When is the US going to get "real" Land Rovers?

On or around Sun, 18 Apr 2004 02:52:21 GMT, R. David Steele
<[email protected]/OMEGA> enlightened us thusly:

>
>|> And why doesn't the US military use the Defender as a basic, and
>|> cheaper, vehicle for the average troops?
>|
>|A question that has been asked by many US servicemen as well. Despite
>|our troops in the Gulf being known as "The Borrowers" by the US Army,
>|when it comes to 4x4s the US tries to borrow Defenders on a regular
>|basis since the Defender seems far better suited to desert warfare than
>|the Hummer. (This according to some of my friends who are currently "out
>|there" in the Gulf states>)
>|
>|A better solution might be the new Discovery III, which apparently is a
>|much, much better off-roader than the Defender. I'm wondering, since one
>|option is to get a Disco III with a 4.4L Jaguar engine, how long it will
>|be before someone bolts on the supercharger from the Jag XJR/XKR to the
>|Disco?
>
>Any info on this??
>

give us a chance, the vehicle's not launched yet.

but in principle, if the engine's the same, it should be possible. It might
end up needing rather a lot of expensive bits to make it fit.
--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.fsnet.co.uk my opinions are just that
Soon shall thy arm, unconquered steam! afar Drag the slow barge, or
drive the rapid car; Or on wide-waving wings expanded bear the
flying chariot through the field of air.- Erasmus Darwin (1731-1802)

"Peter Seddon" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I thought that bigger was better over there orelse why do they use the
> HumVee, its as big as a tank, there's a yellow one up here in the north of
> the UK, it make my disco look like a dinky toy.
>
> Peter.
>
you've hit the nail on the head it's as big as a tank
or more to the point as wide as a tank
they were designed to run in tank tracks

Andy
--
SWB Series 2a ( dressed as a 3) "Bruce"
It's big it's mean it's really really green

R. David Steele <[email protected]/OMEGA> wrote:

> |A better solution might be the new Discovery III, which apparently is a
> |much, much better off-roader than the Defender. I'm wondering, since one
> |option is to get a Disco III with a 4.4L Jaguar engine, how long it will
> |be before someone bolts on the supercharger from the Jag XJR/XKR to the
> |Disco?
>
> Any info on this??

Full review in Top Gear magazine this month.

Brief review at: http://www.carbc.com/Car-News-764.html
and another at: http://tinyurl.com/336mn
and another at: http://tinyurl.com/3cajd

The online reviews don't mention the interesting idea of the webcam
provided that can be mounted on any part of the bodywork that gives a
picture on the dash screen. This allows (e.g.) the camera to be attached
to the chassis so that you can check the terrain close up for rock
scrambling. They do mention the terrain response system that allows a
driver to dial in the type of terrain they are driving on and get a
pre-set combination of suspension, transmission and hill descent
settings for that type of terrain. Hill descent now includes the option
to select descent speed.

The online sites also mention that the Discovery III will be available
with a 4.0 V6 from the world's best selling SUV "in some markets". So I
don't suppose it takes long to guess, Explorer 4.0V6, North America.

--
Having problems understanding usenet? Or do you simply need help but
are getting unhelpful answers? Subscribe to: uk.net.beginners for
friendly advice in a flame-free environment.

Because the average US motorist wouldn't be caught dead driving a diesel of
any kind, therefore most automakers don't bother trying to sell them. VW
and MB being execptions, but even they don't sell too many.

Also, the US government isn't going to spend US taxpayer's money to keep
British autoworkers employed, when they have their own workers to "keep
employed".




"R. David Steele" <[email protected]/OMEGA> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Why can't the US get Defender 90s, 110s and 130s?
>
> Why can't we have diesel powered Landies?
>
> And why doesn't the US military use the Defender as a basic, and
> cheaper, vehicle for the average troops?
>

Pantelis Giamarellos <[email protected]> wrote:

> As for the US military, it does use Land Rovers. IIRC US Marines and some
> other special forces use them.

The Marines and others (Rangers?) ordered a small number of Defenders
after the first Gulf War, because the Defender turned out much more
suitable for the rapid desert raids than the Hummer. However IIRC the
Defenders were ordered without engines to be fitted with GMC 6.3L V8
diesels on arrival. I'm not sure how that would affect desert driving,
for the worse I would think it's a heavy engine.

--
Having problems understanding usenet? Or do you simply need help but
are getting unhelpful answers? Subscribe to: uk.net.beginners for
friendly advice in a flame-free environment.

Peter wrote:

>
>
> Because the average US motorist wouldn't be caught dead driving a diesel
> of
> any kind, therefore most automakers don't bother trying to sell them. VW
> and MB being execptions, but even they don't sell too many.
>
> Also, the US government isn't going to spend US taxpayer's money to keep
> British autoworkers employed, when they have their own workers to "keep
> employed".
>
>
>

MB? Milton Bradley? Diesel powered KerPlunk!?

And the argument about which country stays employed becomes a little more
academic when it's Ford who own LR.

However, I think that if .mil.us were to look for a smaller offroader then
the chances are they'd talk to Chrysler and ask for a revamp on the Jeep
rather than buy landies.

P.

On Sat, 17 Apr 2004 14:46:07 GMT, R. David Steele
<[email protected]/OMEGA> wrote:

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

The US army does use a few Defenders: http://tinyurl.com/yt5pt
--
Charlie...

On Saturday, in article
<[email protected]>
[email protected]/OMEGA "R. David Steele" wrote:

> Why can't the US get Defender 90s, 110s and 130s?
>
> Why can't we have diesel powered Landies?
>
> And why doesn't the US military use the Defender as a basic, and
> cheaper, vehicle for the average troops?

I've seen comments on the web about them using "civilian" versions of
the Hummer. Something about them not having "armor".

The way things are going, I'm not sure I'd want Land Rover to be
associated with the US military.

--
David G. Bell -- SF Fan, Filker, and Punslinger.

"History shows that the Singularity started when Sir Tim Berners-Lee
was bitten by a radioactive spider."

On Sun, 18 Apr 2004 02:53:43 GMT, R. David Steele
<[email protected]/OMEGA> wrote:

>and, btw, US gas prices are now climbing over $2 per gallon, or
>so my wife recently told me.

With the GBP:USD rate as it is at the moment, petrol in the UK is
getting on for $2 per litre ...

--
QrizB

"On second thought, let's not go to Z'Ha'Dum. It is a silly place."

Big diesel pickup trucks are very popular in North America these days. SUVs
and sedans are another story.

"Peter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>
> Because the average US motorist wouldn't be caught dead driving a diesel
of
> any kind, therefore most automakers don't bother trying to sell them. VW
> and MB being execptions, but even they don't sell too many.
>
> Also, the US government isn't going to spend US taxpayer's money to keep
> British autoworkers employed, when they have their own workers to "keep
> employed".
>
>
>
>
> "R. David Steele" <[email protected]/OMEGA> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Why can't the US get Defender 90s, 110s and 130s?
> >
> > Why can't we have diesel powered Landies?
> >
> > And why doesn't the US military use the Defender as a basic, and
> > cheaper, vehicle for the average troops?
> >
>
>

R. David Steele wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Apr 2004 16:47:46 GMT, "Exit" <[email protected]> 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 =

"R. David Steele" <[email protected]/OMEGA> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Why can't the US get Defender 90s, 110s and 130s?
>
> Why can't we have diesel powered Landies?
>
> And why doesn't the US military use the Defender as a basic, and
> cheaper, vehicle for the average troops?

Isn't it something to do with us building vehicles which aren't up to US
safety specs? Initially I thought emissions, but then I thought perhaps not

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.
>
> 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!

> 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.

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

|>> 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.

Too many gear heads into performance vehicles among US automotive
engineers. That is the real problem.

We do have a large diesel market, truck based. And people are
now wanting diesels in the smaller pickups. They also want a
pickup that is tough. Most US pickups will not take the abuse
that the LD Defender will take. Besides we have too many Toyota
pickups anyway.

|> 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!

when I tell the local cops about how British bobbies drive the
Jag XJ8, they are ready to swap their Crown Vics in for the XJ8.
Now there would be a sales tool! US folks do like to buy what
the coppers drive.

|> As for the US military, it does use Land Rovers. IIRC US Marines and some
|> other special forces use them.
|
|The Marines and others (Rangers?) ordered a small number of Defenders
|after the first Gulf War, because the Defender turned out much more
|suitable for the rapid desert raids than the Hummer. However IIRC the
|Defenders were ordered without engines to be fitted with GMC 6.3L V8
|diesels on arrival. I'm not sure how that would affect desert driving,
|for the worse I would think it's a heavy engine.

Question: how tough is the Defender in comparison to the Hummer?
Will it take the abuse that US soldiers give?

Frankly, in comparison to the cost of the Hummer, an armored LD
would allow us to equip more troops with vehicles.

Nothing is going to stop an RPG-7 round this side of a tank.
But a little armor might help protect from small arms fire and
some land mines.

My concern is having a vehicle that does not cost us over
$100,000 US.

R. David Steele <[email protected]/OMEGA> wrote:

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

A question that has been asked by many US servicemen as well. Despite
our troops in the Gulf being known as "The Borrowers" by the US Army,
when it comes to 4x4s the US tries to borrow Defenders on a regular
basis since the Defender seems far better suited to desert warfare than
the Hummer. (This according to some of my friends who are currently "out
there" in the Gulf states>)

A better solution might be the new Discovery III, which apparently is a
much, much better off-roader than the Defender. I'm wondering, since one
option is to get a Disco III with a 4.4L Jaguar engine, how long it will
be before someone bolts on the supercharger from the Jag XJR/XKR to the
Disco?

--
Having problems understanding usenet? Or do you simply need help but
are getting unhelpful answers? Subscribe to: uk.net.beginners for
friendly advice in a flame-free environment.

"R. David Steele" <[email protected]/OMEGA> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Why can't the US get Defender 90s, 110s and 130s?
>
> Why can't we have diesel powered Landies?
>
> And why doesn't the US military use the Defender as a basic, and
> cheaper, vehicle for the average troops?
>


Because they do not meet their minimum crash and rollover standards.
Apparently they are good enough for us in the UK :-(
This will change with the new utility range which is only a year to
eighteen months from launch. Yippee!

Huw


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.572 / Virus Database: 362 - Release Date: 27/01/04

"R. David Steele" <[email protected]/OMEGA> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Why can't the US get Defender 90s, 110s and 130s?

don't meet US crash regs , don't have airbags ....
>
> Why can't we have diesel powered Landies?
>
all the engines have been too small for the US market i nthe past, also
large cap V8s sell well enough

no doubt there is some technicla hitch as well

> And why doesn't the US military use the Defender as a basic, and
> cheaper, vehicle for the average troops?
>
and admit defeat, it's rear USS forces don't use domestic products, and
when they do they keep it specialised - however a lot of the non domestic
kit used by US forces is British in origin and / or design



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.648 / Virus Database: 415 - Release Date: 31/03/2004

I think one of the deciding factors in the purchase of Defenders for SF use
is that they are air portable, and fit inside Chinook helicopters, this
allows SF teams to be flown behind enemy lines with transport. A lot better
than having to drive over hostile terrain to your patrol area.

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected]/OMEGA says...
>
> |> As for the US military, it does use Land Rovers. IIRC US Marines and some
> |> other special forces use them.
> |
> |The Marines and others (Rangers?) ordered a small number of Defenders
> |after the first Gulf War, because the Defender turned out much more
> |suitable for the rapid desert raids than the Hummer. However IIRC the
> |Defenders were ordered without engines to be fitted with GMC 6.3L V8
> |diesels on arrival. I'm not sure how that would affect desert driving,
> |for the worse I would think it's a heavy engine.
>
> Question: how tough is the Defender in comparison to the Hummer?
> Will it take the abuse that US soldiers give?
>
> Frankly, in comparison to the cost of the Hummer, an armored LD
> would allow us to equip more troops with vehicles.
>

Half the abuse the Hummer is subjected to is due to it's own lumbering
weight.

> Nothing is going to stop an RPG-7 round this side of a tank.
> But a little armor might help protect from small arms fire and
> some land mines.

Not being the size of a battleship or as slow as one helps you not to
get shot in the first place.

> My concern is having a vehicle that does not cost us over
> $100,000 US.
>

Isn't that the cost of a chevy pickup with green paint in the US
military?

--
____________________
Remove "X" from email address to reply.