S
scotty-OZ
Guest
Just looked at the Discovery 3 that have hit OZ. They do not stand out except for the front. The rest looks like a Ford bread delivery van. Setting aside aesthetics I looked under the guards and the rear passenger side (driver's side in US) has a bunch of very small diameter (1mil) wires (about 15 or so) exposed (no conduit) and within about 5 inches of the wheel - plain as day. What is with that - one stick or rock off road could easily cut through them. God forbid that such a cut might disable the air suspension or locker control for the rear diff!
I have a DII with ETC and no CDL and a 95 D1. I like the idea of a car like ride on road, but at the end of the day I like (genuine) off roading too much to go the Disco 3 and I love the character of the older models.
There is a good comparrison in this months Land Rover Enthuasist Mag from the UK. Series one and two against the LR3. Stock Series one climbs a hill to the top that LR3 cannot climb - slippery mud; very similar tyres. They did not do the series 2 up the hill but would have made it in my opinion. LR3 had diffs locked up and TCS working away and being driven by a very experienced driver who then promptly just drove series one up the same route with more response from steering and it got up. I have seen another write up from UK where a fellow got prematurely stuck in mud up a hill. It seems to me that up slippery hills the LR3 could be just too heavy to complete with earlier series'.
Also there are reports that they are poor in sand on the sand setting. I dont doubt that because they are very heavy and have low profile tyres - even letting them down is not going to significantly increase footprint in a rolling sense. Juding by the size of the guards unless an owner went back to 16 inch wheels then the thing will probably always struggle on sand.
At the end of the day the series II was the most comfortable true off roader on bitumen and the LR3 is probably the most comfortable on roader that can go off road - ie a compromise that is biased towards highway. Me I prefer to go a little slower on road and have the ability off road. Just some thoughts.
Cheers
I have a DII with ETC and no CDL and a 95 D1. I like the idea of a car like ride on road, but at the end of the day I like (genuine) off roading too much to go the Disco 3 and I love the character of the older models.
There is a good comparrison in this months Land Rover Enthuasist Mag from the UK. Series one and two against the LR3. Stock Series one climbs a hill to the top that LR3 cannot climb - slippery mud; very similar tyres. They did not do the series 2 up the hill but would have made it in my opinion. LR3 had diffs locked up and TCS working away and being driven by a very experienced driver who then promptly just drove series one up the same route with more response from steering and it got up. I have seen another write up from UK where a fellow got prematurely stuck in mud up a hill. It seems to me that up slippery hills the LR3 could be just too heavy to complete with earlier series'.
Also there are reports that they are poor in sand on the sand setting. I dont doubt that because they are very heavy and have low profile tyres - even letting them down is not going to significantly increase footprint in a rolling sense. Juding by the size of the guards unless an owner went back to 16 inch wheels then the thing will probably always struggle on sand.
At the end of the day the series II was the most comfortable true off roader on bitumen and the LR3 is probably the most comfortable on roader that can go off road - ie a compromise that is biased towards highway. Me I prefer to go a little slower on road and have the ability off road. Just some thoughts.
Cheers