Thread: Land Rover

Originally Posted by thethink

From memory the tenderers for the contract had to do more than what LR have on the shelf (or can quickly adapt) - I think it included medium trucks as well as the replacement for the perenties.
Probably because someone thought it'd be a good idea to have everything the same for getting parts and the like.

Similar idea to the Perenties including the 6x6s, but this time I think they go bigger again.

John

Speaking of vehicle fleets, a mate of mine, another Landie enthusiast- (who went on to have a good sized 4x4 Toyota rental fleet) approached JRA or whoever they were in the early 70's to get a price on buying 25 SWB'S for starters, as he wanted to tender for the Thompson Dam contractors requirements and he knew from experience that landies would be able to hack it. He got offered around $600 off Nissans - they were $4200 then, and a similar discount off Toyota. The Landie distributor was willing to give him nothing, not a cracker, take it or leave it.
He said if they gave him $200 he would probably have put in his tender, as it was he was'nt prepared to put Jap vehicles up there, so he let it ride.

When any non-Landy types start putting heaps on my decision to buy the Disco3 I refer them to the scorecard I keep in the glovebox:

Number of times D3 has needed to be recovered 0
Number of Toyotas rescued by D3 3
Number of Nissans rescued by D3 1
Number of Pajeros rescued by D3 1
Number of places D3 could get to that Japcrap couldn't 8
Number of places Japcrap could get to that D3 couldn't 0

And that's only since we got her last December!

That soon quietens them down until they remember the reliabilty argument, to which I respond:

Number of breakdowns of any nature in D3 0

In the past I have owned or driven for work a Subaru, many Nissans, numerous Toyotas, a Mitsubishi, Jackaroos (2 of), Ford Courier, and Landys. When it came to choose a vehicle to retire with I researched thoroughly, took into account past experience with the various vehicles and recalled experiences with warranty claims. In the end Land Rover was an easy choice. I don't expect others to understand the reasoning I used and I don't take their jibes to heart - I just smile as I hook the recovery gear onto them.

Cheers

Russ.

A mate’s dad and my old man and I had this discussion the other day over a BBQ.

The old man owns a 04 Pootrol and mates dad a 06 Pajero which apparently means a W**er in some South American Lingo

They where telling me how and why the D2 or any LR was no good off road due to height and wheel base blah blah blah

With one fowl swoop I said so which one of you have taken the 4X4 off road (no answer)

I said to the old man lets compare cars shall we, what special about a GU3 it’s the same as GU2 a GU and heck even a GQ what has changed other then look he mumbled as he does under pressure

He then went to claim that they’re unreliable I said remember when the GU first came out with the dreaded 2.8 TD I said it was claimed that for every 5 cars a new engine came into the country what about that he was silent

I closed of by saying that that’s rich to old farts that own 4x4 that will never touch the dirt well I said that’s till I in herret the Pootrol and trade for LR

Originally Posted by DeeJay

Speaking of vehicle fleets, a mate of mine, another Landie enthusiast- (who went on to have a good sized 4x4 Toyota rental fleet) approached JRA or whoever they were in the early 70's to get a price on buying 25 SWB'S for starters, as he wanted to tender for the Thompson Dam contractors requirements and he knew from experience that landies would be able to hack it. He got offered around $600 off Nissans - they were $4200 then, and a similar discount off Toyota. The Landie distributor was willing to give him nothing, not a cracker, take it or leave it.
He said if they gave him $200 he would probably have put in his tender, as it was he was'nt prepared to put Jap vehicles up there, so he let it ride.

This is part of the effect I mentioned above - In that period, Rover was unable to meet demand - so the distributor (probably Leyland Australia) had no incentive at all to offer a discount. Why offer a discount to sell 25 vehicles when the problem was getting them from Rover, not selling them? They probably could not deliver in a reasonable time anyway. It would have been about the end of that era, but the mindset had been moulded in the distributor by a decade or more of a seller's market.

Even in the mid eighties, I tried to get several Landrovers for use in Burma where the coil suspension would have been a real asset compared to the Japs, but no LHD ones were available in the required time frame, so we ended up with Landcruisers.

John

Its quite simple really, Australian mentality clearly shows that if anyone is to get ahead of anyone else that we must bag the crap out of them, and the further ahead you get the more you are bagged out. So take it as a compliment that landys are bagged out continually by Australians, it just means they are a damn good truck

Originally Posted by DiscoTDI

...... it just means they are a damn good truck

Actually most of them are station wagons not trucks! Since landrover stopped pushing the utility market most Landrovers have not been trucks - virtually no Discos or Rangerovers and no Freelanders are trucks, and even Defenders the station wagons and hardtops outnumber trucks - about the only model where trucks are a majority would be 130s.

John

It's been said elsewhere " Land Rover owners are individuals, Jap junk owners are conformists"
People tend to bag what they don't understand and the majority of people are narrow minded "sheep"
Although I have noticed within my club the Toyota is slowly being abandoned for the Patrol. They are stirring but not quite waking up!!!