Talk:Land Rover Defender

Australian Military version susceptibility to land mines

The article states that "The Perentie has proven to be highly vulnerable to land mines" suggesting that this version is more susceptible to landmines than other Land Rover variants or other vehicles in general. I think this should be replaced with something like "The Perentie is not hardened or armoured to protect against landmines". If a standard Mack truck offers little land mine protection then I imagine a standard G Class would provide little better protection than a Rover. Djapa Owen (talk) 14:21, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

I have edited the relevant section to correctly reflect the fact that the G-Wagen was not chosen as a land mine hardened vehicle, and that Defence have identified Defence Project Land 121 Phase 4 as providing the second part (land mine hardened) of the Perentie replacement. The ministerial statement [1] identified that the Hawkei is the preferred vehicle for the testing of protected and unprotected vehicles and that the G-Wagen was "to provide a fleet of tactical vehicles and an enhanced training capability to prepare for operations in protected vehicles". Light tactical vehicles not protected vehicles. Currently the lightest protected vehicle in use is the Bushmaster, and the Hawkei is expected to fill the gap between that and the unprotected G-Wagen. A steel floor is not much better than an alloy one, it might even be worse. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djapa84 (talk • contribs) 15:18, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

If you have reliable sources then it is OK to post stuff. I reverted your addition because you had speculated about the Hawkei. Looking at the source you give though, a statement made over a year ago about a yet-to-happen future event really isn't a reliable source any more in my opinion. It would need something must more concrete to be included in the article. That aside it is quite acceptable to state that the G-Wagen isn't armoured. --Biker Biker (talk) 18:11, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

The Hawkei has progressed since the statement mentioned above and has gone on to the next stage of testing. Here is a more recent ABC article: [2] which talks about the progress of the project but does not mention the role of the G-Wagen or the role of the Hawkei (if it succeeds in the trials) in tactical terms. The Hawkei is designed to be landmine hardened, but only IED hardened with the application of optional additional armour. Djapa Owen (talk) 06:51, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

My understanding is that the AA discontinued the LR as they would not consider a new model with removable armour. The G3 does have the capability for add-on armour. As a former repair contractor for the AA, I can state that *ALL* LRs had numerous small problems, and they simply refused to fix them. If they did provide an upgraded part, the cost was outrageous. The civil Freelander was an example. The car was $40k new. A replacement engine was $25k. Freelanders required new engines every 30k kms. Regarding the Isuzu engine; a small firm manufactured kits that allowed several types of engines to be fitted to the LR. The Isuzu diesel kit was by far the most popular with off-roaders. Thus the AA took this experience to Land Rover and they agreed to fit the engine from new. It was by far the best power unit ever used in any Land Rover. Larger engines, such as the Leyland alloy V8, tended to wreck the power train. Particularly the t'fer case and the front joints.203.219.80.188 (talk) 07:33, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Engine options

We now have a great many optional engines listed including the 4.0 litre V8, but not the 3.9 litre or the 4.6, and the 2.8l I6 produced in South Africa, but not the 3.5 or 3.9 Isuzu diesels produced in Australia. How should we deal with this? List one - list all perhaps? Djapa Owen (talk) 09:02, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

how about the Italian only 2.0l engine petrol 2605:59C8:5259:4C10:0:0:0:45A (talk) 04:44, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Replacement section

I think this section should be removed or rewritten as the 2007 replacement is already available.

Ineos wants to build a replacement. TGCP (talk) 16:54, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

I edited the article. Information about Ineos Automotive is included.--Fabian USA (talk) 23:07, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

And I have removed it, since this article is about the Land Rover Defender only, not about similar products from competing companies (especially not since the Ineos is just a project, not a finished product, and mentioning them here thus can be seen as an attempt to plug an upcoming product, i.e. free advertising...). - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 09:40, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Ineos Automotive have announced that they plan to produce an alternative Defender-like SUV vehicle to satisfy their perceived gap in the market left when the Land Rover Defender was discontinued. Jim Ratcliffe, founder of chemical company Ineos, wants to build an off-road vehicle modeled on the rugged Defender. German engineering firm MBtech, which is owned by AKKA Technologies and Daimler, have been engaged to create and produce the prototypes. OK. Have a nice day! (responsible for most content)--Fabian USA (talk) 10:25, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

• @Fabian USA: When Ineos have developed an alternative to the Defender, as opposed to just having a project/plan, that vehicle can have an own article, but neither the project/plan nor the finished vehicle, if there ever is one, belongs in this article. - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 11:24, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks.--Fabian USA (talk) 12:19, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

References

Plan to revise 'BMW M52 engine' section

I plan to put the direct quotation from Land Rover SA into my own words and correct the info about 'Green Mamba,' which according to club_defender_southafrica on Instagram was not the Coniston Green NAS 90 prototype, but an SA market 90 station wagon painted in a bright green colour. I also plan to move the paragraph about the SA 50th models to the Special editions section under Defender 50th. Aharveypdx (talk) 23:44, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

I made the changes as planned. Aharveypdx (talk) 00:49, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

However, there are still some areas that could use work. There are a few more direct quotations and the paragraph with a list of parts is a little long. Aharveypdx (talk) 00:51, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

I added a section about the exhaust system. The information came from the factory parts catalogue and electrical diagrams. Aharveypdx (talk) 17:30, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Using informal language

some parts of the page are using a great deal of informal language such as "folks" 76.202.60.124 (talk) 02:21, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Planned edits to Special Editions and Export and foreign-built versions

I plan to add a paragraph to the 90SV section about the development of the roll cage and also mention the 90SV as the forerunner to the NAS 90. Aharveypdx (talk) 17:47, 30 June 2023 (UTC)