Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Jaguar and Land Rover Angle For Production In China

Posted by timothy on from the ya-go-where-the-action-is dept.

First time accepted submitter ourlovecanlastforeve writes "Those of you still hanging on to Jaguar and Land Rover as the last vestiges of the truly British automobile in the States may find yourselves grasping at straws as Chery announces a nearly two billion dollar joint effort with the auto brand to move production to Changsu in China." Anyone still hanging on to that idea might also be interested to learn that Jaguar and Land Rover are subsidiaries of India's Tata, maker of the low-priced Nano.

13 of 141 comments (clear)

  1. epitome of globalization by G3ckoG33k · · Score: 5, Funny

    Owned by Indians, built by Chinese, bought by Americans and marketed as British.

    This must be the epitome of globalization.

    1. Re: epitome of globalization by 0123456 · · Score: 4, Funny

      They probably had to move manufacturing to China to maintain their lasting record for poor reliability.

    2. Re: epitome of globalization by Zubinix · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Jaguar are selling more cars now than ever before. In part due to Tata's good management. The brand has been reinvigorated rather than been killed off.

      China is the world's largest car market having recently overtaken the US. So it makes sense to move some production facilities there.

      Give credit where it's due and be thankful that a savvy operator like Tata gave new life to these otherwise dying car brands and stop your old world bias.

    3. Re: epitome of globalization by cyber-vandal · · Score: 4, Informative

      They haven't moved it. There are two factories in the UK and they are recruiting heavily right now.

    4. Re: epitome of globalization by SimonTheSoundMan · · Score: 4, Informative

      They are only moving assembly to China for the Chinease market. Shipping made cars two per container from the UK is not feasible. Everyone in Europe, America, Africa etc will still get the British made cars.

      TFA is fud. The factory near where I live in Birmingham is recruiting like crazy. Soon to open a new engine plant in Wolverhampton too.

      Parts for cars come from all over the world now anyway. Assembly doesn't employ many people compared to R&D, sourcing, etc.

    5. Re: epitome of globalization by thegarbz · · Score: 4, Interesting

      China will give you the build quality you ask for. People go to China to build cheaply, so "cheap" is the most important parameter. Then they get all confused when "cheap" (cost) ends up being "cheap" (quality).

      Very true, and this is not just for tech gadgets. Pretty much the entire astronomy industry is currently manufactured in China. Hell I've read Celestron is owned by a Chinese company. Celestron, Meade, Orion pretty much have all their equipment made in China, and to call any of their equipment unreliable or poor could not be further from the truth.

      The problem with working with the Chinese is battling through the bullshit. One of our engineers tried to buy a valve from China one day. When he asked about certification documents, the company replied with something along the lines of, "What certification would you like us to fake for you?" in only slightly less obvious words. I had a similar experience with water filters. I've never seen a TUV certificate use numbers like 100% on anything, yet the certificate applied with this "TUV certified" filter was covered with 100% numbers. Yes it was cheap.

      You get what you pay for. This applies to consumers and to businesses looking for a manufacturing plant, and China can supply both.

  2. Re:Yay it's a lose-lose! by Gordonjcp · · Score: 4, Funny

    Have you ever driven an American car?
    You get the high maintenance *and* the shit fuel economy - but not only that, you get poor braking and handling, lacklustre performance *and* poor ergonomics and aesthetics!
    Now how's that for a package?

  3. Re:Who buys automobiles based on nationality? by JustNiz · · Score: 4, Funny

    LOL probably literally. American cars are shit.

  4. Sensationalism by motd2k · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The linked blog article reports roughly 20% of the full story. In actual fact, the UK factories are maxed out and employing more and more people, and only production destined for the Chinese market is being moved to China as part of this joint venture.

  5. Re:Yay it's a lose-lose! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Think about it. Just like American women. Just like American women.
    As for me, I'll import thank you (without tariff please!).

  6. Incestuous relationships by TubeSteak · · Score: 4, Informative

    http://www.toomanycars.info/CarRelationship/Auto%20Family%20Tree%202008-Layout2.png

    ^This graphic is many years out of date, but it'll give you an idea of the complicated relationships that car manufacturers have.
    When it comes down to it, the car companies that aren't partially owned by one another are all cross licensing technology and sharing engines or chassises with one another.

    --
    [Fuck Beta]
    o0t!
  7. Ugh! by Quillem · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Tata Motors is a subsidiary of the Tata group. The latter is worth at least USD100B which makes it larger than BMW. The former and its subsidiaries also make everything from lorries, buses, and heavy lifting equipment to a number of other road cars besides the Nano. The Nano is in many ways considered a relative failure in India and it's their other cars which are more popular.

    While export might be a possibility, the article clearly mentions that the Chinese domestic market alone demands 40000 imported JLR models which will very likely increase dramatically when they are produced locally and sold with cheaper price tags. A little googling would have also revealed that China is fast becoming the company's largest market and that JLR is expanding its factories in England and hiring more people.

    If anybody needed an example of FUD, the OP would be an apt candidate.

    --
    Quillem : An India-centric mishmash of things.
  8. Sigh-another generations-old stereotype to destroy by mccalli · · Score: 4, Informative

    Sad to see many posters trotting out old reliability myths.

    Jaguar have topped JD Power Satisfaction rankings, and many other rankings, on and off for years now. The unreliable ones you're talking about were made in the 70s and 80s by, effectively, British Leyland.

    Things looked up in the early 90s when Ford took over. They started bringing modernised toolsets to the construction process, and as a result reliability started climbing. It has continued climbing until it is now well ahead of <a href="http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=mercedes%20reliability&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8">Mercedes</a>, for example, which is trotted out often as some form of reliability paragon.

    It takes a long time to change reputation, that's the problem. That reputation didn't match reality as of about 1995 onwards (possibly slightly earlier) with the dumping of the XJ40 and the move to the X300 design (still marketed as XJ6/XJ8), but people still trot out what they once heard in a bar or from their dad. It's annoying - drop it. Jaguars are as reliable, if not more so, as anything else in their class.

    Personally I've owned XJ40 and X300-type XJ6 cars (one a Sovereign, one an XJR). I've owned an X-Type and an S-Type, and am currently contemplating an older XF. During the same time period a friend of mine has owned BMWs and Audis - we've spent about the same on garage bills (an RS8 being a notable exception - bills dwarfed anything I'd seen on the Jags). The X and the S were fine, the XJ40 electrically temperamental, the X300 (XJR) was just superb.

    Cheers,
    Ian