H
Huw
Guest
"beamendsltd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:18a7a604e%[email protected]...
> In message <[email protected]>
> "Huw" <hedydd[nospam]@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
>
is not the same as Platform Engineering!
>
>> As for engines in LR products, the Ford and Jaguar and Volvo [all Ford if
>> you must be pedantic] based engines now likely to be used in the
>> vehicles
>> are an improvement on the TD5 and lacklustre TD6 in the Range Rover
>> application. I test drove an Audi Q7 last week and the engine performance
>> and refinement make my TD6 appear really dire in comparison.
>
> Two entirely different machines. Audi may like to think their
> effrot is in the same league as the Range Rover, but it isn't,
> by any stretch of the imagination.
We'll see. It has a different emphasis and that's for sure. I have a Q7 on
order and have a current Range Rover and have had many other brands over the
years and they are all different. Yes the Range Rover has superior ground
clearance and a low range but let's face it, even mine spends most of their
time on road. The MercedesM and BMW X5 never failed to take me anywhere, on
or off road, that I wished to and neither, I suspect will the Audi.
The Td5 is fine in its intended
> application, the Discovery,
The TD5 is not great and inadequate for the LR products. Its torque curve
drops off the end of a cliff at low revs.
the so called Td6 is just another example
> of badge engieering - "We need and engine for this application, we
> can afford to develop a new engine so we'll make this one do".
The BMW was and is a good engine though it is poorly matched with the ZF
automatic in the Range Rover for some reason so when asked to accellerate
rapidly it revs like heck and downshifts but doesn't have the woomff that it
should and does have with different software in the X5.
The main complaint with the Range Rover is that the cabin is badly insulated
from engine noise. The engine seems much noisier than when it is used in any
BMW application and this is well known. Overall it is a superb engine of its
time but it is now in need of an update which it will soon get.
I
> have worked in VW/Audi group and seen this problem first hand in
> one of their "brands" new models, and the result was the model
> effectively being handed to the marketing people to re-define
> the marques long-held image to "re-align customer expectations".
> In other words it was a codge!
In the same way as you just described Jaguar and Land Rover products you
mean?
>
>>No doubt the V6
>> and V8 Jaguar/LR/Ford/Peugeot diesel engines will redress the balance in
>> LR's favour again for a while. That is progress and what makes the world
>> economy turn, that something new must be more desirable and/or provide
>> positive advantages over existing products. This brings us back to the
>> Defender and the reason I still run my old 1984 110 Hi-cap. A new one
>> with
>> TD5 is not more desirable and only provides one advantage which I am
>> unimpressed by and that is more power. If the advantages of a new model
>> were
>> greater I would change more regularly and would thus provide a continuous
>> income flow to Land Rover as I do for other companies and products. I
>> bought
>> a new Range Rover for instance. I would not have bought another of the
>> previous model and I would not buy another TD6 even though I like my
>> current
>> one a lot.
>
> Just keep the 110 - thats what I'm doing.
That's what I have done. Not that it would be a first choice should they
have made bigger steps to improve the product and provide what I need.
I have no patricular desire
> to have a Td5 Defender (wrong engine for the job), so I'm keeping
> my 200Tdi 110 SW, which has exactly the right engine for the job.
> I've got nothing agaist 300Tdi's - I would feel the same about my car
> if it had been made a year later with a 300.
>
> I have no interest in owning a Range Rover at all, so I can only
> pass on cutomers comments, which are largely that LR have lost the
> plot in terms of what the vehicle is "for", which for the company
> that invented the market sector is seriously bad news.
>
They are wrong. The Range Rover is superb off road as long as the tyre
specification is not too wide and low profile [a customer choice]. In fact
it is probably still second to none in this respect. It is also a good roomy
load carrier. A good towing vehicle. Has superb equipment and luxury and
tours in grand style. With leather seats it is very close to its original
concept.
Yes it is expensive to buy and expensive to run. This has always been true.
My experience is that it is far better built and more reliable than ever
before. It is also the best diesel engine they have ever offered, though it
is now far from being the best diesel engine offered in a large vehicle. But
Land Rover have never offered the very best diesel engines in their
vehicles.
I just cannot see where they have 'lost the plot' with the Range Rover.
Where they have really lost the plot, or even given up plotting, is with the
woefully underdeveloped Defender. In mechanical terms it can hold its head
high and the revised model could only be an improvement with the new engine
given emission regulatory constraints, but body-wise they are still back in
the 1970's and certainly not the better for it.
Huw
