Wonder if anybody can give me advise on a 4x4 purchase,we currently have a piccasso 2.0hdi towing a sterling europa,due to keep getting bogded down on site we are looking for a small4x4,we are looking around the £8000 mark,we like the 5 door freelander td4,but i keep reading about head gasket problems is this on all freelander engines or just the petrols,any advise would be appreciated,i do not want to go and buy and end up paying out later for expensive engine repairs ta andrew.
4x4 advise
- Thread starter Andrew_5105555
- Start date
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Hi Andrew
The head gasket probs relate to the 1.8 petrol engine only, the td4 uses a BMW engine which seems to be a much more reliable prospect.
Don't buy a Freelander just because you like its looks, do some research on its reliability and consider other 4x4 options.
Look at www.whatcar.co.uk and
www.honestjohn.co.uk - click on car by car breakdown, choose Land Rover , Freelander and get an independent in depth review on whats good and more useful whats bad about the model you may buy.
A lot of people on this forum will tell you that their Freelander is the best thing since sliced bread - but their opinion may be biased.
I think that the Freelander is a very macho looking compact 4x4 and off road cannot be beaten by its competitors but 99% of people will never need that level of off road ability.
On road, however is a different story. It is beaten by a number of other compact suv's - x trail , Crv, Hyundai Tucson etc, although
The head gasket probs relate to the 1.8 petrol engine only, the td4 uses a BMW engine which seems to be a much more reliable prospect.
Don't buy a Freelander just because you like its looks, do some research on its reliability and consider other 4x4 options.
Look at www.whatcar.co.uk and
www.honestjohn.co.uk - click on car by car breakdown, choose Land Rover , Freelander and get an independent in depth review on whats good and more useful whats bad about the model you may buy.
A lot of people on this forum will tell you that their Freelander is the best thing since sliced bread - but their opinion may be biased.
I think that the Freelander is a very macho looking compact 4x4 and off road cannot be beaten by its competitors but 99% of people will never need that level of off road ability.
On road, however is a different story. It is beaten by a number of other compact suv's - x trail , Crv, Hyundai Tucson etc, although
The 1.8 engine in itself is a good unit and is not a Land Rover Engine - it is bought in from Rover - so the engine in the MG and Rover cars - as well as many specialist vehicles that use the engine - suffer from the same problem.
Which is a really stupid design where to get the engine to heat up quickly (apparently focus groups told Rover that they wanted to be able to demist the windscreen within 10 seconds of start up) the stuck the thermostat on the inflow bottom hose rather than the more normal exit or top hose.
This means that the thermostat that keeps the engine cool by letting in cooler water from the radiator is of course affected by the cool water coming in rather than the hot water going out.
Result is easy overheating of water trapped in the block when the thermostat closed.
To some degree this problem was overcome on post 2001 1.8 Freelanders and MG's etc because they have a remote thermostat rather than the original one that was mounted in the engine block. However it is still in the bottom hose.
QED engineering offer an excellent top hose remote thermostat that is easily fitted to pre 2001 engines but does require new hoses for the post 2001 engines so that the remote OE thermostat on the bottom hose can be replaced with one in what most consider to be the "proper position" - in the top hose. They reckon the cure rate is 90% and it only costs about
Which is a really stupid design where to get the engine to heat up quickly (apparently focus groups told Rover that they wanted to be able to demist the windscreen within 10 seconds of start up) the stuck the thermostat on the inflow bottom hose rather than the more normal exit or top hose.
This means that the thermostat that keeps the engine cool by letting in cooler water from the radiator is of course affected by the cool water coming in rather than the hot water going out.
Result is easy overheating of water trapped in the block when the thermostat closed.
To some degree this problem was overcome on post 2001 1.8 Freelanders and MG's etc because they have a remote thermostat rather than the original one that was mounted in the engine block. However it is still in the bottom hose.
QED engineering offer an excellent top hose remote thermostat that is easily fitted to pre 2001 engines but does require new hoses for the post 2001 engines so that the remote OE thermostat on the bottom hose can be replaced with one in what most consider to be the "proper position" - in the top hose. They reckon the cure rate is 90% and it only costs about
Hi Andrew
You asked for advice and I gave my honest opinion based on research I did in November whilst looking for a new car. I searched a number of websites looking for unbiased info on the qualities of several compact suv's. Models I considered were Honda Crv, Nissan X Trail, Kia Tuscon, Toyota Rav 4, Freelander and Jeep Cherokee.
First to fall was the Cherokee- unrefined, noisey and heavier on fuel.
Second to go was the Freelander on its abysmal reliability record.
I road tested the other 4 and bought the Honda 2.2diesel. There was nothing in it between these last 4 and only the superb Honda diesel swung it.
When I am spending
You asked for advice and I gave my honest opinion based on research I did in November whilst looking for a new car. I searched a number of websites looking for unbiased info on the qualities of several compact suv's. Models I considered were Honda Crv, Nissan X Trail, Kia Tuscon, Toyota Rav 4, Freelander and Jeep Cherokee.
First to fall was the Cherokee- unrefined, noisey and heavier on fuel.
Second to go was the Freelander on its abysmal reliability record.
I road tested the other 4 and bought the Honda 2.2diesel. There was nothing in it between these last 4 and only the superb Honda diesel swung it.
When I am spending
What is it with these guys that have it in for Land Rover?
As for me not being a realist! Have a look at what I have said about the P38 Cliff!! - Oh and did you bother to look at what I have said about the poor quality control at LR in the past??
And as for the Lucas electrics!
Also - I have mentioned at length the problems of having a second gearbox (the Transfer Box), a Diff Lock mechanism, two propshafts two axles and four drive shafts - All extra things that can and do go wrong! This is the reason why a badly serviced LR is expensive to put right. The parts are not expensive, but there can be a lot of them to go wrong.
I would not touch a LR that does not have a full Land Rover Dealer Service History for the first three years and/or a Specialist Land Rover Service History after that.
Methinks you try too hard my friend! We do not all want to drive a bland eurobox. I like a car that puts a grin on my face. So it's a bit like you really.
The sales of LR's show a healthy trend (14% up 05 on 04) and you cannot argue with the fact that despite all your negativity LR one the most liked/respected vehicle Top Gear award where the voting was by car enthusiasts. So despite your and others almost DESPERATE desire to slag of a make of car that still has 70% of all its vehicles ever built still on the road and whose latest models are winning awards left right and centre, I think those of us who have one will still look at your efforts and wonder why you winge such a lot about a car you clearly do not own?
As for me not being a realist! Have a look at what I have said about the P38 Cliff!! - Oh and did you bother to look at what I have said about the poor quality control at LR in the past??
And as for the Lucas electrics!
Also - I have mentioned at length the problems of having a second gearbox (the Transfer Box), a Diff Lock mechanism, two propshafts two axles and four drive shafts - All extra things that can and do go wrong! This is the reason why a badly serviced LR is expensive to put right. The parts are not expensive, but there can be a lot of them to go wrong.
I would not touch a LR that does not have a full Land Rover Dealer Service History for the first three years and/or a Specialist Land Rover Service History after that.
Methinks you try too hard my friend! We do not all want to drive a bland eurobox. I like a car that puts a grin on my face. So it's a bit like you really.
The sales of LR's show a healthy trend (14% up 05 on 04) and you cannot argue with the fact that despite all your negativity LR one the most liked/respected vehicle Top Gear award where the voting was by car enthusiasts. So despite your and others almost DESPERATE desire to slag of a make of car that still has 70% of all its vehicles ever built still on the road and whose latest models are winning awards left right and centre, I think those of us who have one will still look at your efforts and wonder why you winge such a lot about a car you clearly do not own?
woops! should be "won" the Top Gear award of course.What is it with these guys that have it in for Land Rover?
As for me not being a realist! Have a look at what I have said about the P38 Cliff!! - Oh and did you bother to look at what I have said about the poor quality control at LR in the past??
And as for the Lucas electrics!
Also - I have mentioned at length the problems of having a second gearbox (the Transfer Box), a Diff Lock mechanism, two propshafts two axles and four drive shafts - All extra things that can and do go wrong! This is the reason why a badly serviced LR is expensive to put right. The parts are not expensive, but there can be a lot of them to go wrong.
I would not touch a LR that does not have a full Land Rover Dealer Service History for the first three years and/or a Specialist Land Rover Service History after that.
Methinks you try too hard my friend! We do not all want to drive a bland eurobox. I like a car that puts a grin on my face. So it's a bit like you really.
The sales of LR's show a healthy trend (14% up 05 on 04) and you cannot argue with the fact that despite all your negativity LR one the most liked/respected vehicle Top Gear award where the voting was by car enthusiasts. So despite your and others almost DESPERATE desire to slag of a make of car that still has 70% of all its vehicles ever built still on the road and whose latest models are winning awards left right and centre, I think those of us who have one will still look at your efforts and wonder why you winge such a lot about a car you clearly do not own?
Not every car is fault free-
Have a look at this -
Only 89% of cars up to 2 years old breakdown-free over previous 12 months in 2004 Which? survey. 2004 Which? quote: "Disappointment on wheels. A slightly depressing driving experience and woeful build quality."
Now I wonder what this is from?
Can you guess?
It might surprise you!
It is from Honest Johns analysis of the Vauxhall Vectra
So why do we not see a band of wingers jumping up and down and getting all upset and weepy when someone mentions a Vectra.
Loads of other examples of negative critiscm on differing makes of cars. But I agree with the "Disappointment on wheels" for the Vectra and most other euroboxes.
One thing you can say about a LR - it is never a disappointing drive! It will always put a grin on your face.
Cliff - if you are going to quote something mate - make sure it is representative and not quoted in isolation.
Have a look at this -
Only 89% of cars up to 2 years old breakdown-free over previous 12 months in 2004 Which? survey. 2004 Which? quote: "Disappointment on wheels. A slightly depressing driving experience and woeful build quality."
Now I wonder what this is from?
Can you guess?
It might surprise you!
It is from Honest Johns analysis of the Vauxhall Vectra
So why do we not see a band of wingers jumping up and down and getting all upset and weepy when someone mentions a Vectra.
Loads of other examples of negative critiscm on differing makes of cars. But I agree with the "Disappointment on wheels" for the Vectra and most other euroboxes.
One thing you can say about a LR - it is never a disappointing drive! It will always put a grin on your face.
Cliff - if you are going to quote something mate - make sure it is representative and not quoted in isolation.
Cliff - I just find it sad that when you see reports such as that below - from your own quoted source, a small section of the Forum Population decide to select such data for just one make of vehicle and insist on poping up whenever it is mentioned to slag it off?
This report on the Vectra is by no means an isolated case - other reports on other vehicles are just as bad. And these are "simple" vehicles with less moving parts than a Land Rover.
I wonder what your motivation is?
Because as I said previously Fords PAG is well pleased with LR - compared to other members, LR is doing especially well whilst the car industry in general is suffering from enormous overcapacity and cheaper manufacturing costs elsewhere in the world.
So why slag off a "home grown success" at every opportunity?
We all know LR has suffered from a lack of investment but that just makes what they have achieved all the more remarkable. The Discovery was a triumph and its development costs was about the same as a months canteen costs at Toyota!
It was a parts bin masterpiece - Did you know the headlights on the 200 series came from the Sherpa Van and the door handles from a Morris Marina to save cost?
So in comparison when the might of GM produces a car where:-
"Clutch replacement remains a five- to-six-hour job involving engine removal instead of the simple half-hour job it was on the Cavalier" - and:-
"Whole dash needs to come out to replace odometer bulb"
- these are just two of my favourites!!
For those that have a Vectra - here is the whole report - I post it here not to make you feel bad - just to point out that no one in there right minds would bother to ram such info down your throats as soon a Vauxhall is mentioned on the Forum.
You can make your own minds up about those that wish to pop up with "you don't wanna do that" comments regarding any other make. Especially one as successful as Land Rover.
Source:- Honest John car reports
"Still only a three star performer in 2001 NCAP crash safety tests. Clutch replacement remains a five- to-six-hour job involving engine removal instead of the simple half-hour job it was on the Cavalier. Stodgy handling with severe understeer of early cars not entirely cured even in the 1999 improvements. Styled door mirrors give limited view. DI 16v has undeserved reputation as an oil burner. What actually happens is that oil collects in the 16v head and takes a long time to drain back to the sump. Dip within an hour of stopping and you will get a falsely low reading leading you to overfill with fresh oil. But engine also seems to have a genuine oil consumption problem. Apparently, the bores were machined with too high a gloss. Running-in oil has been used to attempt a quick fix, has been known to cause other problems. Vauxhall/Opel will not accept liability because it would mean expensive repairs to most 2.0DI and 2.2DI Vauxhall/Opel models. Several pressure groups are emerging to try to get Vauxhall/Opel to take responsibility: www.zafirauk.tk and www.peachorlemon.co.uk 2001 model year ex-fleet cars which have been subject to 20,000 mile oil changes will not be as good a second-hand buy as cars which have had their oil changed every 6 months or 7,000 miles at most. Plug leads deteriorate and are ridiculously expensive to replace. Whole dash needs to come out to replace odometer bulb. DIs seem to need new mass/airflow sensors every 36,000 miles. Timing belt and tensioner changes re-scheduled from 80,000 miles to 40,000 miles on engines which have them. Timing belts on 4 cylinder 16v engines also drive the water pump which can shed its impeller blades and seize, throwing off the belt, so best to change water pump too. Tensioner bolt which passes through oil pump also prone to fracture, leaving belt untensioned and apt to fly off. Internal roof stiffener bars on estate models can become unglued due to heat and cold on the roof and cause a rattle. Best tyres for older non-sporty Vectras are Pirelli P6000s. Best for new SRis and GSis are Yokohamas. Front suspension can wear prematurely. 15th from Bottom of 100 models for reliability in Auto Express 2002 survey. See 'What to Watch Out For' for a lot more faults. Clarkson was right first time. Now suffering corrosion of area around rear door latches. Franchises will repair under 6 year no perforation warranty, but only if service history is stamped up with corrosion inspections by Vauxhall franchises. Starting to get reports of water pump failure throwing off timing belts on 2.0 litre 16v petrol models. Noise from rear of car which sounds like wheel bearing noise is usually due to uneven rear tyre wear. Gearbox problems now beginning to emerge on late 1.8s. 2.2 16v petrol engine has been known to snap its timing chain due to the lubrication jet becoming blocked, possibly as a result of running on dirty oil due to extented oil change intervals. Ignition control unit of 2.2 petrol engine is prone to burning out. Repeated a/c compressor failures are common and using the a/c once a week does not seem to prevent this. On diesels, older F18 gearbox prone to fail and by 2005later e F23 gearboxes were failing too. I cannot recommend these cars. Only 88% breakdown free in 2003 Which survey. 28th from bottom out of 137 models in 2003 Top Gear survey. Only 89% of cars up to 2 years old breakdown-free over previous 12 months in 2004 Which? survey. 2004 Which? quote: "Disappointment on wheels. A slightly depressing driving experience and woeful build quality." "
This report on the Vectra is by no means an isolated case - other reports on other vehicles are just as bad. And these are "simple" vehicles with less moving parts than a Land Rover.
I wonder what your motivation is?
Because as I said previously Fords PAG is well pleased with LR - compared to other members, LR is doing especially well whilst the car industry in general is suffering from enormous overcapacity and cheaper manufacturing costs elsewhere in the world.
So why slag off a "home grown success" at every opportunity?
We all know LR has suffered from a lack of investment but that just makes what they have achieved all the more remarkable. The Discovery was a triumph and its development costs was about the same as a months canteen costs at Toyota!
It was a parts bin masterpiece - Did you know the headlights on the 200 series came from the Sherpa Van and the door handles from a Morris Marina to save cost?
So in comparison when the might of GM produces a car where:-
"Clutch replacement remains a five- to-six-hour job involving engine removal instead of the simple half-hour job it was on the Cavalier" - and:-
"Whole dash needs to come out to replace odometer bulb"
- these are just two of my favourites!!
For those that have a Vectra - here is the whole report - I post it here not to make you feel bad - just to point out that no one in there right minds would bother to ram such info down your throats as soon a Vauxhall is mentioned on the Forum.
You can make your own minds up about those that wish to pop up with "you don't wanna do that" comments regarding any other make. Especially one as successful as Land Rover.
Source:- Honest John car reports
"Still only a three star performer in 2001 NCAP crash safety tests. Clutch replacement remains a five- to-six-hour job involving engine removal instead of the simple half-hour job it was on the Cavalier. Stodgy handling with severe understeer of early cars not entirely cured even in the 1999 improvements. Styled door mirrors give limited view. DI 16v has undeserved reputation as an oil burner. What actually happens is that oil collects in the 16v head and takes a long time to drain back to the sump. Dip within an hour of stopping and you will get a falsely low reading leading you to overfill with fresh oil. But engine also seems to have a genuine oil consumption problem. Apparently, the bores were machined with too high a gloss. Running-in oil has been used to attempt a quick fix, has been known to cause other problems. Vauxhall/Opel will not accept liability because it would mean expensive repairs to most 2.0DI and 2.2DI Vauxhall/Opel models. Several pressure groups are emerging to try to get Vauxhall/Opel to take responsibility: www.zafirauk.tk and www.peachorlemon.co.uk 2001 model year ex-fleet cars which have been subject to 20,000 mile oil changes will not be as good a second-hand buy as cars which have had their oil changed every 6 months or 7,000 miles at most. Plug leads deteriorate and are ridiculously expensive to replace. Whole dash needs to come out to replace odometer bulb. DIs seem to need new mass/airflow sensors every 36,000 miles. Timing belt and tensioner changes re-scheduled from 80,000 miles to 40,000 miles on engines which have them. Timing belts on 4 cylinder 16v engines also drive the water pump which can shed its impeller blades and seize, throwing off the belt, so best to change water pump too. Tensioner bolt which passes through oil pump also prone to fracture, leaving belt untensioned and apt to fly off. Internal roof stiffener bars on estate models can become unglued due to heat and cold on the roof and cause a rattle. Best tyres for older non-sporty Vectras are Pirelli P6000s. Best for new SRis and GSis are Yokohamas. Front suspension can wear prematurely. 15th from Bottom of 100 models for reliability in Auto Express 2002 survey. See 'What to Watch Out For' for a lot more faults. Clarkson was right first time. Now suffering corrosion of area around rear door latches. Franchises will repair under 6 year no perforation warranty, but only if service history is stamped up with corrosion inspections by Vauxhall franchises. Starting to get reports of water pump failure throwing off timing belts on 2.0 litre 16v petrol models. Noise from rear of car which sounds like wheel bearing noise is usually due to uneven rear tyre wear. Gearbox problems now beginning to emerge on late 1.8s. 2.2 16v petrol engine has been known to snap its timing chain due to the lubrication jet becoming blocked, possibly as a result of running on dirty oil due to extented oil change intervals. Ignition control unit of 2.2 petrol engine is prone to burning out. Repeated a/c compressor failures are common and using the a/c once a week does not seem to prevent this. On diesels, older F18 gearbox prone to fail and by 2005later e F23 gearboxes were failing too. I cannot recommend these cars. Only 88% breakdown free in 2003 Which survey. 28th from bottom out of 137 models in 2003 Top Gear survey. Only 89% of cars up to 2 years old breakdown-free over previous 12 months in 2004 Which? survey. 2004 Which? quote: "Disappointment on wheels. A slightly depressing driving experience and woeful build quality." "
That make the Freelander look a positively good buy in comparrison!Cliff - I just find it sad that when you see reports such as that below - from your own quoted source, a small section of the Forum Population decide to select such data for just one make of vehicle and insist on poping up whenever it is mentioned to slag it off?
This report on the Vectra is by no means an isolated case - other reports on other vehicles are just as bad. And these are "simple" vehicles with less moving parts than a Land Rover.
I wonder what your motivation is?
Because as I said previously Fords PAG is well pleased with LR - compared to other members, LR is doing especially well whilst the car industry in general is suffering from enormous overcapacity and cheaper manufacturing costs elsewhere in the world.
So why slag off a "home grown success" at every opportunity?
We all know LR has suffered from a lack of investment but that just makes what they have achieved all the more remarkable. The Discovery was a triumph and its development costs was about the same as a months canteen costs at Toyota!
It was a parts bin masterpiece - Did you know the headlights on the 200 series came from the Sherpa Van and the door handles from a Morris Marina to save cost?
So in comparison when the might of GM produces a car where:-
"Clutch replacement remains a five- to-six-hour job involving engine removal instead of the simple half-hour job it was on the Cavalier" - and:-
"Whole dash needs to come out to replace odometer bulb"
- these are just two of my favourites!!
For those that have a Vectra - here is the whole report - I post it here not to make you feel bad - just to point out that no one in there right minds would bother to ram such info down your throats as soon a Vauxhall is mentioned on the Forum.
You can make your own minds up about those that wish to pop up with "you don't wanna do that" comments regarding any other make. Especially one as successful as Land Rover.
Source:- Honest John car reports
"Still only a three star performer in 2001 NCAP crash safety tests. Clutch replacement remains a five- to-six-hour job involving engine removal instead of the simple half-hour job it was on the Cavalier. Stodgy handling with severe understeer of early cars not entirely cured even in the 1999 improvements. Styled door mirrors give limited view. DI 16v has undeserved reputation as an oil burner. What actually happens is that oil collects in the 16v head and takes a long time to drain back to the sump. Dip within an hour of stopping and you will get a falsely low reading leading you to overfill with fresh oil. But engine also seems to have a genuine oil consumption problem. Apparently, the bores were machined with too high a gloss. Running-in oil has been used to attempt a quick fix, has been known to cause other problems. Vauxhall/Opel will not accept liability because it would mean expensive repairs to most 2.0DI and 2.2DI Vauxhall/Opel models. Several pressure groups are emerging to try to get Vauxhall/Opel to take responsibility: www.zafirauk.tk and www.peachorlemon.co.uk 2001 model year ex-fleet cars which have been subject to 20,000 mile oil changes will not be as good a second-hand buy as cars which have had their oil changed every 6 months or 7,000 miles at most. Plug leads deteriorate and are ridiculously expensive to replace. Whole dash needs to come out to replace odometer bulb. DIs seem to need new mass/airflow sensors every 36,000 miles. Timing belt and tensioner changes re-scheduled from 80,000 miles to 40,000 miles on engines which have them. Timing belts on 4 cylinder 16v engines also drive the water pump which can shed its impeller blades and seize, throwing off the belt, so best to change water pump too. Tensioner bolt which passes through oil pump also prone to fracture, leaving belt untensioned and apt to fly off. Internal roof stiffener bars on estate models can become unglued due to heat and cold on the roof and cause a rattle. Best tyres for older non-sporty Vectras are Pirelli P6000s. Best for new SRis and GSis are Yokohamas. Front suspension can wear prematurely. 15th from Bottom of 100 models for reliability in Auto Express 2002 survey. See 'What to Watch Out For' for a lot more faults. Clarkson was right first time. Now suffering corrosion of area around rear door latches. Franchises will repair under 6 year no perforation warranty, but only if service history is stamped up with corrosion inspections by Vauxhall franchises. Starting to get reports of water pump failure throwing off timing belts on 2.0 litre 16v petrol models. Noise from rear of car which sounds like wheel bearing noise is usually due to uneven rear tyre wear. Gearbox problems now beginning to emerge on late 1.8s. 2.2 16v petrol engine has been known to snap its timing chain due to the lubrication jet becoming blocked, possibly as a result of running on dirty oil due to extented oil change intervals. Ignition control unit of 2.2 petrol engine is prone to burning out. Repeated a/c compressor failures are common and using the a/c once a week does not seem to prevent this. On diesels, older F18 gearbox prone to fail and by 2005later e F23 gearboxes were failing too. I cannot recommend these cars. Only 88% breakdown free in 2003 Which survey. 28th from bottom out of 137 models in 2003 Top Gear survey. Only 89% of cars up to 2 years old breakdown-free over previous 12 months in 2004 Which? survey. 2004 Which? quote: "Disappointment on wheels. A slightly depressing driving experience and woeful build quality." "
After reading that lot I would stick with your Picasso - esp with fuel prices on the rise cheap road tax, few inconveniences of getting stuck in the mud now and gain - is it worth it ?
CliveV
I can see by your last post that you are really passionate about Land Rover which is your choice.
I, on the other hand, cannot get worked up over what is after all a piece of metal with 4 wheels.
I can agree with you that there are a number of cars on the market that leave a little to be desired but I will do my best to avoid purchasing them.
I will continue to give my opinion on this forum, unbiased and honestly as every member of the forum as a right to do.
Chill
Happy motoring
I can see by your last post that you are really passionate about Land Rover which is your choice.
I, on the other hand, cannot get worked up over what is after all a piece of metal with 4 wheels.
I can agree with you that there are a number of cars on the market that leave a little to be desired but I will do my best to avoid purchasing them.
I will continue to give my opinion on this forum, unbiased and honestly as every member of the forum as a right to do.
Chill
Happy motoring
I take issue with the unbiased and honest bit - considering your selective use of data!
Come on Cliff!
If you were that uninterested in a box on four wheals - why go to the bother of all the research?
I don't care what you or others drive "Live and Let Live" is my motto - But I suppose I should be flattered that you care so much about what I drive!
Come on Cliff!
If you were that uninterested in a box on four wheals - why go to the bother of all the research?
I don't care what you or others drive "Live and Let Live" is my motto - But I suppose I should be flattered that you care so much about what I drive!
Thanks cliff&clive,looks like i have opened a can of worms here,i think i need to have a rethink,i have in the past looked at all the japanese small 4x4 and find them a little bland except for the x trail but my wife does not like them and she would use the car 99% of the time,i am mobile with work so i may have another look around,thanks for your help,andrew.I take issue with the unbiased and honest bit - considering your selective use of data!
Come on Cliff!
If you were that uninterested in a box on four wheals - why go to the bother of all the research?
I don't care what you or others drive "Live and Let Live" is my motto - But I suppose I should be flattered that you care so much about what I drive!
Andrew
I had the misfortune to be loaned a petrol Freeloader in lieu of my normal towcar (a BMW 530d Tourer). All I can say is I wouldn't choose that particular model if they gave me
I had the misfortune to be loaned a petrol Freeloader in lieu of my normal towcar (a BMW 530d Tourer). All I can say is I wouldn't choose that particular model if they gave me
Clive,
Can I ask where the comment that "Ford are well pleased with Land Rover came from" ... Certainly not from Ford, i'm not singling out LR they've been trying to flog Jag as well
MH
Can I ask where the comment that "Ford are well pleased with Land Rover came from" ... Certainly not from Ford, i'm not singling out LR they've been trying to flog Jag as well
MH
Hi MH
LR is the only member of the PAG to have increasing sales. The car industry in the US is in dire straights.
You mentioned some time ago that Ford had sanctioned "Due Diligence" reports on LR.
It is my understanding that such reports were santioned on all PAG members by Ford. Such reports give the "owner" an independent unbiased view of assets.
So whilst a buyer often sanctions such reports to verify what it is buying - Companies often sanction such reports to help them select what is worth keeping.
Let me ask you a question - with Range Rover Sports selling like the proverbial hot cakes Defender sales still strong with a new Defender about to be launched, Range Rover sales exceeding all expectations and the LR3 (Discovery) making good sales in all markets as well as a new Freelander being built in a Ford factory not Lode Lane and sales world wide increasing, 14% up 2005 on 2004, whilst all other Ford marques are struggling, would you sell LR?
I think I know your answer as I would imagine that rather like my teenage sons - the fridge magnet motto "Teenagers please leave home now whilst you still know everything" has some bearing here.
LR is the only member of the PAG to have increasing sales. The car industry in the US is in dire straights.
You mentioned some time ago that Ford had sanctioned "Due Diligence" reports on LR.
It is my understanding that such reports were santioned on all PAG members by Ford. Such reports give the "owner" an independent unbiased view of assets.
So whilst a buyer often sanctions such reports to verify what it is buying - Companies often sanction such reports to help them select what is worth keeping.
Let me ask you a question - with Range Rover Sports selling like the proverbial hot cakes Defender sales still strong with a new Defender about to be launched, Range Rover sales exceeding all expectations and the LR3 (Discovery) making good sales in all markets as well as a new Freelander being built in a Ford factory not Lode Lane and sales world wide increasing, 14% up 2005 on 2004, whilst all other Ford marques are struggling, would you sell LR?
I think I know your answer as I would imagine that rather like my teenage sons - the fridge magnet motto "Teenagers please leave home now whilst you still know everything" has some bearing here.
Evening Clive,
It was my understanding that Ford had looked at disposing of both Jag and LR but they wanted to for very different reasons - Jag because they are making them at a loss in some instances and the fact was that a new plant was needed.
LR was also done because they thought they could actually get some real money for it. As I understand no buyer came forward despite in being profitable whereas Renault looked at Jag but Renault wanted to much money for it (yes that way round !!)
Volvo wasn't included because Ford have just built them a spanking new plant completed in record time and it uses a lot of common ford components in its ranges. Aston Martin have no info on and Mazda falls into two groups they supply a lot of the American market from their factories in Thailand but are badged for Ford, a Ford plant also makes their Mazda 2.
But to be clear Ford would love to sell LR because it could bail them out of the s**t . I think your points are right but stranger things have happened - BMW brought a company who made montego's !!
It was my understanding that Ford had looked at disposing of both Jag and LR but they wanted to for very different reasons - Jag because they are making them at a loss in some instances and the fact was that a new plant was needed.
LR was also done because they thought they could actually get some real money for it. As I understand no buyer came forward despite in being profitable whereas Renault looked at Jag but Renault wanted to much money for it (yes that way round !!)
Volvo wasn't included because Ford have just built them a spanking new plant completed in record time and it uses a lot of common ford components in its ranges. Aston Martin have no info on and Mazda falls into two groups they supply a lot of the American market from their factories in Thailand but are badged for Ford, a Ford plant also makes their Mazda 2.
But to be clear Ford would love to sell LR because it could bail them out of the s**t . I think your points are right but stranger things have happened - BMW brought a company who made montego's !!
Nothing wrong with a Montego. Good honest cars.Evening Clive,
It was my understanding that Ford had looked at disposing of both Jag and LR but they wanted to for very different reasons - Jag because they are making them at a loss in some instances and the fact was that a new plant was needed.
LR was also done because they thought they could actually get some real money for it. As I understand no buyer came forward despite in being profitable whereas Renault looked at Jag but Renault wanted to much money for it (yes that way round !!)
Volvo wasn't included because Ford have just built them a spanking new plant completed in record time and it uses a lot of common ford components in its ranges. Aston Martin have no info on and Mazda falls into two groups they supply a lot of the American market from their factories in Thailand but are badged for Ford, a Ford plant also makes their Mazda 2.
But to be clear Ford would love to sell LR because it could bail them out of the s**t . I think your points are right but stranger things have happened - BMW brought a company who made montego's !!
Hi MH - I think you are a little too parochial in your analysis. Ford is more likely to remove capacity in the US rather than elsewhere in the world.
The UK is still a good place to produce cars. The PAG is not about selling off profitable bits to shore up a failing empire!
It is about restructuring production into many different facets to appeal to as many people as possible but using the economies of scale by way of common parts and common production facilities.
People "who would not be seen dead" in a Ford are happy to by a Jag because they do not know or are not bothered that it has a Ford engine and a Ford floor pan.
Personally, having seen the LR3 TD V6 accelerate - even I may be tempted to go diesel! That Ford engine is a stunner!!!
Quite what the dear old Mondeo has to do with Ford I am not sure. But I will say the "Countryman" estate version was a cracking workhorse.
As for BMW buying the old British Leyland plant - they now make the very successful Mini. (Did I ever mention that the TD5 Land Rover has better fuel consumption than a Mini?)
The UK is still a good place to produce cars. The PAG is not about selling off profitable bits to shore up a failing empire!
It is about restructuring production into many different facets to appeal to as many people as possible but using the economies of scale by way of common parts and common production facilities.
People "who would not be seen dead" in a Ford are happy to by a Jag because they do not know or are not bothered that it has a Ford engine and a Ford floor pan.
Personally, having seen the LR3 TD V6 accelerate - even I may be tempted to go diesel! That Ford engine is a stunner!!!
Quite what the dear old Mondeo has to do with Ford I am not sure. But I will say the "Countryman" estate version was a cracking workhorse.
As for BMW buying the old British Leyland plant - they now make the very successful Mini. (Did I ever mention that the TD5 Land Rover has better fuel consumption than a Mini?)
Hi Clive,
"Did I ever mention that the TD5 Land Rover has better fuel consumption than a Mini?"
No it doesn't - my wife's Mini D betters 60 mpg on her daily commute. But a petrol engined Cooper S - then yes - but that's hardly the same thing is it?
Robert
"Did I ever mention that the TD5 Land Rover has better fuel consumption than a Mini?"
No it doesn't - my wife's Mini D betters 60 mpg on her daily commute. But a petrol engined Cooper S - then yes - but that's hardly the same thing is it?
Robert
Andrew
At 8K I would look at the larger 4x4's with diesel engines. for me it would bea TD5 discovery but I am biased.
Look at the Kia's and the Pajaro (is that spelt right?)
As for ford selling LR, that would be real odd seeing as they have just started production of the new V8 Deisel unit that will be used in the next generation of LR and other vehicles
Steve
At 8K I would look at the larger 4x4's with diesel engines. for me it would bea TD5 discovery but I am biased.
Look at the Kia's and the Pajaro (is that spelt right?)
As for ford selling LR, that would be real odd seeing as they have just started production of the new V8 Deisel unit that will be used in the next generation of LR and other vehicles
Steve
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
-
-
Need to remove Thetford fridge, do I need to replace wall vent seal?
- Started by joelmb1
- Replies: 7
-
-
Practical Caravan is part of Future plc, an international media group and leading digital publisher. Visit our corporate site.
© Future Publishing Limited Quay House, The Ambury, Bath BA1 1UA. All rights reserved. England and Wales company registration number 2008885.
Facebook
Twitter