the box

August 23, 2006 6:42 PM

Say what you will. The new Land Rover Defender is rad.
posted by The Jesse Helms (66 comments total)

Sat?
posted by Colloquial Collision at 6:50 PM on August 23, 2006

Your favorite car brand sucks.
posted by bob sarabia at 6:50 PM on August 23, 2006

Regretfully, I have to agree: That is a sweet sled. Now, if only it came with Love Guns.
posted by hobocode at 6:52 PM on August 23, 2006

What exactly does it defend?
posted by lekvar at 6:52 PM on August 23, 2006

Double.
posted by Kraftmatic Adjustable Cheese at 6:52 PM on August 23, 2006

What exactly does it defend?

Fragile masculinity?
posted by Serial Killer Slumber Party at 6:56 PM on August 23, 2006

why is it rad?
posted by edgeways at 6:59 PM on August 23, 2006

That's actually what a real SUV should be. Lot's of flat sheet metal for easy replacement (and theoretically cheap) or on the trail repairs.
posted by substrate at 6:59 PM on August 23, 2006

What's the gas milage on that thing?
posted by delmoi at 7:00 PM on August 23, 2006

(Oh boy! I get to be the first to say....)
Does it have a cup holder? For your Pepsi Blue?
posted by wendell at 7:01 PM on August 23, 2006

Fragile masculinity?
posted by Serial Killer Slumber Party at 6:56 PM PST on August 23

Give me a break, its not a hummer. Its Mills on wheels.

why is it rad?
posted by edgeways at 6:59 PM PST on August 23

I'm sorry to respond in this thread, I usually just let it ride. But, I feel as if I can quickly answer here. from Wikipedia:

The Defender is very much an anachronism in today's vehicle marketplace. It is still largely hand assembled, and unlike most modern cars and trucks, all the major body panels and sub-assemblies simply bolt together. A Defender can literally be broken down to its chassis with simple hand tools — there is no unibody structure. This is actually an advantage when used extensive for off road travel - unibody vehicles can weaken over time, but there are no such stress points on a Defender.
posted by The Jesse Helms at 7:03 PM on August 23, 2006

What exactly does it defend?

Oh, you know, stuff.
posted by padraigin at 7:03 PM on August 23, 2006

You know, some of us actually do take trucks out in the woods and get them dirty.
posted by 2sheets at 7:05 PM on August 23, 2006 [1 favorite]

boo
posted by jimmy at 7:08 PM on August 23, 2006

lekvar writes 'What exactly does it defend?'

The memories of a non-existant youth attacked by encroaching middle-age?
posted by signal at 7:10 PM on August 23, 2006

I rode in the back of one of the older ones once over some very bumpy dirt roads. Bare metal seating, minimal shock absorption, buckboard ride. What fun!
posted by mk1gti at 7:10 PM on August 23, 2006

is rad

no it isn't.
posted by eustacescrubb at 7:11 PM on August 23, 2006

Don't you mean: "Cat what you will"?
posted by weapons-grade pandemonium at 7:14 PM on August 23, 2006

'What exactly does it defend?'

The (dwindling) Empire.
posted by Kraftmatic Adjustable Cheese at 7:14 PM on August 23, 2006

Plus it can actually go offroad, unlike the Hummer and a plethora of other urban SUVs
posted by Eekacat at 7:14 PM on August 23, 2006

I like it. Tested one in the rain season in the amazon, from Santarem to Cuiaba. Kind of trip where you have to build bridges to cross rivers. Also another trip from Sao Paulo (Brazil) to La Paz (Bolivia). That's what these are made for, i think.
posted by ig at 7:20 PM on August 23, 2006

Used to be a huge fan, but when Ford bought them I lost interest. Are they till in any sense Land Rovers under the sheet metal, or just yet another permutation of that goddamned Ford Ranger chassis they use in everything despite the fact that it's complete shit?

The best Land Rover in all of cinema has got to be The Antichrist from "The Gods Must Be Crazy". Thing almost steals the movie from N!xau. Almost.
posted by George_Spiggott at 7:21 PM on August 23, 2006

I like the idea that i could take it apart with my bike tools.
posted by Mister_A at 7:22 PM on August 23, 2006

There's a doctor/lawyer/broker who parks his pristine land rover in front of my lawn a couple times a week to pick up his daughter from his ex-wife's house, which is across the street. God, he annoys the shit out of me. I wonder everytime his smug face appears outside my window how he justified buying a car like that when he lives in congested-open-space-lacking-no-off-road-Philadelphia.

If you're in to off-road crap (whatever the fuck that is), then I guess it's a great truck.

If you're a wealthy suburbanite for whom off-road means driving through poor neighborhoods in your consumer-version of a military vehicle that gets 14 fucking mpg^* (city) and costs more than most people make a year, you're a fucking tool.

No really, a fucking tool. And if you answer that you bought it because it makes you feel "safe" or you like to ride "up high" -- you're a pussy and a fucking tool.


* was the latest I could find. Given that Landrover's current 2006 models get the same mpg, I figured it was fair.
posted by illovich at 7:24 PM on August 23, 2006

You know, normally I'm singing with the choir on the SUV bashing, but there's some truly knee-jerk "OMG SUV" hate in this thread.

This isn't a vehicle for tackling the rough and rugged WalMart parking lots. It's a magnificently simple and capable vehicle for use in true off-road conditions.
posted by ninjew at 7:24 PM on August 23, 2006

Cool SUV? Um... What's next, sports scores?

(Okay maybe it's cool for a vehicle, but I just can't get excited about burning more fossil fuels and sitting in more traffic at this point.)
posted by trigby at 7:24 PM on August 23, 2006

I used to offroad a bit. I was never very into it. I bought a stock Jeep TJ and had fun for a year or so going around with an offroading club in my area. We'd try to find the most out-of-the-way, inaccessible roads and bring our rigs out there and tromp all around the wilderness, splattering mud everywhere; extra points if we got stuck and had to get pulled out by a buddy, which happened to me once. Great times.

God, I used to be a jackass.
posted by gurple at 7:25 PM on August 23, 2006

Eh, probably not coming to North America.

Especially not with a motor that produces just 120 horsepower (but three-stumps worth of torque).

Too bad.
posted by notyou at 7:29 PM on August 23, 2006

> What's the gas milage on that thing?
> posted by delmoi at 1:00 PM AEST on August 24

Dunno about the new 2.4 CRD engine, but the 2.5 litre turbodiesel on the 2005 model gets about 10 kilometers to the liter. Which is on par with my 1994 Subaru Liberty/Legacy stationwagon. Despite its size, the Defender is a good deal more fuel efficient than most mid to large SUVs coming out of either Japan or the US. Due at least in some part to the use of aluminium body panels and a very high-tech engine.

Much as I love Defenders though, I'm not sure how regurgitated car company press releases qualify as the best of the web.
posted by tim_in_oz at 7:32 PM on August 23, 2006

Post preview: Illovich - the car you're ranting about is an American only version running a hideously antiquated 3.9 litre petrol V8. Not the same beast as the subject of the link, and altogether more profligate.
posted by tim_in_oz at 7:37 PM on August 23, 2006

+1 vote for best post of Aug. 23!!!!!!!
posted by greensweater at 7:44 PM on August 23, 2006

The negatives must be reversed!
posted by Kwantsar at 7:47 PM on August 23, 2006

why is it rad?

Because it would have been totally awesome in 1985. Over the top gag me with a spoon fer shure fer shure awesome. Even more awesome than parachute pants or Members Only jackets.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 7:47 PM on August 23, 2006

what is this "pick on The Jesse Helms day" or something. looks "rad" to me .

thank you for posting.
posted by nola at 7:58 PM on August 23, 2006

Is it actually still an SUV if it can perform useful offroad fucntions?
posted by Artw at 7:59 PM on August 23, 2006

So, (I think) 10 kilometers to the liter = about 23.8 mpg for the non metric amount us. If the math is wrong I blame alcohol, Anything below 30 mpg that gets used for family light transportation earns a big meh. If you need it for a legit reason I'm sure it is cool, but the vast majority of vehicles are for family use and are way overpowered. If you are hauling wood to the middle of the boonies good vehicle, if you live in the city and experience nature one a year it is a waste.

If my math is wrong I reserve the right to resend judgement
posted by edgeways at 8:04 PM on August 23, 2006

It sure feeds my colonial-era fantasies of European cultural and technological superiority.
posted by stbalbach at 8:22 PM on August 23, 2006

i feel safer already. looks like an escape from four years ago...only uglier.
posted by taocow at 8:23 PM on August 23, 2006

If the math is wrong I blame alcohol, Anything below 30 mpg that gets used for family light transportation earns a big meh.

Maybe for you, but for most of the US, anything over 20mpg is considered acceptable or even good. In a big boxy truck, even moreso.
posted by knave at 8:33 PM on August 23, 2006

I'd rather have the the G-Series by Mercedes as the Nazi legacy makes it much more punk and sticking it to the man.
posted by geoff. at 8:39 PM on August 23, 2006

This isn't a vehicle for tackling the rough and rugged WalMart parking lots. It's a magnificently simple and capable vehicle for use in true off-road conditions.

I'm sure that's where I'll see most of them.
posted by StrasbourgSecaucus at 8:41 PM on August 23, 2006

Rad it most certainly is. Second only to the Unimog in the parthenon of insanely capable vehicles.
posted by Skorgu at 8:45 PM on August 23, 2006

StrasbourgSecaucus et al, I think something has skipped you by. This is not a new vehicle, it is a mild rehash of a truck that has been in continuous production with minor variations since 1948.

The fact that utter tools will use these vehicles in ways for which they are not suited does not in any way detract from the sheer rad-ness of the vehicles themselves.
posted by Skorgu at 8:48 PM on August 23, 2006

I'm in love! I've always lusted after the Defender 90.
posted by ericb at 8:56 PM on August 23, 2006

The fact that utter tools will use these vehicles in ways for which they are not suited does not in any way detract from the sheer rad-ness of the vehicles themselves.

Actually, yes it does.
posted by bob sarabia at 9:06 PM on August 23, 2006

This is a real SUV, not some pansy behemoth which gets stuck in the mud. It handles the real outdoors as well as any stock vehicle. Oh, did you get it muddy with your boots? Hose down the passenger compartment mate.
posted by caddis at 9:51 PM on August 23, 2006

The Defender was pulled from the North American market around 1997 due to its lack of air bags (not sure if there were other mitigating factors). This current Defender is available in many parts of the world, but still not in N.A.

RoverParts claims the Defender is coming back to N.A. in 2007, but if you look at the concept drawings, it looks more like a Jeep Cherokee than its European lineage.

I've always had a mild lust for a Defender, as I'm constantly out in the rough and muck of our National Forests as part of my job. But the current crop of Land Rovers available in the US are geared strictly for the suburban mom.
posted by F Mackenzie at 9:52 PM on August 23, 2006

As Iain Banks, proud Defender owner, said: "Your crumple zone is other people's cars."
posted by i_am_joe's_spleen at 10:08 PM on August 23, 2006

I used to like the Land Rover Discovery but it was an unreliable POS here in the States. Then Land Rover went and soccer mom'd it up and called it the LR3.

Kind of like F Mackenzie, I've always liked the Defenders, and am off road (deserts, BLM land, forests) rather often.

Of course, it's going to be way out of my price range.
posted by drstein at 10:28 PM on August 23, 2006

I used to like the Land Rover Discovery but it was an unreliable POS

Tell me about it. I had one as my 'company car' from '98 to '01 and I had all kinds of trouble with it. Had it flat-bedded back to the dealership three times, and couldn't wait to get out of the lease. Electrical problems, U-joint, front-end.... argh. A total POS.

If the Defenders were reliable and available in the US, I'd consider 'em. For now I'll stick to my 4WD pickup.
posted by F Mackenzie at 10:43 PM on August 23, 2006

Roverparts are out of date. The Defender will continue until 2010, when the new model will come. At least that is the official line now.

As the current Defender hails from 1958 (going from leaf to coil springs and deleting the split windscreen does not a new model make), Ford has been patching up a few of the most nagging anachronisms, first in the 2002 model and then in the 2007 model. The model can more be seen as a branding excercise these days; military sales are small and cheap Japanese pickups have taken over the developing world. Whether the all-new 2010 model will go on to reclaim past glories remains to be seen, but as a Land Rover fan i really hope so.

Loads more pictures here.
posted by Harald74 at 10:48 PM on August 23, 2006

Even with the ford purchase, they still have a very english sense about them - most particularly, the defender. All are amazing off-road vehicles, but the defender is something very particular and special in it's single purpose design. I'd probably never own one, but i have to respect the history and the concept behind them.

Last winter i ran into the best example i've ever seen of a single-purpose defender up on the Langjokull glacier in iceland - a super cool, immensely capable truck - reworked precisely for flying across glaciers like they're a paved highway. cool stuff.



(more pics here if you're bored)
posted by jba at 10:54 PM on August 23, 2006

The fact that utter tools will use these vehicles in ways for which they are not suited does not in any way detract from the sheer rad-ness of the vehicles themselves.
----
Actually, yes it does.

By that logic, the Mona Lisa is crap because some people think it looks like Britney.

BALDERDASH, SIR!
posted by davelog at 11:07 PM on August 23, 2006

I've got a 300tdi 110 that I converted to run on biodiesel. Always makes me want chips.... However I just can't get excited about the new Defenders. A lot of the charm is gone and they are just being marketed as eXtreme(!) which pisses me off.
posted by bouncebounce at 12:39 AM on August 24, 2006

This thing looks a LOT like my old 72 Bronco.
posted by bradth27 at 6:09 AM on August 24, 2006

and no, that's not MY bronco. Just sayin'....
posted by bradth27 at 6:09 AM on August 24, 2006

edgeways, your math is right.
posted by inigo2 at 6:34 AM on August 24, 2006

By that logic, the Mona Lisa is crap because some people think it looks like Britney.

Yes, as we all know the carbon footprint on infamous oil-paintings is a bitch.
posted by prostyle at 7:10 AM on August 24, 2006

By that logic, the Mona Lisa is crap because some people think it looks like Britney.

BALDERDASH, SIR!

I think actually the logic is:

Object with intrinsic value + ridiculous, socially & ecologically suicidal fad (which also drains the wealth of those who partake) = way to many instances of original object being produced and consumed to the point where people who haven't been caught up in the craze begin wondering if it will be necessary to legislate the end of the fad for the good of the planet.

The only way the Mona Lisa reference would be apt is if so many copies of the painting were bought and sold that they collectiely began to block out the sun.

And even then people posted things to metafilter like "Sat what you will, but the Mona Lisa is an awesome painting."


PS - I get it, the FPP was talking about the non-consumer version of the Land Rover -- and I understand that love: I wanted a government issue Humvee when I was a kid. But the crumbelievable fad in SUVs that has happened since then has crushed any admiration I had for the vehicle, mainly because I realized that the fetish I apparently shared for the ridiculous military transport led on a macro scale to the social and safety abomination that is the Hummer and H2 -- or whatever they call the "small" one.
posted by illovich at 7:44 AM on August 24, 2006

Someone commented earlier that they were sure they would see most of these vehicles tackling nothing more challenging than the WalMart parking lot. I have no doubt of this. Yet it strikes me that should they spend more time with Médecins Sans Frontières they would see them in other possibly more challenging environments. I mean really, everything most of us are likely to experience is going to be 4 minutes from a chai tea.
posted by econous at 8:46 AM on August 24, 2006

"This isn't a vehicle for tackling the rough and rugged WalMart parking lots. It's a magnificently simple and capable vehicle for use in true off-road conditions."

"I'm sure that's where I'll see most of them."

Of course, because you won't be out there offroading to see them. But you will see them at Wal-Mart, because you'd rather shop there than get into the great outdoors, because you hate Mom & Pop stores. WHY DO YOU HATE AMERICA, SS?
posted by Eideteker at 9:29 AM on August 24, 2006

I've owned the 1963 version of this vehicle and a 90's discovery with the same mechanicals and running gear. The 63 IIA Station Wagon version was remarkably similar to the 90's version of the Defender.

The thing is a fucking farm implement. They are tools, not products.

Pitty the idiots who buy them to cruise the malls because they are slow as hell, uncomfortable, and completely impracticle unless you use them for what they were designed to do. Seriously, they ride much like a buckboard, especially the older ones. But used as intended, they are brilliant machines.
posted by hatchetjack at 9:32 AM on August 24, 2006

I've always had a soft spot for the true line of SUVs (past tense possibly needed).
At least Land Rover can perform for the infinitesimal segment of our society that could find such a use for this kind of vehicle.

but BOTW? puh-leeze.
posted by Busithoth at 12:16 PM on August 24, 2006

Land Rover Series I, Series II, Series III, Defender
Santana Anibal (Santana is a former Spanish Land Rover licence holder that still manufactures a Series III-based, IVECO-engined vehicle for farmers, the military and real purists).
Minerva Land Rover. (Belgian Land Rovers)
Tempo Land Rover. (German Land Rovers)
posted by Skeptic at 12:29 PM on August 24, 2006

Toyota makes the best off-road vehicle. UN peace keepers use Toyota, the Taliban in Afghanistan use Toyota - they are solid.
posted by stbalbach at 8:30 PM on August 24, 2006

taocow writes "looks like an escape from four years ago...only uglier."

So Ford copied from Rover?

StrasbourgSecaucus writes "I'm sure that's where I'll see most of them."

Could it be that you've got a selection bias?
posted by Mitheral at 5:47 PM on August 26, 2006