Re: land-rover's [no audi content]

[Dave Eaton <dave.eaton@minedu.govt.nz>]

as the past owner of 2 of said "workhorses", i take exception to the undoubted
success of this machine.  while the advent of the range rover was a (long
overdue) chance for rover to actually design something relatively strong and
robust, this did not help those of us without any money, who wanted to use
these machines as nature intended (off-road), and were forced to put up with
the crap that rover called land-rover series i, ii iia and iii (to 1982 or so).

i could also point out a number of factual inaccuracies in this rebuttal, such
as that the range-rover *was* awd, not selectable 4wd, and that the land-rover
had "great axle reticulation", it didn't pre-rangie-based models (defender),
but this is an audi list...

i could also attempt to explain the frustration/anger of having broken a
land-rover rear axle for the 3rd time in a year, except this time, i was 1.5
days into the wilderness, and had to spend a long time getting out in fwd
mode...

there, i feel better now, i've taken some deep breaths...

dave
'95 rs2
'90 ur-q

>------------------------------
>
>Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 22:45:13 -0400 (EDT)
>From: Chris Maresca <ckm@eainet.com>
>Subject: Re: Can someone give me some info to refute this?
>
>On Mon, 1 Jun 1998, Brett Dikeman wrote:
>
>> Frankly, Land Rover's SUV/truck division has NEVER turned a profit; it
>> survives entirely off LR's other divisions(and I hear it is quite the blood
>> sucker.)  On top of this, I have NEVER seen a Land Rover car in my life.
>> There is probably a reason for that(isn't there a export restriction on LR
>> cars?  Oh well.)
>> 
>

[snip]

>mention most countries which were in the Commonwealth.  The ability to
>repair virutally anything on these remarkable machines with just four (!)
>tools [included] has been a key factor it's success, not to mention the
>unique ball & socket wheel to hub couplings which give a huge amount of
>travel.
>

[snip]
>
>FYI, Land Rover never used a Torsen because their products are NOT AWD
>drive, rather, they are switchable 2wd/4wd.  From their website "In 1950,
>permanent four-wheel drive was replaced by a system whereby either two or
>four-wheel drive could be selected in the high range, with permanent
>four-wheel drive in the low range."
>
>Next time you decided to post something, please make sure it is at least
>factually correct.
>
>Chris.
>'90 CQ