New Defender Rage/Hate Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

Carson G

Well-known member
Departure angle has nothing to do with cargo capacity either.
The back of the vehicle can only be so long behind the rear axle if you want a good departure angle. Although LR is supposedly going to build a 130 which will probably have a cargo space at least as big as the LR4.
 

EricTyrrell

Expo God
Why do people keep sharing 4XO's "I am mad that Land Rover stopped inviting me to their events" biased garbage videos like he has anything of merit to say? He's a grouchy clickbait troll with an axe to grind.
When someone far more experienced and qualified doesn't approve of your favorite luxury car, attack the character.
 

Life_in_4Lo

Explorer
So?
The back of the vehicle can only be so long behind the rear axle if you want a good departure angle.
Again, the departure angle has nothing to do with the cargo capacity of the Defender in comparison to the LR4.
The breakover and departure have nothing to do with cargo differences.
The LR4 is larger than the Defender.

You start by chastising me that the Defender is larger than the LR4,
now you say the smaller size is your biggest issue with the Defender?

mate, you don't know what you're saying do you.

Yeah I agree the cargo space is smaller I’ve seen both in person and I’ve had a LR3 since new. It’s my biggest issue with the Defender. My point about wheel size is the fact that no Land Rover in the US since the LR3 has had the option of anything smaller than a 19’. My point being it’s a step in the right direction. The LR4 could not fit 18’s stock in the US. The Defender lost cargo space primarily due to shortening up the back to increasing the break over angle. (edited to: departure angle)From a off road stand point it’s a okay compromise from a hauling perspective it’s annoying.
 

Blaise

Well-known member
He's saying the short rear overhang reduced cargo capacity. I agree with him, I've only ever touched the rear bumper while I was crossing Imogene pass. But I sure do use the cargo capacity regularly.

If the 130 comes out... it's game over.
 

Carson G

Well-known member
He's saying the short rear overhang reduced cargo capacity. I agree with him, I've only ever touched the rear bumper while I was crossing Imogene pass. But I sure do use the cargo capacity regularly.

If the 130 comes out... it's game over.
Thank you. If you take off the spare tire it is shorter than the LR4. With it on it’s a few inches longer. The lack of stepped roof also hurts cargo capacity.
 

Carson G

Well-known member
It's amazing how fluid your statements are.
I don’t see how it’s that hard to understand what I’m trying to say. I agree with you on the cargo space being smaller, that’s what my problem with it is. However you didn’t specifically say the cargo space so I assumed you were talking about the whole vehicle, which is the reason I replied to you in the first place. Had you said the cargo space is smaller than the LR4 we wouldn’t be having this conversation.
 

Blaise

Well-known member
LR4 has slightly more cargo space than the Defender. 90.3cuft vs 78.8.

Cool, back to senseless bashing/hate!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top