal mpg. the roof rack will account for a fair bit of that. poor servicing and a heavy right foot will take care of the rest.

i drive my 200tdi very gently and get good mpg, for such a heavy vehicle.

ps. always remove the roof rack when not in use, (if poss). it just makes good common sense.

ormus said:

...you can easily do more than 20% off the normal mpg. ...a heavy right foot will take care of the rest.

Click to expand...

Well, me and my driving has been called a lot of things over the years, but "aggressive" isn't on the list. But maybe doing 70 in a Defender would qualify?

ormus said:

i drive my 200tdi very gently and get good mpg, for such a heavy vehicle.

Click to expand...

And what would that be then?

ormus said:

always remove the roof rack when not in use,

Click to expand...

If I'd known that it was there when I made the reservation I'd have asked the rental agency to remove it. But as it turned out I had to take it as it was.