Who's running Cooper STT's???

[roverman]

has not logical merit? Tires make a huge difference, of course. But when it comes to the mud and muck in the deep south, I'd take something about a ton lighter with the same tires. And I'd be willing to bet the independent suspension arms would grab that mud more than a solid axle. Although if you're in mud that deep you're probably not going anywhere anyway...
Terrain response doesn't mean much of anything other than the suspension lift in mud like that. I'm just nitpicking, of COURSE it's good. It's just not the first truck I'd choose.

 

[Houm_WA]

I said it has no logical merit because you didn't list any reasons why the LR3 would NOT be good in mud. Rather, you simply said it wouldn't. Hence, no logic, just anectode. ...but now you've done so above. Hmmm...yes, weight is not beneficial generally, unless there is solid ground under the mud in which case the heavier vehicle could get a little more friction from that. ...but that's just Physics and is sort of counter-intuitive. Can the power compensate for weight? Enough speed and you'll get floatation...so isn't power-to-weight ratio really more important than gross weight? I suppose that the A-arms could cause drag in mud, that's true...but then again the solid axle rigs would be draggin' their rear diffs around in the same mud, right?

So I'd say those things may be factors but not enough to say that it's no good in mud. As for the terrain response, I merely made that statement as a matter of fact. Terrain Response is always on, so you must pick a setting...may as well be the appropriate one, right? I don't feel that TR has any pixie dust in its inards to make it propel the LR3 to do amazing things...but you have to tune it! It's a means to set up the vehicle, and that's all I meant by that.

Now...let's proceed with the logical disussion! I didn't mean to slight you in any way, Roverman...I just meant that you didn't give specific reasons...cool?

 

[Mhaise57]

Taking into account the topics contained in this thread; would the current Land Rover lineup survive a real camel trophy event? Mongolia, Malaysia for example where quite treacherous. How do ya'll think the LR3 or LR4 would do? I am sure we can all agree that the G4 challenge is by no means comparable to the Camel Trophy, so to get an accurate idea is completely out of the question. Land Rovers weren't created as a "Luxury" SUV's and we can't forget that in 1948 they were inspired by WW2 jeeps. I am afraid the heritage of the LR concept is being forgotten. Yes the LR3 is a remarkable vehicle and can do everything LR claimed it could do. I am just afraid of where it is going. I had the opportunity to take an LR4 for the day and I will admit it handles like a sports car and is a beautiful piece of machinery, but there is just something about it that doesn't remind me of a Land Rover. I wanna share a pic I took from a project my company sent me on last year in Sabha, Libya in the Sahara desert. It was more like a vacation and I had access to any one I wanted. This is what Maurice Wilks envisioned for his creation. Cheers!

 

[nwoods]

Taking into account the topics contained in this thread; would the current Land Rover lineup survive a real camel trophy event? Mongolia, Malaysia for example where quite treacherous. How do ya'll think the LR3 or LR4 would do?

I feel the same way. The LRX is a great example of LR losing their way (IMHO). The LR3 is exceptionally capable, but durable they are not.

Would they handle that sort of climate in CT style competition? Yes. But not day after day. The guys from the UK on Disco3.co.uk race their D3's in the Morocco Challenge every year, and fair very well. Often recovering stuck Defenders along the way

 

[BldrRover]

Not durable? Campared to what, the old discos? Last I checked, those were some of the most unreliable vehicles on the market. I am sure there were plenty of "pit stops" for the vehicles used in the Camel Trophy for various major repairs. I feel like this argument spawns everytime a new Jeep or LR model pops up, but just about every time, the new vehicle can beat out the old one. CJ7 vs. YJ vs. TJ vs. JK... Disco 1, Disco 2, LR3...

Come on now guys. The leather, heated seats, navigation, good styling and a nice stereo doesn't make it any less capable. It just makes you look that much crazier when people see you off road with it.

 

[duckdive]

Duplicate.

 

[duckdive]

Come on now guys. The leather, heated seats, navigation, good styling and a nice stereo doesn't make it any less capable. It just makes you look that much crazier when people see you off road with it.

Well said.

 

[Houm_WA]

I agree that the luxury doesn't detract from the capability...just requires increased testicular fortitude from the driver. That said, to survive a Camel Trophy like competition would require a completely different set of repair tools/kit. Field repairs of electronic crap would have to be available...and mostly for just the essential stuff (TR brains, suspension stuff, ECM...etc).

 

[Trynian]

I agree that the luxury doesn't detract from the capability...just requires increased testicular fortitude from the driver. That said, to survive a Camel Trophy like competition would require a completely different set of repair tools/kit. Field repairs of electronic crap would have to be available...and mostly for just the essential stuff (TR brains, suspension stuff, ECM...etc).

Just like any challenge, you need to know your vehicle and how to equip and repair it.

 

[nwoods]

Not durable? Campared to what, the old discos? Last I checked, those were some of the most unreliable vehicles on the market.

Don't confuse capability, durability and reliability. Lord knows the LR3's capability has been demonstrated beyond doubt, Similarly, I have found the LR3 to be highly reliable. However, it is not as durable as other vehicles with similar capabilities (utility, not comfort). I think that at least 90% of the LR3 is rock solid. The frame, body, engines, interior assembly and majority of the electronic systems are very durable. However, in my opinion the undercarriage electrical connectors, the transmission, the rear differential, the EPB, the amazingly pathetic suspension bushings, the steering assembly, the front CV's, the swaybar bushings, fuel pumps, air conditioning balancing system and a few other odds and ends are not up to the regular and repeated abuse that a Jeep or older style Land Cruisers (80 series or older) can take. This is not an issue of electronics, it's just economics. Land Rover did not set out to build the most durable car on the planet, they set out to design one of the most capable, comfortable, and versatile vehicles available, and they succeeded. But to take it to the next level in durability would have cost far more in production costs than could ever be justified by the LR3's target demographic market.

Would I travel to the ends of the earth in one? You bet. Would I drive one every day if I lived there? Not without a really good warranty.