|
|
Post by Woodbeef on Jan 28, 2002 19:59:45 GMT 1
Does anyone think that V-BM's implementing of directive L-77 had anything to do with helping to pave their way out of the ag-tractor business?
Did it actually work?
Did V-BM's reputation suffer?
How are the tractors built under the directive holding up vs. the others?
|
|
|
|
Post by Laapa on Jan 31, 2002 9:03:30 GMT 1
As I understood it, L-77 meant V-BM made a big go for it and introduced new models that would secure VolvoBM's place as a Agricultural manufacturer in the furute. The articulated prototype (featured in the prototype-section of this website) was part of the plan. Many models were based on previous ones, I do not think they were any worse than they were before.
I guess by now we can say L-77 did not work, no Tractors or combines have been made by Volvo in Sweden for many years.
Perhaps it was the best way to go for both Volvo and Valtra, both companies have prospered, but I do miss domestic tractor production.
Some Volvo executive said about the L-77 directive: "Everybody loves a fighter, even if he loses".
Honestly I'm a bit suprised by your knowledge of the L77 driective. You never seize to suprise me Woodbeef.
What is your opinion?
|
|
|
|
Post by Woodbeef on Jan 31, 2002 17:56:47 GMT 1
The part of it I was most wondering about,was the under 100 hp tractors.
From this point on V-BM made the desicion to use Perkins motors and IH drive trains for all new models under 70 hp. Did the dependability,and reliability suffer?
Was this the begining of the end? A few short years later ScanTrac came about. But even then the V-BM sourced models were not anything new and earth shattering.
Was it because of L-77,and its inherent implications that V-BM is now VCE(or V-ME)? I often wonder if they lost the fire,and went for the more larger,and thus lucrative construction market because of this out-sourcing?
|
|
|
|
Post by Laapa on Feb 1, 2002 8:27:41 GMT 1
Perhaps others know better, but as I understood it, L77 was a serious (though failed) attempt by Volvo to stay in the ag-business. Doing so meant outsourscing production of certain components (to IH etc.), and perhaps they saved a bit of money on R&D for new products by using old platforms etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by Woodbeef on Feb 1, 2002 15:07:08 GMT 1
good to the Ag-end of V-BM.
The styling was still there,but mechanically they seemed to not progress very much after the directive.
What is still bugging me is that V-BM does not impress me as a company that would push someone else's product instead of developing their own. Their roots just run way too deep!!
Another thing is that they never really came out with anything new,only refreshed the line for the last hurrah!!
Maybe they were forward thinking visionaries and saw the future of ag vs industrial,and L-77 was the turning point. If it did not perform up to expectations,then they would bail!
It is always a shame though when good companies with histories as well earned as Volvo-BM leave the market. Valtra has carried on valiantly with the Nordic tractor tradition,and kept the history alive!!
|
|
