In message <
[email protected]>
"Huw" <hedydd[nospam]@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
>
> "Austin Shackles" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > On or around Fri, 01 Jul 2005 17:16:35 +0100, Tim Hobbs
> > <[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:
> >
> >>>With regard to the TD5, it's in house but rumour has it that Ford
> >>>diesels will be used in the Defender as TD5 won't meet emmission regs.
> >>>i assume it will be one of the Transit Engines.
> >>>
> >>>Sean
> >>>73FL74 101GS
> >>>1984 110 2.5D
> >>>Medway Military Vehicle Group
> >>>www.mmvg.net
> >>
> >>Nothing else would make any sense. They aren't likely to buy in an
> >>engine from elsewhere and it would be a brave man who suggested
> >>developing a brand new unit bespoke for the Defender!
> >
> > I'd've thought they'd use the V6 from the disco.
> >
>
> Far too expensive and not easily packaged into a Defender I would think. As
> it is the Defender is far too expensive to produce in the UK and they are
> pushing their luck with present pricing. They need a cheaper engine and a
> more economical way of building it. Since they are pretty well stuck as far
> as the present design goes they have two or three alternatives.
> They can try and build it cheaper. This might mean cheaper [may need not
> mean inferior] major components or it could mean building it somewhere with
> ultra low labour costs or a combination of both.
> Or they could redesign the whole thing to be cheaper and easier to build to
> a consistently higher standard. They could combine this with other cost
> savings as mentioned above.
>
> Since I don't believe the build volume can ever recover to levels that would
> justify significant investment in a new model then they are fairly stuck
> with cost saving for the existing outmoded model while watching their market
> share flow away.
Ford recently announced their intention to "re-capture" world markets.
To do that they need to go back to basics and invest in a proper
replacement for Defender (which is enjoying the highest sales for years
at the moment) - or leave it alone. From talking to Ford engineers at
various meetings/seminars a few years ago, just after they bought LR,
the engineers are well aware of Defenders inconic status. I doubt
that the marketing men are though, or have any concept of what the
vehicles are *actually* used for.
> It is possible that volume would build sufficiently given a new model to
> justify investment in it but frankly the major agricultural markets are in
> such a poor state and the military market being increasingly choosy, it is
> hard for anyone to put forward a case for that investment.
>
The miltary market is dead - almost all export deals for Defender have
been blocked one political issue or another (handing them on a plate
to the competition who have no such scruples). An order for 500 vehicles
would, I suspect, be declined if it involved any additional design, never
mind the cost of the endless utterly pointless trials involved (the
system that brought us the Reynolds-Boughton RB40 - 'nuff said).
I don't know about other UK areas, but LR have completely re-established
themselves in the Peaks, the move back to Defender is extremely noticable.
> Huw
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
