TATA to build LR and Jaguar in China?????

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PAT303

Well I can tell you about cruisers with diff failures and engines that stop and clutches and gearbox's that **** themselves and they don't all have computers,plenty of 1HD-FTE's were replaced too,as are D4D's so Dullbird isn't alone.I don't think it will make any difference were LR's are made,like ALL vehicles they'll break and everyone needs to get over the computer bit,they are here to stay.Oh,my hilux dash used to light up with warning lights and it never left Kalgoorlie. Pat

---

Firstly I wouldn't buy a new Toyota nor a Nissan either.

However as many have said the 110/County models, particularly those with the Isuzu engines were a more reliable, better made vehicles than those Defenders that come later. Mal Story suggests they had the last of the good Rover CVs, they still had the Salisbury rear end and they were without the let-you-down electronics.

Why did they have to go and spoil that design basis with ever more crappy engineering. Yes I know the pursuit of profits!

Hence I will keep maintaining the earlier models, there is a lot of maintenance in the cost of a new vehicle and old ones don't depreciate like the new ones.

Well my Tdi has over 400,00k's on it and my L322 is full of electronics and neither breaks down or causes trouble so reliability didn't finish with the isuzu.Like it or not it's 2010 not 1980. Pat

WAY TO GO PAT!
How refreshing to hear from someone not locked into the 50's

And I am IN my 50's lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PAT303

Can I go off topic here and ask how many of you have been stuck with broken computers and broken plastic diffs?. Pat

---

3 weeks, 2 days and counting......

and it's only a puma, I'd can't imaging what a RR or D3/4 would be like.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PAT303

Can I go off topic here and ask how many of you have been stuck with broken computers and broken plastic diffs?. Pat

---

Only speaking of a FL2 but in 3 years of driving and yes some of that off road there has been zero issues that have left me stranded, umm actually zero issues that have caused concern really. I would jump in it tomorrow full of confidence that it would get me to my intended destination if it was within the vehicles capabilities. I can honestly say the FL2 is a ****ing great car and I still look forward to jumping in it every day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lotz-A-Landies

Why did they have to go and spoil that design basis with ever more crappy engineering. Yes I know the pursuit of profits!

---

One of the things that set Land Rover apart from Jeep, GM, etc. was that they were prepared to push new technologies and ideas in their vehicles. Often these were successful which is why the marque was successful. Actually that same thing can be said of engineers in general, that given half a chance they'll try things out so see if they work. But at Land Rover they seemed to be listened to. Oh sure the BL years were a blight to the industry but look at what they are trying to do with the latest technology, a hybrid 4X4 I recall reading somewhere.

That means as technology changes you can expect to see those added to the mix. If it weren't the case then Land Rover would still be looking like the Series IV, or the Toyota Troopy with leaves in the rear and a computer in the bow.

Profits pay the bills but new technologies are very very expensive and I am sure each new model doesn't cover all of them. The result of that was the canning of what could have been very successful models in the 80's.

Volumes are what counts and LR have never been able to meet the demand adequately. The world would've been a different looking place if they had the production capabilities of say, Ford or GM. Somewhat squarer I think.

Excellent point.If it wasn't for LR putting 'dem new fangled coilly springs' or constant 4wd or any of the other 101 technologies they have put on thier vehicles we wouldn't have any of todays machines. Pat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PAT303

Excellent point.If it wasn't for LR putting 'dem new fangled coilly springs' or constant 4wd or any of the other 101 technologies they have put on thier vehicles we wouldn't have any of todays machines. Pat

---

ummm...american trucks like the bronco had coils before and i doubt LR "invented" C4WD.....I dont think its fair to assume that LR's engineers are they only ones capable of "inventing" new ideas.....and even then look back and see how much has already been done before, even if only one offs etc....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by disco2hse

One of the things that set Land Rover apart from Jeep, GM, etc. was that they were prepared to push new technologies and ideas in their vehicles.
<snip>
Profits pay the bills but new technologies are very very expensive and I am sure each new model doesn't cover all of them. The result of that was the canning of what could have been very successful models in the 80's.

Volumes are what counts and LR have never been able to meet the demand adequately. The world would've been a different looking place if they had the production capabilities of say, Ford or GM. Somewhat squarer I think.

---

I have no problems with their pushing ahead with technology, do it in the Range Rover/Discovery models and then when it proves to be a success and RELIABLE offer it in the Defender range.

There should be at least an option where a buyers can purchase reliable vehicles, without all the gadgets, that can still be fixed by people in the bush without having to use computer aided diagnostics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by uninformed

i doubt LR "invented" C4WD

---

No one suggested they did except you ;)