Hello,


i have some technical questions about the two new aged Land Rover Models the RR Lm since 2002 and the New Discovery since 2005.

1. What i know so far is, that the RR uses a full Unibody construction with some strenghtening parts whily the Disco3 combines a kind of unibody with a kind of classical frame - in both cases i would like to have some pictures, because the frame parts of the D3 are not related to the Defender or Range P38 afaik.

2. I am wondering why LR decided to get back on the frame with the D3 was it because of financial reasons because frame based SUV#s are cheper to design (i heared that the Lm was very expensive for Land rover to design).

Or was it because the complete Unibody was not tough enough for real offroad abuse? I know there is an amoured version of the LM directly from LR which has a gross weight rating well over 4.000Kg which is pretty heavy so it does not sound like the RR LM could be any less tough than it's younger small brother, but on the other handy LR decided to get back to the frame AND the D3 is as heavy or heavier than the bigger RR.

Thank you all for any answers and have a nice week![/list] Greetings!

Defenderfan wrote:

Hello,


i have some technical questions about the two new aged Land Rover Models the RR Lm since 2002 and the New Discovery since 2005.

1. What i know so far is, that the RR uses a full Unibody construction with some strenghtening parts whily the Disco3 combines a kind of unibody with a kind of classical frame - in both cases i would like to have some pictures, because the frame parts of the D3 are not related to the Defender or Range P38 afaik.

2. I am wondering why LR decided to get back on the frame with the D3 was it because of financial reasons because frame based SUV#s are cheper to design (i heared that the Lm was very expensive for Land rover to design).

Defenderfan wrote:

Or was it because the complete Unibody was not tough enough for real offroad abuse? I know there is an amoured version of the LM directly from LR which has a gross weight rating well over 4.000Kg which is pretty heavy so it does not sound like the RR LM could be any less tough than it's younger small brother, but on the other handy LR decided to get back to the frame AND the D3 is as heavy or heavier than the bigger RR.

Thank you all for any answers and have a nice week![/list]

Hello,

thank you very much for the fast&detailed answer!

Ok the part about the T5 plattform beeing cheaper and easier to adept seems absolut reasonable for me.

But is the elder RR LM really stronger compared to the D§/4/Sport? Its not that i do not trust the BMW/Jaguar engineering, but most peaople consider frames to be the stronger solution when it comes to offroading vehicles.

SUV's like the BMW X5 or Volkswagon Touareg are all in all not considered really offroaders because they feature a pretty light built unibody, so is the Unibody of the LM so much different? I read about something that the LM uses some kind of frame-like barts upside down it's body, so maybe this makes the big difference to the Rest of the unibody suvs.

Greetings Greetings!

No one else anything about the Design?



Greets Greetings!

Click on the link below and take a look at the photos of an RRS with its body lifted, might have to register to view pics (rrs chassis virtually the same as D3, only difference is length). You can see that its a monocoque body attached to a ladder frame. Probably the strongest Land Rover chassis.

link: http://www.aulro.com/afvb/d3-d4-rrs/129096...arged.html

Hi,

Nice pics, was looking for some of those for a while! But i always thought the Lm and the T5 plattform are somehow different? So the T5 really is just a shortened LM?

Greetings Greetings!

The LM platform is completely different - a pure monocoque, without the ladder chassis that the T5 platform incorporates. The T5 is like a double chassis.

RRS and LM322 are related only in name. The RRS is really a posh D3.

Hi,

so now i am a little confused, which Design is the all in all tougher construction? The Lm with the monoquocque+the frame parts below, or the combinational T5 plattform? Kinda an old question, is the most expensive or the youngest best?

Greetings Greetings!

What are you planning that needs the max strength of a chassis??

The LM monocoque design has an extraordinary torsional stiffness of 32,500Nm/degree - take a look at this video to see the strength of the T5 platform

Matt

Hello,

thank you very much for this Information! Its just that i want to understand why the company decided to went half a step backwards from complete to semi-body.

The videao is also very interesting, but it does not actually compare anything, maybe each of the other vehicles would have done the same job as well, we do not know.

So the numbers are much more interesting, if there is this one method of measuring the ability to resist torsional forces. So 32,500NM/degree fpor the RRLM, now it would be very interesting how mich it is on the Discovery or even more interesting how much let's say on a Land Cruiser V8 (VDJ 200) which is the most modern competitor but also using a frame.

Greetings Greetings!

One of the reasons for 'going backwards' was to make it easier to manufacture two different vehicles but sharing as many of the components as possible, thus keeping costs down. Not sure you should be reading this bit.