Every so often, it becomes time to replace your good old 4WD. In our club, that usually means a progression from a Pajero to a Patrol, or perhaps a Prado or a 100 Series. It's a well-worn path, and it's the Done Thing.
Now it's my turn. Nothing wrong with the Paj, as all ex-owners like to preface statements, but I want a diesel, some more space, and some more articulation. So it's time for a change, and I can take advantage of a novated lease scheme so a new vehicle actually makes sense for once.
What follows is my opinion. Yours may differ; you have been warned! For starters, you might not have the same requirements as I do. That's the economy and range of a diesel, serious offroad capability, a lot of room in the back, a lack of concern about luxury features, and a customisable, tough, reliable truck.
Now there's a lot of vehicles on the market that claim to be 4WDs. Let's get rid of anything without low range straight away and leave them parked outside the latte shops where they belong. And everything with less interior room that the Pajero, and everything that isn't a diesel.
That knocks out a lot of the field in one go, but there's a few more easy cuts. If Toyota stuck coils at both ends of the 79 Series, sold it in a wagon format and cut the price by $20k, then I'd seriously consider it. But I don't want that van-like body style, and would take coils over leaves in the rear. And I don't think nearly $60k represents good value.
The Discovery is good, but lacks room in the cargo area (yes, I know you stack things vertically, no I don't like that idea) and its tyres are pretty small. If Landrover made a Discovery Plus with Defender cargo area and wheels, I'd walk away from the hypothetical 79 Series Wagon!
The Prado I think is probably the most capable IFS 4WD out there as far as offroad ability. But I'm more than a little worried about the strength of the transmission. The Jackaroo; might get a good deal on it, but it's not got a live axle and the cargo bay isn't huge. Got a good, powerful 3.0 tdi though, and it's pretty tough.
Utes. Not wild about leaf suspension and IFS, that's a backwards move compared to the Pajero. But the cargo area is excellent and they're relatively cheap.
Pajero DiD. Fantastic engine, and I know Mitsu build a good car, I own one. But I'm going to be doing some pretty rough trips, and I'm not convinced an all-independent suspension is the best idea for serious offroading, lacking in articulation as it does. As for the monocoque chassis; I don't believe those people that say it's going to fall apart, but on the other hand I think this debate will only be settled in a few years time when we have some hard experience to look back on.
So that pretty much leaves the Nissan Patrol in 3.0tdi and 4.2tdi form, the Toyota Landcruiser 100 Series 4.2 and 4.2tdi, and the Landrover Defender 2.5tdi.
Of the two diesel Landcruiser LC100s, variants one costs and arm and a leg and the other requires all other body parts plus a few extra from your family, so I won't be buying the 4.2 turbodiesel. Also counting against the turbodiesel Cruiser is potential transmission weakness, especially the front diff and CVs, and its independent front suspension. In a 2.5 tonne vehicle - no thank you. The normally-aspirated 4.2 LC100 has four coils and live axles both ends, so it remains in the game.
Now to the Patrol. Both the 3.0 and 4.2 turbo-diesels put out pretty much the same power and torque. The 3.0 is a modern, high-performance engine. The 4.2 is an older engine that uses an extra 1.2 litres of capacity to just about match the 3.0's performance. The 3.0 is available in auto or manual, and has much better fuel consumption than the 4.2, and despite being a newer engine, it's several thousand dollars cheaper.
So, the 3.0 a clear winner? Not so fast! The 3.0 engine is not exactly a poster child for reliability, with problems ranging from quirks to total replacements. It's also got a fairly definite turbo boost which isn't a problem on the road, but may be if you want to be operating in that rev band while offroad. As you would be. However, the auto tranny goes a long way to overcoming that and any auto is going to be easier to drive offroad than the manual equivalent.
All things considered, I knocked the 3.0 out, although I understand Nissan have gone a long way to fixing the problems that plagued the early 3.0s and they are now much more reliable. Given a choice, I'd take the 4.2 and live with the higher fuel consumption, pay the extra cash, and if I want more power there's plenty of expertise out there ready to tune those 4.2 litres. But most of all, I want reliability.
So if I want reliability, the Defender should be knocked out too, right? Again, you're leaping to conclusions!
I did a fair bit of research on the topic. First off, no vehicle is perfect, but I was looking for consistent problems. Also, there will be a lemon or two that requires constant attention, even from Nissan and Toyota. After talking to a lot of owners and haunting discussion forums, I came to a different conclusion about Landrover reliability that the received wisdom.
I reckon the newer models are all right. If that upsets you, better leave now because I'm going to be continuing with the contentious statements! It's the sins of the automotive father that get visited on their sons. When I was looking at buying the Pajero a few years back, I very nearly bought a Series I Discovery but decided against it at the last minute because of reliability concerns. I still hold the view that the average Series I Disco is a problematic car, and yes I also know someone who's got a perfectly good example but that doesn't stop me generalising, this is my article and I can be as opinionated as I like!
I'd also like to draw a distinction between build quality, and robustness, and for an example I offer the wooden creation that is in the back of my Pajero and houses 100kg of tools and recovery gear. It is ugly and poorly made; the build quality isn't the best. But it is very strong. Something like a Landrover, really; I think they're strong (at least, nowadays) but agree the build quality in the hand-made Defender isn't Toyota or Nissan standards. But it's good enough. I had a careful look over several new Defenders and didn't notice anything untoward.
So what I'm saying is that I think a modern Landrover isn't going to leak oil all over the floor, or fall apart as you close the door, or require an apprenticeship in electrical engineering to keep running. Yes, this is not the Received Wisdom, but I think I already mentioned it was my opinion!
So where were we? Ah yes; Patrol 4.2tdi, LC 100 4.2tdi, Defender 110 Xtreme, 2.5tdi. Three contenders for my personal 4WD Of the Big Financial Commitment 2004, and I'll be putting my money where my mouth is.
The LC100 live-axle was next to be cut. The LC100 is a fantastic vehicle. On almost every measure it outperforms, or is arguably better than the Patrol. It has much more interior space, better visibility, fantastic articulation, lower gearing, full-time 4WD; it does everything well apart from stay together. You can see why it is so popular.
So why does Nissan continue to be able to sell any Patrols at all, if the LC100 is that much better? Simple. Three reasons. One, LC100s aren't noted for robustness. Patrols are. Two, Patrols are cheaper, or the same price and a better engine (both old 4.2s, but the Patrol's has a turbo and intercooler). Three, all Patrols have live axles at both ends. Most LC100s are IFS. Those reasons are in my view the only advantages the Patrol has over the LC100, and most buyers end up deciding for the Patrol because they're tough, cheaper and the LC100's advantages aren't enough of a difference to risk the robustness and pay the extra cash.
How does the LC100 4.2 GXL stack up against the Defender? Articulation and gearing are pretty close. Defender wins on interior space, visibility, and importantly, robustness. Much as I like the LC100, the Defender is probably better offroad, is much cheaper, is lighter, better fuel consumption, has a better power to weight ratio and is less likely to suffer a tranmission failure. LC100 has a more pleasant interior and is quieter. If all I wanted to do was tour the outback and I had lots of money I'd probably get an LC100 tdi, reinforce the front diff and get going. But I have tougher trips in mind, so the LC100 was knocked out of the shortlist.
At this point I should follow the lead of my friends and go see my local Nissan dealer. And I did that, but I also went and saw my local Landie dealer. The difference between a Landie dealer and The Rest is like chalk and cheese, but that's another story.
Back to the Defender. It looks different. "How long did the restoration take?" ha ha. It's not curvy, it's just basically a box. A not unappealing box, but still a box. But boxes have advantages over curvy shapes, such as interior space. This box does have central locking, and remote central locking at that. See, it's not all 1950s. In fact, far from it. But we shall start with the interior.
The back of the Defender is huge.
We're talking 1200mm from the door to the rear seats, 1600mm wide and the door opening is nearly 1100mm tall. That's more room than the LC100, and way more than the Patrol and the Pajero. There are also sliding rear windows so you can get into the back without coming in through the rear door. Nissan, Toyota and Mitsubishi have abandoned this little feature on the GU Patrol, 100 Series and NM/NP Pajeros respectively compared to their predecessors. If you have a lot of stuff (ie, you are married with a kid), a large cargo area is a Good Thing. There are wheel arches that extend the entire length of the cargo bay for some reason. No carpet or little pockets for things, or third-row seats, but do I care? I'm going to create another cargo-bay monstrosity so I'll never actually see it anyway.
The rear door is a barn-style. It doesn't cover the entire width of the vehicle, just 900mm or so. That means wide loads are going to be a little hard to get in, but that's ok, I don't often need to fit large objects in, just a lot of small ones. But, you can fit a ladder to climb up over the rear and still open the door. The perfect rear door system hasn't been invented, it's all personal preference. The smaller door is easier to open in a confined space though.
The rear seats are firm, and a very basic bench style, and there's no headrest for the rear passengers, but people do attach headrests to the cargo barrier. You literally climb up and into the car. Not for the unfit, or those scared of heights. Once seated in the back, if you look out of the side window you'll notice that Landrover have cleverly positioned the top of the rear window frame at eye level. Bizarre. Not a lot of legroom, either - horizontally. Vertically, there is a fair bit, more than many other vehicles. That may be more important, but I don't want to spend many hours in the back of any 4WD finding out, thanks, I'll take the driver's seat.
Under the rear seats is a huge amount of space for whatever you want. First-aid kit, fire extinguisher, recovery gear, misbehaving children. It's just as well the room is there, because there is no space under the front seats. That's where the battery goes, and some engine electronics. Yes, really. And before you ask, a dual battery can indeed be fitted. The rear seats are 60/40 adjustable, and either can be removed.
Carpet; none. Black rubber matting. Fine with me, I'd have bought mudmats anyway, and I hate vacuuming up twigs, mud, food and the debris I find in my car after a trip.
Front. Now this is where things get really different to Ye Average Japanese 4WD. First off, no glovebox, just a couple of indentations in the dashboard. No jesus handle. Not vast amounts of footroom on the passenger side, and that's been improved from pre-2002 models. No map pockets. No storage compartments, apart from a gigantic box between the seats you could just about lose a small child in. The reason it's so huge is because the front seats are very close to the windows. There's not very much right-arm room when driving a Defender. And that's not all that's odd about the driving position.
Over the years I've owned nine cars, had quite a few company cars and driven countless rentals, friends' cars and so on, and in several different countries. I like to be able to think I can get into any car and work out all its controls without very much effort.
Well, now I've mastered the Defender, I probably can because I eventually won the game of hide and seek that is operation of the Defender's key controls.
A small switch operates the headlights, which are as effective as a baby glow-worm. Given the Defender's military background, maybe it's a kind of stealth mode. Driving lights are essential. The ignition is on the left. The steering wheel can't be adjusted, and while the seat can, most people are going to have it on maximum extension. There is a horn, but it's on a stick, not the centre of the steering wheel.
There are several ventilation controls. I lost count after three. One controls the aircon, which cools the car in the same way that an icecube cools a swimming pool. Good effort, but thanks anyway. Aftermarket airco; next stop after the lights. The next controls the fan speed for the vents that direct air into the cabin. The third controls the fan speed for the fan that directs air downwards. And if that's not enough, there are manually-operated vents that let air in just below the windscreen.
The key goes in on the left of the column. There is no revcounter. Or footrest. One ciggy lighter socket. There is a CD player though, inside the one DIN socket. The dashboard is more of a dashplank. You're very close to the windscreen, which is quite vertical. Prepare for a culture shock, this is British motoring, sir.
Visibility is excellent. You sit up fairly straight, in a comfortable but firm seat, and can easily see everything in front, and to the side. Fantastic.
So time to get out on to the road. Melbourne City Landrover had kindly lent me the vehicle overnight, and said "no offroad". Who, meeee?
Start it up. It's a five cylinder, because four and six are far too normal for Landrover. Noisy, but quite bearable and very smooth.
Clutch goes down. Oooh, that takes some effort. Landrover are clearly trying to promote good driving practice, with a clutch that hard you'd need to be in good shape to slip it. Grab first and we're off. Not like a rocket, but the Landie is not a slug either. The turbo comes in pretty smoothly, better than any turboed diesel I've driven (bar the 4.2 Patrol!), and when it does there's a welcome boost of power. A whole 90kw at my disposal, along with a more impressive 300Nm at 1950rpm. Change gear, and we're moving along.
So what's it like to drive? I bet you're preparing for analogies like oil tankers without rudders and suspension of jelly.
Not a bit of it.
You may not believe this, but the Defender is fun to drive.
And now for the really heretical statement; it handles. Yes, I know this is in direct contradiction of well-respected 4WD magazines, but I liked to drive the Defender and thought it hustled along just fine. It was fun!
The brakes are four big discs all round, with four-channel ABS. The brake pedal feel is good, and you can stop quickly. The engine is willing, and doesn't need a gearchange every half a second. The steering is fairly light, reasonanbly communicative but it is responsive and very controllable. And when pushed into sweeping corners I expected chronic understeer, but no. With a little throttle the thing is actually damn close to neutral. I did not experiment too far, I hasten to add. The Pajero goes into horrible, terminal, washy understeer far more than the Defender. Yes, there's body roll thanks to the lack of swaybars (great offroad) but it's not unliveable. Should also mention here the Defender doesn't really need a suspension lift, and the tyres are 235/85/16s, or a 31.7 inch diameter. What would be the first thing you'd do with a LC100 or Patrol? You'd whack a 2-inch suspension lift in using heavy-duty coils and pop on tyres like 265/75/16s. Then you'd drive it out the dealership. So do that, then compare the handling with the Defender. Or, lower the Defender and put smaller wheels on it. Fair's fair.
Over rougher roads it travels with more surety than the Pajero. Good stuff. The ABS on gravel roads seems to be good too, although I didn't want to do too much with my loan vehicle.
Offroad ability. I was true to MLR and didn't stray offroad. But I reckon the Defender is better than anything else on the market once you're into low range territory, based on my research. That includes the Patrol. But that's like saying Cameron Diaz is better looking than Angelina Jolie. May be true, but there's a certain level beyond which it doesn't matter, and the Patrol and LC100 are well up there. But why do I think that? Because the Defender has lower gearing, better articulation, better clearance, better angles, larger tyres, better visibility, traction control and is almost half a ton lighter. The others counter with off-idle torque, which they need more of as they're heavier anyway, and a tighter turning circle. Obviously any vehicle can be improved, but in that case comparisons become really meaningless, and I don't feel like emptying too many dollars into offroad improvements (I say that because my wife will read this).
I wasn't wild about the lack of right-arm room. But at the end of the night I was pretty happy. The vehicle just grew on me, the more I drove it, the better it felt. Looking at it, it just shouldn't feel so good; the seats are firm (but that's probably a good thing), the driving position isn't very adjustable, and it's a diesel 4WD. But somehow it works. It's actually reasonably comfy, and a rewarding thing to drive. Say what you like about British cars, and I know several people that will and do, but for driveability they're right up there. And I did not notice any squeaks and rattles.
If you don't believe me, go drive one yourself.
It's not all good, of course. The Defender doesn't really have any soundproofing, so cruising at 100kmph is very noisy. So it'll be lights, airco, then a noisekit which reduces idle noise by 4db. And the turning circle…well let's chuck the oil tanker joke in here, then. It's huge. Much worse than the Patrol, by about a metre. No quick u-turns in this thing! And the clutch is tensioned by a spare coil spring.
On the other hand you do have the chance to put the constant 4WD transfer case into low range without locking the centre diff, so that makes for easy low-speed manoeuvring on tarmac. And the transfer case ratio is very low; 3.32:1, compared to 2.02:1 for the Patrol and a pathetic 1.9:1 for the Pajero. Speaking of low range, the computer remaps the engine parameters and that's noticeable; there's good throttle movement in low range, and the tiny amount of turbo boost is easy to live with. Like most turbodiesels it does prefer to be on boost, but with gearing that low it's not really a concern. Coming from a highly geared manual petrol, a very low-geared turbo diesel is going to be an improvement, but it's not going to match a large-capacity diesel off idle.
Wasn't just me that drove it. Good lady wife too. When changing gear she would regularly flail about in the air as left hand searched for gear lever. The Defender's gear lever is long, but it's easy to use and reasonably quiet, provided you change gear smoothly. You aren't going to be doing any heel and toe changes or snatch shifting, but brisk progress can be maintained. Comments? "Not too bad driving" and "I thought it was going to be worse" - and that will probably be true of most people who try it.
Other points; the mirrors bounced around. Annoying, but fixable. Some of the ventilation controls are reflected in the driver's side window at night. There is no footrest; but you don't actually need it, because you can brace against the footwell very easily. The handbrake cannot be easily applied, you need to learn forwards but how often do you need to, and does it kill you to lean forwards a little? The handbrake is a transmission brake, which means it has a hope of holding the vehicle on a hill and effectively operates on all four wheels instead of just the rear two.
Earlier I mentioned the Received Wisdom about Defenders. Aside from reliability, they have a reputation for Being A Bit Agricultural and Basic, and Lacking Creature Comforts. Which is ok, I'm not a creature.
Now let's take a look at this view from the perspective of someone who has actually driven one and researched it, as opposed to just heard about it.
The Defender's interior looks all wrong. It's not like a Japanese 4WD, but that doesn't make it wrong, it makes it different. There are odd things like the rear door that requires a universal joint on your wrist to open, and I've already mentioned the ventilation controls. But these aren't the end of the world, every vehicle has niggles, and once you actually get into and start using the vehicle it all somehow seems to work. But it is worth a comparison in terms of what you get for your money.
Compared to any other large 4WD wagon, the Defender wins on price quite easily. Don't compare it against DXs and Standards; believe it or not, the Defender is actually generally better equipped and stands comparison with the STs and GXLs of this world. In the one and only trim level of Xtreme (silly name) it now boasts central and remote locking, an immobiliser, an alarm, headlight adjustment for load, a radio/CD player with four speakers, ABS, airco (sort of), a n ARB steel, winch-capable bullbar, light-truck tyres (but in road tread pattern), drinks holders and electric windows in the front. Of course, Landrover had to leave something out and they didn't bother with recovery hooks, but adding them is fairly straightforwards.
What sort of things do you miss, or rather not get? Electrically adjustable wingmirrors, adjustable steering column, variable illumination on the dashboard, a revcounter (which can be added later), variable intermittent wipers and airbags. That's probably about it. Most of that list is pretty easily fixed after market, if you want to. For example, I bolt bicycle bottle holders into 4WDs because cupholders don't, offroad. But try buying a different 4WD and then lowering the fuel consumption, or increasing the size of the cargo area. Or lowering the transfer case ratio (yes yes I know it's possible, but it is expensive). And the steel bullbar is worth at least $900 fitted. Airbags are the only major concern you can't readily fix.
But enough about the Defender, let's take a look at the Nissan Patrol 4.2tdi.
On the road the Patrol is quiet, relative to the Defender. It has absolutely no noticeable turbo boost. No quicker than the Defender, neither are rocket ships. Wasn't super-happy about the handling, quite boring, not a lot of feel. The industrial-strength LSD makes its presence felt during tight turns, and the turning circle is good. The Patrol is fine to drive, but it is not fun in the same way as the Defender.
The seating position is a lot more reclined that the Defender, and visibility is nowhere near as good, but there is a footrest and more room for the passenger. You can't see out the side windows as well, the bonnet stretches to infinity and the intercooler scoop doesn't help. Gearchange is ok, nothing wonderful. Light clutch. Brakes are a little spongy but effective, and have good feel.
All the controls are easy to find and operate. Tiny glovebox. The centre console between the seats looks medium-sized, but is in fact tiny, quite narrow and deep. Not great.
The engine. Hates life above 2500rpm. On the other hand, in first low down a small incline I ran out of brake pressure trying to stall it. The torque off idle is amazing. Just what you need, got to love it. Makes up in some way for the 2.02:1 low-range gearing. The TD6 is also pretty smooth, as it should be for a six-cylinder.
Rear seats. Not huge amounts of legroom, but adequate. Not much legroom depth though. Some room under the front seats, none under the rear.
Rear cargo area isn't huge considering the size and weight of the vehicle, not even as tall as the Pajero. Has carpet though, and a third row of seats. Not that I'm going to use it, it would be covered with a plastic mat and a cargo system plugged in.
I'd have the Patrol in a heartbeat if I was offered one for free, and I wouldn't sell it. There's a lot to be said for a big, comfy 4WD diesel with a tough drivetrain, four coils and live axles, and that's the Patrol all over. You couldn't go wrong with one. But the Patrol didn't actually do anything sufficiently better than the Defender to justify the extra money, and the Defender didn't do anything badly enough to force me into Nissan land, and it did quite a few things better.
First off, fuel consumption. Between 8-12L/100km. That's pretty damn good. It needs to be, as the fuel tank is a mere 75L. But that's good for 700km or so. The Patrol has 120L, but the 4.2tdi drinks a lot more so the advantage is not as much as it might be. I expect the relative ranges to be about 700km in the Defender to about 900km in the Patrol. I'd put long-range tanks in both. The Defender can take a 65L auxiliary tank, followed by a 55L second aux. Just an extra 65 would be fine with me.
Payload; 1037kg. That's pretty high, compared with the Patrol's 600kg. Remember that the payload includes all your accessories, humans, recovery gear, camping gear, dogs, cats, kids toys, stray neighbours and whatever else you might carry. Exceed the payload and you're into being unroadworthy by legally overloading your vehicle.
Gearing. Already mentioned, a lovely low range. Third low is a little higher than first high. Most vehicles have second low just a little lower than first high.
Weight. The Defender weighs a shade under 2000kg. The Patrol is more than 500kg heavier, and also consider the Defender comes stock with a steel winch-capable bullbar. That extra weight means greater fuel consumption, and while 90kw of power isn't going to be smoking tyres, you need to look at the torque and power to weight ratios before you start saying the Defender is under-engined. It's actually almost exactly the same as the Patrol 4.2. And the lighter a vehicle is, the less likely it is to get stuck, all else being equal.
Cost. The Defender is way cheaper than the Patrol, $58k to $48k. That's 10 big ones, or more than enough to do the soundproofing, airco, lights (which Patrols could benefit from too) and so on and still have plenty left over to make a start on the essentials like cargo barriers, snorkels, and decent rubber. Speaking of which, the Defender has road tyres, but in a light truck construction so they'd be all right in rough terrain, albeit lacking grip. The Patrol has passenger tyres which have neither the toughness nor the tread pattern required for even casual offroading. But hey, we'd sling the tyres on both so it's a moot point.
Servicing. Modern turbodiesels need less servicing than older ones. No 4.2 Patrol-like 5000km service interval for the Defender. 20,000 recommended, but I reckon you'd be mad and 10,000 would be the go.
Drivetrain. The Patrol is selectable 4WD with an LSD that thinks it's a locker. Powerful. The Defender is constant 4WD, has ABS ($2000 option on Patrol) and traction control. I'd prefer twin air lockers over traction control, but the TC will help in most situations and in any case the Defender still has pretty much the best stock articulation of any 4WD in Australia, and a lockable centre diff, so if the traction control dies it's not such a big worry.
Robustness and reliability. The Patrol has to win here, but again it's a bit like Cameron and Angelina. There's nothing tougher than a Patrol, and that old diesel 4.2 engine is about as reliable as it gets. But from what I can see a new Defender is a pretty safe bet, too.
Defender and Patrol. This Patrol has larger tyres and a 50mm suspension lift. The Defender is standard.
So what's the point of this article? To convert everyone to Landrovers? Not at all. Defenders aren't for everyone, I say with just a touch of understatement. Neither are Patrols, or anything else, it's all a choice as individual as our preferences. But a lot of people seem to blithely write off anything that isn't a Nissan or a Toyota, and I think that's their loss.
References
Home