Not a Landy, so what is it?

Saw it in Lambeth last week. Wotisit?

formatting link

If replying, take out the NOTME :o)

Reply to
Jonathan Spencer
Loading thread data ...

one of the Volvos maybe a TP21

formatting link

Reply to
Derek

It's an old Volvo L2104, I can't remember the more common name off the top of my head, I'll post it if I find it. There's another pic here;

formatting link
formatting link

Reply to
Ian Rawlings

Volvo "Sugga" command-car version AKA TP21, 1950's or thereabouts.

Some more pics from Google Images;

formatting link

Reply to
Ian Rawlings

yet another vehicle to go on my 'wants' list! :)

I like this one that Derek linked:

formatting link

Reply to
Tom Woods

They're good fun - the name means "sow", by the way, as in "female pig". Rather apt, really.

The current Volvo Tgb 11 is even better, that's right after the 110 WMIK on my want list...

Reply to
Torak

I don't think the TGB11 is current, IIRC they're late 1960's vintage and parts are hard to get these days.

Reply to
Ian Rawlings

Saw it this evening when I cycled home. It looks even better in the flesh!

Reply to
Christopher Davis

They're more current than the "Valpen" - the old Volvo.. what, 313 or some such? And they're certainly still in use, with a rather nice-looking replacement due to be phased in over the next few years.

They're definitely still in use - I spent most of my military service in one back in 2001. :-D

Reply to
Torak

As far as I'm aware, the TGB11 is another name for the Volvo C303, although I have to admit to not really going into the variety of names that the C303 has run under, there's a fair few of them! Mind you I've seen a pic of a pinzgauer labelled as a TGB11...

Heh, how's the hearing ;-)

AFAIK they're being phased out rapidly due to their age, I don't think Volvo really came up with a replacement, a situation that sounds eerily familiar...

If you know different I'd be interested in knowing what's coming, and if it'll be as capable off-road as the C303s and Pinzgauer's of old, now that the world is riddled with roads military vehicles seem to be becoming less interesting.

Reply to
Ian Rawlings

No, the Tgb 11 is a development of the 303. It looks vaguely similar, but easy to tell apart if you see them side by side. There's something like twenty years' difference, too.

Oh, not bad. It's the drumming that's ruined it.

The new one's called "Galten", and is... well, I want one, anyway. Don't know much about it, though, except that it's designed to have a .50 on the roof.

Which is nice.

Reply to
Torak

On or around Wed, 16 Aug 2006 23:48:01 +0100, Torak enlightened us thusly:

now that would be handy in the traffic.

Reply to
Austin Shackles

OK, I'll have to have a peek at those sometime.

It's not a forward control any more though, so much less space inside. That's about all I can see from the pictures and there's not that much data on the important bits, i.e. suspension etc!

It also goes under the name of BAE Systems RG-32M from the look of it. Data sheet here;

formatting link
Looks like it has live axles with portal gearboxes, 2wd or 4wd, with locking diffs, no 6x6 variant that I can see :-(

Looks like a nice beefy 4x4, although I suspect out of our budget range ;-)

Reply to
Ian Rawlings

On or around Thu, 17 Aug 2006 08:20:44 +0100, Ian Rawlings enlightened us thusly:

so are new Pinzis, though.

they'll be on sale cheap after the squaddies have beaten 'em up for a few years, then after a bit they'll be rare and collectable and fetch stupid prices.

formatting link
but not much detail about the military one. They do an open-topped patrol vehicle along the lines of the LR ones which succeeded the pink panther.

Reply to
Austin Shackles

BTW I've tried looking into this, everything I've found so far points to the C303 being the civilian version and the TGB11 being the military version of the same basic vehicle with minor differences, I've not found anything on the TGB11 to suggest it's had any significant development since 1982 (same as the C303). Do you have any further info, or are you sure you've not got yer numbers wrong? Note that the C303 isn't the "valpen" or "laplander", which are earlier but similar-looking trucks.

Here's a summary, all the other info agrees with it so far;

formatting link
There is a TGB11-based variand that looks very different, stripped down quite a bit, I used to have some pics of that somewhere, I suspect it's a weapons-carrier variant.

Reply to
Ian Rawlings

Indeed, although the early variants of the gen 2 machines (about equivalent in product history terms to the pre-defender 110/90's) can be bought for about £25K inc vat, still out of my price range though. Most of them would have more miles on them than the gen 1 machines ;-)

That's just the front of their website, was there a specific machine you had in mind? It's a pesky flash website so linking to the right page might be hard!

Reply to
Ian Rawlings

On or around Thu, 17 Aug 2006 09:52:40 +0100, Ian Rawlings enlightened us thusly:

yeah, exactly... I went looking to see if they still did a forward control, but they don't.

Still rate the PS10/anibal though - if I were in the market for a new 110 I'm pretty sure it'd be one of them not a solihull-built one. They really ought to offer the 146hp version of the engine as an option, though. The

125 hp one is a good motor, but I bet half the buyers would pay extra for the extra ponies, and I doubt the engine costs much more for Santana to buy...
Reply to
Austin Shackles

On or around Thu, 17 Aug 2006 09:48:21 +0100, Ian Rawlings enlightened us thusly:

There's some pictures there of a 6x6 one headlight-deep in a peat bog. they don't seem to admit how they got it out - it does have a winch, so given a solid enough recovery anchor point it could have winched itself out.

Reply to
Austin Shackles

The captions suggest that they sent a 4x4 C303 in to tow it out, but that got stuck too!

Reply to
Ian Rawlings

On or around Thu, 17 Aug 2006 14:12:16 +0100, Ian Rawlings enlightened us thusly:

eh? where'd you find captions?

Reply to
Austin Shackles

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.