L319 vs. L462...

[ktm525]

What are you trying to say about loss of power? I’d prefer the lr4 V8 over the v6sc.

Lr4 running boards can be easily removed. It’s crazy to consider that in the equation

But if I were starting over, I’d have a hard time not trying a LC instead anyway.

I would also prefer a V8 but as time marches on the prospect of picking up a low mile V8 becomes harder and harder. New performance upgrades for the V6 puts output higher than the V8 albeit in a rougher delivery for sure. I thought the running boards were part of the vehicle for crash protection? I never bought that so it is good if people are having success removing them. The previous owner of my 2010 had similar ones on since new. They were a pain to remove but no ill effects so far. The Land Cruiser? Just the $$$ deterring me.

 

[ryanjl]

I would also prefer a V8 but as time marches on the prospect of picking up a low mile V8 becomes harder and harder. New performance upgrades for the V6 puts output higher than the V8 albeit in a rougher delivery for sure. I thought the running boards were part of the vehicle for crash protection? I never bought that so it is good if people are having success removing them. The previous owner of my 2010 had similar ones on since new. They were a pain to remove but no ill effects so far. The Land Cruiser? Just the $$$ deterring me.

There's no structural difference between a newer LR4 and an older LR4, so if you are comfortable driving an older LR4, there's no reason to not be comfortable driving a newer LR4 with the running boards removed.

 

[Mcb14230]

Wow I didn't expect the hostility towards Lexus lol. The front on the GX is not pretty for sure but the worldwide aftermarket support is huge. That front fascia can be transformed easily with an offroad bumper/winch setup. The GX also still has that sweet V8. Add in the quality scores that Land Rover can only dream of and it is not that crazy . That being said the swing tailgate kills it for me.

If I go the Lexus route it will more than likely be the Toyota route, as in Land Cruiser. A little tricky since Toyota has not sold Land Cruisers up here for a long long time (except in the mining industry). Again they have there pluses and minus and I really dig the conservative Land Cruiser look.

The other route is another newer LR4 but the running boards kind of **** it. The upgrade kits for the SCV6 sound intriguing so that may put the issue with the loss of power (coming from the V8) to bed.

I saw a new D5 today out in the wild. Definitely not going that route.

its funny, i was for sure a V8 snob for a while. but my 16 lr4 w the scv6 is significantly quicker than my wife's V8 GX and blows away my old Disco1 v8. but i would not give anyone a hardtime about what ever they choose. I just couldnt ever put the GX or even a new landcruiser off road. too much plastic and and too expensive. The toyotas and Lexus are crazy reliable and i love the service dept at Lexus; but i have had every bit as good an experience at my Austin Rover dealership.

 

[ktm525]

Yes but for LR4s going from the V8 to the SCV6 was going down in power and it is noticeable. With the new SC tune (check the other thread) it sounds like the V6 can be "fixed" lol.

 

[jwest]

the lr3 is simply the best overall value though, period. none of the engine BS to deal with and massively cheaper. I have bought many new cars, some up to $100k, most more than what a new lr4 was, so i can appreciate the desire for newer, faster, etc. but now I've completely switched to how cheap can i accomplish my needs with a vehicle. Not meaning "cheap" as in low quality, as i still buy the bigger pressure washer or better tools and best tire possible, but in this scenario, you could find a soccer mommer lr3 for 1/4-1/3 the cost of an lr4 and use the remainder to really build it out with no compromises or an offroad trailer, etc.

I see so many people blowing their *** on an lr4, low miles, etc then they try justifying tires that are "good enough" instead of the best or won't spend the $ to get the spare tire onto the bumper. It's mind boggling.

At this point, a 2-4 yr old lr4 will depreciate in a couple yrs more than my lr3 is worth. That extra $ spent is worth what exactly...? zero aside from just enjoying newer shinier things.

Same thought process goes for GX LX LC etc. The value spot now in land cruisers is the 100 series. $12-$18k gets you a 2006+ Land Cruiser 100 series w heated seats, decent enough touch nav, probably ACH leveling, no fuss solid platform. However the 200 series first few years are now into a value range too and a true step up from the 100 series in trim, systems, design.

It's interesting to compare that the differences from lr3 to lr4 are really not that much aside from the sweet engine. LC 200 got not only a much more powerful engine but also ventilated seats and totally re-engineered chassis especially the funky front end where the 100 series had the torsion bars. 200 got all new KDSS which disconnects the sway bars off road for really nice front end articulation. The rear is still a solid axle which is better for towing.

There are pros and cons for sure. I actually like the unique chassis/body engineering of our lr3/4 being a unibody on a ladder frame. I don't know of any other suv made who did that. It's why ours is so solid in that aspect.

 

[cperez]

I like the LR3 in many ways more than the LR4. In fact, your post got me to go straight to autotrader.com and I found a beautiful specimen for $9K. It's a silver '06 SE model with 110,685 miles. Also found an '09 HSE in Buckingham Blue with 112K miles for $12K. Damn you, @jwest.

I love the LR3's simpler trim; the contrasting wheel flares and the way they wrap around the front fog lights. And the less frilly grill has always struck me as more handsome and purpose-built. Same with the taillights. I've always liked the center stack and console of the LR3, too. The tradeoffs would be minimal in some of the creature comforts. No passive entry. No Bluetooth music streaming. Big deal, easy to adjust to that stuff. And 18" wheels!

The challenge would be the time and effort to locate an LR3 that hadn't been kicked to hell by the previous owner. But given the cost savings, you'd have plenty left over to get it running like a top. Now I'm kinda wishing I had looked at LR3s more closely when my 2011 LR4's time was up.

 

[TheWidup]

Believe it or not there are gem LR3s hiding out there with less than 60k miles on them. You're nearly in LR4 pricing at that point though. I heard the 4.4 v8 was a slow pig with overheating issues though...was I misled?

 

[ktm525]

I ran a a 2006 LR3 HSE for 5 years and then sold it and stepped into a 2010 LR4 (still got it). While I liked the simple exterior design of the LR3 better and the purposeful dash almost everything else weighs in favour of the LR4. I did like the slower steering ratio of the 3 as the 4 feels too quick and over boosted.

Brakes: LR4 are bigger and stronger
Engine: No contest LR4 although the 4.4 was quieter and smoother
Ride: LR4 is smoother
Handling : Land Rover changed the geometry in the 4 and it shows. Much better in the 4


However Land Rover did de-content a couple things. Third row infotainment controls.

I will say my 4 has been much less troublesome than the 3 at similar mileages (105 k miles).


If I was cross shopping a 2008/09 LR3 vs a 2010 LR4 I would go 4. Those are my thoughts.

 

[jwest]

Believe it or not there are gem LR3s hiding out there with less than 60k miles on them. You're nearly in LR4 pricing at that point though. I heard the 4.4 v8 was a slow pig with overheating issues though...was I misled?

Overheating sounds like pure BS. I towed a 7800lb tandem from NC to WA in late summer and only once on a very long grade was there ever an issue that only had me slow down a bit.
You were misled...

 

[jwest]

I ran a a 2006 LR3 HSE for 5 years and then sold it and stepped into a 2010 LR4 (still got it). While I liked the simple exterior design of the LR3 better and the purposeful dash almost everything else weighs in favour of the LR4. I did like the slower steering ratio of the 3 as the 4 feels too quick and over boosted.

Brakes: LR4 are bigger and stronger
Engine: No contest LR4 although the 4.4 was quieter and smoother
Ride: LR4 is smoother
Handling : Land Rover changed the geometry in the 4 and it shows. Much better in the 4


However Land Rover did de-content a couple things. Third row infotainment controls.

I will say my 4 has been much less troublesome than the 3 at similar mileages (105 k miles).


If I was cross shopping a 2008/09 LR3 vs a 2010 LR4 I would go 4. Those are my thoughts.

Guess you have not yet had the rather common timing chain/guides repair yet then. I almost sold and bought an lr4 until a Lr long time mechanic told me how many engine issues they’d had to deal with compared to very few on lr3.
The feel of the engine, transmission, and handling was SOooo tempting in the lr4 but in the big picture, it wasn’t enough to sway me.

Center console: Lr3 has nice little rubber pad ledge under navy screen, and that great spot for stuff below the hvac and between the cup holders. I hate the lr4 removing all those.

Door window ledges: lr4 is nicer shape to me providing better level area for left elbow when driving long days.

18” wheels available all day long and 17” if you change the brake rotors. To me the slight braking improvement on lr4 is nothing big. I’ve never needed more on the lr3 and it weighs 7200-8200 lbs on trips.