So I love ND, and in the "testing" phase. Recently, I've been driving a loaner Wrangler (4 Door Sahara), and tested a Bronco Badlands 4 door with KO2s. My question is this: given I will be doing alot of on road and highway driving, and my current LR has take a ton of abuse from basic potholes, metal plates in the road, and curbs I've run over to get the best parking spots, how would you compare the suspension on the ND vs the non-air suspensions offered on something like Bronco? My off road is mostly gravel roads, mud ruts, and mountain roads. If it's winter, then it's snow & ice over the gravel/mud ruts. I do no rock crawling. It's bumpy trails at slow speeds, camp sites where the best parking spot is to the SUV with good tires, and the unfortunate pothole I didn't see at night (after a rain the pothole fills up with water, making depth difficult to judge. Sometimes it's just a bad day for my suspension). I'm not sure how the air suspension will hold up over time, given what's in store for it? I can't change how bad the roads are around me... Thanks in advance for any comparison advice!

 

I spend a lot of time in particularly awful conditions (geologist). I have had three out of the last four vehicles with air suspension. Not really had any issues with them. My 97 Defender had a coil break on the other hand. So let's see three out the 4 last vehicles have had air suspension. I had one coil break, and one gas strut leak (after 14 years). The coil cost a lot more than the rebuilt air shock ($150). The coil took most of an afternoon to change and I had to get one of those scary coil tools and the air shock took almost 45 minutes, with normal tools. There are strong opinions about both, my experience has been quite good. I also like the ability to raise and lower the vehicle. Raise for rutted big rock strewn trails and lower to get the skis off the rack and let the wife in.

 

Air suspensions are good to go. All the air ever does is hold the vehicle up. One of the remarkable things about Land Rover was they brought about locating the axles with control arms or links 27 years before Jeep adopted the same on the Wrangler. It's the link arrangement that gives the suspension a more or less remarkable capability to follow the terrain and maintain traction. Leaf springs can either flex or control the axle location, but not both. Coil springs or air springs only ever have to hold the vehicle up, so they won't contribute anything else. The main advantage of air springs is their adjustability. This is primarily a benefit in handling variations in the weight they're holding up. They can have a low rate for an empty vehicle, and an increased rate for a loaded vehicle. Besides that, they can make slight adjustments in the ride height and consequently, the ground clearance, but this is not particularly effective because the spring rates and link geometry are also necessary affected so that a change in ride height is not the only effect.

You seem to be asking for a practical justification for new Wranglers, Broncos, or Defenders. You won't find any in a pothole. A 15-year old pickup truck will do everything you're asking and there would never need to be any question that there is something better for the purpose. You're only proposing a stupendously elaborate and costly solution to a very simple problem. You don't need any of the proposed vehicles for what you're describing. If you were to want one anyway, there is nobody resisting you. The greatest concern a pothole will ever present is to the alloy rims shod with low-profile tires. You can get a 20" ND wheel for about $275 and the 22" are probably not a lot more. So would you abstain from spending an extra thirty-thousand dollars on a Defender because it might additionally cost you a few hundred bucks for a wheel should you hit that big one?

 

l've got a 2022 Defender 90 on coils. lt's absolutely fine on and off road, towing etc

l drove the same model with air suspension and there wasn't that much difference, l think the air suspension was better ride quality on road but it depends what you want. l didn't want a Range Rover, l wanted something that felt a bit like my old Defender but brought up to date.

l would test drive both and see which you prefer. l wouldn't worry about the reliability of air suspension unless you're planning to keep the truck for 10 years.

 

Land Rover's air suspensions are solid. Never had an issue over 400K+ total miles on 5 vehicles with them. And we have lots of potholes here in the Northeast.

If potholes are your biggest concern and you are running winter tires on a Defender, buy 5 including a winter spare. If you blow out a sidewall on a pothole in March, most winter tires are sold out by then. Only dilemma is how to mount the directional spare winter tire. I went with "right" thinking most potholes are near the right edge of a road.

 

it's pretty solid suspension. I run 4 winter tires, always can limp in the city on summer one which is omnidirectional.

 

Well I get your point: Bronco, Wrangler, Defender - makes no difference you can hit potholes and go over curbs the same in all of them. And that's a real goal. I need a daily driver, and the last thing I want is a daily driver giving me problems. My existing LR has been great but it's getting old, and if I track down the issues I've had, they are mostly proximate to the tires (flats & tread not lasting long). The tech hasn't been a problem in my LR, it's been the tires. Because my LR is old, I want to do better with my next car purchase, and get something more prepared. I would not be buying a Defender because of the potholes, I'd be buying a Defender because I need a new family adventure SUV. But there are choices, like the GX Over Trail, Defender, and maybe LC. (Wranglers has been great fun to drive temporarily, but it's way too small to replace my LR; I like it, but I wouldn't buy one). The Bronco is bigger than a Wrangler, so that's still in the mix. Given daily driving uses, I want to find one least likely to give me issues from the potholes that just part of the daily drive. A truck doesn't serve my purposes any better than a UniMog, because I'm not buying a Defender because of potholes; I'm not buying a tank, I'm buying a new SUV because I need a new SUV. The potholes are just background problems for whatever SUV I buy next. It seems no different than folks in Alaska that likely look for cars fantastic and way better than average in snow. But your point is that a ND with 20" rims and so-so off road tires (that my LR dealer would get) is just as good with potholes as a Bronco with 19' rims and KO2s - that's your point of how the air suspension equalizes the tire/rim options available? If the air suspension makes a 20" rim Defender equal in taking potholes at 30 mph to the Bronco with KO2s, then of course I'd prefer Defender - the inside is amazing. But it's not obvious that air suspension can equalize that KO2 tire durability, but you're saying it can? After looking at how many of the stronger Goodyear tires (Kevlar) only fit the 17/18" rims, it makes me wonder why Defender doesn't just offer a 18" rim with KO2s and air suspension straight from the factory.

 

I still don't get the point of making a choice of super costly new SUVs based on comparatively cheap tires. But the key thing is the sidewall profile -- my Land Rover rolls on 85 profile tires. I drive over boulders. My wife's Subaru Outback has 60 profile tires. Those are better for a daily driver. The 85's are what most people would call "vague." A Porsche rolls on 30 or 35 profile tires. The profile is actually a ratio of the tread width to the sidewall height so there are no units. A new Defender is going to be 45, 60, or 65 depending on 22, 20 or 19" wheels. 65 profile tires on 22" wheels wont fit in the wheel wells.

What profile tires have been problematic for you?

If you have the 60's on 18" wheels, then you can only expect a little better with 65's on 19" wheels - not much difference. The 60/20" and 45/22" will be worse than what you have now.. If you have the 55's on 19" wheels, 65 on 19" will be significantly better.

 

according to tiresize.com, I have 235/60R18. It tells me I have a 5.6" sidewall. this has been good overall, and I had a Forrester before the LR (the subaru folks told me to either stay on the road and drive nice, or buy something different - everything attached to the tires was designed for paved driving conditions, and although OK to hit some potholes, too many would ruin it, which it did.) the LR off-road tech has not been a problem. To be honest, just basic drive has been great - I only look to the tech if I'm about to be stuck (or am stuck). Otherwise, drive is fine. But when I have encountered a problem, it's not been the tech that has been the let down, it's been the tires. hence, my next suv purchase (which I have to make soon anyways), I'd like to go for an SUV that will give me leeway to try different tires over time. I've noticed the KO2s on Broncos, and Goodyear also makes a "Kevlar" reinforced tire. They look good, but Defenders don't allow for stronger and reinforced treads like these. Why not? When I go to the Goodyear site, I don't get KO2s recommended for Defender. If I plug in a Wrangler, sure, then I get the KO2s to fit. But why doesn't JLR allow for Defender to fit KO2s? the 4 cyl can have an 18" rim, giving a 255/70R18... but plugging that in at Goodyear, and still not a match for KO2s. There's the rim size and then there's what you can put on the rim. My goal is to ensure I have broad tire choices over time with whatever car I buy next, and the Defender rim options drastically limit tire choices for owners. The new GX Overtrail may have 265/70R18s? Will that allow for KO2s? Who knows, but clearly, if you've seen things like the Firestone Destination tires on your neighbor's Wrangler, you get to wondering why an $85k off road SUV somehow can't fit what a way less expensive (but still great - no knocking Wrangler) SUV can fit. If you're supposed to be oriented to off road, don't you first need to make sure you can put some durable rubber on the thing? You'd think, but thus far, that's one thing holding me back from buying Defender (and I really love my old LR, so it's no knocking LR tech or other features). I can say that for me, it was fun testing out a Bronco - rolling over curbs just because I could, and the street divots I've hit with my Wrangler, to me, it's fun for sure. It's nice to just drive and not have to slow down; but I get it, that's not what JLR wants folks doing with Defenders... The GX is launching with off road tires, and if I can put other tires on there over time (within reason) that I may see on a Wrangler or Bronco, IMO think that's what JLR should have done with Defender. If you don't want that - you don't have to buy it: the V8 on 22" is about as untrustworthy off road as I can imagine, but on road, it's likely fantastic. Personally, I don't care about 0-60 acceleration times. I am disappointed JLR is restricting tire choices for folks that just spent $85k on Defender - I don't get that? I think they should figure out how to make Defender work with KO2s, and then sell that trim to whoever wants it. The optics for Defender becoming a figurative off roader but not an actual one is going to be put to the test if JLR doesn't wake up and realize what the GX is targeting for capabilities. The GX upgrades didn't focus on HP, EV, or MPG - it focused on torque - and not only did that go up significantly, but now the GX is paired to a fancy electronic system (taken from LCs) that can likely match the Defender's tech. In other words, if the tech is about equal, but the GX is geared for more torque and beefy tires, it's going to be formidable off road SUV.

 

You keep focusing on tires yet gloss over the fact that the abysmal approach, breakover and departure angles in the new GX make much of the advantages of the 18" wheels moot anyway. With that said, you don't need anyone here to justify how you spend your money. If you prefer the GX, get that.