A few weeks ago, spy photographers took a 2020 Land Rover Defender 110 prototype with quad-pipes wrapped under the bumper. When the shooters ran the car's place in the car, they found the prototype was powered by a 5.0-litre V8. The direct connection is that Land Rover borrowed the well-travelled car manufacturer's 5.0-litre AJ that comes in two supercharged. We're told SVO is not marshaling this project, the engineering team of the production series is. If a V8 finds its way under the hood, what wouldn't it be? The brand's 5.0-litre is understood to be now gray-haired and attached to Ford, so the Ford Bridgend engine plant that builds the engine is shutting down later this year. Autocar believes it is possible Land Rover could build a hiding place for the V8s, which could come in handy if there was a difficult production cap on the Defender V8. Or, with Jaguar Land Rover having roughly reached an agreement last year for a supply of the BMW 4.4-litre V8 bi-turbo - an agreement in the works for 3 years - the German option would offer a lot of power with a less thirsty touch than the 5.0-litre. Autocar figures a Defender performance would be rated at something like 500 hp or below, giving it a lot of altitude above the most powerful production version of the Defender, the sweet-hybrid right-six putting out 395 hp.
With the bread and butter models still in the early stages of deployment, don't expect to check out a Defender V8 for a minimum of a year, if that happens.
With the Defender V8, one producing 518 horsepower and 461 pound-feet of torque, the other 557 horsepower and 516 pound-feet of torque, the simple question is: Why? Unfortunately, we don't have a simple answer, but we won't imagine that the tests are a joke - automakers already have an excessive amount of trying to do and less money than they'd like to make. Autocar suspects Land Rover is preparing a production Defender V8 because the market is there, and can use limited production numbers and a high price to remain the SUV to scribble Jaguar Land Rover's fleet average CO2 emissions.
The mag writes that in 2017, Land Rover's chief designer Gerry McGovern has admitted his desire to use the carmaker's special vehicle operations division to place tuners 'off the shelf'. Yet, Autocar believes McGovern was talking about the Defender, the old model having become an unreasonably fashionable starting line for six-digit SUVs that will hit on burly or luxury or both; a replica of the Bowler-tuned Defender 110 pickup used in the James Bond movie Spectre cost $165,000. It's unlikely SVO could dent, let alone crush, the worldwide gang of small stores making Defender restomods - these stores, after all, don't have to worry about CO2 emissions, OEM regulations, and the brand's pedigree. But an in-house Defender with a huge V8 could get into the very profitable part, an equivalent way Land Rover sold every 150 Defender V8 70th anniversary model in a month at 150,000 euros per pop.
We're told that SVO isn't mobilizing this project, the production engineering team is. If a V8 could find its way under the hood, what wouldn't it be? The brand's 5.0-litre is understood to be now gray-haired and attached to Ford, so the Ford Bridgend engine plant that builds the engine is shutting down later this year. Autocar believes it is possible Land Rover could build a hiding place for the V8s, which could come in handy if there was a difficult production cap on the Defender V8. Or, with Jaguar Land Rover having roughly reached an agreement last year for a supply of the BMW 4.4-litre V8 bi-turbo - an agreement in the works for 3 years - the German option would offer a lot of power with a less thirsty touch than the 5.0-litre. Autocar figures a Defender performance would be rated at something like 500 hp or below, giving it a lot of altitude above the most powerful production version of the Defender, the sweet-hybrid right-six putting out 395 hp.
With the bread and butter models still in the early stages of deployment, don't expect to check out a Defender V8 for a minimum of a year, if that happens.
0 Comments