View Single Post
  #5  
Old April 18th 04, 02:20 PM
Exit
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

R. David Steele wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Apr 2004 16:47:46 GMT, "Exit" > wrote:
>
>> R. David Steele wrote:
>>> Why can't the US get Defender 90s, 110s and 130s?

>>
>> The main problem is that LR and Ford's marketing dept have trouble
>> seeing where they wouls fit in to the US market. They would be
>> smaller than many US pick-ups but would be more expensive to buy.
>> They do not have the comfort and luxury of a typical US pick-up and
>> most of the market demands this. The sheer utility of a Defender and
>> the off-road ability would of course be superior to most pick-ups
>> but perhaps still not create a large enough market to make them
>> viable. LR continually say the no longer sell Defenders in the US
>> because of emmissions and passenger airbag issues - this of course
>> is nonsense as they sell thousands of Discoverys with exactly the
>> same engine and emmissions and fitting a passenger airbag is not
>> beyond the engineering wit of Lode Lane either. On the upside, the
>> US will definitely get the new Defender based on the T5 chassis in a
>> few years, so you'll have to hang on.

>
> Word was that we were going to get the TD6, not the TD5. And you
> forget that we have a midsize and compact size pickup market.
> All most all the big trucks have smaller brothers.
>

I realise that, but the market for a Defender in the US that is the same
size as the smaller pick-ups but costs more than the full-size ones is still
thought to be very limited by LR. Maybe they are wrong. The TD6 is also too
expensive to fit to Defenders and has already been dropped by Ford as it is
a BMW engine and they don't like buying outside. You should however get the
new Ford-Peugeot 2.7 V6 diesel jointly developed for the new Discovery which
has 200bhp and 300lb-ft of torque.

>>>
>>> Why can't we have diesel powered Landies?
>>>

>> The two biggest problems are that US diesel is very porr quality
>> with a high sulfur content and modern high-tech turbo-diesels won't
>> swallow it. The other problem is that petrol is cheap and there in
>> very little diesel-car culture in the states yet. It would however
>> be great to drive a 30mpg TD5 in the states so you can tell all the
>> tree-huggers who think you drive a gas-guzzling SUV to **** off!

>
> We have low sulfur diesel now. I have a VW Jette TDI back in the
> states. In fact the US environmental laws are far more harsh
> than anything in Europe.
>

They can't be that harsh judging by the the numbers of people I see over
there driving round in 6.8 litre V10 petrol motors! I think petrol will need
to get a lot more expensive than it is now before a real market for diesels
in anything but large pick-ups will develop properly, rather than just a
niche.

> BTW, Jeep is suppose to sell the Liberty with the Mercedes Common
> Rail Diesel but that not yet happened.
>

There are no technical reasons why you should not have a big choice of
diesels - it's the marketing departments of the motor manufacturers who
don't believe the market exists or you would already have them.

>>> And why doesn't the US military use the Defender as a basic, and
>>> cheaper, vehicle for the average troops?

>>
>> Politically, it is very difficult for the US to procure non-domestic
>> military kit. Even when the US military decided they must have
>> British Harriers, the top brass had to lie to congress and leap
>> through all sorts of hoops to make them look American before they
>> could purchase them. Same thing with the British Chobham armour used
>> on all abrams tanks. The US Rangers bought some special Defenders
>> called RSOV but I doubt they will ever figure very highly.

>
> LD is now part of Ford Motor Company, just as Jeep is now part of
> Mercedes.


Perception is reality I'm afraid. People see LR and think English. Maybe
when the POTUS swaps his limo for a Jag your army will get LR's, but I
wouldn't hold my breath!

--
Julian
---------
= Pretentious Sig required =


Ads