What the hell

Nodge68 · Jun 16, 2013

redhand said:
Really ??

Land Rover, Defender, Discovery, Range Rover & Freelander

Year..........Total.........Defender.........RangeRover.........Discovery.........Freelander
......................................................Classic MKI/II
1989......55,240......23,437............28,509.......0.........3, 296.................0
1990......68,471......21,210............24,194.......0........23,067.................0
1991......54,588......18,915............16,412.......0........19,261.................0
1992......57,062......17,416............15,334.......0........24,312.................0
1993......67,910......17,482............14,780.......0........67,910.................0
1994......93,100......22,265............13,667....2,669....54,499.................0
1995..... 127,158....27,600..............4,000..25,639....69,919.................0
1996......126,578....31,724.....................0..29,815....65,039.................0
1997......127,962....36,169.....................0..30,066....58,352..........3,375

Totals.....778,069...216,218.........116,894...88,189..385,655.........3,375

Yep Gaylanders really pulled LR out of an economic blackhole when it was introduced..

You could put up the production figures for years that the freelander was actually sold

Land Rovers have always sold well regardless of model but not made much profit on the sales due to the cost of manufacture especially with the separate chassis models! That's why most manufacturers use the monocqe design.

Hippo · Jun 16, 2013

redhand said:
Really ??

Land Rover, Defender, Discovery, Range Rover & Freelander

Year..........Total.........Defender.........RangeRover.........Discovery.........Freelander
......................................................Classic MKI/II
1989......55,240......23,437............28,509.......0.........3, 296.................0
1990......68,471......21,210............24,194.......0........23,067.................0
1991......54,588......18,915............16,412.......0........19,261.................0
1992......57,062......17,416............15,334.......0........24,312.................0
1993......67,910......17,482............14,780.......0........67,910.................0
1994......93,100......22,265............13,667....2,669....54,499.................0
1995..... 127,158....27,600..............4,000..25,639....69,919.................0
1996......126,578....31,724.....................0..29,815....65,039.................0
1997......127,962....36,169.....................0..30,066....58,352..........3,375

Totals.....778,069...216,218.........116,894...88,189..385,655.........3,375

Yep Gaylanders really pulled LR out of an economic blackhole when it was introduced..

Yer figures misrepresent what peeps are saying. You've only listed the Freelander sales for the first year. It only started late that year. What about all the years thereafter?

Pikey · Jun 16, 2013

Hippo said:
Yer figures misrepresent what peeps are saying. You've only listed the Freelander sales for the first year. It only started late that year. What about all the years thereafter?

1st full years sales were 47,000 rising to 70,00 at end of 1999 as I said hardly dragging LR out of a black hole.

Nodge68 · Jun 16, 2013

redhand said:
1st full years sales were 47,000 rising to 70,00 at end of 1999 as I said hardly dragging LR out of a black hole.

But it did, it was cheaper to make because it used an easy to manufacture monocoque body. It also used engines from other Rover models to further keep costs down! Although in hind sight the latter might have been its downfall. Once the press blew the HG thing out of all proportion its days were numbered.

Hippo · Jun 16, 2013

redhand said:
1st full years sales were 47,000 rising to 70,00 at end of 1999 as I said hardly dragging LR out of a black hole.

What were the sales figures for the other vehicles in those years? If you compare 40000 and 70000 to 127000 that's a significant increase. I admit it's not ten fold but a rise of 10% sales for any well established company is often far from reach. +30% would be considered amazing for most companies and beyond expectations.

The Freelander filled a gap in the market as the rr and disco moved more upmarket. They also spotted a gap for buyers wanting smaller vehicles. It could be argued they didn't see a gap, they created a gap and filled it. It could also be argued the Freelander wasn't LR's answer to a market need. Could be a case of a solution available which the market chose to buy.

Diesel Do · Jun 16, 2013

http://www.best4x4xfar.co.uk/2011/08/land-rover-defender-production-sales.html

Pikey · Jun 16, 2013

Hippo said:
What were the sales figures for the other vehicles in those years? If you compare 40000 and 70000 to 127000 that's a significant increase. I admit it's not ten fold but a rise of 10% sales for any well established company is often far from reach. +30% would be considered amazing for most companies and beyond expectations.

The Freelander filled a gap in the market as the rr and disco moved more upmarket. They also spotted a gap for buyers wanting smaller vehicles. It could be argued they didn't see a gap, they created a gap and filled it. It could also be argued the Freelander wasn't LR's answer to a market need. Could be a case of a solution available which the market chose to buy.

the market was already there and going to Honda CRV, Suzuki vitara, subaru forester, rav4 and similar vehicles. it was this market that the gaylander was aimed at.

Hippo · Jun 16, 2013

Diesel Do said:
The Best 4 x 4 x Far: Land Rover Defender - Production / Sales Infographic

Interesting sales figures in that link:

SnowmanV8 · Jun 16, 2013

Sales mean **** discos are by far a much better offroader!

Hippo · Jun 16, 2013

SnowmanV8 said:
Sales mean **** discos are by far a much better offroader!

It's strange yer dun't see many muddy disco's.

Freelaner · Jun 16, 2013

SnowmanV8 said:
Sales mean **** discos are by far a much better offroader!

if it wasn't for freelander there would be no land rover today....that's a bona fidi fact

SnowmanV8 · Jun 16, 2013

Nah not at all. Bmw isn't shy of a penny.

Freelaner · Jun 16, 2013

SnowmanV8 said:
Nah not at all. Bmw isn't shy of a penny.

look up the history then re-read that

Hippo · Jun 16, 2013

SnowmanV8 said:
Nah not at all. Bmw isn't shy of a penny.

They were when they flogged off LR. Wheels were set in motion to build a betterer brand but the time it would take to pay oft was a problem for bmw and they were forced to make the choice. They had to sell LR to keep finances ok for bmw. bmw did a lot to help LR. It just took time for it to show in new vehicles and the investment they made.

Freelaner · Jun 16, 2013

Hippo said:
They were when they flogged off LR. Wheels were set in motion to build a betterer brand but the time it would take to pay oft was a problem for bmw and they were forced to make the choice. They had to sell LR to keep finances ok for bmw. bmw did a lot to help LR. It just took time for it to show in new vehicles and the investment they made.

they did pinch quite a lot of LR technology

thank god they dint know what to do with it and produced ****e like the X5

SnowmanV8 · Jun 16, 2013

Freelaner said:
they did pinch quite a lot of LR technology thank god they dint know what to do with it and produced ****e like the X5

Too true! Makes very little point towards how good an offroad car is.

Hippo · Jun 16, 2013

Freelaner said:
they did pinch quite a lot of LR technology thank god they dint know what to do with it and produced ****e like the X5

That's true. I guess the technology was allowed to exist at LR because bmw let it. I expect their plan at the beginning was to keep LR. Or at least own it for a lot longer. It's been profitable for many years and sales have been steadily increasing since the early 90's so the business was good and had a future. Even selling off rover must of hurt a bit. Cash flow rules, a bit like Freelanders.

Freelaner · Jun 16, 2013

Hippo said:
That's true. I guess the technology was allowed to exist at LR because bmw let it. I expect their plan at the beginning was to keep LR. Or at least own it for a lot longer. It's been profitable for many years and sales have been steadily increasing since the early 90's so the business was good and had a future. Even selling off rover must of hurt a bit. Cash flow rules, a bit like Freelanders.

FREELANDERS RULE

Nodge68 · Jun 17, 2013

Freelaner said:
FREELANDERS RULE

On the road if not off it. You don't get discos that perform like this from the factory!
Land Rover Freelander 1 v6 0 to 60mph Acceleration - YouTube

I hope you don't mind Hippo?

WLJayne · Jun 17, 2013

I've been through enough ****e with my Hippo not to be totally blinded by unconditional love for the vehicle. It's a fantastic car for what it's supposed to do, it's a mini range rover that will get me wherever I need to go in any conditions in any season. I don't eggspect it to win the Dakar, if I want to do that then I'll fecking build something that'll do the job properly.

Hair dressers drive Freelanders.
Murderers drive Disco's.
Inbreds drive Fenders.
Snobby ****s drive Rangies.
I shall not even speak of the Nissan with a LR badge that offends my every sense.

It's six o' one half a dozen o' t'other.

What the hell

Well-Known Member

Lord Hippo

Dummy Ejection Facilitator..

Well-Known Member

Lord Hippo

Well-Known Member

Dummy Ejection Facilitator..

Lord Hippo

Well-Known Member

Lord Hippo

Landy Driver

Well-Known Member

Landy Driver

Lord Hippo

Landy Driver

Well-Known Member

Lord Hippo

Landy Driver

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads