Thread: D5 Disaster

Originally Posted by 4bee

Every one of those points incorporates a Sensor or two of some sort & from what I read on here Sensors can give a whole **** load of grief. Not exactly what you need when in Outback & isolated conditions.

I bet good olde boy Len Beadell had more problems with his survey equipment than he did with all his models of Series Rovers put together.


Just Sayin'

Repairing flat staked tyres kept him pretty busy most days before several leisurely hours of star gazin’ before turning in a few hours before dawn.

Originally Posted by 4bee

Every one of those points incorporates a Sensor or two of some sort & from what I read on here Sensors can give a whole **** load of grief. Not exactly what you need when in Outback & isolated conditions.

None of those facilities would affect the ability to travel when in remote areas if it was to become inoperative so no reason to avoid vehicles with them fitted. What I see as a problem when anywhere is LR's insistence on resorting to extreme limp modes for their engines when correlation mismatches occur whereas curtaining top-end performance is all that should be done. LR got it right with the TD5 by using default values for sensors that appeared faulty and limiting boost to the mechanical waste-gate whereby the vehicle still performed quite well. The only sensor required to run the TD5 was the crankshaft position sensor as all the others could be disconnected without gross performance reduction.

Originally Posted by INter674

Anyhow I respect you're right to provide comment and support for other brands but the fact is they are followers not leaders wrt many LR features and innovations.

Kinda reminds me of Xerox. They innovated and were always breaking down, so they built a great service network to support their innovative product. Canon copied, but built copiers that just worked. Yeah, they were a generation behind, but you can't put a price on it "just works" and they cleaned Xerox's clock as a result.

So, while I agree LR are innovators, they are persistently incapable of coming up with anything that approaches reliability and they are steadfast in hiding under the table rather than standing by their product. Their disdain for suckersowners is legendary. If they actually did build reliable vehicles, they wouldn't have the roundly deserved reputation that invites ridicule from drivers of "appliances".

Originally Posted by BradC

Kinda reminds me of Xerox. They innovated and were always breaking down, so they built a great service network to support their innovative product. Canon copied, but built copiers that just worked. Yeah, they were a generation behind, but you can't put a price on it "just works" and they cleaned Xerox's clock as a result.

So, while I agree LR are innovators, they are persistently incapable of coming up with anything that approaches reliability and they are steadfast in hiding under the table rather than standing by their product. Their disdain for suckersowners is legendary. If they actually did build reliable vehicles, they wouldn't have the roundly deserved reputation that invites ridicule from drivers of "appliances".

Wot you sayin' Willis, their ridicule doesn't arise from being jealous as buggery?

I must say that I do not think that LR are the innovators that many think.
For example many innovations are designed and sold to carmakers by companies like ZF and Robert Bosch.
These companies are the ones who developed the dreaded electric handbrake, the multi speed auto transmissions, and the combined alternator/electric motor used in the PHEV. In addition companies like this do the development of computer systems and drivetrain . Lemforder developed the hydro bushes in the FCAs .
The screens would be developed by vendors such as Siemens and the CANBUS developed by specialist companies.
All LR does is select which premium features they want in the vehicles and this depends on what the market will bear. the vendore then customise the offering to LR.
The hydroforming chassis process used in D3/D$ was developed by Ford, or probably a vendor to Ford .

The motors are Ford etc until the Millenium which has it appears been a disaster so far.

IMHO one of the few systems that LR developed was and is the air suspension, and were the only manufacturer even up until now who are game to take the engineering risk, which is mainly borne by the poor customers. Few other manufacturers have been game although Mercedes and Porsche have variations.
Electric brakes as in the new Defender were offered by Mercedes in the mid 2000s and they were a disaster. these were developed by Robert Bosche. I hope Bosche has now perfected the design.
Even back in teh old days the ECU program in the TD5 D2A has "property of Volvo" all over the place if it is run as a text file.
Regards PhilipA

Originally Posted by Graeme

None of those facilities would affect the ability to travel when in remote areas if it was to become inoperative so no reason to avoid vehicles with them fitted. What I see as a problem when anywhere is LR's insistence on resorting to extreme limp modes for their engines when correlation mismatches occur whereas curtaining top-end performance is all that should be done. LR got it right with the TD5 by using default values for sensors that appeared faulty and limiting boost to the mechanical waste-gate whereby the vehicle still performed quite well. The only sensor required to run the TD5 was the crankshaft position sensor as all the others could be disconnected without gross performance reduction.

That is fair comment if true, so everyone who has complained about ****ty sensors is bull****ting?

I don't own one nor is it my wish to, (my LR days are well gone after owning a D1 Facelift & they didn't have many or none at all) but just recalling comments made by posters on here from time to time & the need to use a "gadget" to fault find the problem & find which one is giving grief.

Originally Posted by PerthDisco

Repairing flat staked tyres kept him pretty busy most days before several leisurely hours of star gazin’ before turning in a few hours before dawn.

And that would happen to any vehicle that Len used considering the virgin country that he was Surveying, & the Bulldozer & Grader followed his track afterwards in that order..


Better him than me I can tell you.

Originally Posted by PhilipA

I must say that I do not think that LR are the innovators that many think.

Exactly,but some seem to think otherwise.........

Like i said,many years ago maybe,but not really these days.

4Bee,but a good,and thats what i mean,good Fridgie can sort anything,so you would be fine with your FFRR,out in the Simpson Desert,with a faulty sensor,easy as.Not much different than a faulty coil senser on an electronic TX valve in a freezer cabinet.If you do have a real issue,you can give Rick130 a call on the Sat phone