Interesting, but the Snatch (the VPK) is just one variant of the LR family in the UK forces and it is a pretty specialist one at that and it must have had a very small production run. it has been heavily criticised and is often not considered to be fit for purpose; but that has been the furore over their use in Afghanistan whereby, IMO, they were put to use in tasks for which they were never designed.
Wiki is pretty much up on that aspect if anyone wants to follow the links.
Snatch Land Rover - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The snatch is as much a pig to drive as the LR ambulance conversion; the LR fire-engine fit is probably also a pig (I haven't driven one of those) but at least it doesn't have to go very far; just around a few airfields on fairly smooth bitumen.

Despite these new specialist vehicles, such as the Ocelot, coming into service, the army will still need a general purpose run-around LR type of vehicle; such as the Wolf.

The army already has a lot of wolfs, I would be surprised if any more were to be bought as everything is getting bigger and heavier.

As an example Fitted for radio Wolfs have had to have a large rear anti roll damper fitted to overcome the weight of the radio fit; they are also are running rear tyres at 60psi, both of which have not helped off road grip.

LR are too small to allow modular up armouring to current required standards. Future military vehs are likely to be bigger than current models to allow such up armouring, even if thats not needed to run to and from the chippy when not deployed.

The old 110 were rated for 10 soldiers, driver, comdar and 8 in the back.
Most Wolf ar rated at a maximum of 6, based on seatbelt fit in the rear.

A fited for radio wolf is 3, driver comd and 1x signaller provideing that personal equipment is stored in a trailer.

The good news is that there may well be some for sale....

Hitler reacts to LR DC100 announcement
 

Utter rubbish.
the modern defender is full of electronics, and electronics and landrover are not too words that sit too well together. And you do need a computer to fix many of the problems on the newer defenders, and this proposed one will be even worse.

whilst not defenders my mums TD5 disco sat uselessley in the drive because some muppet routed the electrics through the highly noxious environment of the rocker box, and as you mention headlights, what about the brand new range rover on the landrover stand at a show that wouldn't start because water in the headlight caused a short which shut down the computer. took the land rover technician 45 minutes with his computer to solve that one. And what will you do when the immobiliser on your defender fails, as happened to some poor chap in China in his rangie who then had to trailer it several thousand miles to a dealer to get it fixed.

Thats why I run an old truck with no electronics. I wouldn't touch any newer 4x4 for an expedition, least of all a defender, and thats from someone who has owned several landrovers, has the T shirt and the hat!!

Your not allowed to carry soldiers in the backs of landrovers anymore under most cicumstances (war fighting excepted). the military have also stated that they want a common manufacturer for all it's weights of GP vehicles. to my knowledge only Ford and Mercedes (AKA unimog) can do that.

The snatch was fit for purpose. the problem was some idiot then put it into a role it was never designed for in an environment it wasn't designed for, because some other idiot hadn't spotted what everyone else had, that the most likely theatre of war for the last 30 years has ben the desert.

The 101 ambie was a pretty good tool. I took one round the hill rally course for several years doing med cover. I also took a wolf version and it was dire, much prefered the 101. the ambie body is just too heavy for the landrover. The Wolf ambie was also never fit for purpose as delivered because the original design brief was wrong. In reality it probably still isn't.

IMHO unimog is they way to go for soft skinned ambies, for armoured, well, how about one like the danish army have (see below)!!

The hummers are pretty rubbish IMHO. they were built by comittee and have a lot of compromises. they are too large and unweildy and I have seen them stuck in places than landies sail through. the ambulance versions developed severe stress cracks around their bodywork.

Moggy - oh my goodness me. I hope I didn't disturb your sleep last night:D
http://fastcache.gawkerassets.com/as...oninternet.jpg

Seriously though - I agree 100% re electronics - a bloody nuisance. I was referring to the mechanical side of things.

:thumbup1: great cartoon, spookilly close to the truth. still haven't found that camera in my office!!:eek3:

New Defender
 

Land Rover Freelanders and RR Evoque are using a newish 2.2 diesel, imagine thats what the defender will havr to use - so cetainly a common rail, which rule ous servicing in the field with out computers !

UNfortunately I think this is a bit of a toughhie for LR damned if they do and damned if they don't!

Yeah LR are in a difficult position, they have to sell vehicles in North America and Europe to help cover develpoment costs and 'improve the marques image' so any engine has to meet emissions legislation on both continents, be smooth refined, powerful and fuel effecient.

Yet for 3rd world use, we need simple reliable under stressed engines that run on crap diesel and can be bush repaired without a laptop/technician

On several occasions when working for Land Rover UK as an employee I suggested they make a 'bling' new defender for NAmerica/Europe markets on a modified T5 chassis with air/independent suspension, CRD engines and all the electronic gubbins - and a coiler with live axles, a proper 3 litre or more non CRD engine with minimal electrics for ROW (with some build quality please)

I get thoroughly annoyed with LR's insistance of using 2.5L or smaller engines in Defender/Defender replacement - start with a decent sized understressed bloody engine and make it bombproof.

Im sure LR will follow the herd and produce a plastic POS that sells well - and Id buy one here in Canada to replace our ageing gas guzzling Discovery, but I will keep the 300Tdi Defender for overlanding.......

Unfortunately the only defender (series) landrover with a right size engine was the V8 . They dont seem to get the big engine /low stress since they went from series which was a medium engine/low stress unit. The 300 tdi was almost there pity it wasnt a six 3.75ltr.
It would be a good idea to have a big engine that has all the emissions crap , but can go to a dirty but usable mode when a sensor or chip fails !
And as already posted they need to realise they make enough plastic poser vehicles and need to retain 1 workhorse that is suitable to modify to "multirole" . JMHO

The other purchase the mod have done is the panther - an iveco base product with a boat like hull that deflects blasts and no one sits over a wheel.

Again heavier than 3.5 tonnes, the landy isn't up to it for the military nowadays. Now if landrover had carried on developng the 101 into the lama into ? they might be there but even waving the flag probabily isn't going to get them massive orders now

Ahhhh the one Tonne, I remember flying down the M4 in a 101 doing 80 mph towing a Rapier missile Launcher about 20 years ago.......much more capable than the 130 defenders we got to replace it and the PTO winch was awesome!

shame the Llama didnt take off, but the requirement and vehice size required for Military ops and armour has outgrown most manufacturers.

The size of the IEDs/suicide bombs being used in country currently will take out most vehicles short of a MBT, seems even the Panther is under protected too... or like usual, its been put in a role it wasnt designed for by the MOD:

Defence of the Realm: Costing lives

What the boys are up against, the truck that slows and pulls over to let the convoy past is packed with explosives:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4uJFQZ96eIshould

even if you were in an M1 or Challenger 2 locked down, this would give you a nasty headache.


Its a shame the Td5 engine wasnt a 3 or 3.5 litre.....the concept was good, the end product was crap (IMO)

If you look back to the very first landrover you can see the ethos that still commands the decision making today.
when they designed the first landrover they raided the rover p4 car parts bin.
when toyota developed the first landcruiser they raided their truck and bus division.
landrover are still basically producing cars that go off road. toyota build small trucks that go off road. thats why landrovers traditionally have small engines and landcruisers have big ones.
look at the engineering on a landcruiser and it is massive compared to a landie, at least my H60 is!!
Until landrover have a sea change in the culture of their approach they will continue to build vehicles that are fundamentally under engineered for what some of their end users want to put them through. The defender needs to be a commercial vehicle for the commercial market. I think the santana is more like the way defenders should have gone

Some interesting thoughts coming through on this. I don't like the idea of the new one either, but if I woke up next to it I probably wouldn't kick it out of bed!

I have a Series 1 Landie, and have had since 1987. Basic is the word. It still works (sometimes) even after nearly 55 years.

I have a V8 Defender. The engine is the sweetest, most forgiving unit - totally understressed in this unit but when in petrol supping mode (towing, offroading, errrrrr, onroading too doh), you have to be accompanied by a petrol tanker. She's on LPG which is a nasty compromise.

I also have a Santana, the so-called "Series 4". The Iveco engine is better than anything i've experienced in a Landie and the whole concept is rugged, tough, useful, fit for purpose.

I still prefer two wheels though :scooter:, or heaven forbid shank's pony!

Maybe the way forward after the new low-fat decafeinneated plastic and electronic Defender-lite comes out is for people who would have bought traditional Defenders to go for Santanas instead.