Has the chassis steel quality changed over the years?

This site contains affiliate links for which LandyZone may be compensated if you make a purchase.
Colthebrummie said:
I had a 2 year old mk1 escort in the Mid 1970's. The floor didn't rust but the edge of the boot lid and bonnet did, also the top suspension mounts. Volvo led the way in the 70's by galvanising their vehicle body's. I know this sounds mad but I often wonder if the products owners use in an attempt to prevent corrosion actually promote it. I attended the Newbury classic car show yesterday. There was many fantastic cars form days gone by, all in fantastic condition, including many fords from the 70's and a few old vauxalls. Having talked to a few of the proud owners, there was one thing in common, none of the cars saw any use except attending car shows and only then if it was sunny. So that is the answer, lock your landy in a nice warm garage and never drive it again.

Col
Click to expand...

Using big plastic wheel arch liners to protect the steel underbody was also a huge step forward in corrosion protection. For some reason, Defenders never made this great leap forward.

Odd drive on a sunny day might be OK. Or else go through it and paint the chassis properly, and spray Dinitrol or similar inside, like the factory should have done originally.
 
Even put the early 1990 LR had good quality steel chaise, think it was the start of disco production and then fender production when everything went down grade.
 
pete1987RRC said:
Even put the early 1990 LR had good quality steel chaise, think it was the start of disco production and then fender production when everything went down grade.
Click to expand...

Chassis on Ninety/One Ten, and early Defenders, aren't too bad. Series 3 were horrendous. Downhill curve from S1 to S3, blipped up, then, as you say, downhill again through til the present.
 
Turboman said:
Did they say if that was in 1948, or 2009?
Click to expand...
It was during the tour in 2015. There were gkn supplied chassis's being transported to the track to start assembly. When questioned about why they never applied waxole or similar during production they said they create the base vehicle and the buyer has the option to apply additional protection or not. It would make production messy and the fumes would be a problem. Dealers will apply it if requested.
 
Hippo said:
It was during the tour in 2015. There were gkn supplied chassis's being transported to the track to start assembly. When questioned about why they never applied waxole or similar during production they said they create the base vehicle and the buyer has the option to apply additional protection or not. It would make production messy and the fumes would be a problem. Dealers will apply it if requested.
Click to expand...

Generous of the dealers to do that, I expect it is reasonably priced too! :)

And so kind of the folk at JLR to let the new owners customise their vehicle with underbody protection if they choose. Must give them a feeling of responsibility, and a sense of pride in ownership!
 
Colthebrummie said:
My series 3 is from 1977 with its original chassis. No welds, holes or treatment. Only one new outrigger in 40 years. There is some surfacerust
Click to expand...

Most of the really rusty S3s I have seen were from the last few years of production. Sounds like you have a good one, and maybe one that has been well looked after by yourself, and previous owners.
 
Turboman said:
Generous of the dealers to do that, I expect it is reasonably priced too! :)

And so kind of the folk at JLR to let the new owners customise their vehicle with underbody protection if they choose. Must give them a feeling of responsibility, and a sense of pride in ownership!
Click to expand...
The way I see it LR will never do right in the minds of some owners. Scratch through a galvanised chassis and it will rust. The tour opened up a different mind-set for me. They're a business and need to make money. It cost less money to produce one design of engine than two, which it whey the tratter got the 300Tdi when the disco did. Same when the Td5 came out. Owners and magazines go on about how LR upgraded the tratter... it did, but it made financial sense to do it which is where most of the decisions come from. That's the reasoning why they didn't make many changes over the years. They have to make a profit to stay in business. Hence why they supply to the demands of buyers wanting the newer vehicles.
 
Hippo said:
The way I see it LR will never do right in the minds of some owners. Scratch through a galvanised chassis and it will rust. The tour opened up a different mind-set for me. They're a business and need to make money. It cost less money to produce one design of engine than two, which it whey the tratter got the 300Tdi when the disco did. Same when the Td5 came out. Owners and magazines go on about how LR upgraded the tratter... it did, but it made financial sense to do it which is where most of the decisions come from. That's the reasoning why they didn't make many changes over the years. They have to make a profit to stay in business. Hence why they supply to the demands of buyers wanting the newer vehicles.
Click to expand...

Exactly. The Defender didn't make money, so they made them so badly they didn't sell, and they could stop making them.
 
Turboman said:
Exactly. The Defender didn't make money, so they made them so badly they didn't sell, and they could stop making them.
Click to expand...
They said they did make money. If they didn't then they wouldn't have made them for so long nd therefore stopped sooner. When asked why they stopped making them for the military they said they couldn't meet the spec for bomb proof and also the biggest issue they had was the military wanted to pay around £15k to £15.5k, when the public or business will pay £22k upwards. Slightly different spec but in essence the same time/cost to build on the track.
 
Hippo said:
They said they did make money. If they didn't then they wouldn't have made them for so long nd therefore stopped sooner. When asked why they stopped making them for the military they said they couldn't meet the spec for bomb proof and also the biggest issue they had was the military wanted to pay around £15k to £15.5k, when the public or business will pay £22k upwards. Slightly different spec but in essence the same time/cost to build on the track.
Click to expand...

I am sure they covered costs, but imagine the margins weren't what they were after. Margins on new cars are very tight throughout the industry now.

I was unaware of that about the military, but unsurprised. Customers usually expect a good discount on large orders in any industry.
 
Turboman said:
I am sure they covered costs, but imagine the margins weren't what they were after. Margins on new cars are very tight throughout the industry now.

I was unaware of that about the military, but unsurprised. Customers usually expect a good discount on large orders in any industry.
Click to expand...
That's right. They made a profit which was said to be ok but it wasn't high enough when compared to other builds. They didn't mind the type of assembly as the design wasn't practical for robots + the cost to convert would be considerable. It's a shame they stopped it but they were cornered into starting again which most won't accept but it's how it goes.
 
I would have thought JLR made most of its profits from supplying the military with parts hence why the vehicles could be sold to them cheaply. Let's be honest, them squaddies aren't renowned for their carfull driving.

Col
 
Colthebrummie said:
I would have thought JLR made most of its profits from supplying the military with parts hence why the vehicles could be sold to them cheaply. Let's be honest, them squaddies aren't renowned for their carfull driving.

Col
Click to expand...

True, or careful maintenance. But they probably don't want to pay much for parts either.
 
A lot of tratter parts like panels were made in the factory for the track and some were shipped out to other retailers who sell them on. So some of the panels peeps bought over the years were genuine LR without them eggspecting it. ;)
 
Hippo said:
A lot of tratter parts like panels were made in the factory for the track and some were shipped out to other retailers who sell them on. So some of the panels peeps bought over the years were genuine LR without them eggspecting it. ;)
Click to expand...

Goes for a lot of things I think, I have more than once now brought bearmach branded stuff (radiator hoses and trim panels etc) and when it had arrived I have found genuine parts labels overstickered with bearmach labels
 
mikerajjers said:
Has the quality of steel used for the chassis degraded over the years? I was passing some time this morning and looking at a 2013 90 defender and the chassis has definitely got quite a bit of rust (also considering its only done 27000 km). When I compare it to my 1997 110 which was properly abused by the police (over 250000km - ex croatian border police) and my 2000 TD5 90 this new one must have been made from ****tier steel.

Just curious. Anyone in the know?
Click to expand...

Generally steel is of a lower quality now than it ever was, Chinese steel has taken the world by storm offering cheap steel, their processes are not as tight as British Steel's was and US steel even Russian steel used to be good too, and most of the Chinese steel is recycled.

I remember years ago I took the old Defender chassis down to a big river side scrap yard, I was weighed in and sent to the back of the yard to offload, I was about 25 meters from a big rusting hulk of a ship (I thought at first it was the scrap!) that was being loaded up with a crane from the dock, I actually saw some of my stuff going onto the ship as I left, I asked the guy at the pay station if that was off to China and he laughed and said "Yes, you will get your metal back in the next steel thing you buy". Now in amongst that steel was my old chassis (decent enough 1980's steel - what was left) old washing machines (recent poor quality for white goods) and just a general mix of scrap, that will get made into good and bad stuff, the steel the LR chassis was made from will be watered down with the tripe and that's more good steel gone.

The only good steel really would be new steel made from good new iron ore probably in a British steel mill - sadly this is so expensive now it doesn't end up in most consumer goods.
 
Hippo said:
It was during the tour in 2015. There were gkn supplied chassis's being transported to the track to start assembly. When questioned about why they never applied waxole or similar during production they said they create the base vehicle and the buyer has the option to apply additional protection or not. It would make production messy and the fumes would be a problem. Dealers will apply it if requested.
Click to expand...

Yes that was right - it was a bigger thing in the Series days I would say.

I remember a friend did a tour of the Austin plant where they made the London Cabs before they went over to Carbodies for the coachwork, and he recognised what looked like Land Rover chassis going into the waxoyle bath, turned out they got sent all the land rover chassis for MOD orders and any that were special request. All makes sense really, Austin were absorbed by British Leyland who owned Land Rover so I guess they just sent the chassis over, also the Land Rover Group 2.5 12J engine was fitted, 15J designation to the Freight Rover and FX4 taxi so you can see all the crossover. I guess that is all gone now so I bet they just got the workshop boy out with a can of waxoyle latterly!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

K
What money should I be asking?
2
Replies
27
Views
4K
Karls
K
L
SOLD - Land Rover Ninety (Defender 90) 300TDi Auto soft-top
Replies
9
Views
4K
mondifa
M
L
From sun visor to chassis change!
Replies
2
Views
877
Litch
L
J
My love and joy stolen! Moving on and some questions about LEZ...
Replies
6
Views
1K
Dippypud
Dippypud
hd3
Why Injectors Fail and ..
Replies
5
Views
4K
hd3
hd3
Back
Top