Thread: G wagon hopeless

Originally Posted by Blknight.aus

the 4x4 gaywagon empty weighs the same as the 110 fully loaded. (near enough)

it runs fatter rubber, is taller and has a slop box, has AC, has power steering, runs 2 alternators, a bunch of computers, and maintains the same areodynamic properties as your average shed.

if I ever ran him on diesel or tuned him up properly with just the driver on board I could probably get better fuel economy distance for distance out of fozzy.

I think your answers are a bit weak, have you got testing to prove your answers or is it a guess.

I to would think it would have to get better economy then a Landy. The tyres aren't exactly huge and A/C adds stuff all, the car has been designed for it.

A 3lt common rail diesel is far superior to a 4bd1 in reguards to economy and power.

yes, yes I do...

in fact you can prove it yourself

look up the boast sheet for the gaywagen then the sheet for the 110....

you'd appear to be missing the basic obvious.

a 3.9l diesel pushing 2.7T (fully loaded) with no parasitic load and no additional drive line loss

or a 3l turbo diesel pushing 2.7ish T( empty) with an assload of parasitic load and pumping loss in the transmisison.

http://www.army.gov.au/Our-work/Equi...20G-Wagon.ashx

Originally Posted by Blknight.aus

yes, yes I do...

in fact you can prove it yourself

look up the boast sheet for the gaywagen then the sheet for the 110....

you'd appear to be missing the basic obvious.

a 3.9l diesel pushing 2.7T (fully loaded) with no parasitic load and no additional drive line loss

or a 3l turbo diesel pushing 2.7ish T( empty) with an assload of parasitic load and pumping loss in the transmisison.

http://www.army.gov.au/Our-work/Equi...20G-Wagon.ashx

That is not proof.

To make a claim you need fuel consumption figures of both vehicles covering the same ground tested loaded and unloaded.

I under what you are saying with parasitic loss and the smaller engine but mechanical injection Vs common rail is a no brainer when it comes to efficiency and being a modern turbo diesel it is also more powerful.

The vehicle is also more likely to be able to carry more equipment then the rover as well.

Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner

What you guys are saying about using white goods for gs purposes, the British army are using fridges from Japan on a lease basis for driver training and support purposes, officers are getting driven around in leased disco's
The green fleet are being only used in anger as they have extended the contracted life and overhauled all the old contracted vehicles, nothing has been put in place for when they pull em .... Vw beetles maybe ! Lol

Originally Posted by lambrover

That is not proof.

To make a claim you need fuel consumption figures of both vehicles covering the same ground tested loaded and unloaded.

damn it, you have a point I hadnt considered, If only I was qualified on both vehicles for both operate and maintain...

oh wait......

Its like saying I cant comment on the qualities of the ford versus the td5 because I dont own the ford... There are reasons I wont own the ford....

http://www.army.gov.au/Our-future/Pr...oklet-web.ashx

that one gets you the fuel tanks.....

see if you cant find the range of the gaywagon yourself.

and I dont need to work it out the ADF already has thats why they have a planning range.

I think Lots of Landies is wright, Land Rover didn't even show for the fight. If this is correct then it's just another nail in Defenders coffin. Our beloved Defenders are becoming extinct as the needs and wants of modern consumers, be it civilian or armies is changing. A Defender doesn't cut it anymore no matter what we think, know, or want.
Still LR have chosen to sit in the design room and board room and arrogantly believe what they feel is perfectly fine is fine for many years. This may suit many of us, but LR have been slow in developing the Defenders replacement for a changing market and world safety and emission rules.

As a tax payer if I have to accept the collins submarine comedy, and who knows what other wasted money then the new gwagon will do it's job just fine I'd imagine. It will cost a lot just like the Defenders did up front, and it will drain the budget with maintenance just like defender did.
But vote or don't vote it makes little difference.

The Gwagon should be a fine vehicle for the aust army.
It has a good history with other armies around the world and computors and Auto boxes is the way the world is going.
I am old fashion and like manual gearboxes and simple equiptment ect, but I realise the world is changing too.......for better or worse.
The Prentie Landrovers are one of the best landrovers ever bolted together and the design was largely Australian.
If landrover entered a contract for new vehicles for the Australian army for new vehicles it would lose out big time to other offerings.
Landrovers 2.2 litre motor with Auto, air con with all the problems like axle drive flanges that still wear out and rover diffs verses the salisbury on the older models..........dont think so...........safety protection verses other vehicles...dont think so.
Ron

Originally Posted by newhue

I think Lots of Landies is wright, Land Rover didn't even show for the fight. If this is correct then it's just another nail in Defenders coffin. Our beloved Defenders are becoming extinct as the needs and wants of modern consumers, be it civilian or armies is changing. A Defender doesn't cut it anymore no matter what we think, know, or want.
Still LR have chosen to sit in the design room and board room and arrogantly believe what they feel is perfectly fine is fine for many years. This may suit many of us, but LR have been slow in developing the Defenders replacement for a changing market and world safety and emission rules.

As a tax payer if I have to accept the collins submarine comedy, and who knows what other wasted money then the new gwagon will do it's job just fine I'd imagine. It will cost a lot just like the Defenders did up front, and it will drain the budget with maintenance just like defender did.
But vote or don't vote it makes little difference.

If we had have gone down the collins class sub route with 4x4's we would have decided that mercedes could not build a better car than an Australian made car designed and built from the ground up by a committee. Imagine then what we would be driving, a 70 series land cruiser front end with a chinese great wall petrol engine converted to run on diesel, with cardboard commonrail injectors sticky taped on with a suzuki mighty boy tub in the rear ready to be fully loaded with 35kg of weight.