FS td5 engine line

landrover are advertising the sale of the complete production line for the
storm engine ! wonder who will buy it ?


the last landrover engine ?

In message <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> wrote:

> landrover are advertising the sale of the complete production line for the
> storm engine ! wonder who will buy it ?
>
>
> the last landrover engine ?

Yes - it's bodge jobs from now on - farewell LR's off-road ability :-(

I was around when the engine for Baby Bently was being chosen - all the
marques values went out of the window (with apprpriate marketing
codswallop) so that a "Not Very Appropriate But Its The Only One In
The Company That Even Comes Close" one can be used. The decision will be
made by people who have never driven off-road, towed anything other
a modern caravan (and certainly never done both together) and are
soley interested in bhp (or kW) at whatever speed the engine runs at
to do 80-90mph so it will look good on Top-Gear.

Yes - I am cynical, and yes - I have no doubt (from customer feed-back)
that LR are rapidly, as they say round here, losing the plot. Even the
Td5 is only tollerated, rather than liked.
>
>

Richard

--

>Yes - it's bodge jobs from now on - farewell LR's off-road ability :-(
>
>I was around when the engine for Baby Bently was being chosen - all the
>marques values went out of the window (with apprpriate marketing
>codswallop) so that a "Not Very Appropriate But Its The Only One In
>The Company That Even Comes Close" one can be used. The decision will be
>made by people who have never driven off-road, towed anything other
>a modern caravan (and certainly never done both together) and are
>soley interested in bhp (or kW) at whatever speed the engine runs at
>to do 80-90mph so it will look good on Top-Gear.
>
>Yes - I am cynical, and yes - I have no doubt (from customer feed-back)
>that LR are rapidly, as they say round here, losing the plot. Even the
>Td5 is only tollerated, rather than liked.
>

I don't think they've lost the plot, so much as chosen a different
one. They have decided to build cars which are the best off-roaders
in their class and very desirable to people with lots of money.
They've done a very good job of that.

That's not necessarily the same as building great off-roaders though,
and certainly not about creating vehicles that last for years and
years.

Nobody is rushing to fill the void though....



--

Tim Hobbs

'58 Series 2 88" aka "Stig"
'77 101FC Ambulance aka "Burrt"
'03 Volvo V70

"Tim Hobbs" wrote
>
>>Yes - it's bodge jobs from now on - farewell LR's off-road ability :-(
>>
>>I was around when the engine for Baby Bently was being chosen - all the
>>marques values went out of the window (with apprpriate marketing
>>codswallop) so that a "Not Very Appropriate But Its The Only One In
>>The Company That Even Comes Close" one can be used. The decision will be
>>made by people who have never driven off-road, towed anything other
>>a modern caravan (and certainly never done both together) and are
>>soley interested in bhp (or kW) at whatever speed the engine runs at
>>to do 80-90mph so it will look good on Top-Gear.
>>
>>Yes - I am cynical, and yes - I have no doubt (from customer feed-back)
>>that LR are rapidly, as they say round here, losing the plot. Even the
>>Td5 is only tollerated, rather than liked.
>>
>
> I don't think they've lost the plot, so much as chosen a different
> one. They have decided to build cars which are the best off-roaders
> in their class and very desirable to people with lots of money.
> They've done a very good job of that.
>
> That's not necessarily the same as building great off-roaders though,
> and certainly not about creating vehicles that last for years and
> years.
>
> Nobody is rushing to fill the void though....
>

Santana?

--
Regards
Bob
In Runnymede, 17 miles West of London

In message <[email protected]>
"Bob Hobden" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> "Tim Hobbs" wrote
> >
> >>Yes - it's bodge jobs from now on - farewell LR's off-road ability :-(
> >>
> >>I was around when the engine for Baby Bently was being chosen - all the
> >>marques values went out of the window (with apprpriate marketing
> >>codswallop) so that a "Not Very Appropriate But Its The Only One In
> >>The Company That Even Comes Close" one can be used. The decision will be
> >>made by people who have never driven off-road, towed anything other
> >>a modern caravan (and certainly never done both together) and are
> >>soley interested in bhp (or kW) at whatever speed the engine runs at
> >>to do 80-90mph so it will look good on Top-Gear.
> >>
> >>Yes - I am cynical, and yes - I have no doubt (from customer feed-back)
> >>that LR are rapidly, as they say round here, losing the plot. Even the
> >>Td5 is only tollerated, rather than liked.
> >>
> >
> > I don't think they've lost the plot, so much as chosen a different
> > one. They have decided to build cars which are the best off-roaders
> > in their class and very desirable to people with lots of money.
> > They've done a very good job of that.
> >
> > That's not necessarily the same as building great off-roaders though,
> > and certainly not about creating vehicles that last for years and
> > years.
> >
> > Nobody is rushing to fill the void though....
> >
>
> Santana?
>

Indeed...... and a hell of a lot cheaper. If LR mess with Defender
I can see them catching on.

Richard
--
www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk [email protected]
Running a business in a Microsoft free environment - it can be done
Powered by Risc-OS - you won't get a virus from us!!
Helping keep Land Rovers on and off the road to annoy the Lib Dems

On or around Fri, 19 Aug 2005 07:39:54 +0000 (UTC), beamendsltd
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>In message <[email protected]>
> "Bob Hobden" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>> "Tim Hobbs" wrote
>> >
>> >>Yes - it's bodge jobs from now on - farewell LR's off-road ability :-(
>> >>
>> >>I was around when the engine for Baby Bently was being chosen - all the
>> >>marques values went out of the window (with apprpriate marketing
>> >>codswallop) so that a "Not Very Appropriate But Its The Only One In
>> >>The Company That Even Comes Close" one can be used. The decision will be
>> >>made by people who have never driven off-road, towed anything other
>> >>a modern caravan (and certainly never done both together) and are
>> >>soley interested in bhp (or kW) at whatever speed the engine runs at
>> >>to do 80-90mph so it will look good on Top-Gear.
>> >>
>> >>Yes - I am cynical, and yes - I have no doubt (from customer feed-back)
>> >>that LR are rapidly, as they say round here, losing the plot. Even the
>> >>Td5 is only tollerated, rather than liked.
>> >>
>> >
>> > I don't think they've lost the plot, so much as chosen a different
>> > one. They have decided to build cars which are the best off-roaders
>> > in their class and very desirable to people with lots of money.
>> > They've done a very good job of that.
>> >
>> > That's not necessarily the same as building great off-roaders though,
>> > and certainly not about creating vehicles that last for years and
>> > years.
>> >
>> > Nobody is rushing to fill the void though....
>> >
>>
>> Santana?
>>
>
>Indeed...... and a hell of a lot cheaper. If LR mess with Defender
>I can see them catching on.

If I were in the market for a new 110, it'd almost certainly be a Santana.
The only thing I think they should do is to offer the 146ps version of the
engine at least as an option. 125ps is all very well, but it doesn't
compete with the opposition - they're in danger of falling into the same
trap that LR themselves have never really got out of, and that's the one of
under-powering the diesels. A more-powerful engine in light use will
probably be just as economical, and has the reserve of go when you need it.

I reckon the TD5 should have had the same piston size as the TDi - which
would have given it something around 3.1l capacity which would have been
much more like it. the proposed TD4 would have been 2.5l, and the TD6 would
have been about 3.8 which would have been very useful in the new rangie.

still, 's all water under the bridge.
--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
Confidence: Before important work meetings, boost your confidence by
reading a few pages from "The Tibetan Book of the Dead"
from the Little Book of Complete B***ocks by Alistair Beaton.

Austin Shackles wrote:

> On or around Fri, 19 Aug 2005 07:39:54 +0000 (UTC), beamendsltd
> <[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:
>
>>In message <[email protected]>
>> "Bob Hobden" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "Tim Hobbs" wrote
>>> >
>>> >>Yes - it's bodge jobs from now on - farewell LR's off-road ability :-(
>>> >>
>>> >>I was around when the engine for Baby Bently was being chosen - all
>>> >>the
>>> >>marques values went out of the window (with apprpriate marketing
>>> >>codswallop) so that a "Not Very Appropriate But Its The Only One In
>>> >>The Company That Even Comes Close" one can be used. The decision will
>>> >>be made by people who have never driven off-road, towed anything other
>>> >>a modern caravan (and certainly never done both together) and are
>>> >>soley interested in bhp (or kW) at whatever speed the engine runs at
>>> >>to do 80-90mph so it will look good on Top-Gear.
>>> >>
>>> >>Yes - I am cynical, and yes - I have no doubt (from customer
>>> >>feed-back) that LR are rapidly, as they say round here, losing the
>>> >>plot. Even the Td5 is only tollerated, rather than liked.
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > I don't think they've lost the plot, so much as chosen a different
>>> > one. They have decided to build cars which are the best off-roaders
>>> > in their class and very desirable to people with lots of money.
>>> > They've done a very good job of that.
>>> >
>>> > That's not necessarily the same as building great off-roaders though,
>>> > and certainly not about creating vehicles that last for years and
>>> > years.
>>> >
>>> > Nobody is rushing to fill the void though....
>>> >
>>>
>>> Santana?
>>>
>>
>>Indeed...... and a hell of a lot cheaper. If LR mess with Defender
>>I can see them catching on.
>
> If I were in the market for a new 110, it'd almost certainly be a Santana.
> The only thing I think they should do is to offer the 146ps version of the
> engine at least as an option. 125ps is all very well, but it doesn't
> compete with the opposition - they're in danger of falling into the same
> trap that LR themselves have never really got out of, and that's the one
> of
> under-powering the diesels. A more-powerful engine in light use will
> probably be just as economical, and has the reserve of go when you need
> it.
>
> I reckon the TD5 should have had the same piston size as the TDi - which
> would have given it something around 3.1l capacity which would have been
> much more like it. the proposed TD4 would have been 2.5l, and the TD6
> would have been about 3.8 which would have been very useful in the new
> rangie.
>
> still, 's all water under the bridge.

Yes - but I understand that the engine size of 2.5l is a tax threshold in
some countries that were regarded as market critical - which is why the
2.25 was enlarged to 2.5, but the Tdi and Td5 kept the same capacity.
JD

>
> Yes - but I understand that the engine size of 2.5l is a tax threshold in
> some countries that were regarded as market critical - which is why the
> 2.25 was enlarged to 2.5, but the Tdi and Td5 kept the same capacity.
> JD

seems to be the the story with landrovers hey?

- 12 seats in the station wagon (rear 6 barely big enough for a small dog)
so it could dodge the tax.
- lights moved onto wing from the s2a to s3 due to lighting requirements in
certain countries.
- engine size retained at piddly level due to tax issues.

any more to add to the list??

"Bob Hobden" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Tim Hobbs" wrote
> >
> >>Yes - it's bodge jobs from now on - farewell LR's off-road ability :-(
> >>
> >>I was around when the engine for Baby Bently was being chosen - all the
> >>marques values went out of the window (with apprpriate marketing
> >>codswallop) so that a "Not Very Appropriate But Its The Only One In
> >>The Company That Even Comes Close" one can be used. The decision will be
> >>made by people who have never driven off-road, towed anything other
> >>a modern caravan (and certainly never done both together) and are
> >>soley interested in bhp (or kW) at whatever speed the engine runs at
> >>to do 80-90mph so it will look good on Top-Gear.
> >>
> >>Yes - I am cynical, and yes - I have no doubt (from customer feed-back)
> >>that LR are rapidly, as they say round here, losing the plot. Even the
> >>Td5 is only tollerated, rather than liked.
> >>
> >
> > I don't think they've lost the plot, so much as chosen a different
> > one. They have decided to build cars which are the best off-roaders
> > in their class and very desirable to people with lots of money.
> > They've done a very good job of that.
> >
> > That's not necessarily the same as building great off-roaders though,
> > and certainly not about creating vehicles that last for years and
> > years.
> >
> > Nobody is rushing to fill the void though....
> >
>
> Santana?

Now that IS a change of career direction... though it is good to have a
second string to one's bow when the records don't sell like they used to..

Samuel wrote:

>>
>> Yes - but I understand that the engine size of 2.5l is a tax threshold in
>> some countries that were regarded as market critical - which is why the
>> 2.25 was enlarged to 2.5, but the Tdi and Td5 kept the same capacity.
>> JD
>
> seems to be the the story with landrovers hey?
>
> - 12 seats in the station wagon (rear 6 barely big enough for a small dog)
> so it could dodge the tax.
> - lights moved onto wing from the s2a to s3 due to lighting requirements
> in certain countries.
> - engine size retained at piddly level due to tax issues.
>
> any more to add to the list??

The six seats in the back of the wagon are, I think, unique to the UK.
Everywhere else had/has only four. Lot easier than different engines for
different tax regimes, though.
JD

"JD" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Samuel wrote:
>
> >>
> >> Yes - but I understand that the engine size of 2.5l is a tax threshold
in
> >> some countries that were regarded as market critical - which is why the
> >> 2.25 was enlarged to 2.5, but the Tdi and Td5 kept the same capacity.
> >> JD
> >
> > seems to be the the story with landrovers hey?
> >
> > - 12 seats in the station wagon (rear 6 barely big enough for a small
dog)
> > so it could dodge the tax.
> > - lights moved onto wing from the s2a to s3 due to lighting requirements
> > in certain countries.
> > - engine size retained at piddly level due to tax issues.
> >
> > any more to add to the list??
>
> The six seats in the back of the wagon are, I think, unique to the UK.
> Everywhere else had/has only four. Lot easier than different engines for
> different tax regimes, though.
> JD

not absolutely sure, but didn't some of the s3 station-wagons here in
Australia have 12 seats?

Sam.

Samuel wrote:

>
> "JD" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Samuel wrote:
>>
>> >>
>> >> Yes - but I understand that the engine size of 2.5l is a tax threshold
> in
>> >> some countries that were regarded as market critical - which is why
>> >> the 2.25 was enlarged to 2.5, but the Tdi and Td5 kept the same
>> >> capacity. JD
>> >
>> > seems to be the the story with landrovers hey?
>> >
>> > - 12 seats in the station wagon (rear 6 barely big enough for a small
> dog)
>> > so it could dodge the tax.
>> > - lights moved onto wing from the s2a to s3 due to lighting
>> > requirements in certain countries.
>> > - engine size retained at piddly level due to tax issues.
>> >
>> > any more to add to the list??
>>
>> The six seats in the back of the wagon are, I think, unique to the UK.
>> Everywhere else had/has only four. Lot easier than different engines for
>> different tax regimes, though.
>> JD
>
> not absolutely sure, but didn't some of the s3 station-wagons here in
> Australia have 12 seats?
>
> Sam.

Never seen one, but that doesn't mean anything. Currently, at least in NSW
more than nine seats makes it a minibus with roadworthy inspections twice a
year.
JD

"Natalie Drest" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Bob Hobden" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> "Tim Hobbs" wrote
>> >
>> >>Yes - it's bodge jobs from now on - farewell LR's off-road ability :-(
>> >>
>> >>I was around when the engine for Baby Bently was being chosen - all the
>> >>marques values went out of the window (with apprpriate marketing
>> >>codswallop) so that a "Not Very Appropriate But Its The Only One In
>> >>The Company That Even Comes Close" one can be used. The decision will
>> >>be
>> >>made by people who have never driven off-road, towed anything other
>> >>a modern caravan (and certainly never done both together) and are
>> >>soley interested in bhp (or kW) at whatever speed the engine runs at
>> >>to do 80-90mph so it will look good on Top-Gear.
>> >>
>> >>Yes - I am cynical, and yes - I have no doubt (from customer feed-back)
>> >>that LR are rapidly, as they say round here, losing the plot. Even the
>> >>Td5 is only tollerated, rather than liked.
>> >>
>> >
>> > I don't think they've lost the plot, so much as chosen a different
>> > one. They have decided to build cars which are the best off-roaders
>> > in their class and very desirable to people with lots of money.
>> > They've done a very good job of that.
>> >
>> > That's not necessarily the same as building great off-roaders though,
>> > and certainly not about creating vehicles that last for years and
>> > years.
>> >
>> > Nobody is rushing to fill the void though....
>> >
>>
>> Santana?
>
> Now that IS a change of career direction... though it is good to have a
> second string to one's bow when the records don't sell like they used to..
>
>
LOL!

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> landrover are advertising the sale of the complete production line for the
> storm engine ! wonder who will buy it ?
>
>
> the last landrover engine ?
>

There will be another along in a bit. Engines are like buses, miss one and
another will be along in a minute.

Let's hope that the next engine chosen for Defender will be more appropriate
than the last one eh? If that is the case, then who cares which factory
produces it? What I want is a refined and economical engine with around
400Nm of torque at 1600 revs and around 160hp at 4200rpm. Oh! And total
reliability up to 12000 hours of service life between easy overhauls.
Am I asking for too much? I don't think so because Toyota have offered such
engines for many years. Mine has 200hp and it is old technology by today's
standards.
They should certainly try and offer the 2.7 from the Discovery as an option
with the standard being perhaps a tough four cylinder commercial like the
Iveco unit fitted to Santana. Both should be available with
powershift.........sorry, 'automatic', transmissions capable of heavy and
prolonged duty.
Things can only get better. The question is, will they get better fast
enough to save Defender from sales oblivion?

Huw

In message <813cc99c4d%[email protected]>, beamendsltd
<[email protected]> writes
>Indeed...... and a hell of a lot cheaper. If LR mess with Defender
>I can see them catching on.
>
>Richard



Landrover NEED to mess with the Defender.

It is way behind the competition in many areas and way too expensive.
--
Marc Draper

www.mdeng.co.uk

Austin Shackles wrote:
> On or around Fri, 19 Aug 2005 07:39:54 +0000 (UTC), beamendsltd
> <[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:
>
>> In message <[email protected]>
>> "Bob Hobden" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "Tim Hobbs" wrote
>>>>
>>>>> Yes - it's bodge jobs from now on - farewell LR's off-road
>>>>> ability :-(
>>>>>
>>>>> I was around when the engine for Baby Bently was being chosen -
>>>>> all the marques values went out of the window (with apprpriate
>>>>> marketing codswallop) so that a "Not Very Appropriate But Its The
>>>>> Only One In
>>>>> The Company That Even Comes Close" one can be used. The decision
>>>>> will be made by people who have never driven off-road, towed
>>>>> anything other
>>>>> a modern caravan (and certainly never done both together) and are
>>>>> soley interested in bhp (or kW) at whatever speed the engine runs
>>>>> at
>>>>> to do 80-90mph so it will look good on Top-Gear.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes - I am cynical, and yes - I have no doubt (from customer
>>>>> feed-back) that LR are rapidly, as they say round here, losing
>>>>> the plot. Even the Td5 is only tollerated, rather than liked.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I don't think they've lost the plot, so much as chosen a different
>>>> one. They have decided to build cars which are the best
>>>> off-roaders in their class and very desirable to people with lots
>>>> of money. They've done a very good job of that.
>>>>
>>>> That's not necessarily the same as building great off-roaders
>>>> though, and certainly not about creating vehicles that last for
>>>> years and years.
>>>>
>>>> Nobody is rushing to fill the void though....
>>>>
>>>
>>> Santana?
>>>
>>
>> Indeed...... and a hell of a lot cheaper. If LR mess with Defender
>> I can see them catching on.
>
> If I were in the market for a new 110, it'd almost certainly be a
> Santana. The only thing I think they should do is to offer the 146ps
> version of the engine at least as an option. 125ps is all very well,
> but it doesn't compete with the opposition - they're in danger of
> falling into the same trap that LR themselves have never really got
> out of, and that's the one of under-powering the diesels. A
> more-powerful engine in light use will probably be just as
> economical, and has the reserve of go when you need it.
>
> I reckon the TD5 should have had the same piston size as the TDi -
> which would have given it something around 3.1l capacity which would
> have been much more like it. the proposed TD4 would have been 2.5l,
> and the TD6 would have been about 3.8 which would have been very
> useful in the new rangie.
>
> still, 's all water under the bridge.

The diesel in the wifes Touareg is a 2.5 tdi & it really does fly, my mates got a V6 3.0 Tdi Touareg &
that is very impressive, not as impressive the astonishing V10 5.0, but very good!

Mind you, the torque on the V10 shreds tyres in a few thousand if you give it some whallop!

Nige

--
Subaru WRX (Annabel)

Landrover 110 County Station Wagon (Tyson)

'"Say hello to my little friend"

"Marc Draper" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In message <813cc99c4d%[email protected]>, beamendsltd
> <[email protected]> writes
>>Indeed...... and a hell of a lot cheaper. If LR mess with Defender
>>I can see them catching on.
>>
>>Richard
>
>
>
> Landrover NEED to mess with the Defender.
>
> It is way behind the competition in many areas and way too expensive.

LR need to but they are not likely to, other than to change components.
Sales do not justify it. There is an element of 'chicken and egg' here of
course and there needs to be a bold and creative initiative if sales are to
recover. IMO they gave up a decade ago. Defender has remained largely
unchanged for over twenty years and that is a disgrace.

Huw

Nige <[email protected]> wrote:

> The diesel in the wifes Touareg is a 2.5 tdi & it really does fly, my
> mates got a V6 3.0 Tdi

The 2.5 TDI in the fat Touareg is nowhere in competition compared to a
slightly modified TD5. With my TD5 Defender I can outperform a 2.5 TDI
Touareg in every competition, I know because a mate owns one and I
forgot to tell him that my TD5 is not completely original

Raoul
--
==To e-mail me exchange das_liest_keiner with anything else==
I'll give up my Land Rover when you pry my cold dead fingers
from the steering wheel.

"Huw" <hedydd[nospam]@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:

> produces it? What I want is a refined and economical engine with around
> 400Nm of torque at 1600 revs and around 160hp at 4200rpm.

Its a question of 1300 Euros to have what you want. Nice, quick,
reliable and a little less thirsty than original.

Raoul
--
==To e-mail me exchange das_liest_keiner with anything else==
I'll give up my Land Rover when you pry my cold dead fingers
from the steering wheel.

Raoul Donschachner wrote:
> Nige <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> The diesel in the wifes Touareg is a 2.5 tdi & it really does fly, my
>> mates got a V6 3.0 Tdi
>
> The 2.5 TDI in the fat Touareg is nowhere in competition compared to a
> slightly modified TD5. With my TD5 Defender I can outperform a 2.5 TDI
> Touareg in every competition, I know because a mate owns one and I
> forgot to tell him that my TD5 is not completely original
>
> Raoul

Sorry? I didn't actually try to compare it to the TD5, I was simply saying that out of the box the
Touareg engine is a very nice engine. I wish my 110 had a TD5 engine in any day of the week, but it
doesn't bother me that much!

--
Subaru WRX (Annabel)

Landrover 110 County Station Wagon (Tyson)

'"Say hello to my little friend"