1992 Land Rover Defender "Spectre" Movie Replica Created

by Jason R. Sakurai

Published: December 11th, 2020

1992 land rover defender spectre movie replica created

A replica of the 1992 Land Rover Defender from the 2015 James Bond movie “Spectre,” has been created by Wilmington, North Carolina’s Osprey Custom Cars, specialists in restomodding classic Land Rover Defenders, Ford Broncos, and Toyota FJs. One of Osprey’s latest, the truck’s outward appearance is identical to that of the movie vehicle, but the similarities begin and end there.

During the 2015 Frankfurt motor show, Jaguar Land Rover revealed three stunt vehicles that were featured in the film, including a special Land Rover Defender that made its debut in Frankfurt. The 24th film in the Bond series, it had as a centerpiece a black Land Rover Defender that was modified with 37-inch diameter off-road tires and body armor to handle the rough terrain of the snow-covered mountains on location.

While the Bond films are known for showcasing Aston Martin vehicles, Jaguar vehicles have also been featured. In 2012’s “Skyfall,” a Land Rover Defender 110 Double Cab pickup and a Jaguar XJ were highlighted.

A drivetrain identical to the movie vehicle wasn’t an option, so Osprey installed a GM 6.2-liter LS3 with 435 horsepower and 428 lb-ft of torque, plus a 6L80E automatic transmission, and a heavy-duty transfer case. Upgraded TDCI axles, brakes and rotors, springs, and shocks were added to the truck, as well as a new track rod, drag link, and an aluminum skid plate.

Exterior upgrades include the Santorini Black paint job, a full 110 external roll cage, 17-inch aluminum wheels, off-road tires, and a full LED light package from front to rear.

The interior was completely revamped with new air conditioning, LED lights, leather upholstery, Recaro heated seats in front, Alcantara headliner, power windows, multiple charging points, and keyless entry. A double DIN stereo with DVD, Bluetooth connectivity, navigation, Apple Car Play, and ten speakers round out the audio system.

To paraphrase James Bond, we thought Christmas only came once a year.

[Images: Osprey, Jaguar Land Rover]

#Defender #JamesBond #LandRover #MovieCars

Jason R. Sakurai

With a father who owned a dealership, I literally grew up in the business. After college, I worked for GM, Nissan and Mazda, writing articles for automotive enthusiast magazines as a side gig. I discovered you could make a living selling ad space at Four Wheeler magazine, before I moved on to selling TV for the National Hot Rod Association. After that, I started Roadhouse, a marketing, advertising and PR firm dedicated to the automotive, outdoor/apparel, and entertainment industries. Through the years, I continued writing, shooting, and editing. It keep things interesting.

More by Jason R. Sakurai

Comments

Join the conversation

3 comments

SCE to AUX on Dec 11, 2020

"To paraphrase James Bond, we thought Christmas only came once a year." You are today's winner!

Like Reply
- FreedMike on Dec 11, 2020
  
  Saw that one in theaters with my (then) mother-in-law, and when Denise Richards' character was introduced as "Christmas Jones," she leaned over to me and said, "I bet you there will be a 'Christmas only comes once a year' joke." Sure enough, it was the last line of the movie. That Bond movie gets a bad rap - aside from the fact that Richards absolutely cannot act, it was pretty darn good, if you ask me. Plus, how often do you get to see a Z8 sawed in half?
  
  Like
Lorenzo on Dec 13, 2020

It looks like George Barris died too soon. Imagine production versions of his TV and movie creations!

Like Reply

Recent Comments

Bouzouki Cadillac (aka GM!!) made so many mistakes over the past 40 years, right up to today, one could make a MBA course of it. Others have alluded to them, there is not enough room for me to recite them in a flowing, cohesive manner.Cadillac today is literally a tarted-up Chevrolet. They are nice cars, and the "aura" of the Cadillac name still works on several (mostly female) consumers who are not car enthusiasts.The CT4 and CT5 offer superlative ride and handling, and even performance--but, it is wrapped in sheet metal that (at least I think) looks awful, with (still) sub-par interiors. They are niche cars. They are the last gasp of the Alpha platform--which I have been told by people close to it, was meant to be a Pontiac "BMW 3-series". The bankruptcy killed Pontiac, but the Alpha had been mostly engineered, so it was "Cadillac-ized" with the new "edgy" CTS styling.Most Cadillacs sold are crossovers. The most profitable "Cadillac" is the Escalade (note that GM never jack up the name on THAT!).The question posed here is rather irrelevant. NO ONE has "a blank check", because GM (any company or corporation) does not have bottomless resources.Better styling, and superlative "performance" (by that, I mean being among the best in noise, harshness, handling, performance, reliablity, quality) would cost a lot of money.Post-bankruptcy GM actually tried. No one here mentioned GM's effort to do just that: the "Omega" platform, aka CT6.The (horribly misnamed) CT6 was actually a credible Mercedes/Lexus competitor. I'm sure it cost GM a fortune to develop (the platform was unique, not shared with any other car. The top-of-the-line ORIGINAL Blackwing V8 was also unique, expensive, and ultimately...very few were sold. All of this is a LOT of money).I used to know the sales numbers, and my sense was the CT6 sold about HALF the units GM projected. More importantly, it sold about half to two thirds the volume of the S-Class (which cost a lot more in 201x)Many of your fixed cost are predicated on volume. One way to improve your business case (if the right people want to get the Green Light) is to inflate your projected volumes. This lowers the unit cost for seats, mufflers, control arms, etc, and makes the vehicle more profitable--on paper.Suppliers tool up to make the number of parts the carmaker projects. However, if the volume is less than expected, the automaker has to make up the difference.So, unfortunately, not only was the CT6 an expensive car to build, but Cadillac's weak "brand equity" limited how much GM could charge (and these were still pricey cars in 2016-18, a "base" car was ).Other than the name, the "Omega" could have marked the starting point for Cadillac to once again be the standard of the world. Other than the awful name (Fleetwood, Elegante, Paramount, even ParAMOUR would be better), and offering the basest car with a FOUR cylinder turbo on the base car (incredibly moronic!), it was very good car and a CREDIBLE Mercedes S-Class/Lexus LS400 alternative. While I cannot know if the novel aluminum body was worth the cost (very expensive and complex to build), the bragging rights were legit--a LARGE car that was lighter, but had good body rigidity. No surprise, the interior was not the best, but the gap with the big boys was as close as GM has done in the luxury sphere.Mary Barra decided that profits today and tomorrow were more important than gambling on profits in 2025 and later. Having sunk a TON of money, and even done a mid-cycle enhancement, complete with the new Blackwing engine (which copied BMW with the twin turbos nestled in the "V"!), in fall 2018 GM announced it was discontinuing the car, and closing the assembly plant it was built in. (And so you know, building different platforms on the same line is very challenging and considerably less efficient in terms of capital and labor costs than the same platform, or better yet, the same model).So now, GM is anticipating that, as the car market "goes electric" (if you can call it that--more like the Federal Government and EU and even China PUSHING electric cars), they can make electric Cadillacs that are "prestige". The Cadillac Celestique is the opening salvo--$340,000. We will see how it works out.
Lynn Joiner Lynn JoinerJust put 2,000 miles on a Chevy Malibu rental from Budget, touring around AZ, UT, CO for a month. Ran fine, no problems at all, little 1.7L 4-cylinder just sipped fuel, and the trunk held our large suitcases easily. Yeah, I hated looking up at all the huge FWD trucks blowing by, but the Malibu easily kept up on the 80 mph Interstate in Utah. I expect a new one would be about a third the cost of the big guys. It won't tow your horse trailer, but it'll get you to the store. Why kill it?
Lynn Joiner Just put 2,000 miles on a Chevy Malibu rental from Budget, touring around AZ, UT, CO for a month. Ran fine, no problems at all, little 1.7L 4-cylinder just sipped fuel, and the trunk held our large suitcases easily. Yeah, I hated looking up at all the huge FWD trucks blowing by, but the Malibu easily kept up on the 80 mph Interstate in Utah. I expect a new one would be about a third the cost of the big guys. It won't tow your horse trailer, but it'll get you to the store. Why kill it?
Ollicat I am only speaking from my own perspective so no need to bash me if you disagree. I already know half or more of you will disagree with me. But I think the traditional upscale Cadillac buyer has traditionally been more conservative in their political position. My suggestion is to make Cadillac separate from GM and make them into a COMPANY, not just cars. And made the company different from all other car companies by promoting conservative causes and messaging. They need to build up a whole aura about the company and appeal to a large group of people that are really kind of sick of the left and sending their money that direction. But yes, I also agree about many of your suggestions above about the cars too. No EVs. But at this point, what has Cadillac got to lose by separating from GM completely and appealing to people with money who want to show everyone that they aren't buying the leftist Kook-Aid.
Jkross22 Cadillac's brand is damaged for the mass market. Why would someone pay top dollar for what they know is a tarted up Chevy? That's how non-car people see this.