I agree. There is no doubt in my mind that the New Defender is a capable off-roader that can go anywhere, but you'll never see one with a cherry picker on the back, you'll never see one with a Power Take Off for external equipment, you'll never see one with the wheels removed and replaced with something mad like caterpillar tracks or train wheels because it has lost the ability to be a platform. The Defender was a comercial vehicle, the New Defender is an SUV. It would be like Ford saying "here's the new Transit, we've based it on the Galaxy."

I ask that same question when I use my abacus while my workmates flip on their computers

the old ones are too expenisive and puma's are entirely computer controlled - if people really cared about getting an affordable reliable car they would drive Japanese

That's a good question. The reality is, LR created the current market. The luxuries that were placed in RR were soon in every other 4x4. By 2004 the HSE D3, for instance, was air sprung, FBH, independ suspension, 4x heated seats as too were the mirrors, windscreen. It had AC, CC, Xeon light, lecky adjustable seats and mirrors (that fold electrically). It has a fridge, dual climate control, central locking, automatic/sequential transmission, TC, ABS, HDC, terrain response, centre and rear locking diffs, triple sunroofs, logic 7 Harman Kardon audio system, voice recognition, satnav, 7 full sized leather seats that fold into a flatbed position, 4* crash rating... With the above said, how and why would LR not continue with such advances, considering my 2006 HSE D3 has covered 180k miles with all electrics working as they should and like many others, it's still on its original suspension airbags (no other vehicle is on original coils after 180k). Tech only gets better. If technology for 2004 is still rocking then it stands to reason that later tech would work as well, if not much better (and be cheaper to manufacture). Granted, there'll always be initial bugs in the system, especially with newer/less tried tech. However, JLR are meeting demand. Technology and luxury is as expected in a Land Rover today as 4x4 is. They're a business. Demand rules supreme. Besides, it's not as though we're being forced to buy new. I used a 2006 vehicle. I'm very happy with it. And, I've owned many others to aid comparison. I find the D3 to be a happy sweet-spot. Used buy-in price vs ability vs security vs efficiency vs reliability vs comfort etc = win-win. Edit: safety and efficiency are a major deal today. Such qualities demands colossal tech and R&D. All LR's are 5* rated in crash tests and they still kick-ass off-road, as well as on it.

I agree. I still wish for a solid rear axle on air suspension for some articulation on the L663

@Kyle B BWHAHAH!!!! Oh wait, you were serious??? Have you priced a Land Cruiser???

Ppp P9o

No it’s not

The above L663 didn't have a rear locker fitted. If it did the Camel wouldn't stand chance, no matter how many lockers you fit. The point of the video is that all vehicles are stock. The other two traditional Defenders were never available with a rear locker. The L663 in the video has no rear locker - it was using Terrain Response 2, effectively a set of 'infinite lockers' all round. Some would argue an artificial infinite locker is more able over multiple surfaces than lockers alone. Either way, from the showroom, the L663 is available with incredible abilities from from poverty spec to the full beans.

Erm no. Ive nothing against the new defender but it's seriously limited by it's suspension when it comes to anything more than mild off-road (which that was). Compared to something like a Wrangler Rubicon which is fully lockered on beam axles, the new defenders offroad limitations are quickly realised as it teeters between 2 and 3 wheels on anything more than a mild undulation whereas the jeep remains firmly planted on all four wheels making it far safer, more pleasant to drive and more capable in this kind of situation. It is also absolutely not capable of withstanding the type of conditions the camel trophy vehicles were subjected to on a daily basis, mostly due to the amount of electronics on the car which are taxed keeping the vehicle reliable on tarmac let alone being dragged through a rain forest. It's still a very capable vehicle for what it does, providing much more in the way of refinement and safety than the old one ever could and the traction control system is very very good, but it can't mask the the fact the suspension design is biased toward road performance rather than off-road performance. If asked to tow 3.5 tonne 400 miles you'd take the new defender all day long, to cross the Darien gap? No chance, it's going to be the camel.

Yeah, the defender can take its self down steep hills too, leave it in 1st low, and diff lock on ( if needed) , and it will take itself down nicely, all you need to do really is steer.

No. The feature film will go into detail.

In my other film, Bob Ives, winner of the Camel Trophy claims the current Range Rover would manage the Darien gap today just as the RRC managed 50 years ago. As for the Camel theory, how many owners of traditional Defenders attempted anything like the Camel outside of competition, in a stock unit vs how many used their vehicles 98.9% of the time of roads, sand, grass and gravel? Camel vs L663. It is a pointless argument, this was purely for fun. Camel vehicles were Works machines and fit for purpose. They're not civilian builds. And the truth is, they break just like any other LR. As for how easy the L663 is to fix, to those in the know, a majority of issues are very easy to fix - as simple as plugging in a device. But buying new isn't about how easy something is to fix for the overwhelming majority - it's about how able, efficient, safe, quick, secure, reliable and practical the vehicle is. If the L663 was no good Bob Ives wouldn't have bought one, which should say everything. Bob is a farmer, off-road advisor and Camel winner. My film will have Bob's account, along with many others. Effectively, my upcoming L663 feature is about what others think, not what I believe. Spoiler alert, the L663 isn't thought to be a poor Defender by those very familiar with Defenders of old.

Get over it the new one is great - it has the most interest from people that any vehicle I have ever driven...to the point of annoyance!

As the description says, the all new Defender shown has no lockers other than a centre locker, as do the others. However, the new Defender only has AT's fitted, whereas the Camel and Puma are equipped with MT tyres - the Camel also had its anti-roll bars removed.

Some defeners have traction control

@@michaeldavis5075 yes, the Puma has TC but wasn't able to perform as well as the L663 even though it had MT's fitted.

Those were the last decent defenders, Just a shame those are expensive to buy. I own the TD5 which is another great model. My dad owns the 200 TDi which is so easy to work on, the 300 Tdi was the same too. But sadly that got stolen and destroyed, so i switched to the TD5.

@@procta2343 I like them all , but when they face-lifted them it became a dream car for me. Since they came out i have been desperate for one. Just look so good with the bonnet.

The old defender has its charm but is a awful place to be when behind the wheel, the world has progressed over the last 70 years it didn’t

@@miketucker7466 Hahah.. You are absolutely wrong. You’re right though, that the world progressed. The new interior options- options for suspension .. make these such a joy to drive!!

@@heritage4x490 nothing can make the the old one safe or comfortable- I owned one!

@@miketucker7466 East Coast Defenders look them up. Make some beautiful Defenders that drive awesome and are safe. No I don’t work for them...The 2 I currently own ...I rebuilt from the ground up. Rides and drives like a cloud.

@@heritage4x490 there's nothing you can do to a defender to make it safer or significantly more comfortable. There's nothing you can do to improve passenger or pedestrian safety or introduce crumple zones. And for comfort, the cab design is inherently cramped. you can fit air con and a plush interior, but that's never really what made them uncomfortable. But that's not the point, they're great machines, an excellent platform to build on, and fun to drive. The new defender is good too,it just doesn't have that same raw functionality.

As the description says, the all new Defender shown has no lockers other than a centre locker, as do the others. However, the new Defender only has AT's fitted, whereas the Camel and Puma are equipoised with MT tyres - the Camel also had its anti-roll bars removed.

@@landroverphotoalbum but it got traction control based on ABS and brakes... brakes where tent do burn due hard offroad usage. Lots of LR3 and LR4 after even few days of muddy offroading need to have changeg brake pads...

@@jakubstrumillo the 2015 Puma Defender also has traction control. It has MT's fitted, too - tyres make a big difference. I've used both my D3's off-road for 5 years, with over 100k covered between them.. No pad/disc issues, at all, whatsoever. I have had one piston seize on a rear caliper when on the road though.

@@jakubstrumillo glad seeing people here who actually understand something about cars and off-road!

@@adtfor i build few 4x4s on my life.

How about you be more reductive and just walk?