L319 vs. L462...

[ktm525]

Yes, so far so good on the timing chain tensioners. I believe I have kept them at bay with regular oil changes beyond the 24 k / 1 year crap LR was advising when these were new. The braking does not show up in numbers it just seems to have more bite and feel. I do miss the LR3 console. Of course 18" wheels are expensive in the 4.

I had an early build 2006 and frankly it just broke more: air compressor, starter, 2 sets of LCAs, both front wheel bearings etc. Same driver and conditions so no idea. I think with Land Rover the later in the product life the better as the items are mostly sorted. I have heard that the 2009s were the LR3 to get.

 

[Mcb14230]

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.

frankly that doest match the published numbers. the Lr3 with 4.4 v8 was 300hp; the Lr4 scv6 is 340hp. perhaps the LR3 was significantly lighter than the l4R otherwise the LR4 with SCV6 has better performance numbers

 

[ktm525]

frankly that doest match the published numbers. the Lr3 with 4.4 v8 was 300hp; the Lr4 scv6 is 340hp. perhaps the LR3 was significantly lighter than the l4R otherwise the LR4 with SCV6 has better performance numbers

Er... The V8 in the LR4 has 375 HP and 375 ft lbs. The SCV6 was a step down in both.

 

[iconoclast]

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

Especially when he made comments of giving the LX a complete nose job to make it more attractive.
I prefer the V8 over the SCV6 as well. The SCV6 is loud and negligible fuel "savings" over the V8.
I believe LR would have been better off selling the LR4 in two variants. SCV6 and V8.
The SCV6 with a la carte options and the V8 a fully loaded or close to model.
Probably would have sold more this way towards the end of it's life-cycle.

frankly that doest match the published numbers. the Lr3 with 4.4 v8 was 300hp; the Lr4 scv6 is 340hp. perhaps the LR3 was significantly lighter than the l4R otherwise the LR4 with SCV6 has better performance numbers

You will be hardpressed to find anyone who did not refer to the v8 in the lR3 as anemic and underpowered.

 

[ktm525]

Yes I drove a 4.4 LR3 for 5 years and I would describe it as adequate. The 5.0L in my current LR4 is good. The SCV6 that replaced the V8 in 2014+ is weaker which is not good. The dropping of the V8 in the latter years reduces my search window to a low mileage 2012-2013 to eventually replace my 2010. This makes it tough to find a low mileage cream puff.

On another note

adding an aftermarket bumper is not a huge deal (other than $$) and it cures the ugly Lexus mugs Toyota is currently using. They make one for the LR4 too I believe.

 

[ryanjl]

Wait till you see a profile view of that ARB bumper on a 200-series Land Cruiser. Looks like it's got severe underbite. The TJM bumpers look a little better, but it still just doesn't look right.

 

[jwest]

Especially when he made comments of giving the LX a complete nose job to make it more attractive.
I prefer the V8 over the SCV6 as well. The SCV6 is loud and negligible fuel "savings" over the V8.
I believe LR would have been better off selling the LR4 in two variants. SCV6 and V8.
The SCV6 with a la carte options and the V8 a fully loaded or close to model.
Probably would have sold more this way towards the end of it's life-cycle.



You will be hardpressed to find anyone who did not refer to the v8 in the lR3 as anemic and underpowered.

Nah, you sound a little uninformed on the specifics. People w an lr3 aren't worried about how fast they can move a 7000 lb vehicle. While the 5.o is grin inducing, it's the transmission in the lr3 that makes it an annoying drive, not the engine.

 

[ktm525]

Wait till you see a profile view of that ARB bumper on a 200-series Land Cruiser. Looks like it's got severe underbite. The TJM bumpers look a little better, but it still just doesn't look right.

Not a full side profile but I get what you mean. It must have to do with mounting the proper size winch. It isn't pretty but it looks all business. Also it is a step above the predator grille

grill.

 

[ryanjl]

The TJM ones look fitted a bit better. For some reason, ARB decided to require the owner hack up the trim piece under the headlights, whereas the TJM bumper just replaces that piece entirely.

Toyota's 2016 redesign on the front of the Land Cruiser did them wonders, too. So much better looking than the 2015's and earlier.

 

[iconoclast]

Nah, you sound a little uninformed on the specifics. People w an lr3 aren't worried about how fast they can move a 7000 lb vehicle. While the 5.o is grin inducing, it's the transmission in the lr3 that makes it an annoying drive, not the engine.

I may be "uninformed" but I've owned an LR3, and several variants of the LR4. I am quite familiar with them and from my experience along with other's opinions/statements the engine in the LR3 was just seriously under-powered and poorly paired but the driving characteristics and mpg are very similar to the SCV6 found in the later years with a better transmission pairing. On a side note the D2 I owned was an odd vehicle because it had a V8 but felt and drove like a 4cyl with it's 1950's Buick motor. That was a peculiar vehicle but one of my favorite. IMO. YMMV.