The end of the Australian Ford

I like to compare Land Rover with Fud and 'olden. All three sold vehicles no one wanted, all three went broke, all three were government subsidised. One decided to reinvest in new models,new factories,kicked out the unions,went seriously into debt to make it all happen and 20 years later is now one of the most profitable vehicle manufacturers there is.The same manufacturer exports all over the world,doesn't use high wages and a strong currency get in the way of doing so,nor as an excuse for failure,is a world leader in production technique's such as the manufacture of alloy body shells in house,the only one who can at present and by hard work and commitment has built a strong loyal following in every market it sells in.The other two make the same vehicles they made 20 years ago for a market that ceased to exists 30 years ago and wonder why they went from having over 50% of the market to nothing today,no prizes for picking the which is which. Pat

Yes they certainly made the wrong vehicles. If they could design a world class vehicle like the Ranger then it shows they knew what the market needed. If the Focus and the Ranger were being built here then maybe they would be profitable.

Sent from my SM-G900I using AULRO mobile app

I hear what you are saying Pat, but I think that's both simplistic and biased. I'll throw the bias the other way and expand a bit for balance...

One of those three got bailed out and 'fixed' (by the parent of one of the others) and operates from an extremely protected base and builds solely SUVs which is the major growth segment while all other segments shrink globally. The other two operate from the most diverse market on earth with zero protection. Only one of those two makes an SUV - one that redefined the segment and still sells strongly to this day despite being yesterday's news now. It was benchmarked against the BMW X5 originally and is still more refined than it. The BMW is a high-tech chaff-cutter in comparison.

Comparing a Holden or Ford from 20 years ago to a modern one is like comparing a series with a current Rangie. An EF Falcon is not similar to an FG-X Falcon. A VS Commodore does not compare favourably to a VF-II Commodore.

I am impressed as hell with the current Land Rover line up. Fantastic cars, well made, and well executed. I have driven most of them and they rate very highly and have a brilliant character to them. My next purchase will almost definitely be a RRS. That doesn't mean I can't appreciate the local stuff. And you forgot to mention the other one that still engineers and builds here and makes extremely good products... here. And they also tune to local conditions which is why the suspension works on any surface, the headlights actually illuminate the road, and all can be punished through the outback and return... repeatedly. Because that's what we do here.

Think of how far LR has come in the last decade, let alone two and you'll find similar improvements at Holden, Ford and Toyota for local variants.

I don't think I'm biased at all, Ford and Holden have done nothing,and I mean absolutely nothing in regards to innovation vehicle wise whether it's design,manufacture,materials nothing.You make the comparison from the RRC to the L405 and think the Ford and Holden are no different,well the two Australian vehicles have cast iron engines and gearbox's only a generation or two above the RRC and are still made from pressed mild steel sheet spot welded together.The L405 uses graphite composite blocks with the most modern gearbox's ZF makes wrapped up in hydra formed alloy bodies for a start.I'd like you to follow me through the outback in a Holden or Ford,can take the punishment can they?,suspension that works?,trying hard not to laugh mate seriously,they are made from the cheapest parts both makers can acquire. Pat

The US used incentives to attract and support car plants at the same time as we in Australia were slashing support for the vehicle industry. The results were predictable.

US used foreign investment to develop a new car industry, a lesson Australia hasn't learned - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

This is certainly an interesting topic, here's my 2c worth...

* It's sad that a number of Australian workers will be un-employed as a result of Ford, Holden and Toyota closing their doors.
* At the end of the day people just aren't buying enough sedans (Falcons, Commodores).
* If the demand was there AND the price was right, then I think that Ford/Holden would still make the cars.
* Ford/Holden/Toyota (Mitsubishi and Nissan) made the decision that the Australian divisions just aren't profitable enough.

One could argue that Land Rover are lucky because they are in a growing market (SUVs).
One could also argue that they build great cars -after all if they built crap people wouldn't buy them.
One could also say "look at what happened to Rover Cars - they simply didn't make a product that people wanted to buy".

I have a few theories as to why SUV's are becoming more popular..
* The roads are littered with speed cameras.
* Speeding fines / demerit points are high
* "Speed Kills"
* People want a "safer" car (read: big and heavy with a good view)
* People want to travel this great land of ours
* The roads are so crowded

I think that some people buy SUVs because you can't enjoy a sportscar anymore, but with an SUV it is multi-purpose so you can use it as a daily and "get-away" on the weekends... You can't do that with a normal sedan.

Yes I have owned sports cars, sedans and hatches. Yes I have been involved in motor sport.

Jut my 2 cents worth! :angel:

It's an interesting comparison Pat. One advantage Land Rover have had is access to the EU which has meant they effectively have a very large domestic market. Britons also contribute approx $30 per capita per annum to the car industry to our $18.

These conditions also meant Honda, Nissan and Toyota set up manufacturing in the UK as their way in to Europe, so the industry produces about 1.6 million cars annually compared to around 200,000 here. This has also benefited JLR through economies of scale. Despite their best attempts at killing it in the 70s and 80s, the British government does now at least seem to recognise the importance of the car industry.

I think that Land Rover were lucky to be bundled up with Jaguar when Ford sold them as it made them viable as a stand alone manufacturer. Then they had the fortune to be purchased by Tata who believed in the marque and invested significantly at a time when other manufacturers were cutting back.

As a company they didn't squander this luck. They have produced some truly innovative vehicles that, despite the criticism they get on here, have been what the market wanted.

I suspect they may not have had the same success had they remained part of Ford. In all likelihood after the GFC they too would have been reduced to an engineering department designing badge-engineered Fords to be manufactured in South America or Asia.

It will be interesting to see what effect Brexit will have on JLR. It can't be good for them.

Cheers,
Jon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grey_ghost

One could argue that Land Rover are lucky because they are in a growing market (SUVs).
One could also argue that they build great cars -after all if they built crap people wouldn't buy them.

---

Im sure a toyota owner would argue that last point :)

OK, I'm comparing PASSENGER cars here. Not purpose built 4WDs against road cars. In the Outback you see 4WDs and.... Commodores and Falcons. Period. I've done sign-off trips out to Camerons Corner (~15 years ago) in bog-stock Falcons. It's part of the standard sign-off for all local product (just like we actually test our bullbars in real crash tests into full size/weight Kangaroo dummies). Yeah I've done that testing and it's really not fun. In short, we test and design cars to survive Australia, not just driving down a motorway in Germany.

Lack of innovation? Given the constraints driven by very low volume, negligible support, etc I think you'll find that's not entirely accurate.

The current Commodore is festooned with the latest tech. Something we couldn't do on Falcon as there was no justification for the massive cost on a short-term platform.

Ford locally ran the same ZF 6-speed as LR through this period. LR have only just stepped up to the newer 8HP, not something feasible if you are killing the platform imminently, per Falcon. LR introduced the ZF 6HP in the same year as Falcon so there's no argument there.

Research the LPi system. That's not done anywhere else in the world and we pioneered it and brought it to production. And it makes an LPG engine produce more power and torque that the petrol equivalent with great fuel economy.

Iron engines? The Commodore engines have been all-alloy for well over a decade. Ford's V8 is all-alloy and the 'venerable' six is only iron-blocked. Most high-power density engines today have gone back to being iron blocked. Lion V6/V8? Iron. Iron is stronger and has better NVH. Alloy is good for fast warm-up for emissions.

I suspect strongly that you have not driven a Falcon, Territory, Commodore (or even Camry/Aurion) built in the last 5-10 years over any distance objectively. If you had I doubt you would be referring to these vehicles in light of 1980-1990 thinking. It would also make you typical of much of the buying public that perceive the local stuff as inferior, because we once were... And there's a big part of the problem.

Anyway, I'm clearly flogging a dead horse here and we'll just have to agree to disagree. But please do not denigrate the extraordinary work that local engineers have done.

Oh, and the Ranger and Everest are entirely engineered here. It's 'our' platform and we engineer it to go to every corner of the world and it's been a massive success everywhere.

Agreed.
What a pity Ford didn't commit to build the Ranger and Everest here for export, but I'm sure that's a very complicated story.