trax99
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 1,149
- Location
- Montgomeryshire
Jap 4x4s Vs Defenders
- Thread starter BuzzLand
- Start date
This site contains affiliate links for which LandyZone may be compensated if you make a purchase.
trax99
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 1,149
- Location
- Montgomeryshire
hmmmm, maybe a snatch would be good - only got a bad press when they was used wrong, they were never designed for explosives only small arms, yknow like the armalite the yanks bought for the IRA.
:mil44: yup just like that
:bolt:
right I'm off
quick
TS888
New Member
- Posts
- 66
- Location
- A Yank in Lestah
Weighing in from the Yank perspective -- aw quiet down, I haven't said anything bad yet!... 
I owned a few Jap and US trucks over the years. They all seemed competent and reliable enough. I used a Mitsu Pajero (badged as a Dodge Raider in the US) as a daily driver and off road toy for several years. In 2001 I finally gave in to a life long itch and bought a Land Rover, a 1992 Range Rover County SWB, what would be a Vogue here. Despite it having a lot of power modcons, which I usually avoid, it was a revelation. The ride on road was comfortable, and the seating position and view of the road was excellent. OK, the 3.9 V8 was thirsty (in fact "Thirsty" became the truck's name), and it didn't provide amazing on road power, but it was simple to work on and even at US prices, it wasn't a lot of money to deal with all the usual wear/deferred maintenance issues to get a good reliable runner. And yes, the trim bits inside seemed to be made of hard candy rather than any useful form of plastic, but there are lots of dead RRC's in the US to scavenge.
But after the first off roading trip, I knew I would never own another brand of 4x4. Once the RRC was on the dirt, everything came together. The suspension compliance was remarkable; it soaked up rough trial like a magic carpet. The V8's torque combined perfectly with the ratios in the 4HP22. It would crawl up and down steep terrain in low range like, uh, like... Well like a Land Rover, there's nothing else that does it like that!
My experience with the RRC was a revelation in another way -- the mechanical simplicity. The chassis, suspension and drive train are simple and sturdy. The front CV's, hidden in swivels, looked like a nightmare waiting to happen, but turned out to be something you could r&r on the trial in an hour. Prop shafts were equipped with normal U-joints, easy to replace. Rear axles were a 5 minute swap! Steering was very conventional, and if something got bent on the trail, a little hammer massage or a bit of work with a ratchet strap and it would get you home.
When I came to the UK nearly two years ago, I knew I would end up buying a "real" Land Rover, which in my definition is a Defender. In reality, I bought 2 -- an early production A reg 110 (Sept 1983 build), and a 1995 Defender 110. Both were SORN, and now two have become one -- the 1995 donated its complete low-mileage 300TDi drivetrain and some body panels to complete the A reg 110, which had been scavenged of its 200TDi and front body for another truck being rebuilt.
I personally don't buy into the "unreliable Land Rover" stereotype. My experience in the US is that since Land Rovers are premium priced, and the dealer network charges an arm and a leg for service, once the original purchaser moves on, depreciation sets in fast and the next 3 or 4 owners don't do the needful. Lack of maintenance leads to mechanical failures, it's inevitable. Once I corrected the things that resulted from deferred maintenance, my truck was stone reliable for two years (and I expect it would have soldiered on a for a few more, had I not suffered a moment of inattention at the wrong time and wound up wheels up). And even before it was all sorted, it never stranded me -- and that was a petrol V8 with 150,000 miles on it, running a 14CUX! I'm not ignorant of some of the electrical foibles in RR's and Discos over the years, but other makes have similar issues. Read the message boards of any brand, and you'll find the "stickies" with solutions for this or that common complaint.
Another thing people seem to forget is how slowly the LR changed. That is a good thing in terms of it's intended use, in severe conditions, off road, in remote places where parts could be scarce. The type of things being seen as reliability issues in the 80's would not have been viewed the same in the 60's. An 80's LR was still a 60's LR, just built more recently. Up until the TD5, the Defender could be had electronics-free, a remarkable thing in the late 1990's. I love the simplicity of my 110, in particular the 300TDi, with no ECU. If needed, it can run without any supply of electricity. That is comforting when you intend to use the vehicle for trips where you may be away from settled areas for days on end.
I'll also accept that Land Rover axles are not the strongest. I've never broken one, but I have friends who have. This was usually when attempting difficult terrain, using a locker, and/or with larger than standard tires. Even Land Rover acknowledged their weakness and licensed the Dana 60 for the back of LWB's beginning with the 109, used a 4 pin diff for early V8's and again in the P38. I don't know why LR has never beefed up the axles (or galvanised the frames, or properly rustproofed the bulkheads...), but I have a theory on why they are how they are. When Rover created the LR, they were often up-engineering existing Rover parts. The long-serving 3rd member used in Series LR's up through the latest Defenders began life in a passenger car. Toyota and Nissan entered the market using parts down-engineered from commercial vehicles, which were stronger. Jeep was built to Mil-Spec, again from truck parts, and over the years adopted the Dana axle, which has been at home under every US-made light truck at one time or another.
My usual response to people who want to have the "my Toy/Nissan/GWagen/Jeep is better than a Land Rover" argument is to say "I'm sure it's better for you -- but the Land Rover is better for me and my needs." For me the 110 is perfect. It's big enough for how I use it, but not nearly as big as a US full size SUV, or even a late model LC. It is simple and reliable. Most of the body is made of panels that can be hand formed in the shed if need be. The electrics are dead simple and can be patched around in a pinch. The 300TDi is stout and will run on damn near anything from melted Yak butter to used motor oil. If the turbo dies, I can run without it. If I break an axle, it's an easy fix, and if I can't make the repair, I can lock the center diff and keep moving. The only thing I wish I could change is to somehow eliminate the cam belt, but if I replace it regularly it really shouldn't be an issue.
The comments about patriotism, quality of UK manufactured goods, labor cost, etc. are interesting. I am old enough to remember the output of the UK motor industry before the BL consolidation and the ugly 80's. Jaguar, Aston Martin, Rolls Royce, Bristol -- those names mean superior engineering to me. Likewise British tools, British electronics (Quad, Leak, SME, Linn, Rega, Wharfdale, Thorens! What a list!). And look back into history -- Bacon, Halley, Boyle, Hook, Newton -- or more recent -- Issigonis, Chapman, Mclaren (OK, a Kiwi) -- lots of big brains and amazing inventiveness on these little islands.
Did unions and socialism kill industry? Meh. They created challenges, but entrepreneurs have been leveraging challenges to make money for centuries. My perspective, from a lifetime in the consumer products industry on the other side of the pond (and a fair bit on the other side of the world), points the finger in a slightly different direction. What killed manufacturing in the UK, and the US? The stock market. Specifically, the stock market's growing focus on quarterly profits of public companies.
In an unstable environment (the economy), how do you deliver profits and hit specific targets every quarter? Well, realistically you don't. But as the number of people making their living trading stocks grew from thousands in a few western countries to hundreds of thousands globally, and a few thousand large institutional investors began demanding continual profits, and boards of directors started holding CEO's accountable for those constant gains, the game changed. In the last 30 years, the business of business has changed from creating a product to "creating shareholder value". Shareholder value = stock price. The biggest, most highly valued companies used to be the ones that made the most demanded products, or provided the most valuable services. Now that is secondary to stock performance.
I've seen the same pattern over and over again in my career. Strategies are established, plans are made, projects are launched. Everyone from the mailroom to the boardroom agrees that the company should invest in capacity, develop people, build market, yada, yada, whatever. Then the CFO calls the CEO and says "Hey Chuck, I think we might be a bit short on the Q3 target." Oh, No! The Street (or the City) will not take that well! Our stock price will plummet! Quick -- cancel all the capital investments. Lay off 15% of the workforce. Trim the development budgets and kill half of the new product introductions.
Chuck calls Fred, and Fred reports that the numbers are back on track. Chuck is a hero, the board rewards him with a huge bonus and a new contact with a golden parachute. Two years later, the company goes bust because it failed to invest for the future. Chuck, Fred, the board, they all fall into their pile of money and are none the worse for wear. The rest of the company fares somewhere between OK and destitute. And of course, the failure of this company ripples out to their suppliers, and in a few years some of them go bust. Others are gobbled up in acquisitions, which usually end with at least some of the existing staff released and parts of the business sold off or shut down. Competition decreases, so prices go up, quality goes down, and manufacturing seeks the lowest price with the smallest capital commitment.
Welcome to 2011. How are your stocks doing?
I owned a few Jap and US trucks over the years. They all seemed competent and reliable enough. I used a Mitsu Pajero (badged as a Dodge Raider in the US) as a daily driver and off road toy for several years. In 2001 I finally gave in to a life long itch and bought a Land Rover, a 1992 Range Rover County SWB, what would be a Vogue here. Despite it having a lot of power modcons, which I usually avoid, it was a revelation. The ride on road was comfortable, and the seating position and view of the road was excellent. OK, the 3.9 V8 was thirsty (in fact "Thirsty" became the truck's name), and it didn't provide amazing on road power, but it was simple to work on and even at US prices, it wasn't a lot of money to deal with all the usual wear/deferred maintenance issues to get a good reliable runner. And yes, the trim bits inside seemed to be made of hard candy rather than any useful form of plastic, but there are lots of dead RRC's in the US to scavenge.
But after the first off roading trip, I knew I would never own another brand of 4x4. Once the RRC was on the dirt, everything came together. The suspension compliance was remarkable; it soaked up rough trial like a magic carpet. The V8's torque combined perfectly with the ratios in the 4HP22. It would crawl up and down steep terrain in low range like, uh, like... Well like a Land Rover, there's nothing else that does it like that!
My experience with the RRC was a revelation in another way -- the mechanical simplicity. The chassis, suspension and drive train are simple and sturdy. The front CV's, hidden in swivels, looked like a nightmare waiting to happen, but turned out to be something you could r&r on the trial in an hour. Prop shafts were equipped with normal U-joints, easy to replace. Rear axles were a 5 minute swap! Steering was very conventional, and if something got bent on the trail, a little hammer massage or a bit of work with a ratchet strap and it would get you home.
When I came to the UK nearly two years ago, I knew I would end up buying a "real" Land Rover, which in my definition is a Defender. In reality, I bought 2 -- an early production A reg 110 (Sept 1983 build), and a 1995 Defender 110. Both were SORN, and now two have become one -- the 1995 donated its complete low-mileage 300TDi drivetrain and some body panels to complete the A reg 110, which had been scavenged of its 200TDi and front body for another truck being rebuilt.
I personally don't buy into the "unreliable Land Rover" stereotype. My experience in the US is that since Land Rovers are premium priced, and the dealer network charges an arm and a leg for service, once the original purchaser moves on, depreciation sets in fast and the next 3 or 4 owners don't do the needful. Lack of maintenance leads to mechanical failures, it's inevitable. Once I corrected the things that resulted from deferred maintenance, my truck was stone reliable for two years (and I expect it would have soldiered on a for a few more, had I not suffered a moment of inattention at the wrong time and wound up wheels up). And even before it was all sorted, it never stranded me -- and that was a petrol V8 with 150,000 miles on it, running a 14CUX! I'm not ignorant of some of the electrical foibles in RR's and Discos over the years, but other makes have similar issues. Read the message boards of any brand, and you'll find the "stickies" with solutions for this or that common complaint.
Another thing people seem to forget is how slowly the LR changed. That is a good thing in terms of it's intended use, in severe conditions, off road, in remote places where parts could be scarce. The type of things being seen as reliability issues in the 80's would not have been viewed the same in the 60's. An 80's LR was still a 60's LR, just built more recently. Up until the TD5, the Defender could be had electronics-free, a remarkable thing in the late 1990's. I love the simplicity of my 110, in particular the 300TDi, with no ECU. If needed, it can run without any supply of electricity. That is comforting when you intend to use the vehicle for trips where you may be away from settled areas for days on end.
I'll also accept that Land Rover axles are not the strongest. I've never broken one, but I have friends who have. This was usually when attempting difficult terrain, using a locker, and/or with larger than standard tires. Even Land Rover acknowledged their weakness and licensed the Dana 60 for the back of LWB's beginning with the 109, used a 4 pin diff for early V8's and again in the P38. I don't know why LR has never beefed up the axles (or galvanised the frames, or properly rustproofed the bulkheads...), but I have a theory on why they are how they are. When Rover created the LR, they were often up-engineering existing Rover parts. The long-serving 3rd member used in Series LR's up through the latest Defenders began life in a passenger car. Toyota and Nissan entered the market using parts down-engineered from commercial vehicles, which were stronger. Jeep was built to Mil-Spec, again from truck parts, and over the years adopted the Dana axle, which has been at home under every US-made light truck at one time or another.
My usual response to people who want to have the "my Toy/Nissan/GWagen/Jeep is better than a Land Rover" argument is to say "I'm sure it's better for you -- but the Land Rover is better for me and my needs." For me the 110 is perfect. It's big enough for how I use it, but not nearly as big as a US full size SUV, or even a late model LC. It is simple and reliable. Most of the body is made of panels that can be hand formed in the shed if need be. The electrics are dead simple and can be patched around in a pinch. The 300TDi is stout and will run on damn near anything from melted Yak butter to used motor oil. If the turbo dies, I can run without it. If I break an axle, it's an easy fix, and if I can't make the repair, I can lock the center diff and keep moving. The only thing I wish I could change is to somehow eliminate the cam belt, but if I replace it regularly it really shouldn't be an issue.
The comments about patriotism, quality of UK manufactured goods, labor cost, etc. are interesting. I am old enough to remember the output of the UK motor industry before the BL consolidation and the ugly 80's. Jaguar, Aston Martin, Rolls Royce, Bristol -- those names mean superior engineering to me. Likewise British tools, British electronics (Quad, Leak, SME, Linn, Rega, Wharfdale, Thorens! What a list!). And look back into history -- Bacon, Halley, Boyle, Hook, Newton -- or more recent -- Issigonis, Chapman, Mclaren (OK, a Kiwi) -- lots of big brains and amazing inventiveness on these little islands.
Did unions and socialism kill industry? Meh. They created challenges, but entrepreneurs have been leveraging challenges to make money for centuries. My perspective, from a lifetime in the consumer products industry on the other side of the pond (and a fair bit on the other side of the world), points the finger in a slightly different direction. What killed manufacturing in the UK, and the US? The stock market. Specifically, the stock market's growing focus on quarterly profits of public companies.
In an unstable environment (the economy), how do you deliver profits and hit specific targets every quarter? Well, realistically you don't. But as the number of people making their living trading stocks grew from thousands in a few western countries to hundreds of thousands globally, and a few thousand large institutional investors began demanding continual profits, and boards of directors started holding CEO's accountable for those constant gains, the game changed. In the last 30 years, the business of business has changed from creating a product to "creating shareholder value". Shareholder value = stock price. The biggest, most highly valued companies used to be the ones that made the most demanded products, or provided the most valuable services. Now that is secondary to stock performance.
I've seen the same pattern over and over again in my career. Strategies are established, plans are made, projects are launched. Everyone from the mailroom to the boardroom agrees that the company should invest in capacity, develop people, build market, yada, yada, whatever. Then the CFO calls the CEO and says "Hey Chuck, I think we might be a bit short on the Q3 target." Oh, No! The Street (or the City) will not take that well! Our stock price will plummet! Quick -- cancel all the capital investments. Lay off 15% of the workforce. Trim the development budgets and kill half of the new product introductions.
Chuck calls Fred, and Fred reports that the numbers are back on track. Chuck is a hero, the board rewards him with a huge bonus and a new contact with a golden parachute. Two years later, the company goes bust because it failed to invest for the future. Chuck, Fred, the board, they all fall into their pile of money and are none the worse for wear. The rest of the company fares somewhere between OK and destitute. And of course, the failure of this company ripples out to their suppliers, and in a few years some of them go bust. Others are gobbled up in acquisitions, which usually end with at least some of the existing staff released and parts of the business sold off or shut down. Competition decreases, so prices go up, quality goes down, and manufacturing seeks the lowest price with the smallest capital commitment.
Welcome to 2011. How are your stocks doing?
Last edited:
Spacemonkey...
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 1,048
- Location
- Darzet
Very well put. And makes sound sense to me.
Now, see if you can explain Dick van Dyke and Hollywood's idea of a Brit accent...
Now, see if you can explain Dick van Dyke and Hollywood's idea of a Brit accent...
Pikey
Dummy Ejection Facilitator..
- Posts
- 47,185
- Location
- in Baron Wet Bum's Slave pit..
Ya got PMS or is your thong on backwards
The brit have been with us for the last 90 yrs. fighten for your freedom so you can BITCH like this. go ahead and vent that is what freeeeeeedom is all about, gave 20 yrs for the service for your freedom and mine . Why don't you rent a room to kadaphe he's looking for on. you just might get along with him:blabla::blabla::blabla::blabla::blabla::blabla::blabla:
NO you've been fighting for yourselves and your corporate profits. OH and oil of course. Freedom and democracy my ****ing arse.. Tell F&D to the black Americans you've slaughtered brutalised and victimised for the last 300years. even to thwe extent of closing the only accessible highway out of New Orleans when Katrina struck because neighbouring counties didn't want to blacks in their neighbourhood.. Kent University?? Gauntamano Bay. the most corrupt Policeforce in the world I could go on but your depressing..
their is a philosophical argument that says "I think, Therefore I am" it applies to Merkins as well only it's more a case of "I'm a Septic therefore I'm full of ****"
tom1disco.300
Active Member
- Posts
- 389
- Location
- southwater/horsham westsussex
landrovers are the best 4x4xfar,and that is it,oh and the toyota huilux might be good(or not)but some one owns one across the road,and the day it snowed gusse what ,he couldent get off the drive becuase it wouldent start,and our 83 rangerover classic 3.5 ,that is hardly used,just started streight up and backed off the drive and drove off,appart from a mitsubishi shogun, my discovery,the rangie and the shogun were the only cars to move out our road, and i dont see a toyota huilux going over the darien gap,or on the g4 type chllanges
- Posts
- 44,865
- Location
- Hornchurch
hilux first car to drive to the norf pole innitlandrovers are the best 4x4xfar,and that is it,oh and the toyota huilux might be good(or not)but some one owns one across the road,and the day it snowed gusse what ,he couldent get off the drive becuase it wouldent start,and our 83 rangerover classic 3.5 ,that is hardly used,just started streight up and backed off the drive and drove off,appart from a mitsubishi shogun, my discovery,the rangie and the shogun were the only cars to move out our road, and i dont see a toyota huilux going over the darien gap,or on the g4 type chllanges
Trewey
Cockernee, Pasty munchin bastid.
- Posts
- 20,088
- Location
- Kernow - Near England
Weighing in from the Yank perspective -- aw quiet down, I haven't said anything bad yet!...
I owned a few Jap and US trucks over the years. They all seemed competent and reliable enough. I used a Mitsu Pajero (badged as a Dodge Raider in the US) as a daily driver and off road toy for several years. In 2001 I finally gave in to a life long itch and bought a Land Rover, a 1992 Range Rover County SWB, what would be a Vogue here. Despite it having a lot of power modcons, which I usually avoid, it was a revelation. The ride on road was comfortable, and the seating position and view of the road was excellent. OK, the 3.9 V8 was thirsty (in fact "Thirsty" became the truck's name), and it didn't provide amazing on road power, but it was simple to work on and even at US prices, it wasn't a lot of money to deal with all the usual wear/deferred maintenance issues to get a good reliable runner. And yes, the trim bits inside seemed to be made of hard candy rather than any useful form of plastic, but there are lots of dead RRC's in the US to scavenge.
But after the first off roading trip, I knew I would never own another brand of 4x4. Once the RRC was on the dirt, everything came together. The suspension compliance was remarkable; it soaked up rough trial like a magic carpet. The V8's torque combined perfectly with the ratios in the 4HP22. It would crawl up and down steep terrain in low range like, uh, like... Well like a Land Rover, there's nothing else that does it like that!
My experience with the RRC was a revelation in another way -- the mechanical simplicity. The chassis, suspension and drive train are simple and sturdy. The front CV's, hidden in swivels, looked like a nightmare waiting to happen, but turned out to be something you could r&r on the trial in an hour. Prop shafts were equipped with normal U-joints, easy to replace. Rear axles were a 5 minute swap! Steering was very conventional, and if something got bent on the trail, a little hammer massage or a bit of work with a ratchet strap and it would get you home.
When I came to the UK nearly two years ago, I knew I would end up buying a "real" Land Rover, which in my definition is a Defender. In reality, I bought 2 -- an early production A reg 110 (Sept 1983 build), and a 1995 Defender 110. Both were SORN, and now two have become one -- the 1995 donated its complete low-mileage 300TDi drivetrain and some body panels to complete the A reg 110, which had been scavenged of its 200TDi and front body for another truck being rebuilt.
I personally don't buy into the "unreliable Land Rover" stereotype. My experience in the US is that since Land Rovers are premium priced, and the dealer network charges an arm and a leg for service, once the original purchaser moves on, depreciation sets in fast and the next 3 or 4 owners don't do the needful. Lack of maintenance leads to mechanical failures, it's inevitable. Once I corrected the things that resulted from deferred maintenance, my truck was stone reliable for two years (and I expect it would have soldiered on a for a few more, had I not suffered a moment of inattention at the wrong time and wound up wheels up). And even before it was all sorted, it never stranded me -- and that was a petrol V8 with 150,000 miles on it, running a 14CUX! I'm not ignorant of some of the electrical foibles in RR's and Discos over the years, but other makes have similar issues. Read the message boards of any brand, and you'll find the "stickies" with solutions for this or that common complaint.
Another thing people seem to forget is how slowly the LR changed. That is a good thing in terms of it's intended use, in severe conditions, off road, in remote places where parts could be scarce. The type of things being seen as reliability issues in the 80's would not have been viewed the same in the 60's. An 80's LR was still a 60's LR, just built more recently. Up until the TD5, the Defender could be had electronics-free, a remarkable thing in the late 1990's. I love the simplicity of my 110, in particular the 300TDi, with no ECU. If needed, it can run without any supply of electricity. That is comforting when you intend to use the vehicle for trips where you may be away from settled areas for days on end.
I'll also accept that Land Rover axles are not the strongest. I've never broken one, but I have friends who have. This was usually when attempting difficult terrain, using a locker, and/or with larger than standard tires. Even Land Rover acknowledged their weakness and licensed the Dana 60 for the back of LWB's beginning with the 109, used a 4 pin diff for early V8's and again in the P38. I don't know why LR has never beefed up the axles (or galvanised the frames, or properly rustproofed the bulkheads...), but I have a theory on why they are how they are. When Rover created the LR, they were often up-engineering existing Rover parts. The long-serving 3rd member used in Series LR's up through the latest Defenders began life in a passenger car. Toyota and Nissan entered the market using parts down-engineered from commercial vehicles, which were stronger. Jeep was built to Mil-Spec, again from truck parts, and over the years adopted the Dana axle, which has been at home under every US-made light truck at one time or another.
My usual response to people who want to have the "my Toy/Nissan/GWagen/Jeep is better than a Land Rover" argument is to say "I'm sure it's better for you -- but the Land Rover is better for me and my needs." For me the 110 is perfect. It's big enough for how I use it, but not nearly as big as a US full size SUV, or even a late model LC. It is simple and reliable. Most of the body is made of panels that can be hand formed in the shed if need be. The electrics are dead simple and can be patched around in a pinch. The 300TDi is stout and will run on damn near anything from melted Yak butter to used motor oil. If the turbo dies, I can run without it. If I break an axle, it's an easy fix, and if I can't make the repair, I can lock the center diff and keep moving. The only thing I wish I could change is to somehow eliminate the cam belt, but if I replace it regularly it really shouldn't be an issue.
The comments about patriotism, quality of UK manufactured goods, labor cost, etc. are interesting. I am old enough to remember the output of the UK motor industry before the BL consolidation and the ugly 80's. Jaguar, Aston Martin, Rolls Royce, Bristol -- those names mean superior engineering to me. Likewise British tools, British electronics (Quad, Leak, SME, Linn, Rega, Wharfdale, Thorens! What a list!). And look back into history -- Bacon, Halley, Boyle, Hook, Newton -- or more recent -- Issigonis, Chapman, Mclaren (OK, a Kiwi) -- lots of big brains and amazing inventiveness on these little islands.
Did unions and socialism kill industry? Meh. They created challenges, but entrepreneurs have been leveraging challenges to make money for centuries. My perspective, from a lifetime in the consumer products industry on the other side of the pond (and a fair bit on the other side of the world), points the finger in a slightly different direction. What killed manufacturing in the UK, and the US? The stock market. Specifically, the stock market's growing focus on quarterly profits of public companies.
In an unstable environment (the economy), how do you deliver profits and hit specific targets every quarter? Well, realistically you don't. But as the number of people making their living trading stocks grew from thousands in a few western countries to hundreds of thousands globally, and a few thousand large institutional investors began demanding continual profits, and boards of directors started holding CEO's accountable for those constant gains, the game changed. In the last 30 years, the business of business has changed from creating a product to "creating shareholder value". Shareholder value = stock price. The biggest, most highly valued companies used to be the ones that made the most demanded products, or provided the most valuable services. Now that is secondary to stock performance.
I've seen the same pattern over and over again in my career. Strategies are established, plans are made, projects are launched. Everyone from the mailroom to the boardroom agrees that the company should invest in capacity, develop people, build market, yada, yada, whatever. Then the CFO calls the CEO and says "Hey Chuck, I think we might be a bit short on the Q3 target." Oh, No! The Street (or the City) will not take that well! Our stock price will plummet! Quick -- cancel all the capital investments. Lay off 15% of the workforce. Trim the development budgets and kill half of the new product introductions.
Chuck calls Fred, and Fred reports that the numbers are back on track. Chuck is a hero, the board rewards him with a huge bonus and a new contact with a golden parachute. Two years later, the company goes bust because it failed to invest for the future. Chuck, Fred, the board, they all fall into their pile of money and are none the worse for wear. The rest of the company fares somewhere between OK and destitute. And of course, the failure of this company ripples out to their suppliers, and in a few years some of them go bust. Others are gobbled up in acquisitions, which usually end with at least some of the existing staff released and parts of the business sold off or shut down. Competition decreases, so prices go up, quality goes down, and manufacturing seeks the lowest price with the smallest capital commitment.
Welcome to 2011. How are your stocks doing?
That's the best post I've read on LZ for years.
Well done mate.
tom1disco.300
Active Member
- Posts
- 389
- Location
- southwater/horsham westsussex
yea that is a good point it will get there,but defenders and landys in genrall appart from the new ones are esier to work on ,and i bet you wouldent have to do as much to a defender as they did to the hilux to get that there . but good point
- Posts
- 44,865
- Location
- Hornchurch
bet the heater in the hilux was good.Never had a good defender heater
tom1disco.300
Active Member
- Posts
- 389
- Location
- southwater/horsham westsussex
but mate they go wrong all the time the guy that live right over the road has probably had the aa out about 4 times in the last 2 months,wiring probolems well yea they will have good heaters,but thats probably bout it .! but yes the heaters are good
well yea they will have good heaters,but thats probably bout it .! but yes the heaters are good
- Posts
- 44,865
- Location
- Hornchurch
had me rr recoverd twice, defender always braking down, s3 was worse than terrible.but mate they go wrong all the time the guy that live right over the road has probably had the aa out about 4 times in the last 2 months,wiring probolems
tom1disco.300
Active Member
- Posts
- 389
- Location
- southwater/horsham westsussex
well wev never had a break down befor,appart from the d2 td5 was crap always going wrong but that is td5 for ya ,but all 4 discos never probolem,all rangies ,35 carb.injection and 200tdi never gone wrong ,and we have pulled a horse trailer with two race horses in it,with the heads gone and the top end,fooked,ust does show how tough they are tho,and s3 are trrible becuse of leafs but they are fun
oldskool
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 3,116
- Location
- Essex near maldon
What the fu$%k would you do hat for, is an X5 as good or better than a LR?? well i don't think so, there also a fooksite more expensive to repair, and yes they do go wrong and yes there pigs to work on.Jeeps are made by Chrysler. Who also make Dodge. Who are now sorta owned by Fiat. We all know the stories about them!
But off topic , but you have to compare like with like. Different age vehicles are hard to compare. For example:
The '03 Dodge Dakota sport (4.7l V8) I drive when I'm in Canada is rusty as ****. It's done no miles and lives in the garage most of the time.
The alternative transport, an '87 or '88 Dodge Dakota, 5.2l V8, isn't as rusty, has done plenty of miles, lives outside and gets heavily loaded.
Old Dakota = better build
New Dakota = cheaper to compete
Marrying into an all auto family (mostly Chrysler and GM), Yanks (and Canadians) buy yankee cars 'cos it's made there. There is huge pressure to buy your own produce; my wife couldn't drive her Honda to the Chrysler plant, people would nick bits off it and write things in the dust. My brother in law still has to drive a yankee car to the Ford plant, cos foreign stuff is "banned" from the car park! I think that's the only the big 3 survive, cos their recent output sucks. Every year i have a list of things to do on the yankee **** we drive over there.
Given the lack of patriotism over here, LR can't be making total bollocks, or nobody would buy a Landy.
LR took a view of the market and have tried to make the most of it. I think it started going down hill with the S3....that big seam along the chassis rails is just **** poor
However, I don't think LR are any better or worse than the other car makers right now. They use the same technologies and manufacturing processes.
Personally, I'd buy German
And the fooking indicators never work either, front fog light switches are ****e cos there always stuck on anorl
TS888
New Member
- Posts
- 66
- Location
- A Yank in Lestah
If I could do that, I would offer up Saturday's lottery numbers for the hat trick...
ricc
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 2,671
- Location
- central somerset
ive got an f reg fourtrak and a h reg disco....theyre similar age , similar degree of complexity, and both have similar niggles and needs . when the disco dies ill look for another disco..... when the fourtrak dies it will probably be replaced by another disco or possibly a 110...... but thats purely down to the size of the vehicle you can get a lot more leylandi trimmings in the disco than you can in the fourtrak..... if the fourtrack was the same size as the disco and had five doors... and the split rear seat id be happy with it.....
when vehicles get over 15 years old the lemons have largly died and whats left is pretty much of a similar standard...the choice is then down to ease and cheapness of maintenance and personal preferance.
when vehicles get over 15 years old the lemons have largly died and whats left is pretty much of a similar standard...the choice is then down to ease and cheapness of maintenance and personal preferance.
- Posts
- 44,865
- Location
- Hornchurch
for 1000 mile mainly motorway trip id choose jap, for a jolly through london id chose jap, for anything off road id choose LR.
juiceyv8
New Member
- Posts
- 4,738
- Location
- bordon hants
Dartmoor Navigator
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 5,899
- Location
- Dartmoor
What about in the middle of Gondwanaland? Skidoo, Snowcat, Muskeg, Foremost Delta???
- Posts
- 44,865
- Location
- Hornchurch
there werent no fuel in gondwannaland so id walk.
What about in the middle of Gondwanaland? Skidoo, Snowcat, Muskeg, Foremost Delta???
