By lingyang on Wednesday, October 31, 2001 - 10:28 pm: Edit

Does anyone know?And why???

By Craig on Wednesday, October 31, 2001 - 10:35 pm: Edit

stock vs. stock, I'd have to say the G-wag because of less overhangs and factory lockers. Disco has more potential though.
Craig

By PerroneFord on Thursday, November 01, 2001 - 12:06 am: Edit

I believe Chuque Henry (a former D90 owner) is building up a SWB G-wagen. He is the founder of the clubgwagen site, and is the former founder of the d-90.com site. Maybe you should try contacting him about his findings.

I do agree with Craig, that the Disco and the D90 have better potential for buildup and there are a LOT more production pieces available to do so.

-P

By Seann on Thursday, November 01, 2001 - 12:25 am: Edit

G-wagen by far. Like the old saying goes, you get what you pay for. I own a disco, very happy with it, but a g-wagen is the ultimate. Go to the dealership in New Mexico, its right next door to LR and take both test drives, and see first hand, all I can say is, if I had 80k I be in one.

Seann

By MA on Thursday, November 01, 2001 - 07:58 am: Edit

I'm also going to have to admit, the G-wagon is probably more capable, stock. If my Disco had 3-lockers on it, then my Disco would be more capable. I know somebody that has one of these, I think a late 80's model. He lives no where close to me, but when we visit him and take it off-road...wow. I mean, he goes up these impossibly steep side slops with no problem, he bog's through knee-high mud with no problem. The only mod he has is some BFG MT's. Absolutly amazing. I think he only bought it for $25000 a year ago. Last April, when I went to the NY Autoshow, Mercedes had a couple of G-wagons sitting around. I think they are just about perfect. Typical, Mercedes-Benz interior complete with all those mind-boggling gizmos. Industrial strength build quality. Military proven capability. A 5.0L 300hp V8. 30 lbs of carpeting. Soft squishy leaher. Damn...those are nice cars. If I had $72,000, I'd get one of these(and still keep my Disco )

Here's a more comparable question: would you rather get a 2001 Range Rover 4.6HSE or a 2002 Mercedes-Benz G500. The Disco is more comparable with a M-class, and I think that we would all take the Disco over the M-class.

By John Liebson on Thursday, November 01, 2001 - 08:17 am: Edit

The dealer in Santa Fe, NM, is no longer the G-Wagen dealer: Mercedes bought him out and is now the direct importer.

Price has dropped from around $130,000 to around $72,000 (US). Sure must be causing some regrets about tremendous depreciation among G-Wagen owners!

By PerroneFord on Thursday, November 01, 2001 - 08:38 am: Edit

MA, interesting question. But I'd certainly take the G-Wagon over a new 4.6 for many reasons. Better motor, better dealer network (at least until Ford get their act together), better off-road, but I'm not so sure I'd be wheeling with EITHER of them! That's a LOT of money to put on a trail. A $10k RR or a $20k Disco is one thing, but more than a year's salary (for me anyway ) is more than I want to drag through the mud and over the rocks.

Some of the older GWagens seem to be selling for under $25k. Might make a nice D90 alternative with its short wheelbase, removable top, and factory lockers. Parts can be gotten in just about any major city, and there's about a gazillion shops to work on mercedes engines, trannys, and such.

Anyone been for a ride in one of these? How do they ride?

-P

By Ron on Thursday, November 01, 2001 - 09:20 am: Edit

How do they ride?

Old ones like crap. Stiff.

Like I always say there is a reason they have 3 lockers, they NEED them. No flex. They have basically a rover front suspension both front and rear (accoring to Q) which we all know has limited flex.

Ron

By Tom P. on Thursday, November 01, 2001 - 10:11 am: Edit

>...there is a reason they have 3 lockers,
>they NEED them. No flex.

So, they are like a little, euro Hummer?

Tom P
96 Disco

By PerroneFord on Thursday, November 01, 2001 - 10:12 am: Edit

Ron,

Wasn't Q working on a 3-link or something to that effect to open them up more? That would be a hell of a mod for that truck. I've only seen on G-Wagen and it was an older model, but I've never seen them wheel. One of the LR mags did a comparitive on them against an older RR or Defender, and some other trucks. Interestingly, when all was considered, neither the LR or the GWagen won the comparo.

-P

By Ron on Thursday, November 01, 2001 - 10:17 am: Edit

Q was trying a lot of stuff. Hinged arm but he figured out that would not work in the rear. He is/was trying to get the 90 back though last I had heard.

Ron

Tom P,

Ya kinda. Solid axle though. And rear lockers not hummer lsds

By Mike D1 on Thursday, November 01, 2001 - 10:59 am: Edit

I live in Marin CA and see Gal-Wagens (usually gals drive them) often. I see them at the supermarket a lot. I don't know about stock, but I would take one on any day. I am running a 3" RTE lift and ARBs front and rear. Don't forget the center diff lock! What would make the difference in the long run is after market off road parts, Rover wins hands down on that. The other is width, length and weight. The Gal-Wagen looks heavy. I would take an Ibex (defender frame)(http://www.ibex4x4.co.uk/index.htm ) anyday for that much $$.

By Ho Chung (Ho) on Thursday, November 01, 2001 - 11:28 am: Edit

i really can't comment much on this debate.
but what i can say for sure is, there's a lot of hotties here at the SEMA.

By Tom P. on Thursday, November 01, 2001 - 11:35 am: Edit

Ho,

Webcam?

Tom

By Jon Williams (Jonw) on Thursday, November 01, 2001 - 11:51 am: Edit

I've driven a G-Wagen before, a European '80's model G300 diesel 5-speed. It was a little underwhelming. Decent truck then, but still overrated now. I imagine with the 5.0-litre V8 it's spright, but then again, it weighs a little better than 5000-lbs. I guess it'd be a nice conversation piece, and I agree that it's more capable in its stock form than a Disco, but at least the Disco has character

By Nathan Hindman on Thursday, November 01, 2001 - 12:37 pm: Edit

Although I haven't driven a G Wagen before, I've wheeled a few times with Chuque since he did the switch from D90 to G-Wagen (Technically: D90 to LWB Gwagen to Disco to SWB GWagen, but that's beside the point).

For starters, those trucks are damn capable right out of the box, but that capability comes primarily in the form of Lockers front and rear. As Ron stated, there is very limited flex to be had in those trucks due to the radius arm set up front and rear. Q is currently working on a couple of different solutions to it, most recently, he's be considering rad. hinged arms front and rear.
But the G has a couple of other advantages: super low gearing (optional 6.10s from the factory IIRC) great approach and departure angles (think D90 *ss end on a 110 or Disco) and fully synchronized t-case. That means you can pop it back and forth between low and high range all day long.... a big advandage if you were doing alot of soft sand/desert work. It also has some pretty sizable wheel wells that allow you to stuff bigger meats without trimming ( Q had 265/85/16s on stock suspension).

But bottom line, I'd rather have a Disco. Although they start out less capable, there's much more build up potential in them. With lockers and a mild suspension upgrade the Disco will have much more capability than you could get in a G-Wagen w/o some major redesign/modification (ie 3-links, 4-links etc). And you're not stuck with their amaemic engine on the road (yes, it's wimpier than a Rover V8)

My 2¢

Nathan Hindman
http://www.pangaea-expeditions.com

By MA on Thursday, November 01, 2001 - 04:28 pm: Edit

My Mercedes dealer in Dallas, TX should be getting some new 2002 G-500's by mid December. I'll try to test drive one around that time. The dude with the older G-wagon let me drive his. I thought the ride was ok. It wasn't as "civilized" as a Disco, but it wasn't as bad as a D-90(soft-top). My guess is that the 2002 G-wagon will be another "rappers delight," you'll see it in all those rap music videos.

By Milan on Thursday, November 01, 2001 - 08:58 pm: Edit

Why do you guys say the radius arm suspension is the travel limiting factor?

The things I have seen limit flex on RA suspension is either arms that are too short, track arms that don't allow flex (if they use tie rod end), stiff swaybars and short shocks. All except the short arms are easily remedied, making a 3 link radius arms suspension one of the best flexing setups around.

On the disco the flex is limited by the sway bar and eventually shocks. What is it on the G-wagen?
If it has radius arm 3-link f&r I'm sure it can be made to flex with the best of them. Although I'm sure I'll stick with my "cheap" (compared to the G-wagen) Disco for a while.

By Phillip Perkinson (R0ver4x4) on Thursday, November 01, 2001 - 11:00 pm: Edit

the new g wagon is gonna have a 4:38 r&p

By Clint on Friday, November 02, 2001 - 04:34 am: Edit

Milan,
I haven't posted here is a long time, but I couldn't resist.

The radius arm suspension is FLEX limiting, but not necessarily TRAVEL limiting. The engineer types would call it "overconstrained".

Picture it this way. Your axle is a pipe and you put two opposing pipe wrenches on it.

Try to pull them in the same direction and the pipe rotates. This is the same as bump and rebound or suspension travel on a flat surface.

Now try to pull them in opposite directions. They don't go anywhere because they are solidly attached. This is the same as articulation or flex.

The only thing that allows a radius arm suspension to FLEX at all is bushing deflection.
However, you cant just design the bushing to have large deflection. The bushings in the axle necessarily limit the amount of rotation of the axle to prevent "axle wrap" under braking and acceleration loads.

There are many positive aspects to cast iron radius arm suspension though. The travel is good, axle wrap is non-existent, you can jack up the truck in the middle of one without bending it, the bracketry on the axle is clean and protected. Basically it is very strong and durable. The only downside is fairly limited flex and changing pinion/caster angle throughout the travel length. This only matters if you lift the truck or have massive travel.

Don't forget the the DII uses radius arms front and rear, just like the Gwagen and has more stock travel ( 9"F 11" R) than a DI.

On a related note, flex seems much less important if you have dual lockers. Perhaps Mercedes has it right with the Gwagen and the unimog. (actually the unimog has both flex and lockers).

Clint

By Leslie N. Bright (Leslie) on Friday, November 02, 2001 - 04:39 am: Edit

Hasn't this just turned into the sexy-flexy suspension versus lockers that we go through regularly here? i.e., sexy-flexy is 'good' when you don't have lockers, but moot once you get lockers?

-L

By Milan on Saturday, November 03, 2001 - 12:35 am: Edit

Clint,
I think that radius arm suspension allows great flex (and travel) due to the radius bushings which allow the axle to twist. These bushings by nature allow travel up&down and side to side to also allow for deflexion caused by the trac bar. An a-arm 3 link setup is even better.

What D2 has, are more control arms than radius arms as there are no radius bushings. That setup is limited in flex but can travel well.

Know what I mean?

I don't want to turn this into slinky vs. non-slinky suspension discussion. I just feel the radius arms on my Ford and LR are the best over any other suspension I used. And I was wondering what people did not like about it. As far as slinky goes, I believe everything should be done in moderation, even flex.

By Clint on Saturday, November 03, 2001 - 11:53 am: Edit

OK,
I should have been more clear.
I agree that the radius bushings @ the frame are not the limiting factor.
It is the bushings at the axle that are. Each arm is attached at two point to the axle. When you try to flex the axle they fight each other. This is why someone developed the hinged radius arm. http://www.d-90.com/prod/hinge.html
Remember the over constrained part? The hinge removes this constraint and allows flex without deflecting the axle bushings as much. It is the same as removing one bushing from one arm. Then that arm is free to pivot @ the axle while the othe arm controls axle wrap.

This is the exact same reason that an A arm three link ( like the rear of D1) is even better. There are only three points of attachment to the axle and they don't fight each other. The Safari gard three link front suspension follows the same idea.

The DII still has bushings, they are just the "hoop" style rather than the "pin" style.
Just like shocks.

I agree for a "high stock" amount of flex ~12" or so, the radius arm can do it. As I said above it is tough and simple and has enough flex to be a solid choice if you are not too radical.

Clint

By Clint on Saturday, November 03, 2001 - 11:59 am: Edit

Also,
one thing that I don't like about the Gwagen
is that it uses dana-style integrated housing axles. I think that third member style axles (LR, ford, toyota) have numerous advantages. Strength, weight, durability and ease of pinion setup.

By Milan on Saturday, November 03, 2001 - 04:14 pm: Edit

Clint,
I agree on all counts now. I think you were talking about axle twisting forces which stress the 2 axle side bushings on each arm. Here I believe in big enough bushings to do the job but if you want monster flex, you have to do something else I guess.

I, too, like the 3rd-member style axles better. If only they all came with strong housings and centersections and pinions. Something like a trussed Ford 9" with high-strength centersection and 35-spline spooled axles is still best in my book.