FS td5 engine line

H

Huw

Guest

• Aug 23, 2005

• #41

"beamendsltd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:2128b9e4d%[email protected]...
> In message <[email protected]>
> Marc Draper <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> In message <3e6e7e9e4d%[email protected]>, beamendsltd
>> <[email protected]> writes
>> >Since the primary non-road use for Defenders on farms is as temporary
>> >fencing and the like, the asthetic build quality does not really matter
>> >- the ability to halt an irate bull and be drivable is far more
>> >important.
>>
>>
>>
>> That's all very well but when you pay a kings ransom for it you expect
>> more.
>
> Funnily enough, and it does surprise me, farmers don't complain about
> the cost very much, if at all. Having said that, compared to a tractor
> they are two a penny, plus they get full capital allowances and all
> that stuff to set against tax (even the tax man is not going to try and
> claim they are a car - something any future Defender plans should take
> into account).
>

Oh yes they do complain of Defender prices, features, comfort and
reliability. What they do not complain about is the towing ability and
utility. Defender market share is at an all time low and falling in all
areas where it is suitable. Most farmers do not make enough profit to offset
a Defender against these days so it is a pure cost against their businesses.
This is not good.

Huw

 

B

beamendsltd

Guest

• Aug 23, 2005

• #42

In message <[email protected]>
"Huw" <hedydd[nospam]@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:

>
> "beamendsltd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:2128b9e4d%[email protected]...
> > In message <[email protected]>
> > Marc Draper <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> In message <3e6e7e9e4d%[email protected]>, beamendsltd
> >> <[email protected]> writes
> >> >Since the primary non-road use for Defenders on farms is as temporary
> >> >fencing and the like, the asthetic build quality does not really matter
> >> >- the ability to halt an irate bull and be drivable is far more
> >> >important.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> That's all very well but when you pay a kings ransom for it you expect
> >> more.
> >
> > Funnily enough, and it does surprise me, farmers don't complain about
> > the cost very much, if at all. Having said that, compared to a tractor
> > they are two a penny, plus they get full capital allowances and all
> > that stuff to set against tax (even the tax man is not going to try and
> > claim they are a car - something any future Defender plans should take
> > into account).
> >
>
> Oh yes they do complain of Defender prices, features, comfort and
> reliability. What they do not complain about is the towing ability and
> utility. Defender market share is at an all time low and falling in all
> areas where it is suitable. Most farmers do not make enough profit to offset
> a Defender against these days so it is a pure cost against their businesses.
> This is not good.
>
> Huw
>
>

Things must be different in your neck of the woods, round here Defender
has ousted the opposition big time over the last four or five years.

I've never heard a farmer moan about "features" - it's a tool for
job, not a limo! Comfort gets a mention in the context of "I'd not
like to drive to Scotland in it" - but then thats not what they buy
them for, they have their Discovery for that (Discovery I's that is,
Discovery II and III are not liked much).
Reliability is nowhere near as bad as it was (sadly..... selling parts
...... mutter mutter ;-) ). The interesting thing about reliabilty
that we see on our travels is that, for vehicles that actually *work*
for a living and get treated as funtional tools, the cometition
isn't that far ahead - and one particular maufacturer makes LR look
good (Jeep - massive problems with rear axles, and then getting parts).

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

 

J

JD

Guest

• Aug 23, 2005

• #43

Huw wrote:

>
> "beamendsltd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:2128b9e4d%[email protected]...
>> In message <[email protected]>
>> Marc Draper <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> In message <3e6e7e9e4d%[email protected]>, beamendsltd
>>> <[email protected]> writes
>>> >Since the primary non-road use for Defenders on farms is as temporary
>>> >fencing and the like, the asthetic build quality does not really matter
>>> >- the ability to halt an irate bull and be drivable is far more
>>> >important.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> That's all very well but when you pay a kings ransom for it you expect
>>> more.
>>
>> Funnily enough, and it does surprise me, farmers don't complain about
>> the cost very much, if at all. Having said that, compared to a tractor
>> they are two a penny, plus they get full capital allowances and all
>> that stuff to set against tax (even the tax man is not going to try and
>> claim they are a car - something any future Defender plans should take
>> into account).
>>
>
> Oh yes they do complain of Defender prices, features, comfort and
> reliability. What they do not complain about is the towing ability and
> utility. Defender market share is at an all time low and falling in all
> areas where it is suitable. Most farmers do not make enough profit to
> offset a Defender against these days so it is a pure cost against their
> businesses. This is not good.
>
> Huw
Speaking from the farming point of view - round here almost no farmers use
Defenders - there is no dealer network worth talking about is the main
reason probably, but for a generation it has been a choice of a 'Cruiser or
Patrol. Landrover lost the market here in the eighties if not earlier,
with poor support, inadequate (diesel) power, and bad marketing.
JD

 

B

beamendsltd

Guest

• Aug 23, 2005

• #44

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

> Huw wrote:
>
> >
> > "beamendsltd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:2128b9e4d%[email protected]...
> >> In message <[email protected]>
> >> Marc Draper <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >>> In message <3e6e7e9e4d%[email protected]>, beamendsltd
> >>> <[email protected]> writes
> >>> >Since the primary non-road use for Defenders on farms is as temporary
> >>> >fencing and the like, the asthetic build quality does not really matter
> >>> >- the ability to halt an irate bull and be drivable is far more
> >>> >important.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> That's all very well but when you pay a kings ransom for it you expect
> >>> more.
> >>
> >> Funnily enough, and it does surprise me, farmers don't complain about
> >> the cost very much, if at all. Having said that, compared to a tractor
> >> they are two a penny, plus they get full capital allowances and all
> >> that stuff to set against tax (even the tax man is not going to try and
> >> claim they are a car - something any future Defender plans should take
> >> into account).
> >>
> >
> > Oh yes they do complain of Defender prices, features, comfort and
> > reliability. What they do not complain about is the towing ability and
> > utility. Defender market share is at an all time low and falling in all
> > areas where it is suitable. Most farmers do not make enough profit to
> > offset a Defender against these days so it is a pure cost against their
> > businesses. This is not good.
> >
> > Huw
> Speaking from the farming point of view - round here almost no farmers use
> Defenders - there is no dealer network worth talking about is the main
> reason probably, but for a generation it has been a choice of a 'Cruiser or
> Patrol. Landrover lost the market here in the eighties if not earlier,
> with poor support, inadequate (diesel) power, and bad marketing.
> JD

It does seem to be true that the presence and/or enthusiasm of
the dealerships makes a huge difference. In Hampshire there were
very few around until a new dealership opened near Horndean, and
then promptly got scaled back when LR had the bright idea of forcing
dealerships to spend around £1 million each on tarting the premises
up and thereby lost around 2/3 of the dealer network - vitrtually
all of the closing ones being in rural areas, i.e. exactly where
they needed to be selling them. A stoke of true genius.

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

 

S

Samuel

Guest

• Aug 23, 2005

• #45

"beamendsltd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:ee64ec9e4d%[email protected]...
> In message <[email protected]>
> JD <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Huw wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > "beamendsltd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:2128b9e4d%[email protected]...
> > >> In message <[email protected]>
> > >> Marc Draper <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> In message <3e6e7e9e4d%[email protected]>, beamendsltd
> > >>> <[email protected]> writes
> > >>> >Since the primary non-road use for Defenders on farms is as
temporary
> > >>> >fencing and the like, the asthetic build quality does not really
matter
> > >>> >- the ability to halt an irate bull and be drivable is far more
> > >>> >important.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> That's all very well but when you pay a kings ransom for it you
expect
> > >>> more.
> > >>
> > >> Funnily enough, and it does surprise me, farmers don't complain about
> > >> the cost very much, if at all. Having said that, compared to a
tractor
> > >> they are two a penny, plus they get full capital allowances and all
> > >> that stuff to set against tax (even the tax man is not going to try
and
> > >> claim they are a car - something any future Defender plans should
take
> > >> into account).
> > >>
> > >
> > > Oh yes they do complain of Defender prices, features, comfort and
> > > reliability. What they do not complain about is the towing ability and
> > > utility. Defender market share is at an all time low and falling in
all
> > > areas where it is suitable. Most farmers do not make enough profit to
> > > offset a Defender against these days so it is a pure cost against
their
> > > businesses. This is not good.
> > >
> > > Huw
> > Speaking from the farming point of view - round here almost no farmers
use
> > Defenders - there is no dealer network worth talking about is the main
> > reason probably, but for a generation it has been a choice of a 'Cruiser
or
> > Patrol. Landrover lost the market here in the eighties if not earlier,
> > with poor support, inadequate (diesel) power, and bad marketing.
> > JD
>
> It does seem to be true that the presence and/or enthusiasm of
> the dealerships makes a huge difference. In Hampshire there were
> very few around until a new dealership opened near Horndean, and
> then promptly got scaled back when LR had the bright idea of forcing
> dealerships to spend around £1 million each on tarting the premises
> up and thereby lost around 2/3 of the dealer network - vitrtually
> all of the closing ones being in rural areas, i.e. exactly where
> they needed to be selling them. A stoke of true genius.


In Australia, i think it was much more about the availability of a much
better vehicle, in particular the landcruiser. with the brand new td5
defenders, they are only now getting to the power and torque level that the
toyotas had back in the early 80s. after owning a ****ty old 1980 diesel
landcruiser with probably about 200,000 ks on the clock, and now a 1978 s3
petrol with only 60,000 ks on the clock, i can categorically say if i had
any "sense" i would have stuck with the 'cruiser.

i mean, 2.25 litres of petrol fury versus the hugely understressed 4.2 litre
donk in the 'cruiser? and 2.25 litres of four-cylinder diesel grunt versus
the 4 litre six cylinder (with turbo option) in the 'cruiser.

Sam.

 

C

chris

Guest

• Aug 23, 2005

• #46

"Pantelis Giamarellos" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Chris Hi,
>
> I would be grateful if you could post a link to the advertisement posted
> for
> the sale of the TD5 production line (no I do not intend on buying it, I am
> just curious)
>
>
its in the back of machinery classified ( trade mag ) ! sale by tendor !

 

P

Pantelis Giamarellos

Guest

• Aug 23, 2005

• #47

Chris thanks.

Unfortunately we do not get this magazine here in Greece.

Take care
Pantelis

"chris" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Pantelis Giamarellos" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Chris Hi,
> >
> > I would be grateful if you could post a link to the advertisement posted
> > for
> > the sale of the TD5 production line (no I do not intend on buying it, I
am
> > just curious)
> >
> >
> its in the back of machinery classified ( trade mag ) ! sale by tendor !
>
>

 

C

chris

Guest

• Aug 23, 2005

• #48

its subscription only ! may be something on the web site
machinaryclassified.co.uk or something similar afraid my copys already gone
in the bin ...


"Pantelis Giamarellos" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Chris thanks.
>
> Unfortunately we do not get this magazine here in Greece.
>

its subscription only ! may be something on the web site
machinaryclassified.co.uk or something similar afraid my copys already gone
in the bin ...

 

A

Austin Shackles

Guest

• Aug 23, 2005

• #49

On or around Fri, 19 Aug 2005 20:17:51 +1000, JD <[email protected]>
enlightened us thusly:

>Austin Shackles wrote:
>
>> 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

probably true, and probably Italy...

was a bum decision, though, as witness the sales of 3.1l and 3.0l isuzus,
4-litre turbo landcruisers etc.

--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
"Pereant qui ante nos nostra dixerunt"
(confound the men who have made our remarks before us.)
Aelius Donatus (4th Cent.) [St. Jerome, Commentary on Ecclesiastes]

 

A

Austin Shackles

Guest

• Aug 23, 2005

• #50

On or around Mon, 22 Aug 2005 11:49:21 +0000 (UTC), beamendsltd
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:
>
>The other market, which round here LR are doing well in, is the
>user who needs a utility vehicle for work. Most farmers, most
>utilities and such like have tried non-Defender solutions round
>here and have now gone back to Defender. While there are not many
>except me and a few other loonies who would drive a Defender as a
>first-choice vehicle, there are plenty who buy other LR vehicles
>as a spin-off from their work vehicle. Toyota understand this, as
>do Nissan of late. Jeep don't, and look where they are in market
>perception.....


The only vehicle that's really competed seriously in the farming market is
the later Daihatsu Foutrak; and they've stopped making them now, which makes
a good late-model one worth more than it looks. Very tough vehicle, once
they'd solved the "rots away in 3 years" issues.

and that, too, grew to have a 2.8 engine and a 2.8 TDi finally.
--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
Appearances: You don't really need make-up. Celebrate your authentic
face by frightening people in the street.
from the Little Book of Complete B***ocks by Alistair Beaton.

 

A

Austin Shackles

Guest

• Aug 23, 2005

• #51

On or around Tue, 23 Aug 2005 08:06:36 +0000 (UTC), beamendsltd
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>In message <[email protected]>
> "Huw" <hedydd[nospam]@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Oh yes they do complain of Defender prices, features, comfort and
>> reliability. What they do not complain about is the towing ability and
>> utility. Defender market share is at an all time low and falling in all
>> areas where it is suitable. Most farmers do not make enough profit to offset
>> a Defender against these days so it is a pure cost against their businesses.
>> This is not good.
>
>Things must be different in your neck of the woods, round here Defender
>has ousted the opposition big time over the last four or five years.

There are quite a lot being bought around this area too - the people who
were into fourtraks can't get a new one any more, and a lot of them have
recent 90s. There are quite a lot of nipponese double cab pickups, but
still plenty of 90s. very few 110s, mind.
--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
Appearances: You don't really need make-up. Celebrate your authentic
face by frightening people in the street.
from the Little Book of Complete B***ocks by Alistair Beaton.

 

A

Austin Shackles

Guest

• Aug 23, 2005

• #52

On or around Sat, 20 Aug 2005 12:43:44 +0100, "Huw"
<hedydd[nospam]@tiscali.co.uk> enlightened us thusly:

>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.

Unless they've split up again, Iveco and Ford are part of the same thing, so
an Iveco would be a likely choice.
--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
Appearances: You don't really need make-up. Celebrate your authentic
face by frightening people in the street.
from the Little Book of Complete B***ocks by Alistair Beaton.

 

H

Huw

Guest

• Aug 23, 2005

• #53

"Austin Shackles" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On or around Tue, 23 Aug 2005 08:06:36 +0000 (UTC), beamendsltd
> <[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:
>
>>In message <[email protected]>
>> "Huw" <hedydd[nospam]@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> Oh yes they do complain of Defender prices, features, comfort and
>>> reliability. What they do not complain about is the towing ability and
>>> utility. Defender market share is at an all time low and falling in all
>>> areas where it is suitable. Most farmers do not make enough profit to
>>> offset
>>> a Defender against these days so it is a pure cost against their
>>> businesses.
>>> This is not good.
>>
>>Things must be different in your neck of the woods, round here Defender
>>has ousted the opposition big time over the last four or five years.
>
> There are quite a lot being bought around this area too - the people who
> were into fourtraks can't get a new one any more, and a lot of them have
> recent 90s. There are quite a lot of nipponese double cab pickups, but
> still plenty of 90s. very few 110s, mind.

Are many of those under four years old? There must be a few but the market
is not what it was. I see more and more 4x4 pick-ups with people who used to
run 90's and Daihatsu commercials but who never dreamt of having a 110
pick-up.
I talked to a dealer far to the South of you when I bought the RR and he
said he had not sold a 90 in three months at that time. This in the middle
of what must be a huge and fertile agricultural area. He had sold over 10
Mitsubishi pick-up trucks in that same period. Farmers tend to favour
British products for good reason so there is something dreadfully amiss with
the Defender for today's market.

Huw

 

H

Huw

Guest

• Aug 23, 2005

• #54

"Austin Shackles" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On or around Mon, 22 Aug 2005 11:49:21 +0000 (UTC), beamendsltd
> <[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:
>>
>>The other market, which round here LR are doing well in, is the
>>user who needs a utility vehicle for work. Most farmers, most
>>utilities and such like have tried non-Defender solutions round
>>here and have now gone back to Defender. While there are not many
>>except me and a few other loonies who would drive a Defender as a
>>first-choice vehicle, there are plenty who buy other LR vehicles
>>as a spin-off from their work vehicle. Toyota understand this, as
>>do Nissan of late. Jeep don't, and look where they are in market
>>perception.....
>
>
> The only vehicle that's really competed seriously in the farming market is
> the later Daihatsu Foutrak; and they've stopped making them now, which
> makes
> a good late-model one worth more than it looks. Very tough vehicle, once
> they'd solved the "rots away in 3 years" issues.

Did they ever? Late model 'independent' have been suffering catastrophic
failures due to rot of the tube that crosses between chassis members between
the rear wheels. You know the one? The pipe that has the axle breather
attached to it.
These things are rotting away and the chassis falls apart on vehicles only
around six years old. The Daihatsu was only ever bought on its low price and
initial reliability. Never on long term quality or performance, although the
100hp 2.8 turbo was very competitive in its time [before the 200TDi].

Huw

 

H

Huw

Guest

• Aug 23, 2005

• #55

"Austin Shackles" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On or around Sat, 20 Aug 2005 12:43:44 +0100, "Huw"
> <hedydd[nospam]@tiscali.co.uk> enlightened us thusly:
>
>>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.
>
> Unless they've split up again, Iveco and Ford are part of the same thing,
> so
> an Iveco would be a likely choice.

The relationship between Iveco and Ford is basically one of Iveco having
purchased the Ford medium and heavy truck business.
The latest fruit of co-operation between Iveco and other companies is the
setting up of the European Engine Alliance business with partners Cummins
and New Holland. Experience so far would suggest that they have the basis
for a damn fine family of engines to carry them into a more emissionised
future.

Huw

 

J

JD

Guest

• Aug 23, 2005

• #56

Samuel wrote:

>
> "beamendsltd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:ee64ec9e4d%[email protected]...
>> In message <[email protected]>
>> JD <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> > Huw wrote:
>> >
>> > >
>> > > "beamendsltd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> > > news:2128b9e4d%[email protected]...
>> > >> In message <[email protected]>
>> > >> Marc Draper <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >>> In message <3e6e7e9e4d%[email protected]>, beamendsltd
>> > >>> <[email protected]> writes
>> > >>> >Since the primary non-road use for Defenders on farms is as
> temporary
>> > >>> >fencing and the like, the asthetic build quality does not really
> matter
>> > >>> >- the ability to halt an irate bull and be drivable is far more
>> > >>> >important.
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> That's all very well but when you pay a kings ransom for it you
> expect
>> > >>> more.
>> > >>
>> > >> Funnily enough, and it does surprise me, farmers don't complain
>> > >> about the cost very much, if at all. Having said that, compared to a
> tractor
>> > >> they are two a penny, plus they get full capital allowances and all
>> > >> that stuff to set against tax (even the tax man is not going to try
> and
>> > >> claim they are a car - something any future Defender plans should
> take
>> > >> into account).
>> > >>
>> > >
>> > > Oh yes they do complain of Defender prices, features, comfort and
>> > > reliability. What they do not complain about is the towing ability
>> > > and utility. Defender market share is at an all time low and falling
>> > > in
> all
>> > > areas where it is suitable. Most farmers do not make enough profit to
>> > > offset a Defender against these days so it is a pure cost against
> their
>> > > businesses. This is not good.
>> > >
>> > > Huw
>> > Speaking from the farming point of view - round here almost no farmers
> use
>> > Defenders - there is no dealer network worth talking about is the main
>> > reason probably, but for a generation it has been a choice of a
>> > 'Cruiser
> or
>> > Patrol. Landrover lost the market here in the eighties if not earlier,
>> > with poor support, inadequate (diesel) power, and bad marketing.
>> > JD
>>
>> It does seem to be true that the presence and/or enthusiasm of
>> the dealerships makes a huge difference. In Hampshire there were
>> very few around until a new dealership opened near Horndean, and
>> then promptly got scaled back when LR had the bright idea of forcing
>> dealerships to spend around £1 million each on tarting the premises
>> up and thereby lost around 2/3 of the dealer network - vitrtually
>> all of the closing ones being in rural areas, i.e. exactly where
>> they needed to be selling them. A stoke of true genius.
>
>
> In Australia, i think it was much more about the availability of a much
> better vehicle, in particular the landcruiser. with the brand new td5
> defenders, they are only now getting to the power and torque level that
> the toyotas had back in the early 80s. after owning a ****ty old 1980
> diesel landcruiser with probably about 200,000 ks on the clock, and now a
> 1978 s3 petrol with only 60,000 ks on the clock, i can categorically say
> if i had any "sense" i would have stuck with the 'cruiser.
>
> i mean, 2.25 litres of petrol fury versus the hugely understressed 4.2
> litre donk in the 'cruiser? and 2.25 litres of four-cylinder diesel grunt
> versus the 4 litre six cylinder (with turbo option) in the 'cruiser.
>
> Sam.

The early Landcruisers (up to late 1970s at least) had serious problems with
reliability, handling, bodywork, but they had several major advantages -
power as you say, also 126" (from memory) wheelbase ute which allowed a
bigger tray than the 109 Landrover despite the bigger engine, helped by the
wider track as well, and then they had a growing dealer network as sales of
their ordinary cars boomed. Much the same for the Patrol, although it
became competitive later. I remember it being slated by one of the
magazines for major structural failure while being road tested - I think
the front axle housing broke in two. But unlike Landrover, Toyota and
Nissan rapidly rectified problems as they showed up, probably part of the
strong and growing dealer network and growing sales.

The Landrover 110/130 has actually outperformed the diesel
Landcruiser/Patrol since the introduction of the 200Tdi, and the 3.9 Isuzu
available since the late seventies in the Stage 1 and 110 was not far
behind, but the battle was largely lost by then anyway. Another thing
Landrover handed to Toyota on a tray was a lot of sales here when you could
not buy Landrovers in the early seventies because the entire Australian
allocation was going to the army.

Whether you consider the eighties Landcruiser better than the contemporary
Landrover is a matter for discussion, but the fact is the market did prefer
it - largely because of the power and size, and partly because of the
better dealer network.
JD

 

P

Pantelis Giamarellos

Guest

• Aug 24, 2005

• #57

Chris thanks.

I will have a look at the link you quoted.

Take care and thanks again
Pantelis

"chris" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> its subscription only ! may be something on the web site
> machinaryclassified.co.uk or something similar afraid my copys already
gone
> in the bin ...
>
>
> "Pantelis Giamarellos" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Chris thanks.
> >
> > Unfortunately we do not get this magazine here in Greece.
> >
>
> its subscription only ! may be something on the web site
> machinaryclassified.co.uk or something similar afraid my copys already
gone
> in the bin ...
>
>

 

B

beamendsltd

Guest

• Aug 24, 2005

• #58

In message <[email protected]>
"Huw" <hedydd[nospam]@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:

>
> "Austin Shackles" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > On or around Tue, 23 Aug 2005 08:06:36 +0000 (UTC), beamendsltd
> > <[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:
> >
> >>In message <[email protected]>
> >> "Huw" <hedydd[nospam]@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Oh yes they do complain of Defender prices, features, comfort and
> >>> reliability. What they do not complain about is the towing ability and
> >>> utility. Defender market share is at an all time low and falling in all
> >>> areas where it is suitable. Most farmers do not make enough profit to
> >>> offset
> >>> a Defender against these days so it is a pure cost against their
> >>> businesses.
> >>> This is not good.
> >>
> >>Things must be different in your neck of the woods, round here Defender
> >>has ousted the opposition big time over the last four or five years.
> >
> > There are quite a lot being bought around this area too - the people who
> > were into fourtraks can't get a new one any more, and a lot of them have
> > recent 90s. There are quite a lot of nipponese double cab pickups, but
> > still plenty of 90s. very few 110s, mind.
>
> Are many of those under four years old? There must be a few but the market
> is not what it was. I see more and more 4x4 pick-ups with people who used to
> run 90's and Daihatsu commercials but who never dreamt of having a 110
> pick-up.
> I talked to a dealer far to the South of you when I bought the RR and he
> said he had not sold a 90 in three months at that time. This in the middle
> of what must be a huge and fertile agricultural area. He had sold over 10
> Mitsubishi pick-up trucks in that same period. Farmers tend to favour
> British products for good reason so there is something dreadfully amiss with
> the Defender for today's market.
>
> Huw
>
>

Interesting... with a couple of exceptions independents cannot sell new
Defenders (until the new EU rules come along that is), so I'd
find your "local" LR main dealershp and ask them - you'll be put
on the end of a (curently) 2 to 3 month waiting list for any model
Defender, and a lot longer if you want a particular variant/colour/
spec. The typical farm 90 in these parts is either a late 300Tdi
(not many still working on the farm) or a new to 3 years old
Td5 (i.e. still under warranty) - the gap being where other marques
were tried. Double cabs etc are around here, but typically not used
by farmers for daily farm work, and certainly not got dirty! Tyre
company owners and hair dressers (seriously, not taking the ****)
seem to quite like them.......

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

 

H

Huw

Guest

• Aug 24, 2005

• #59

"beamendsltd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:d33c5d9f4d%[email protected]...
> In message <[email protected]>
> "Huw" <hedydd[nospam]@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>
>> "Austin Shackles" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>> > On or around Tue, 23 Aug 2005 08:06:36 +0000 (UTC), beamendsltd
>> > <[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:
>> >
>> >>In message <[email protected]>
>> >> "Huw" <hedydd[nospam]@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Oh yes they do complain of Defender prices, features, comfort and
>> >>> reliability. What they do not complain about is the towing ability
>> >>> and
>> >>> utility. Defender market share is at an all time low and falling in
>> >>> all
>> >>> areas where it is suitable. Most farmers do not make enough profit to
>> >>> offset
>> >>> a Defender against these days so it is a pure cost against their
>> >>> businesses.
>> >>> This is not good.
>> >>
>> >>Things must be different in your neck of the woods, round here Defender
>> >>has ousted the opposition big time over the last four or five years.
>> >
>> > There are quite a lot being bought around this area too - the people
>> > who
>> > were into fourtraks can't get a new one any more, and a lot of them
>> > have
>> > recent 90s. There are quite a lot of nipponese double cab pickups, but
>> > still plenty of 90s. very few 110s, mind.
>>
>> Are many of those under four years old? There must be a few but the
>> market
>> is not what it was. I see more and more 4x4 pick-ups with people who used
>> to
>> run 90's and Daihatsu commercials but who never dreamt of having a 110
>> pick-up.
>> I talked to a dealer far to the South of you when I bought the RR and he
>> said he had not sold a 90 in three months at that time. This in the
>> middle
>> of what must be a huge and fertile agricultural area. He had sold over 10
>> Mitsubishi pick-up trucks in that same period. Farmers tend to favour
>> British products for good reason so there is something dreadfully amiss
>> with
>> the Defender for today's market.
>>
>> Huw
>>
>>
>
> Interesting... with a couple of exceptions independents cannot sell new
> Defenders (until the new EU rules come along that is), so I'd
> find your "local" LR main dealershp

He is the main LR dealership. He also sells Jaguar, Mitsu and peugeot and,
until recently, Rover.


and ask them - you'll be put
> on the end of a (curently) 2 to 3 month waiting list for any model
> Defender, and a lot longer if you want a particular variant/colour/
> spec.

That is only because they have to be factory orders, mainly because dealers
will not buy Defender for stock or on spec any more in most areas. The
factory is hardly running its Defender line at full capacity these days but
any factory order from any major manufacturer takes around 12 weeks to arive
at the dealers premises.

Not that I am saying -you- are, but don't look at their sales through rose
tinted specs. The fact is that sales are down drastically to farmers, partly
due to their economic plight, and military sales have almost dried up
completely.
People were not realistic about Rover sales over the past 18 months but I
forcast, just from the heamorrage of dealers, that their demise was not far
off. Realistically, att the present rate, and unless they either build it in
a low cost country or substantially update it, the Defender is not going to
struggle on for long. That is all IMO of course and feel free to acknowledge
it if it proves correct but do please forget it if the current shape
Defender is still with us in four years time.


Huw

 

B

beamendsltd

Guest

• Aug 24, 2005

• #60

In message <[email protected]>
"Huw" <hedydd[nospam]@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:

>
> "beamendsltd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:d33c5d9f4d%[email protected]...
> > In message <[email protected]>
> > "Huw" <hedydd[nospam]@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> "Austin Shackles" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> news:[email protected]...
> >> > On or around Tue, 23 Aug 2005 08:06:36 +0000 (UTC), beamendsltd
> >> > <[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:
> >> >
> >> >>In message <[email protected]>
> >> >> "Huw" <hedydd[nospam]@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> Oh yes they do complain of Defender prices, features, comfort and
> >> >>> reliability. What they do not complain about is the towing ability
> >> >>> and
> >> >>> utility. Defender market share is at an all time low and falling in
> >> >>> all
> >> >>> areas where it is suitable. Most farmers do not make enough profit to
> >> >>> offset
> >> >>> a Defender against these days so it is a pure cost against their
> >> >>> businesses.
> >> >>> This is not good.
> >> >>
> >> >>Things must be different in your neck of the woods, round here Defender
> >> >>has ousted the opposition big time over the last four or five years.
> >> >
> >> > There are quite a lot being bought around this area too - the people
> >> > who
> >> > were into fourtraks can't get a new one any more, and a lot of them
> >> > have
> >> > recent 90s. There are quite a lot of nipponese double cab pickups, but
> >> > still plenty of 90s. very few 110s, mind.
> >>
> >> Are many of those under four years old? There must be a few but the
> >> market
> >> is not what it was. I see more and more 4x4 pick-ups with people who used
> >> to
> >> run 90's and Daihatsu commercials but who never dreamt of having a 110
> >> pick-up.
> >> I talked to a dealer far to the South of you when I bought the RR and he
> >> said he had not sold a 90 in three months at that time. This in the
> >> middle
> >> of what must be a huge and fertile agricultural area. He had sold over 10
> >> Mitsubishi pick-up trucks in that same period. Farmers tend to favour
> >> British products for good reason so there is something dreadfully amiss
> >> with
> >> the Defender for today's market.
> >>
> >> Huw
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Interesting... with a couple of exceptions independents cannot sell new
> > Defenders (until the new EU rules come along that is), so I'd
> > find your "local" LR main dealershp
>
> He is the main LR dealership. He also sells Jaguar, Mitsu and peugeot and,
> until recently, Rover.
>
>
> and ask them - you'll be put
> > on the end of a (curently) 2 to 3 month waiting list for any model
> > Defender, and a lot longer if you want a particular variant/colour/
> > spec.
>
> That is only because they have to be factory orders, mainly because dealers
> will not buy Defender for stock or on spec any more in most areas. The
> factory is hardly running its Defender line at full capacity these days but
> any factory order from any major manufacturer takes around 12 weeks to arive
> at the dealers premises.
>
> Not that I am saying -you- are, but don't look at their sales through rose
> tinted specs. The fact is that sales are down drastically to farmers, partly
> due to their economic plight, and military sales have almost dried up
> completely.
> People were not realistic about Rover sales over the past 18 months but I
> forcast, just from the heamorrage of dealers, that their demise was not far
> off. Realistically, att the present rate, and unless they either build it in
> a low cost country or substantially update it, the Defender is not going to
> struggle on for long. That is all IMO of course and feel free to acknowledge
> it if it proves correct but do please forget it if the current shape
> Defender is still with us in four years time.
>
>
> Huw
>
>

Obvioulsy the market in your area is completelty different to this
area - both main dealers have Defenders in the showroom (Stafford
Land Rover and Stratstone (nee Evans-Halshaw), and sometimes
have s/h ones on the forecourt (breifly - they go like hot cakes).

Admittedly the last figures I saw was around six months ago, but Defender
production was the highest it had been for years at the factory. It's
also worth noting that the Defender line does not run full-time, it's
run when required and staff work on other (speeded-up) lines the rest
of the time. This was introduced by BMW as a very effective way of
improving efficiency and does not refect on sales.

I think it's fair to say, since we sell parts, accessories and service
stuff, and deliver to all manner of garages (yes, we even supply one main
dealer with Genuine Parts when requested) we have a pretty good idea
of who is driving what and what they think of them - after all, we do
have to manage our stock to match demand!

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