Hummm...

RBBailey

Well-known member
Jul 26, 2004
6,758
3
Oregon
www.flickr.com
My wife is toying with the idea of selling the '03 Disco and getting an LR3.

We would need to get Certified to be able to afford mechanical issues.

What should we watch for? What type of problems have you had? We have driven them quite a bit, I wouldn't want one for myself, but I think it would make a great family/wife car. We keep the '03 stock, and the LR3 would also stay stock except for a step up in tire size or something.
 

jwest

Well-known member
May 28, 2006
899
7
WA & NC
If it's mainly hers, what are the other needs to fulfill with it? Family-how many, how big, how rough? Hauling anything, winter travel or will the Discovery be the one? There are other vehicles out there possibly worth their cost more than the present versions of the LR3. It does however have a few features no other vehicles can offer.
Others offer better gas mileage, more modern features/high tech cool stuff, etc.

I only say all this because with an LR3 you'll end up with 2 vehicles of similar uses and poor gas mileage, etc.

Do you hate actual wagons? Lots of people space, comfort, better gas mileage, etc. You can still put a rack on top and have great AWD traction in snow. BMW 328xiT or 530xiT, Volvo XC, Subaru Outback, Audi Allroad.

Just ideas.
 

RBBailey

Well-known member
Jul 26, 2004
6,758
3
Oregon
www.flickr.com
We like Rovers

We want 7 seats, we actually use them

We did have 4 of them, now we only have two

We tow in the summer, camp with it

I have the XD for off road

We like the Saabs we had, but you can't tow... neither can my XD, even with the 4.6, it's just too hard on the engine.
 

Ol'Drippy

Well-known member
Apr 20, 2004
1,685
1
Chinoike Jigoku
We traded my wife's D2 for the LR3. Warranty is nice, we got a V6 so gas mileage on long trips is 20+. Tires are near bald at 18k, that is the only negative thing I can say about it. It'll have a set of Nittos soon. I say go for it if it's only a daily driver that will never see trail use. LR3 is more comfortable and easier to get in/out of.
 
B

bterpstra

Guest
Ol'Drippy said:
We traded my wife's D2 for the LR3. Warranty is nice, we got a V6 so gas mileage on long trips is 20+. Tires are near bald at 18k, that is the only negative thing I can say about it. It'll have a set of Nittos soon. I say go for it if it's only a daily driver that will never see trail use. LR3 is more comfortable and easier to get in/out of.

The mileage difference between the v6 and the v8 isn't that great. I can still get 20+ if I keep it to 75 or so. I have a light foot, so maybe i'm just benefitting that way. Consider that before you choose. V6 for flat land is fine - in the mountains pretty marginal.

As far as tires, yes it does eat tires. I had the dealer put decent BFG AT's on it before I bought it. They should at least get me 30k (had 80k on them on an old toyota)

For moderate trail use, I would still pick the LR3 over the disco. Anything more severe, the d2 since you can modify it
 

nwoods

Well-known member
Apr 1, 2006
467
0
SoCal
www.nextstepdesigns.com
expectthebest said:
I'm curious what it is about the LR3 that eats tires so quickly. Why would it do so more than other AWD 4x4's.

A combination of things. In no particular order:

First is that the Goodyears it comes with are exactly that, GoodForOneYear. They completely suck and it's embarrassing that LR continues to fit them to this day.

Second, it's a heavy vehicle, and always in 4wd, and it has a very tight turning radius compared to the beam axeled disco's. I don't know if the differentials keep the wheels turning the right speeds on tight turns or not, but I suspect there is a wear factor with those fantastic turning radius's

Third, the factory camber setting up to (and possibly including - I'm not sure), 2007 model year were off by quite a bit. Or at least, if not "off", what they were set to was negative camber for stability or perhaps better contact patch in Off Road (raised) mode. Not sure, but you can see this yourself, just follow behind one. Possible even worse than the BMW X5's.

Fourth, there is a TSB out that indicates some models are experiencing bushing wear somewhere in the linkage that is causing excessive camber issues. There's lots of differing opinions about this, and Land Rover itself is choosing the head in the sand approach to resolving it, which is extremely odd because they have been VERY proactive in fixing all the other little nits and fiddles. I don't know what the true story on this is. I've had LR technicians tell me different things, and there are different reports all over the web. In my own experience, they said bushings and no tire replacement credit at all after 12,000 miles, and only pro-rated to a max of 50% prior to 12,000 miles. This is after they said my alignment was normal and they all do that.

I now get my alignment done every 4 to 6 months independently, and they find a need to adjust it every time. However, I off road mine a lot, have taller springs, bigger tires, etc... Could all be a factor. Not sure.
 

jwest

Well-known member
May 28, 2006
899
7
WA & NC
nwoods said:
Not sure, but you can see this yourself, just follow behind one. Possible even worse than the BMW X5's.

It makes for great cornering at high speed though. The beauty is that these new air systems provide a great blend of both extremes.
I'm not sure why anyone spending even the low end of used pricing on an lr3 would be too concerned with tire cost/wear issues.