Newbie considering a LR3...any advice?

[gtc]

This is simply my opinion guys. Nobody has to agree with me. I just think that you'll only get half of the LR3's value if you don't wheel it. You will deal with the headache of maintenance without experiencing the pure bliss of what it excels at. X5s **** it on the road; GX470 kills it on reliability; nothing touches it on off-roading ability. It's NOT an SUV, it's a Rover....

So my opinion, is that buying an expensive vehicle and not using it to its full potential is ill-advised. Since I was asked for advice, I gave mine.

Certainly understand your point, but the LR3 also offers better packaging (IMO!) then the either the BMW or GX470, at a very attractive price point when looking used.... To that end, buying used, I wouldn't consider it a very expensive vehicle.

The wives on our street have started comparing our LR3 to their minivans from a practical perspective - the minivans win on gas mileage and cargo volume - the LR3 wins in all other areas (including passenger volume), and a two year old LR3 is cheaper then many new mini-vans (ie, our 2 y/o LR3 was cheaper to buy then the neighbor's KIA minivan - and his brother works at the dealership!). Throw in the extended warranty and you're covered better then your average new minivan as well.

I can see where many people wouldn't want the LR3 compared to a minivan, but it's really no different then comparing it to a BMW or Lexus SUV - except that a minivan has better on road manners then your average SUV; people usually buy what they want, not what they need.

For the record, I'd also encourage anyone buying an LR3 to take it offroad - not something that I ever thought I'd enjoy, but it is a lot of fun....

 

[jptruck]

This is simply my opinion guys. Nobody has to agree with me. I just think that you'll only get half of the LR3's value if you don't wheel it. You will deal with the headache of maintenance without experiencing the pure bliss of what it excels at. X5s **** it on the road; GX470 kills it on reliability; nothing touches it on off-roading ability. It's NOT an SUV, it's a Rover....

So my opinion, is that buying an expensive vehicle and not using it to its full potential is ill-advised. Since I was asked for advice, I gave mine.

I'm with Houm on this one. If you don't have a pressing need or desire to go off-road, then get something else. My wife's X5 is a pleasure to drive, probably better in the snow, and a much better touring car for long trips. For me, I have to worry about getting in and out of muddy areas everyday and it's a neccessity. Pick the right tool for the job.

 

[kingfishgrapeja]

I think it kind of got glazed over but options wise anything in those years are going to be comparable. There are little things like power to the passenger seat and a clock display in the driver information area (the radio has a clock on it as well though). Also the wood trim kits are actual wood in the 08 and possibly the 07 but definitely not the 06. But there aren't any major differences in performance until the LR4.

Land Rover seemed to have fixed a bunch of kinks from the 05 year but if you can, try to get something with a little of the factory warranty left so you are able to get any updates that may have been missed done under warranty.

If you have a family, the 7 seat option is something you want. The third row is actually useful for adults even.

 

[Houm_WA]

@gtc: life cycle costs for the LR3 will be way higher than a mini-van. Then factor in that you're paying X and only using a fraction of that utility and it's not a good decision in terms of value, either.

@jptruck: I'd take the LR3 in snow over the X5 any day.

 

[jptruck]

@gtc: life cycle costs for the LR3 will be way higher than a mini-van. Then factor in that you're paying X and only using a fraction of that utility and it's not a good decision in terms of value, either.

@jptruck: I'd take the LR3 in snow over the X5 any day.

I'd take the LR3 in deep snow any day. On the road, with modest amount of snow (usual snow driving on roads), the X5 is what I'll drive. I've had both for 6 years now and when I have to drive in the snow with the kids in the back, i'd rather have the X5. LR3 is good, but BMW has a damn good stability system matched to a car that drives well.

 

[NickLR3HSE]

Granted I cannot even fit in a BMW X5, its not even a comparison to the LR3. The x5 is about half the size and half the weight. I am 6'6 and can sit in the 3rd row of the LR3 without any issues. I have driven both the x5 and own the lr3 and x5 drives more sport and stiff than the land rover, now take the range rover sport and compare it to the bmw x5 and the sport blows the x5 out of the water!

 

[Houm_WA]

jp: Do you live in a place that requires you to drive down (steep) hills? 4-Lo is invaluable in those situations. The X5 doesn't have it.

 

[jptruck]

I live in the Shenandoah Valley. Mountain ranges on both sides. Steep hills are optional for me. I like playing with the LR3 In snowy conditions. Sliding backward down a 30 degree hill can be fun on a cold winter day.

Just FYI. . .I have rarely needed by low range except in the worst of the worst snow, mud conditions. Normal mode usually works fine for me in gears 1,2.

 

[gtc]

@gtc: life cycle costs for the LR3 will be way higher than a mini-van. Then factor in that you're paying X and only using a fraction of that utility and it's not a good decision in terms of value, either.

@jptruck: I'd take the LR3 in snow over the X5 any day.

Not sure I'd buy the lifecycle costs being higher if you buy used and aren't racking up large numbers of miles... granted I'm comparing new to used, so not really an apples to apples comparison. Loosely comparing our TCO on the LR3 vs. the neighbours, I seem to be a fair bit ahead - granted, I've wrenched a few easier things myself which might swing the difference, and our mileage is relatively modest (10k - 15k miles / year) since we usually have more cars then drivers...

The usage of utility holds true for just about every offroad capable vehicle, or sports car for that matter... to stretch the analogy, most bikes also fit into the category. I think the key is that the LR3 does an awful lot of things very well - something that couldn't be said for prior Disco's (or at least they were a bit of a let down in the on road manners department from what I recall - haven't driven one in 7 or 8 years, and it was just a loaner....)

 

[Houm_WA]

@jptruck: do those hills have a nice little run-out at the bottom of them so that you can idle to a stop when it flattens out? I'd still be carrying a lot of speed in 2nd gear (hi-range) for my taste. Stopping when the hill is still inclined would require a lot of braking. Maybe you wouldn't be sliding backwards on those 30 degree hills if you were in 4-Lo !



@gtc:

Not sure I'd buy the lifecycle costs being higher if you buy used and aren't racking up large numbers of miles...

The usage of utility holds true for just about every offroad capable vehicle, or sports car for that matter...

Okay so if you buy one used and don't drive it the life-cycle costs are low. I can't argue against that statement! (yes, that's sarcastic)

I agree with what you say in the second statement. It goes along with my point. I wouldn't buy a sports car unless it was purely for fun. I wouldn't buy a Jeep Wrangler either unless it was purely for fun. That's an extention of my argument, indeed.

I bought the LR3 because I needed a vehicle that could do anything and everything, including off-roading. If not for the off-roading piece, it would be tough to deal with the bushings and brakes and MAF sensors and batteries and leaky sunroofs and crummy rear latches and suspension compressors and <insert poorly engineered part name here> and...you get the point.

I love my LR3 and put up with all its crap because of the ONE thing it can do that no other rig can...everything.