LR3 - LR4 Resources

[nwoods]

Scott, there was a thread awhile back where I tried to answer a lot of those questions, and others. Check it out here:
http://www.expeditionportal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=23932

As for resources for the LR3/4, here are a few quick links:
- http://lr3tips.wordpress.com/
- http://www.disco3.co.uk/forum/index.php
- http://www.landroverworld.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=35
- http://www.lrrforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26


My thoughts on your questions: In stock form, the LR3 is the most capable vehicle ever produced by Land Rover....but it is certainly not the most durable.

 

[Lancer]

I suspect that a part of the problem regarding the "loss" of the KISS principle referred to above, is that the VAST majority of these vehicles - even Defenders, aren't going to be used on expeditions. They get used for normal everyday stuff like shopping and taking children to school. Defenders - and other vehicles in that class (other than military) may well get used for a bit more, eg in the case of a farmer's or vet's vehicle, might get used to hump stuff and animals around in muddy conditions, or by utility companies, but even then will spend far more time on-road than off.

That being the case, the vehicle has to comply with engine and exhaust emission regulations and also engine noise regs - all virtually impossible to do now without increasingly complex electronic engine management systems. As the manufacturers know that they are selling into a mostly domestic-use market, the vehicles also have to be as comfortable as possible hence the increasingly complex suspension systems and - because most of the market they are selling to is 4x4 ignorant - as "idiot proof" as possible, hence the automated everything else. Where I live (South East London/North Kent) there are probably at least 8 4x4 vehicles within a couple of hundred yards of my house (other than mine). As far as I can see, not one is ever used off road at all.

Speaking of noise etc regs - I don't know what the situation is in the US, but from (I think) 2012 - Euro regs come in regarding tyre noise levels. The new General Grabber AT will meet these regs - no idea about other 4x4 tyres. As even a mud-tyre equipped vehicle probably spends more time on the road than on/in mud, and given how noisy they are, it will be interesting to see how the maunufacturers manage.

 

[Antichrist]

I suspect that a part of the problem regarding the "loss" of the KISS principle referred to above, is that the VAST majority of these vehicles - even Defenders, aren't going to be used on expeditions. They get used for normal everyday stuff like shopping and taking children to school.

That's why I said

So I'll be interested in what people have to say about them as a long distance overland vehicle, as opposed to off-roading with a group of friends where rescue is a call away.

My assumption was that this thread was about that, not about them as daily drivers for occasional off-roading adventures with friends.
In my view that's two entirely different scenarios.

 

[upcruiser]

Correct me if I am wrong but aren't there issues with the front control arms? I remember seeing pictures of an LR3 that had catastrophic control arm failure on the highway that lead to a bad wreck. The control arms looked to be stamped steel and quite flimsy.

Also, do most of the comments here also pertain to the last gen Range Rover?I have always wondered how they would perform for the same use. Same platform correct?

 

[benedmonson]

The V-8 was not really "Ford".... it's a Jaguar AJ-V8. 4.4L, 300HP. So, whether or not it's a "Ford" really depends on if you consider a Jaguar to be Ford. I could see why some people would think it was, others would slap you for uttering such an insult.

It definitely wasn't BMW.

The V6 offered was a Ford. The Cologne V6. Same as in the Ford Explorer, Ranger, and Mustang. IMHO, it's a POS as far as performance and NVH are concerned, but otherwise it's a stout, reliable engine that you will forget is under the hood as long as you do remember to change the oil every once in a while.

Both are vastly superior to the Rover V8, IMO.

Hey! I don't want to get slapped!!! It makes me feel better to hear it was a Jaguar motor, just sounds cooler........

 

[Dave Legacy]

Correct me if I am wrong but aren't there issues with the front control arms? I remember seeing pictures of an LR3 that had catastrophic control arm failure on the highway that lead to a bad wreck. The control arms looked to be stamped steel and quite flimsy.

Also, do most of the comments here also pertain to the last gen Range Rover?I have always wondered how they would perform for the same use. Same platform correct?

RRS is the LR3 platform, but the RR is on a completely different platform. EAS on all three.

 

[nwoods]

Correct me if I am wrong but aren't there issues with the front control arms? I remember seeing pictures of an LR3 that had catastrophic control arm failure on the highway that lead to a bad wreck. The control arms looked to be stamped steel and quite flimsy.

Yes and no. The incident you are referring to was later determined to "probably" be the result of a sheared bolt. This has happened to at least one other person now. That's two known incidents in several hundred thousand vehicles produced. Interestingly, Land Rover has changed the design of those carrier bolts now. I know a few folks that have bought spares or proactively replaced them just in case.

As for the control arms, no known failures, ever. Perhaps they are stamped steel, but the are adequate for the task. Remember that tire size is limited on the LR3, thus so is maximum force that can be applied.

 

[nwoods]

That's why I saidMy assumption was that this thread was about that, not about them as daily drivers for occasional off-roading adventures with friends.
In my view that's two entirely different scenarios.

Well said!

 

[Navman]

IOverall we loved our LR3 as much as you could love a vehicle. When you look at the time spent on the tarmac in your over landing vehicle it is way more than time spent in the dirt. This was one of the reasons we liked her so much, she was a dream on the road and pretty much a bad *** off-road when working properly.

That pretty well sums up the feeling of most LR3 owners that I've talked to since we bought ours.

After we bought our LR3 I was planning on keeping my D1 and doing extensive mods to it. However, after driving the LR3 and putting it though it's paces offroad I decided to get rid of the D1. I got spoiled by the LR3. Like most though I am a little worried about the complexity of it, especially getting a suspension fault in the middle of nowhere.

 

[David Harris]

I am a little worried about the complexity of it, especially getting a suspension fault in the middle of nowhere.

I love the looks of the LR3 platform, but you echo my main concern. I have been thinking of buying one of these, but the complexity in the long run is a worry to me . . .

 

[Dave Legacy]

I love the looks of the LR3 platform, but you echo my main concern. I have been thinking of buying one of these, but the complexity in the long run is a worry to me . . .

I don't know if there is a long-term life for LR3s. I guess it just depends on how well the electronics hold up. I've been thinking about it lately and most modern cars are heavily electronics dependent, plus EAS is hardly a new concept for Land Rover. Really electronics age really well as there's not a lot of moving parts. Outside of Land Rovers I've seen ECUs outlive motors plenty of times.

 

[Columbia Rovers]

This video sums up the LR3's off-road capability: [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STt7DmJeeVc&NR=1"]YouTube - Disco 3 at moegatle 4x4[/ame]

We have a full LR3 conversion kit including Old Man Emu lift springs. We are just looking for a willing soul to commit to the swap. We also have IDS so we can work on the programming aspect.

The LR3 is an AWESOME vehicle. I didn't see anyone post anything about snow but they are amazing both at speed and while crawling in the white stuff. I left well equipped Discovery 1's and 2's at the top of a trail and had to come back when no one could make it more than 10 feet off the highway.

Reliability: Avoid 05 and even early 06. 07 is your best bet. We don't see anywhere near the electronic and EAS (Electronic Air Suspension) issues with the LR3 as we have the P38 (95-02) and L322 (03+) Range Rovers. As is with most vehicles, our customers that have the most trouble with their LR3's are the customers that frequently ignore their interval services and our service recommendations.

Bushings: There is PLENTY of warning when it comes to lower control arm bushing degredation. I have seen customers drive on sloppy bushings for months before committing to the repair. If you have the control arms replaced, make sure you have the carrier bolts replaced (they can sieze and require significant force to remove so don't want those going back in) and get an alignment. It's a good idea to coordinate the control arm replacement with new tires and a lift where applicable. Most alignment shops can't handle a full alignment so be prepared to shop around. Your local dealer is always a safe bet.

Motor: The 4.4 is a true Jag motor and it kicks the crap out of the LR legacy block that they milked for decades. I have clocked 22MPG with oversized tires. Compare that with my Discovery II that dyno'd at 127HP and never saw over 17MPG. So far, the Jag 4.4's are holding their fluids even better than the BMW 4.4L found in 2003-2005 Range Rovers.

Field Repairs: For those that don't want to drop $23k on the factory IDS system, there are some aftermarket alternatives that we have seen for $2500-$5000 that can be kept in the vehicle on long journeys. Yes, that is still A LOT of money but competition will drive that cost down. Someone is probably working on a recovery module already, similar to the "ABS Amigo" pioneered by RSWsolutions.

Air Suspension Failure Prevention: Inspect the suspension bellows for leaks. Use soapy water if you are a DIY type. Consult your service provider (must have IDS) to ensure the EAS software is up to date. Old revisions of the software can cause the compressor to burn up, thus faulting the vehicle to the bump stops.

WARNING regarding Oversized Tires: Larger tires may contact the frame right where the EAS height sensor wire is ran thereby cutting the wire or yanking it enough to cause a fault. Options to avoid this: Weld additional material to the bump stop thereby decreasing your turning radius. Add wheel spacers. Get a different wheel such as the Redbourne Duke. Re-route the harness wire.

Hope my .02 helps!

 

[Paladin]

Did one of my posts get deleted or I forgot to push Submit?

Yes and no. The incident you are referring to was later determined to "probably" be the result of a sheared bolt. This has happened to at least one other person now. That's two known incidents in several hundred thousand vehicles produced. Interestingly, Land Rover has changed the design of those carrier bolts now. I know a few folks that have bought spares or proactively replaced them just in case.

As for the control arms, no known failures, ever. Perhaps they are stamped steel, but the are adequate for the task. Remember that tire size is limited on the LR3, thus so is maximum force that can be applied.

If Rover changed the design of the bolt, that's an indication that something is up. I remember looking at pictures of failed arms, but it was never clear if it happened before or after the accident.

 

[nwoods]

WARNING regarding Oversized Tires: Larger tires may contact the frame right where the EAS height sensor wire is ran thereby cutting the wire or yanking it enough to cause a fault. Options to avoid this: Weld additional material to the bump stop thereby decreasing your turning radius. Add wheel spacers. Get a different wheel such as the Redbourne Duke. Re-route the harness wire.

Welding might be a bit extreme, moving the wire takes only a minute and is easy to do.
http://lr3tips.wordpress.com/2010/10/01/bigger-tires-move-this-wire/

 

[sgaynor]

A 2007 LR3 all modded up:

http://www.discoweb.org/forums/showthread.php?t=71941