Vehicle for occassional towing

Ian Rawlings wrote:
> On 2005-08-10, Steve Firth <%steve%@malloc.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Umm which world-wide armed forces would that be?
>
> I don't know for certain Steve other than what I've seen on telly,
> various documentaries, posts in other forums, articles in magazines
> etc, but we're in the middle of an anecdote trading storm here so you
> hardly expect proof do you? Go an ask in alt.fan.landrover, it's been
> mentioned a few times there.
>
> As for why particular vehicles are chosen,

Certainly in my day the SIII landy was the ONLY vehicle you could hide in a
small bush, as we used them with no tilt and the windscreens folded down for
that very purpose. So that's what was purchased. I don't know these days -
the Defenders the MOD seem to use look as though they've all got hard
tops...maybe a "health and safety" thing? (As if war was healthy and safe?)

--
Gordon B Parker L/Cpl RE (Ret'd)
Late 34 Fd Sqn RE, A Coy 6LI and Recce Pl att B Coy 4RGJ

Gordon <[email protected]> wrote:

> Certainly in my day the SIII landy was the ONLY vehicle you could hide in a
> small bush, as we used them with no tilt and the windscreens folded down for
> that very purpose. So that's what was purchased. I don't know these days -
> the Defenders the MOD seem to use look as though they've all got hard
> tops...maybe a "health and safety" thing? (As if war was healthy and safe?)

AFAIK recces are still done using Pink Panthers, don't know what will
happen when they all break down. The Defenders are supplemented by
Pinzgauers which did better in trials than the Defenders, neither
vehicle has a fold down windscreen AFAIK. Ragtop Defenders are in use,
but they're just not as small as either the SIII or the lightweights.

--
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little
temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

-- Benjamin Franklin, 1759

On 2005-08-11, Steve Firth <%steve%@malloc.co.uk> wrote:

> AFAIK recces are still done using Pink Panthers, don't know what
> will happen when they all break down. The Defenders are supplemented
> by Pinzgauers which did better in trials than the Defenders, neither
> vehicle has a fold down windscreen AFAIK. Ragtop Defenders are in
> use, but they're just not as small as either the SIII or the
> lightweights.

Pinz's are the mutt's nuts and replaced the ageing Landrover 101FCs
for towing field guns, unfortunately shortly after the army decided on
using them the manufacturer either went bust or stopped making them,
so the rights were bought out and they're now owned by a British
company. I don't think they're replacing the Defenders although I do
see a lot of them on the A303 near my house. IIRC the Defenders are
being replaced by a chunky-looking thing that looks like a small
Hummer, independent suspension and all, doesn't look like it's got as
much ground clearance as the Defender. There was a link to an article
about it in alt.fan.landrover a few months back. The main
improvement, and probably why it was so chunky and low to the ground,
was that it has extensive anti-mine protection as standard, quite
important now the yanks have scattered so many all over the place.

The Pinz's apparently aren't liked very much by the people that have
to drive them, I don't know why but considering that they make a
stripped-out defender seem civilised that's not surprising,
transmission whine is extremely loud and if you corner them too hard
the wheels can tuck under Triumph Spitfire style.

--
For every expert, there is an equal but opposite expert

On 2005-08-10, Huw <hedydd> wrote:

> The TD5 is an abomination in a working vehicle.

A friend of mine recently bought his first Defender, after years of
slagging them off to me. I told him to skip the TD5 and get a 300TDi
instead, he tried a few TD5s and kept stalling them unless he revved
them more than the 300TDi, and said that they tended to snatch the
transmission and pull off with a bit of a jerk. The 300TDi on the
other hand is very hard to stall, and mine will accelerate from 15MPH
in fifth. Plus of course the fly-by-wire accelerator pedal stops
working if you get it wet. Landrover definately screwed up with the
TD5, I'd never own one.

> Not me. I'll stick with the old 110 until it fails terminally
> then........who knows, there may be something better by then.

Some article in LROI said sommat about an engine based on the 2.7
litre turbodiesel from a mondeo being the new power plant for the
Defender, not sure how much truth there is in that, but the TD5 looks
like it's on the way out, thankfully. The official reason for dumping
the TD5 is emissions regulations, any excuse is just fine as far as
I'm concerned!

Not that I'm in the market for a new truck of course, mine's only 12
years old with 170K on the clock.

--
For every expert, there is an equal but opposite expert

On 2005-08-10, Steve Firth <%steve%@malloc.co.uk> wrote:

> a) Bollocks.

Blimey, can't see what you are, can you. It only takes a mention of a
landrover product to prompt a one-line insult from you.

> b) If that knee jerks any higher you'll have a black eye.

Somehow that fails to find its mark, something to do with where it's
coming from I think!

--
For every expert, there is an equal but opposite expert

Ian Rawlings ([email protected]) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying :

> Some article in LROI said sommat about an engine based on the 2.7
> litre turbodiesel from a mondeo being the new power plant for the
> Defender, not sure how much truth there is in that

The 2.7 TDv6 in the Disco3 and R-R "Sport" is currently only shared with
Jag (S-type, XJ), but will soon be available via PSA (it's a jointly
developed unit) in the Cit C6 and Pug 407, so I wouldn't be at all
surprised if it was in the next Defender, too. After all, the 200, 300 and
TD5 were all shared between Def and Disco.

I'd think it'd be a bit too grunty for the Mondeo, but if it's going into
the 407, it'd make sense for Ford to use it there too.

On 2005-08-11, Adrian <[email protected]> wrote:

> The 2.7 TDv6 in the Disco3 and R-R "Sport" is currently only shared with

The article in LROI said that the new engine will be based on the 2.7
litre 4-cylinder currently used in the Mondeo, so it sounds like the
one you're talking about and the one LROI are talking about are
different, however they're close enough to be a mishear away so
perhaps LROI are wrong and you're right!

I don't know if there even is a current 2.7 litre diesel mondeo, given
that I have about as much interest in modern runabouts as I have in
nasal hair.

I'd prefer it if they stuck with a nice simple engine for the Defender
rather than start bolting on lots of electronics, but modern emissions
regs seem to need it.

--
For every expert, there is an equal but opposite expert

Ian Rawlings ([email protected]) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying :

>> The 2.7 TDv6 in the Disco3 and R-R "Sport" is currently only shared
>> with

> The article in LROI said that the new engine will be based on the 2.7
> litre 4-cylinder currently used in the Mondeo

There isn't one.
There *is* a 2.0 and 2.2 four-pot diesel in the Mondeo, though.

> I don't know if there even is a current 2.7 litre diesel mondeo

There isn't.
Ford (at least in .eu) don't have a 2.7 diesel four-pot.
But they do have a very nice, shiny new 2.7 diesel v6.
Which is in use across half of the L-R range already.

> I'd prefer it if they stuck with a nice simple engine for the Defender
> rather than start bolting on lots of electronics, but modern emissions
> regs seem to need it.

*ding*

Oh, and the salespeople...

On 2005-08-11, Adrian <[email protected]> wrote:

> There isn't one.
> There *is* a 2.0 and 2.2 four-pot diesel in the Mondeo, though.

Aha, mystery solved, it's the 2.2 four-pot diesel expanded to 2.7
litres. Described by landrover as a stop-gap engine, which really
inspires confidence, until they complete their new TDv6.

--
For every expert, there is an equal but opposite expert

On 2005-08-11, Adrian <[email protected]> wrote:

> There isn't.
> Ford (at least in .eu) don't have a 2.7 diesel four-pot.

I did think a four-pot of that size sounded a little suspicious,
especially in a Mundano..

The article said that Land Rover have "confirmed" the use of the new
engine, so chances are something is going to go in, just don't know
what! Probably is the 6-pot you've already mentioned.

--
For every expert, there is an equal but opposite expert

Ian Rawlings ([email protected]) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying :

>> There isn't one.
>> There *is* a 2.0 and 2.2 four-pot diesel in the Mondeo, though.

> Aha, mystery solved, it's the 2.2 four-pot diesel expanded to 2.7
> litres. Described by landrover as a stop-gap engine, which really
> inspires confidence, until they complete their new TDv6.

That'll be the TDv6 that's been in the Disco 3 and R-R Sport since they
were launched, then?

I very much doubt the 2.2 four-pot could be stretched to 2.7 - it just
doesn't seem likely at all. I strongly suspect the mag's got it wrong.

"Ian Rawlings" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On 2005-08-11, Adrian <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> There isn't.
>> Ford (at least in .eu) don't have a 2.7 diesel four-pot.
>
> I did think a four-pot of that size sounded a little suspicious,
> especially in a Mundano..
>
> The article said that Land Rover have "confirmed" the use of the new
> engine, so chances are something is going to go in, just don't know
> what! Probably is the 6-pot you've already mentioned.
>

It is too expensive and won't fit in any case. They will use a version of
the four cylinder Mondeo engine, which is a 'good' thing IMO.

Huw

"Ian Rawlings" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On 2005-08-11, Adrian <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> There isn't one.
>> There *is* a 2.0 and 2.2 four-pot diesel in the Mondeo, though.
>
> Aha, mystery solved, it's the 2.2 four-pot diesel expanded to 2.7
> litres. Described by landrover as a stop-gap engine, which really
> inspires confidence, until they complete their new TDv6.
>
> --
> For every expert, there is an equal but opposite expert

I would like to know how you come to such a conclusion. This is extremely
unlikely. For one thing they already have a TDv6 on production lines at
Solihull being installed in Discovery.
All engines are stop-gap if you consider that a different engine will be
along within an average of around every five years.

Huw

Huw wrote:

>
> "Ian Rawlings" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> On 2005-08-11, Adrian <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> There isn't.
>>> Ford (at least in .eu) don't have a 2.7 diesel four-pot.
>>
>> I did think a four-pot of that size sounded a little suspicious,
>> especially in a Mundano..
>>
>> The article said that Land Rover have "confirmed" the use of the new
>> engine, so chances are something is going to go in, just don't know
>> what! Probably is the 6-pot you've already mentioned.
>>
>
> It is too expensive and won't fit in any case. They will use a version of
> the four cylinder Mondeo engine, which is a 'good' thing IMO.
>

Just to throw a little speculation in here - Ford have access to Nissan
tooling - the 4 pot TD from the old Terrano/Maverick is a 2.7 - any chance
they may be using that for the Defender - ISTR it's got quite a good
reputation in the wider world.

P.

On 2005-08-12, Huw <hedydd> wrote:

> I would like to know how you come to such a conclusion. This is
> extremely unlikely. For one thing they already have a TDv6 on
> production lines at Solihull being installed in Discovery.

That's what's written in the mag who described it in quotes as a
stop-gap solution as the TD5 won't be sold next year due to emissions
requirements. The article states that it'll be fitted to the Defender
until the TDv6 is fitted, so it seems they intend to fit the TDv6 but
can't right now, perhaps supply issues? No reasons for the stop-gap
are given.

If anyone wants further info go and read up on the July issue of LROI
or have a peek at their website and get some contact details from
them. No point debating with me any more as I was just reporting the
article, and have no knowledge of the technical issues behind the
decision or even whether the article is true or not.

--
For every expert, there is an equal but opposite expert

On 2005-08-12, Adrian <[email protected]> wrote:

> That'll be the TDv6 that's been in the Disco 3 and R-R Sport since they
> were launched, then?

That's not what I've been describing, it's definitely described as the
2.2 from the Mundano (including cut-out illustrations of the engine)
stretched to 2.7, not something that I think is impossible.

--
For every expert, there is an equal but opposite expert

Ian Rawlings ([email protected]) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying :

>> That'll be the TDv6 that's been in the Disco 3 and R-R Sport since they
>> were launched, then?

> That's not what I've been describing, it's definitely described as the
> 2.2 from the Mundano (including cut-out illustrations of the engine)
> stretched to 2.7, not something that I think is impossible.

It's not *impossible*, but it's a *damn* big stretch...

.... and it just seems... pointless.

On the other hand, I've just been sent the Geneva show bumf for the Cit C6,
which describes the PSA/Ford v6 diseasel as "Developed specially for luxury
cars" - that fits the Disco and R-R Sport far better than it does a new
Defender...

"rivenglo" <[email protected]> schreef in bericht
news:[email protected]...
>
> "John Page" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>>>
>>> Good mpg
>>> Low purchase cost (a few years old)
>>> Low annual mileage - 8K
>>> Occassional towing of a pony + trailer (up to 1500KG loaded)
>>> 4wd - just for towing (so best if it can be switched off)
>>> Cheap and easy to DIY maintain
>>> Reliable
>>> Low insurance
>>>
>>> Any suggestions??
>>>
>>
>> How about a ford transit?
>
> I didn't know there was a 4X4 transit. Are they any good?
Ever considered a Hyundai Santa Fe? A fellow member of our Pajero club
(www.POCUK.com) bought one and he's been teasing us with the good mpg he's
had. Plus the overall performance of the car, compared with his old PJ. He
was quite satisfied.
Frank

"Paul S. Brown" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Huw wrote:
>
>>
>> "Ian Rawlings" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>> On 2005-08-11, Adrian <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> There isn't.
>>>> Ford (at least in .eu) don't have a 2.7 diesel four-pot.
>>>
>>> I did think a four-pot of that size sounded a little suspicious,
>>> especially in a Mundano..
>>>
>>> The article said that Land Rover have "confirmed" the use of the new
>>> engine, so chances are something is going to go in, just don't know
>>> what! Probably is the 6-pot you've already mentioned.
>>>
>>
>> It is too expensive and won't fit in any case. They will use a version of
>> the four cylinder Mondeo engine, which is a 'good' thing IMO.
>>
>
> Just to throw a little speculation in here - Ford have access to Nissan
> tooling - the 4 pot TD from the old Terrano/Maverick is a 2.7 - any chance
> they may be using that for the Defender - ISTR it's got quite a good
> reputation in the wider world.
>

This engine is not available to Ford/LR since the Ford Maverick built by
Nissan in Spain ceased to be available some few years ago, although it again
could be by arrangement I suppose. In any case it is old technology indirect
injection which is inefficient by present standards and which could never
meet future [or even perhaps current] exhaust emission regulations.

Huw

"Painless" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...



> Ever considered a Hyundai Santa Fe?

The specs look good, but like the X-Trail (current favourite) they are going
for considerably more than £3K.