New Defender - Land rover micro site

[Cowabunga]

Modern automatics seem to have a lot more gears (ZF box has 8) so a lot more shifty shifting so lower revs and better fuel consumption as a consequence. I believe the duck mentioned his XC90 hit the highs of 39mpg on a fairly brisk road run which is near astonishing given I drive our auto Volvo (6 speed) with half the horsepower and struggle to get above 38mpg.

The XC90 averages about 38mpg and consistently does 39mpg on long runs with lots of motorways driven at up to 80mph for long periods. Best I've managed is 44mpg with economy driving forced due to traffic conditions. Of course instant readouts or zeroing the counter before a long downhill section gives silly ridiculous figures but mine are easily achievable. Also easy to get it down to 32mpg when driven hard.
I never take any notice of short journey [less than 10 mile] figures, because from a cold start the dash is always pessimistic. Nevertheless my average figure includes all journeys, however long or short.
For longer journeys I have found the dash to be about 0.5mpg optimistic when measured by pump readout and distance covered.

It is an 8 speed, but Volvo use AW transmissions as do Audi Q7 V6 diesels[and its derivatives], but in longitudinal form rather than the Volvo's transverse version [the same as many Toyota and Lexus cars that use the same box].

My Honda has a nine speed transverse ZF auto which is every bit as good, although more noisy [it groans a bit sometimes]. It doesn't do the longer trips that the Volvo does and usually not more than 100 mile round trips with no motorway. This means that, to me knowledge, it has yet to shift into 9th gear. I've been up to 70mph in it and that isn't quite fast enough to change into top.


The Honda is slightly more powerful and torquey than my Ford Ranger2.2, from a 1.6 twin turbo, and does an average of 42mpg with 50 attainable driven sensibly on longer routes. It does weigh half a ton less than either Volvo or Ranger though.

Even so the Ranger only ever manages a best of 30mpg. This is with the six speed automatic. [Averages between 18 and 22mpg on general farm work/towing] The Ford engine is notoriously thirsty by today's standards and the new 2.0 Ford with ten speed auto should achieve 35 to 38mpg with more power and performance available.

 

[feilding]

Never did anymore than 25-26mpg with our D2 manual. It was a late model as well untinkered with apart from EGR delete. Our auto struggled to do 20mpg as did others locally.

32mpg towing I find very hard to believe.

If yours was a late model that could be the difference. Mine are 2000/2001 models, the later models had cats in exhaust system, I know of one that is heavy on fuel it's a 2004 model and it's got a rusty chassis. My chassis's are very good as they're sprayed with waxoyl and waste oil mix every 6 months. [emoji2] .

 

[Drillman]

If yours was a late model that could be the difference. Mine are 2000/2001 models, the later models had cats in exhaust system, I know of one that is heavy on fuel it's a 2004 model and it's got a rusty chassis. My chassis's are very good as they're sprayed with waxoyl and waste oil mix every 6 months. [emoji2] .

Auto was X Reg. A truly appalling piece of badly built junk. To make any sort of progress it had to be thrashed within an inch of its life.

By contrast my current daily driver a 3.2 auto Ranger will easily do 30mpg plus on a run and averages about 22mpg on normal work duties. I’m not grumbling at that as it seems welded to a trailer most of the time.

 

[Hooch]

Got told yesterday that they are not releasing a commercial until end of 2020 or early 2021

 

[Cowabunga]

Got told yesterday that they are not releasing a commercial until end of 2020 or early 2021

That has been the case from the start. The 90 shorty will not appear for another year yet and the 130 will be later still. All before the commercial versions. Unless sales bomb and they have the time and spare capacity to shorten the timescale, which isn't beyond the bounds of possibility.

I strongly suspect that, as with previous Discovery commercial versions, they will gouge their customers by actually charging a higher price before VAT for the stripped out commercial than they do for the roughly equivalent passenger models. Having been a long serving customer of theirs, must say that I little patience or loyalty left for the brand. Especially now that this model is an import like all its rivals that sell for less. In the twilight of my working career, I buy what I like and want, regardless of brand, image, price or anything else.

Might end up with another Fiat Panda, although my wife wouldn't be seen with me in the car, because she says we looked like The Wombles. Personally I like The Wombles.

 

[D14]

So had a lease price yesterday for a 2.0 D240 HSE 110 5dr Auto [6 Seat] over 3 years, 60,000 miles none maintained. Initial deposit £2700 + vat and then 33 monthly of £900 + vat. OTR price is £59,250 + vat. Yes its a top spec HSE but you should see the list of optional extras available which will push it a lot higher.

If you drop to the most basic version a 2.0 D200 110 5dr Auto then the price drops to £2200 + vat deposit and 33 monthly at £697 + vat. OTR price £43,300 + vat.

Availability I am told is 12-16 weeks but we won't be looking any further as those prices are not competitive against others. Don't get me wrong its a nice vehicle but not worth those kind of figures.

 

[Clive]

Got told yesterday that they are not releasing a commercial until end of 2020 or early 2021

I have no interest in them until then

 

[Hilly]

I have no interest in them until then

Nor me.

 

[Rowland]

Nor me.

I also want a commercial but will test drive the swb one asap to see how it drives as it will be the same as the commercial one but without bells and whistles. Then I can make my mind up what to do about my deposit.

 

[Hilly]

I also want a commercial but will test drive the swb one asap to see how it drives as it will be the same as the commercial one but without bells and whistles. Then I can make my mind up what to do about my deposit.

The way livestock farmings going I won’t be getting one until their is s shagged out one in a collective sale with the wires hanging out if and every panel dented lol

 

[NorthEastLad]

New Ford Bronco, rumoured to be starting at $30k, highly unlikely to come to Europe though.

 

[pgk]

Hope it's better than their Ranger, understand that Ford means Fix Or Repair Daily!

 

[JP1]

View attachment 837919

New Ford Bronco, rumoured to be starting at $30k, highly unlikely to come to Europe though.

That or a modern day version of the International I keep seeing featuring on Netflix would be ideal

 

[Hilly]

Hope it's better than their Ranger, understand that Ford means Fix Or Repair Daily!

That will ruffle a ducks feathers .

 

[Cowabunga]

That will ruffle a ducks feathers .

Not this one. Not keen on pickups. They are an indispensable tool for my business and I couldn't do without one, but that is it. Even with the latest luxuries, they are not particularly civilised compared to a good SUV or car.
Reliability? All brands go through phases. Isuzu with dodgy engines at times. Nissan with duff chassis and back axles for some ages. Mitsubishi with head gaskets. Ford with oil pumps. Toyota with emission equipment. You name it and they have had their issues on certain models from time to time. Even luxury brands are the same. Thinking of BMW with timing chain failures, VW with emission cheating and subsequent sub-standard software 'upgrades'. Ford and VW group with their respective DSG transmision failures. Nissan with unfit for purpose CVT transmissions. I could go on all night and frighten the life out of owners of all common brands.

 

[Paddington]

Presumably the vehicle is monocoque construction, does the body lift off the car for engine, transmission access like the D3/4 ?

 

[Cowabunga]

Presumably the vehicle is monocoque construction, does the body lift off the car for engine, transmission access like the D3/4 ?

You have a fundamental misunderstanding of ‘monocoque construction’. The body is the car. There is nothing to lift the body off from. It is just like any other modern car. Like most family cars since the early 1960’s in fact. Not much different to a Morris Minor 1000 in that respect and access to components is probably very similar.

 

[Paddington]

Land Rover have only had a monocoque car since the RR 322 was introduced in 2002, but I was comparing the new Defender to the old separate chassis models. I was only asking if the new Defender is built like a modern Range Rover (monocoque) or like the D4's (Integrated body frame) ?

 

[Nithsdale]

Land Rover have only had a monocoque car since the RR 322 was introduced in 2002, but I was comparing the new Defender to the old separate chassis models. I was only asking if the new Defender is built like a modern Range Rover (monocoque) or like the D4's (Integrated body frame) ?

Thought the Freelander was monocoque, it came out late 90's?

 

[Cowabunga]

*Land Rover have only had a monocoque car since the RR 322 was introduced in 2002, but I was comparing the new Defender to the old separate chassis models. I was only asking if the new Defender is built like a modern Range Rover (monocoque) or like the D4's (Integrated body frame) ?

That's not correct either. The Discovery up until the current shape, plus the RR Sport until the current model also have separate chassis. Which is what allows the body to be removed from it.

All current production models, since about three years ago, are monocoque. The 2002 RR was mono. *So was the Freelander and everything from the Halewood factory from the get-go. Not until very recently has the Disco and RR Sport been redesigned to be monocoque.