Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.
Wow, never knew that, but makes total sense. Thanks for the link.
Now I appreciate each and every single pound of my 5800 LBs of LR4 even more
, hence the benefit of a heavier towing vehicle, specially one with an Integrated-Body Frame.
Bromhead,
I respectfully disagree.
I loved the D1/II, but when LR3 came out, I was stoked. Why, because the evolution of D1/II into the modern world with this LR3 was not an ordinary one by any means. This evolution and progress was one which was very intelligently designed and implement (minus some bad engineering/design choices like the mufflers running under the rear axels etc, which I had thought would be addressed in the future re-designs in the same spirit of engineering innovation).
The engineers/designers had challenged themselves and had gone to great lengths to marry that well-planted smooth highway ride offered by the independent suspension with the vertical wheel travel that the solid axels had provided, resulting in the cross-linked air-suspension, etc. They had spent time and effort to marry the advantages of the uni-body to those of ladder frame design resulting in Integrated-Body Frame. If you have any doubts about this unique IBF, park your truck on a steep incline while titled to either side, and then open any of the four doors and shut them back without any extra force.
If LR simply had followed and continued the same tradition of engineering innovation and standards, set by themselves, then today we would have had a much more capable D5 with much more refined ride, better wind tunnel performance without compromising on the interior room, and including a solution to the mufflers running under the axels problem.
If they had continued to challenge themselves, today we'd have had a solution the changing track width (a side effect of vertical wheel travel with independent suspension). If you look at LR3/LR4' rear suspension' components/hardware design, the engineers were already thinking ahead and were already on their way to coming up with a solve.
So, no. Cant speak for others here, but that ridiculous tail gate design of the new D5 which increases the truck' hight will not grow on me at least. The lack of stadium seating will not grow on me. The lack of flat cargo floor will not grow on me. The lack of panoramic views, the new restricted outside visibility due to smaller windows, and the lack of command driving position will not grow on me. The lack of 18 inch wheels will not grow on me. And most certainly, the Ford Explorer like rear end will not grow on me at all
I think we are in agreement... I LOVE my LR4! I had a 97 D1 for almost twenty years, and for the last 4 it simply sat in my driveway as, except for worrying about damaging it, I couldn't think of a single reason to use it over my LR4 (with the rear locker of course). Besides whining about my brief experience with the JGK, my comment about my test drive of the D5 was simply remembering that many of us were jaded when we first heard we were dropping solid axels and the tire mounted on the back....perhaps, over time we will appreciate the D5 like we have the LR3/4. Right now, I don't see it. As you said, seating, tailgate, bland explorer like exterior styling etc are not a step in the right direction...unless you want a RR as it is certainly far more posh than what I expect for a Land Rover. I love my LR/D4 and have no plans to replace it, especially as it is paid off...but the allure of a diesel engine has always been out there for me...we will see...
