G wagon hopeless

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

29th October 2012, 05:03 PM
PAT303

So what does the Army do exactly,patrols around Sydney???. Pat
29th October 2012, 05:06 PM
Lotz-A-Landies

Quote:

Originally Posted by PAT303

So what does the Army do exactly,patrols around Sydney???. Pat

DNSDC, Moorebank
(Defence National Storage and Distribution Centre!)

Currently dozens of Perenties, Unimogs, No.5 Trailers, 20 Ton plant trailers, 8 Ton Haulmark trailers, R Series Mack trucks in various configurations, all parked up gathering dust.

Then there is the School of Military Engineering, who train sappers and EOD specialists, EOD dogs, and also around the corner in the main Holsworthy Barracks there are the Military Police. You may remember an EOD Sapper was killed in the sand pit last week, he was based at SME Moorebank (Holsworthy).
29th October 2012, 05:10 PM
manic

If land rover had won the bid the supplied landrovers would not have been Pumas. Whats all this talk of the defender being old tech having not progressed compared to the G-Wagon? The G-wagon itself is built on a design just as old as the defender. Most progress in car tech has been on comfort, emissions, crash safety, gimmicks like parking assist...
all of which are useless bulk in extreme military like conditions. Surely for a military run about a mechanically driven land rover cant be beaten?

How hard would it have been for LR to continue to supply military spec land rovers with the 300tdi? Seeing as the perenties had an Isuzu put in, the engine and driveline seems to be pick and choose anyway.

Didnt the UK mil use 300tdi over TD5 because of 'electronic warfare' where it might be possible for electro-magnetic pulses to disable an ECU controlled engine. Out of interest is the g-wagon protected from this?

Mercedes see value in holding onto the old G-wagen and continuing to push it for mil apps around the world.. for land rover producing mil spec vehicles has been their backbone, apparently they dont need it anymore!

Over the coming years we will start seeing more and more civilian G-wagons on the road as a result of Aussie Military endorsment - so a big win for Mercedes. If land rover go DC100 with the defender my next car may be a G-Wagon! :wasntme:
29th October 2012, 05:13 PM
Disco Muppet

Quote:

Originally Posted by manic

Didnt the UK mil use 300tdi over TD5 because of 'electronic warfare' where it might be possible for electronic pulses to disable an ECU controlled engine. Out of interest is the g-wagon protected from this?

Yes, the "Wolf" variant runs the 300tdi.
I thought the Td5 was rejected for ADF vehicle due to the inability for the electrical issues to be solved with bush fixes, i.e soldiers don't carry a nanocom :angel:
29th October 2012, 05:26 PM
djam1

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lotz-A-Landies

You can't convince me that a HiLux or Colorado parked in a lot at Moorebank or Townsville will need a wheel alignment every month.

I have a mate who does most of the wheel alignments in Karratha and I can assure you the Hiluxes are pretty hopeless.
One trip up the local jump up sees everything out of whack some even beyond what can be fixed by adjustment.
I agree with Pat there are many more problems than what the Toyota advertising would have you believe.
Not all 4x4s in Australia spend their lives on the sealed road.
29th October 2012, 05:44 PM
rick130

Quote:

Originally Posted by Disco Muppet

Yes, the "Wolf" variant runs the 300tdi.
I thought the Td5 was rejected for ADF vehicle due to the inability for the electrical issues to be solved with bush fixes, i.e soldiers don't carry a nanocom :angel:

Read post # 39 ;)

The TD5 was going to be used, or at least trialled to repower the Perentie and it had it's RFI problems overcome as a mate of mine led the team that did it.
As I've mentioned before, the Poms wouldn't have it as they'd spent untold £'s and still couldn't do it so ther ewas no way they'd accept that the colonials could've achieved it, so he had to fly to the UK with the bits in a briefcase :lol:
29th October 2012, 05:51 PM
Disco Muppet

Quote:

Originally Posted by rick130

Read post # 39 ;)

The TD5 was going to be used, or at least trialled to repower the Perentie and it had it's RFI problems overcome as a mate of mine led the team that did it.
As I've mentioned before, the Poms wouldn't have it as they'd spent untold £'s and still couldn't do it so ther ewas no way they'd accept that the colonials could've achieved it, so he had to fly to the UK with the bits in a briefcase :lol:

Hmm....
Where have I heard that before?
*cough* Leyland *cough* :D
Did the Td5 defenders that were recently sold off by the ADF still have all their elecktrickery?
29th October 2012, 06:00 PM
Lotz-A-Landies

Quote:

Originally Posted by Disco Muppet

Hmm....
Where have I heard that before?
*cough* Leyland *cough* :D
Did the Td5 defenders that were recently sold off by the ADF still have all their elecktrickery?

Can't tell you about the electrical protection, but the fact that the TD5s being sold off first before the Perenties which were at least 12 years older, pretty much tells you everything about the Army's opinion of the TD5.

Remember if Ford PAG (inc. Land Rover Australia) did tender for the Army contract, it would have been the post 2003 TD5 Defender (or Puma Defender) with the p38 diffs and the G-Wagon would likely have still won the contract.
29th October 2012, 06:15 PM
newhue

Quote:

Originally Posted by PAT303

Rubbish.I spent the weekend doing my Ambulance driving accreditation and my TDCi beat everything except the Merc ambulances,doing emergency braking from 110,braking with two wheels in the dirt from 80 and doing braking from 110 on dirt it was brilliant,the other vehicles,76 series,hilux's etc were hopeless,the troopys were dangerous,trust me the defender is an old design but a very well designed,very well engineered old design. Pat

I'm glad you are so blinded by your well engineered Defender. My sway bar fell off on the weekend, just another quality bit added to the list.

As for well designed maybe so, but you could hardly say LR have actively tried to keep it current. Why do they only sell 20 or 30 a month, I don't think it's all supply issues.
29th October 2012, 06:30 PM
lambrover

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blknight.aus

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

oh wait......
Spare me the bull ****, I have been on drivers and maintainers courses as well, the latest for Bushmaster and it means ****, if you needed the course to actualy work on it you should be shot for being a numpty.
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.

Seeing as the vehicle has a 95lt tank and as the video shows it has a fuel consumption of 11.7lt per 100km that equats to 812.25km for that tank then it has an other 55lt tank so theres an other 470.25km, thats 1282.5km.

G Wagon - Australian Army

This is not a ****ing compertition, I was just very surprised by your claim that its double fuel consumption and think that needs evidance to back it up.

I feel you dislike the vehicle and its lead you to say these things that arent factual.(just a thought)

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page