Class: Cars, Off-road / SUV — Model origin:
Minor action vehicle or used in only a short scene
Author | Message |
---|---|
◊ 2015-10-14 07:56 |
Early Series 1 , Military Special maybe ? licence build ? lots of detail differences , lockers in front wings are unusual. |
◊ 2015-10-15 00:31 |
According to Wikipedia the short wheelbases were: 1948-53: 80"/2.03 m 1954-56: 86"/2.18 m 1957-58: 88"/2.23 m So what makes it for sure a 1948-53 model? -- Last edit: 2015-10-31 03:06:21 |
◊ 2015-10-15 00:52 |
Don't do older Land-Rovers as a rule but this web page gives some pointers on identifying them: http://www.lrfaq.org/faq.2.ident.lr.html Agree there is nothing here to say an 80inch model (I actually think it's an 86 or 88 if we take the clues about the headlights (covered by the grille or not) but Land-Rover identification is not really a precise science - give me a Range Rover or a Disco any day!) |
◊ 2015-10-15 01:44 |
Thanks for the link, Sandie. I'm the one who gave this Land the 1948 model year, but I meant it as default one (read it as 1948-58). I don't know who added the 80", and I think it should not appear as we have a doubt about the accurate wheelbase. This makes me think that I find the Land Series classification really weird: why having the wheelbase length at first, as (for me) the series is more important to classify them? Aren't the series like different generations of the vehicle? For now, the IMCDb can help to find easily all 88" and 109" with one click, but having all Series I models the same way, for example, is impossible... Was it set that way at first just out of habit and never changed after (sort of IMCDb habit), or were the Lands promoted that way at the time they were sold? -- Last edit: 2015-10-15 01:47:13 |
◊ 2015-10-15 01:59 |
It's been like that since before I was here, brochures aren't really helpful: http://www.car-brochures.eu/landroverbrochures.htm Early ones call it 'the Land-Rover', they briefly describe them as 'Land-Rover Series II' then move on to calling them '88" Wheelbase Regular' or '109" Wheelbase long' fitting the IMCDB system. This goes right on until the 90/Ninety and 110/One-Ten come out (they weren't officially named Defender until late 1989/1990MY). |
◊ 2015-10-15 02:33 |
Sounds more like an old IMCDb habit, then: there is indeed a Series II Regular and a Series II Long in the brochures, meaning the series was announced first when the it changed from I to II. Or maybe we could just have this I, II, IIa and III in the mark field? Land-Rover apparently handled it that way, when not mentioning the series starting with the Series IIa... Do you think this exchange could be worth a forum post to have several ideas and opinions, including maybe the ones that led to the current system? I don't think it fits exactly the IMCDb system, because the series doesn't appear before or after the wheelbase length. As said above, I think that Land-Rover just consider the vehicle (I never know how to call it: car? truck?) as a single model since the beginning, the series change being apparently (not) promoted just as what could be called phase in the French makes. Except for 1958, which seem to be the only time when the change was emphasized. -- Last edit: 2015-10-15 02:46:53 |
◊ 2015-10-15 14:47 |
I mean it fits it in the sense of emphasising the wheelbase in the naming (which started this discussion). I agree that it might be useful to discuss the naming of these on the forum. Though I'm not sure there are many Series Land Rover specialists on the site these days. |
◊ 2015-10-20 22:46 |
![]() ![]() |