Can LR build an engine?

[bbyer]

I regard the engines in our Land Rovers, and certainly the AJ-V8 in my petrol 4.4L LR3 as being Ford built and as such, pretty good engines. Jaguar AJ-V8 engine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaguar_AJ-V8_engine)

My same thinking applies to the AJD-V6 diesel units that your D3's mostly have in them. Ford AJD-V6/PSA DT17 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_AJD-V6/PSA_DT17)

Per the link below, it would appear LR will be building their new engines in it sounds like, a new TATA paid for facility. I am wondering if this is good news or something to be concerned about.

It is just the Ford bits within current production have probably done more good than harm; now substituting the expertise of the acknowledged world leader in three wheelers, I just wonder.

Discovery getting a family and new engines | LRO.com UK (http://www.lro.com/news-reviews/2014/3/discovery-getting-a-family-and-new-engines/)

[Pedro_The_Swift]

Maybe depends on if you think the TD5 was a success,,

[bbyer]

Yes, after a bit of a rough introduction, I think one could say the TD5 was a success. The question is should BMW get the credit?

I guess it is that sort of doubt that bothers me as it appears LR may be truly starting with a clean sheet, and perhaps no one to run to.

For what it is worth, over here, I am not certain that Ford or GM has yet to perfect their Japanese diesels either so ..... Dodge uses some variation of a Cummings and it is so retro, I think they would still fit in the Italian tanks of WWII where I guess the engine got its initial field testing done. For their smaller diesel engines, Chrysler uses Mercedes.

Engines can be a real problem for any manufacturer, even those with a heritage.

[JDNSW]

Yes, after a bit of a rough introduction, I think one could say the TD5 was a success. The question is should BMW get the credit?

I guess it is that sort of doubt that bothers me as it appears LR may be truly starting with a clean sheet, and perhaps no one to run to.

......

The Td5 was a Landrover design, predating BMW, planned to come in 4,5,6 cylinders at least. BMW moved everything but the five cylinder one off the menu, as they had competing engines already in production.

Landrover, and its parent company, Rover, had been designing and building their own engines from about 1930 on. The IOE engines, although not in production until after WW2, are a late 1930s design, and very advanced even postwar.

The four cylinder diesel, designed in the early 1950s, and in production by 1957, was one of the first small diesels to see production. The petrol version followed in 1959, with the diesel enlarged to 2.25l in 1961, and these remained in production for over 30 years. After a rather unsuccessfult go at turbocharging, almost the first turbocharged diesel in a mass produced car, the engine was extensively redesigned to give the very successful 200Tdi. This was replaced a few years later by the even more extensively redesigned 300Tdi,also very successful.

While I have no idea how much expertise the company still has in this area, it is probably considerable. What has held them back from developing their own engines over the last decade and a half has been multiple changes of ownership, plus the availability from their parent companies of engines that met the requirements with more certainty and a lower cost than developing their own.

There is the problem that developing and tooling up for a new engine to meet current (legal) requirements is a very expensive business - and Landrover can probably obnly justify it if - 1. They plan on making a lot of them, either to put in their own cars or to sell elsewhere; or 2. because the current engines are expected to become unavailable/too expensive/unreliable supply; 3. They think they can build engines to give a significant competitive advantage.

John

[bbyer]

There is the problem that developing and tooling up for a new engine to meet current (legal) requirements is a very expensive business - and Land Rover can probably only justify it if - 1. They plan on making a lot of them, either to put in their own cars or to sell elsewhere; or 2. because the current engines are expected to become unavailable/too expensive/unreliable supply; 3. They think they can build engines to give a significant competitive advantage. John

I appreciate your above comment about unavailability / expensive and I wondered if Ford was cutting LR off.

If so, that would no doubt dictate developing your own engine if you could not find something suitable elsewhere - and that is no certainly either. Other than maybe the French, I am not certain anyone has a small diesel figured out.

The one good thing is that TATA has lots of money and nothing to foist onto LR; maybe we are looking at opportunity here.

[Marmoset]

JLR have been developing their own "hotfire" engines for a few years now. More details have been released with the details of the new Jaguar XE. Note that the engine can be used in many drivetrain configurations, so I'll wager this is the one we're gonna see in an LR first(Probably the new baby disco/freelander). It seems to have an impressive range of operating parameters, depending on how it needs to be specificed. I assume it will come in petrol and diesel flavours.

I wouldn't be suprised to see one in the new RRS given it's outputs.

Jaguar XE 3-series rival - first picture | Autocar (http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/geneva-motor-show/jaguar-xe-3-series-rival-first-picture)

[inside]

I appreciate your above comment about unavailability / expensive and I wondered if Ford was cutting LR off.

From memory a condition of sale of LR to Tata was that the Ford/Peugeot engines were to be used for a certain time. This likely suited Tata as they had no capability themselves.

[Disco Muppet]

Maybe depends on if you think the TD5 was a success,,

I would dare say so, but I'm slightly biased ;)
The Td5 suffered the same fate as lots of LR products, not just engines.
They get the big things right, for the most part.
It's the little things that let them down, and make the big bits look bad.
Classic example, the oil pump bolt. Less than a dollars worth of thread locker being able to completely destroy an engine.
Personally I'm optimistic about the future of Land Rover products in general, not just their engines.
I think the D4 has been a huge success, as was the D3. Shows that you don't have to drive a bland jap 4WD appliance to go places.
Viva la difference :cool:

[3toes]

I am going to guess that the engine is about half the value of the vehicle. Of you use one provided by someone else you have to share the profit not just when made but also every time it comes in for service or repair. Also the supplier can limit the number of engines and hence how many cars you can sell.

[JDNSW]

I am going to guess that the engine is about half the value of the vehicle. Of you use one provided by someone else you have to share the profit not just when made but also every time it comes in for service or repair. Also the supplier can limit the number of engines and hence how many cars you can sell.

Early in the history of motoring the cost of the motor may have been well over half the value of the vehicle, but I am not certain that it is that high today (as the rest of the car has become far more complex in comparison), but the motor is certainly the highest value single item that goes into the vehicle. And to amplify your further comments, it is also (apart from tyres and possibly brakes) the highest maintenance cost single item - most of your service costs are directed at the motor.

The problem for the manufacturer is that the cost of any manufactured item consists of a fixed cost (design, development, tooling etc) and a marginal cost of manufacture. This means that, for example, Ford already has an engine in production. They have already spent the fixed cost, so that they can sell extra engines for the marginal cost plus a modest profit, where to replace those engines Landrover has to put up the fixed cost and spread it over a smaller number of engines.

As emission and fuel consumption regulation has got tighter, the fixed cost has got higher because of the amount of research and development needed.

John