Next Land Rover models "half a tonne lighter"

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pebb
  • 13 comments
  • 980 views
Status
Not open for further replies.
Pebb

Pebb

Messages
16,737
England
Southampton, UK
Messages
Pebb--
Messages
Pebb
Source: AutoCar

The next generation of Land Rover models could be based on a new, rivet-bonded aluminium monocoque body.

Adopting the lightweight technology pioneered by Jaguar would fix one of Land Rover’s most pressing technical challenges: to build spacious and luxurious vehicles while reducing weight and improving fuel economy.

According to an inside source, the new Range Rover is pencilled in as the first all-alloy, monocoque-bodied 4x4 and is due around 2010.

“There’s no decision yet and we don’t have to decide for a couple of years, but it seems a logical step to investigate it,” said our source.

Land Rover is also exploring alloy construction for other models. The Discovery and Range Rover
Sport are both due for replacement two years after the Range Rover and there could be economies of scale gained by sharing the same alloy technology across the three models.

Until now, the next Range Rover had been expected to switch to Land Rover’s semi-monocoque steel T5 platform, the basis for the Discovery and the Range Rover Sport.

A 4.4-litre V8 version of today’s Range Rover weighs about 2700kg, but if Land Rover could engineer a tough enough structure to survive off road and benefit from the same 15 per cent weight saving that Jaguar claims, a new Range Rover could be targeted at around 2200kg.

A similar improvement in fuel economy could lift consumption from 18mpg to 22mpg, bringing a welcome cut in carbon dioxide output.
 
Technology pioneered by audi, now used in jaguars, and to be borrowed from jag for land rover.
 
OKAY! We know you like Audi.

The 500kg weight removal sure sounds nice and should make the car better in just about every aspect, including, of course, fuel economy. Sounds good to me!
 
What, does nobody remember the Honda NSX around here? Oh wait, I better go grab my Audi fanboy hat.

I'm a bit confused about the article. Why would Land Rover, a brand that prides themselves with their off-road prowess, revert to full monocoque? That's backwards to me.
 
The RRS is supposed to be somewhat handy off-road, so I assume a monocoque isn't all that bad.

Audi? Honda? Didn't Land Rover beat them to the extensive use of aluminum in a production vehicle by decades? The first Land Rover was all-aluminum, as I recall.
 
niky
Audi? Honda? Didn't Land Rover beat them to the extensive use of aluminum in a production vehicle by decades? The first Land Rover was all-aluminum, as I recall.
Click to expand...

I think you recall correctly:

http://www.ford.com/en/company/about/brands/landRover.htm

It's funny that you can find conflicting articles that claim both the A2 and A8 as the "world's first aluminum car". Even Jaguar tried to take claim (current-generation XJ). They've all got some claim to innovations with aluminum like creating a spaceframe or bonding techniques, but none were as early as what I think I found here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminum_(automobile)

Anyone else know about this or something earlier?
 
I think theres a difference between the claims of audi with the A2, A8 and the jag XJ compared to that of the land rover. I think they are talking about the way the chassis is constructed using aluminium, as there is some article somewhere that was saying how Audi are atleast 3 years ahead of the competition when it comes to using ASF in their vehicles.
 
Half a tonne lighter?
In that case, they have to tie down the Discovery 4, otherwise it's 2.2 tonnes might blow away.
 
Land Rover's claim is supposedly not recognized by the others because it's an aluminum alloy... :lol:

Honda's NSX was the first all-aluminum body in a modern production car... (never mind the fact that there have been aluminum skinned cars since the 30's), while Audi's claim is the first aluminum space-frame.

Which brings us around to claims to innovation, in which Audi aggressively tries to take credit for just about everything... oh, I'll give them AWD on sedans and sports cars, but they weren't exactly the first or only with direct injection (Merc was first, and Mitsubishi pioneered production in the 90's, way before the R8...) or aluminum.
 
Ah, I completely forgot about the original RR. So in a weird and wonderful way, Land Rover's... going back to their heritage? ;)

A big "indeed" on Audi's rush to take credit. I actually remember first reading up on direct-injection in Gran Turismo 1 of all things, since a Galant model featured it back then (infact, I'm pretty sure that was the first modern EDI car). 4WD isn't really their's either, though I will admit that in the realm of rallying, they were first, and it really was beneficial. I believe Jensen holds that particular title.
 
Theres a difference between direct injection and fuel startified injection. Audis had direct injection before they were marketing FSI I think.

FSI is a bit like VTEC in how your driving style depends on what MPG your getting and how much power you require. Bad explanation but I hope you can kinda fiugure out what im trying to say.
 
These Land Rovers, the Discovery etc, will obviously not be capable of off roading...We really need to change the names of them because they arent Land Rovers, they are modern SUV's bought for the school run. Go to a place like Devils Pit, you wont see a single "new age" discovery or range rover, all the older models that can actually do what they were designed to do.
 
I was going to make a rejoinder to that, but then, I thought about it... most of my off-roading friends still prefer Ladder-on-Frame vehicles for truly heavy off-roading.

Still, monocoque can't be all bad... but an all-aluminum monocoque might be too expensive to maintain on an off-road rig.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest Posts

Back