New LR4 in October 2009
- Thread starter jbrockiii
- Start date
seems the look is getting closer and closer to the Range Rover SPort ,
when you think of the disco 2, disco 3, also the slight cosmetic change of the disco 3 2009 (painted bumpers and so on..) and now disco 4.
Would this announce the end of the Range Rover ?
when you think of the disco 2, disco 3, also the slight cosmetic change of the disco 3 2009 (painted bumpers and so on..) and now disco 4.
Would this announce the end of the Range Rover ?
looks cool. When I first saw it, I thought "that looks like an LR3 with a RRS supercharged grille" and "oh, they put the terrain response in a more prominent area" How does that make a model change?
Then I remember the LWB, big butt, SLS, HDC/TC, Bosch motor, and big door handles that made the disco 2.
I like the 5 liter and the general appearance. Is this Tata making their own land rover a bit better? Just like BMW making the discovery and range rover their own?
Then I remember the LWB, big butt, SLS, HDC/TC, Bosch motor, and big door handles that made the disco 2.
I like the 5 liter and the general appearance. Is this Tata making their own land rover a bit better? Just like BMW making the discovery and range rover their own?
hlalibe said:
Nope, the new RR is even more changed:
1-instrument dials all replaced with TFT screen showing "virtual" dials and gauges, cool but maybe a little sci fi. Redesigned nav/touch screen with fewer buttons surrounding it and some other features like 40Gb HD rather than DVD.
2-new dampers that have similar electromagnetic characteristics like Audi magnetic ride. User selectable or changes with terrain setting and speed.
3-"base" RR for USA will have same 5L or SC version will be just under 500hp!
With any luck the RRSC will still be 2x the msrp of the LR4 ~ $120k assuming there's no way a loaded LR4 will be less than $60k. I can't imagine all the new LR4 stuff like 5 exterior cameras and new engine will allow the price to stay under $60k loaded.
My wife likes to call her LR3 the chick Rover. Remember the article that talked about 50 women helping to design the LR3? I know for all of the "girlie stuff" on the LR3 it is a capable off road vehicle. but it looks like they're going back to a more "manly" (more power) vehicle.
marcod110 said:
yes, I heard when the other day but forgot. Maybe like 2011/2012 which is why there are only a few things changed on 2010 to keep them technically featured still above the RRSports. Apparently the 2010 will be a short run or something.
The talk of the RR has been to push it higher and higher price wise. which would give the LR4 room to grow into.
I suppose if the LR3 becomes the LR4, the the hippo/LR2 will be the LR3 and we'll all get confused!
I suppose if the LR3 becomes the LR4, the the hippo/LR2 will be the LR3 and we'll all get confused!
I Australia we will be getting the 3.0 litre Turbo Diesel at 600nm of torque 500 of which is said to be available at idle within half a second...nice.
Cheers
PS. I can remember the horse power of the 3.0 but its over 200.
Cheers
PS. I can remember the horse power of the 3.0 but its over 200.
Just like the current LR3, the LR4 will not get the new supercharged engine, that's going into 2010s RRS and RR only. Still, the non blown 5-liter should make 375hp/375lb-ft, quite an improvement over the existing 4.4 liter V8. Will use less gas, too.
Does no one care that we got shafted, at the very least, by the serious limits of tire size on the post Discovery rovers?
I mean you can't even fit snow chains to 31.5" tires without rubbing the upper arms, let alone turn the wheels or compress the suspension with them or larger tires without any.
Then, to get the lift we ought to have the choice of using, we have to screw with stupid sensor arms or buy expensive computer override systems (German market).
I think it is really too damn bad - it could have been so MUCH more with a couple small changes in design/build. Tire clearance alone would have been the easiest thing to allow.
I am probably replacing the LR3 with a Disco for the time being and likely a G wagon when I find a good deal on a 550 or an older 55. Conceptually, it's the same as the disco but with heavier build and more power.
I am basically ranting because the LR3 has so many very nice design/function features like the seats/load floor, multi sunroofs for airy interior and very good interior cargo dimensions along with functional drop gate and rain/snow protecting upper gate.
The LR4 will address some of the shortfalls like torque for holding the gears and soft suspension. It'll be funny though if overall wheel travel is reduced with the new system once it reduces body roll by the stated +/- 40mm fr/rr.
I think anyone who bought an 05 lr3 really got hoodwinked - the previous rover had basic things like "lumbar" adjustment for the driver - OMG, so modern, and the lr3 had none, the disco had one touch down windows whereas the lr3 had stupid only front and no adjustable headrests!
A $50,000 vehicle should have had all of the basics of modern vehicle design! To be quite honest, I didn't realize many of these things until after purchase because it never occurred to me that such basic features would be left off when previous years had them - I mean, hell, my 96 disco had lumbar and one touch down windows!
I mean you can't even fit snow chains to 31.5" tires without rubbing the upper arms, let alone turn the wheels or compress the suspension with them or larger tires without any.
Then, to get the lift we ought to have the choice of using, we have to screw with stupid sensor arms or buy expensive computer override systems (German market).
I think it is really too damn bad - it could have been so MUCH more with a couple small changes in design/build. Tire clearance alone would have been the easiest thing to allow.
I am probably replacing the LR3 with a Disco for the time being and likely a G wagon when I find a good deal on a 550 or an older 55. Conceptually, it's the same as the disco but with heavier build and more power.
I am basically ranting because the LR3 has so many very nice design/function features like the seats/load floor, multi sunroofs for airy interior and very good interior cargo dimensions along with functional drop gate and rain/snow protecting upper gate.
The LR4 will address some of the shortfalls like torque for holding the gears and soft suspension. It'll be funny though if overall wheel travel is reduced with the new system once it reduces body roll by the stated +/- 40mm fr/rr.
I think anyone who bought an 05 lr3 really got hoodwinked - the previous rover had basic things like "lumbar" adjustment for the driver - OMG, so modern, and the lr3 had none, the disco had one touch down windows whereas the lr3 had stupid only front and no adjustable headrests!
A $50,000 vehicle should have had all of the basics of modern vehicle design! To be quite honest, I didn't realize many of these things until after purchase because it never occurred to me that such basic features would be left off when previous years had them - I mean, hell, my 96 disco had lumbar and one touch down windows!
jwest, the percentage of buyers that buy LR3/4 and care about that stuff is so small that LR probably does not care. I saw 2 LR3's with ARB bumpers and 1 with a roof rack, but saw hundreds or thousands (too many) of others that were completely stock and even quite a few with 20's ect when i did the dealer thing....
I know - it just sucks for us. Discos could be both - I mean, they weren't sports cars but they actually drove quite well by the 04 generation.
I suppose "we" wouldn't be so sad about it all if we had the option for the newest D models - I'd be perfectly happy with an 09 D110, loaded as much as possible and with an "expedition" parts kit.
I guess that's why I started looking to the G wagon - nice and modern while the best of the old simultaneously.
I suppose "we" wouldn't be so sad about it all if we had the option for the newest D models - I'd be perfectly happy with an 09 D110, loaded as much as possible and with an "expedition" parts kit.
I guess that's why I started looking to the G wagon - nice and modern while the best of the old simultaneously.
Jwest, does the G-Wagon have a good many tire choices?
I am disappointed at the tire choices as well. I don't think there is one mud tire that will fit the LR3. A winch is almost a necessity with the LR3 with the poor tire choices.
I bet most of us on here would be driving 110's if they were sold over here- I would.
I am disappointed at the tire choices as well. I don't think there is one mud tire that will fit the LR3. A winch is almost a necessity with the LR3 with the poor tire choices.
I bet most of us on here would be driving 110's if they were sold over here- I would.
Last edited:
I don't want to turn the thread to G or G vs LR3/4 but yes, the G will take 33" tires in stock form while having zero rubbing or clearance issues even while allowing snow chains on that size.
Being steel spring and solid axles, the G is very modifiable just like the Discos. People who love the G for it's purpose, like us and rovers, either give it a minor 2" lift to allow 35's or a 3" like in Iceland or Norway to allow 12x38's to float over snow/ice. The G is more like the D90 though in it's short approach and departure angles, very steep on the rear. However the wheel base is 112 so it drives high speed well like the LR3.
Nice mix, being out closest modern equivalent to the newest D models.
It's no plush ride though so the overall / all-around winner is still pretty much the LR3/4 if you were to score a whole list of things. I imagine the LR3 is also safer with it's side air bags and full 3 row curtain whereas the G is a little dated having no actual sides but rather front and head curtain x2 rows. Being on a seriously heavy frame, I also doubt it has the high tech energy absorbing qualities in the front, rear, and sides that the LR3 does.
Being steel spring and solid axles, the G is very modifiable just like the Discos. People who love the G for it's purpose, like us and rovers, either give it a minor 2" lift to allow 35's or a 3" like in Iceland or Norway to allow 12x38's to float over snow/ice. The G is more like the D90 though in it's short approach and departure angles, very steep on the rear. However the wheel base is 112 so it drives high speed well like the LR3.
Nice mix, being out closest modern equivalent to the newest D models.
It's no plush ride though so the overall / all-around winner is still pretty much the LR3/4 if you were to score a whole list of things. I imagine the LR3 is also safer with it's side air bags and full 3 row curtain whereas the G is a little dated having no actual sides but rather front and head curtain x2 rows. Being on a seriously heavy frame, I also doubt it has the high tech energy absorbing qualities in the front, rear, and sides that the LR3 does.
Sadly, I'd have to agree. It seems like over the years the disco has been turning more and more luxury oriented than being just a hardcore go-anywhere-you-want vehicle. Also, the Range seems to be drifting into something entirely different that i don't even know how to describe.hlalibe said:
Or maybe it's just me, but that's how i feel.
I miss the nineties.