Army landrovers....

My guess is they buy special make landies these days...defenders that can be pulled appart with a battery drill and rivit gun....lighter to transport, probabky able to run on all kinds of fuels etc etc
Andrew

I thought The Army landies had Izuzu motors as original equipment.
Cheaper. Easy spares...ummm dare I say...better motor?

Info from a family member who is currently serving:
Defence requires a supplier to provide a vehicle without model change for extended periods (minimum of 10 years). This includes components (spares, etc). In the past, no other supplier has been prepared to guarantee this. Land Rover provide the vehicles in a number of configurations and Defence use them without modification. They do add minor accessories and modify them for special ops.
Hope this helps.
Regards

(TLC is an 11 seater?????) Back in the 80's when the last round of major trials took place, Toyota didn't put the Cruiser up for consideration as they were still building the old 40 series so the 70 series for wasn't even available for evaluation.
Really there is no commercial range of vehicles built by a single supplier that will do every task required of the military so in choosing the Landy the Army were looking for a platform that could be readily adapted to suit it's needs. No doubt parts availability, it's physical size, weight & rugged build were all features they were looking for. Pity Landrover didn't ever release a military spec vehicle to the public (minus the guns & armour plating) as they would have been a good seller.
Cheers Craig................

In approx 94/95 (I can't really remember) there was quite a few accidents with people riding in the rear of the landrovers unrestrained. We were ordered not to ride in the rear on public roads. We then had to be transported via buses to the location of the exercise and then we were allowed to ride in the rear. Go figure! I am pretty sure I never seen any armor or anything like it. We used to hose them out with the fire hose and then wipe everything, and I mean everything with diesel 1 hour prior to any inspection. They were serviced by our own guys (RAEME). The army never, never ever bought anything expensive that it did not have to. I am a carpenter and for 8 years they still gave me a little egg beater dill as part of your standard kit. The LC just started to come in around then, everyone important used to drive them because they did more than 90 km/h and had A/c. Also because they have big fuel range they were popular to win on the week end lottery. I always found the Landrover with the 3.9L engine to walk over just about anything. IMO they were far more capable than the LC in stock form.
I am always amazed how everybody seems to think if the army uses it or does something a certain way it must be good. My experience in my 8 years was completely the opposite.

The early landys were assembled in Sydney with the Isuzu motor, Latter ones were defenders built to special order. Next year the landys will be replaced by Mercedes G wagons so there will be a few cheap landys at auction. Eric

They still have coils. I have heard that they bought the Landy to keep Leyland Aust in business.

Very capable in the bush when they dont leak oil.

Anyway they are soon to be replaced by the Mercedes G Wagon.

Check out post number 63289 for what "MAY" replace the 4x4 and 6x6 Landys.
Our shop fronts onto Great Eastern Highway in Midland (Perth) WA. We have seen one 4x4 and two 6x6 versions in full camo going I presume between one of their barracks, possibly Campbell or their stores branch in Guildford and what we have surmised to be the training and evaluation facility in Northam many times over the last month or so.

Cheers Pop

During project Perentie, the selection project that lead to the current landrovers, the Army apparently wanted to buy G-Wagons then. However the government overruled them and forced them to buy the modified 110 landrovers.

This time around they Army got their way and they are getting the G-Wagons. What would be real nice is if MB started selling the G-Wagons (And utes etc) through there dealers as well. Give the Toyota 70 series some competition.

If my old memory is still working, the reason the Landrover 110 was chosen by the Army back in the early 1980s was simply that it was the best choice at the time.

The four vehicles in the Perentie trials were:
1. Landrover 110 from Jaguar Rover Australia (JRA)
2. Landcruiser HJ47 from Toyota Australia
3. Jeep J10 from Jeep Australia
4. MB 'G' Wagon from Mercedes Benz

Remember that these were only the light 4X4 vehicles in the Perentie trials, there were also larger vehicles trialled too, such as the Landrover 6X6, MB Unimog UL1300 and Jeep J20.

The results were something like this.

The 110 with Isuzu 4BD1 3.9 litre diesel engine was a clear winner in driveabilty, price and a configuration that fitted the Army's specifications closely. It's coil sprung suspension was a big plus. Remember that the Army had been buying Landrovers since 1950.

The HJ47 was considered a good vehicle but the Army felt that i's fuel economy was not good enough to meet their specs. It is my opinion that the RSL may have had a great deal of influence in this trial. They were vehemently opposed to the Army purchasing Japanese vehicles.

The Jeep J10 had nothing going for it. It had a big gas guzzling petrol engine when the Perentie spec wanted a diesel. It was also a tray back (if I remember correctly) when the Army wanted a troop carrier style of vehicle.

The G wagon was a brilliant vehicle but was let down buy a totally gutless 5 cylinder diesel engine and a huge price tag, about 3 times more than the Landrover I think.

How do I know all this? I was attached to the Perentie trials team for a week in about 1984 I think. I got to drive all the vehicles both on and off road. I also knew a number of the permanent members of the Perentie team quite well so I found out easily what they thought about all the vehicles.

I hope this helps.
Rod