Ask the Car People.SM


Land Rover LR3

4548 messages,  Last post on Nov 18, 2012 at 11:21 AM

You are in the Land Rover Forum.

What is this discussion about? Land Rover LR3, SUV

Messages Page 386 of 456

#3842 of 4548 Summing Up by steve_ HOST

Aug 04, 2006 (7:46 pm)

"Although we've experienced some minor glitches, we've never been stranded or left without the LR3 for any real length of time. If you're looking for an SUV that can do it all, the LR3 is a worthy choice in the midsize luxury segment."
 
Long-Term Test: 2005 Land Rover LR3 (Inside Line)
 

 
"After 18,000 miles and one year of service in our long-term fleet, the 2005 Land Rover LR3 doesn't look any worse for wear."

#3843 of 4548 Well not a LR3... by british_rover

Aug 05, 2006 (8:09 am)

but it is its ancestor. I just saw this video and thought it was funny.
 
Top Gear video

#3844 of 4548 Re: Well not a LR3... [british_rover] by mac24

Aug 05, 2006 (8:30 am)

Replying to: british_rover (Aug 05, 2006 8:09 am)
Did you also watch the Hummer vs Defender video? It's just one of those situations where a longer wheelbase gives you the advantage.
 
H1 v D90

#3845 of 4548 Re: Well not a LR3... [mac24] by british_rover

Aug 05, 2006 (8:47 am)

Replying to: mac24 (Aug 05, 2006 8:30 am)
Yeah sometimes you do need a longer wheel base but...
 
 The defender tires looked questionable at best and they were not aired down. First rule of off roading is air your tires down then I bet he would have had fewer problems. Didn't help that he was spinning his tires through mud covering those rocks in slick mud making it even more difficult for himself.

#3846 of 4548 Re: Well not a LR3... [british_rover] by mac24

Aug 05, 2006 (9:18 am)

Replying to: british_rover (Aug 05, 2006 8:47 am)
I agree that lower tire pressures would certainly have helped, as would a more sensitive application of the right foot, but ultimately I think that the terrain just favored the longer wheelbase.
 
If the LR had managed to climb the initial rock, it would have been at such a steep angle (because of its length) that continuing under its own power would have been almost impossible............which is why winches were invented!
 
I think it would be fair to say the the greater track width of the Hummer gave it an advantage also.

#3847 of 4548 Re: Well not a LR3... [mac24] by british_rover

Aug 05, 2006 (7:14 pm)

Replying to: mac24 (Aug 05, 2006 9:18 am)
Yeah it is very hard to design a off road vehicle for all situations.
 
A H1 is too wide for lots of trails and even though its IRS/IFS set up with geared hubs gives it awesome ground clearance it also creates problems since it does not have a cross linked valve set up.
 
The off-road driving school we go to sometimes has a section called the steps of doom or somethign like that. It is made up of rock ledges that are between just over one foot and just under two feet high. Each ledge is about 90 inches wide so a D90 doing over the course is very painful indeed but it is one of the few vehicles that can cross this obstacle. No H1 has ever done it because it losses traction when the IFS/IRS set up hits ledges it does not put enough force down on the other tire to keep traction.
 
No cross-linked valve IFS/IRS Land Rover has ever tried the course so not sure if the cross-linked valve set up will mimic a solid axel enough to go over the ledges. A LR3 or Range Rover would probably still need some modifications to cross the tallest ledges though. Would probably need to have the bumpers trimmed, larger tires that can be aired down more easily and the ability to manual select EAS extended mode.
 
These videos are kind of cool from the British Motor show.
 
British Motor Show Land Rover Experience

#3848 of 4548 Re: Well not a LR3... [british_rover] by explorerx4

Aug 06, 2006 (6:05 pm)

Replying to: british_rover (Aug 05, 2006 7:14 pm)
at the very least amazing rear suspension travel!

#3849 of 4548 Reduce Octane Requirement at Higher Altitude by lr3maybe

Aug 07, 2006 (6:46 am)

Below is the response I got from a NAPA car care member who is also a gas station owner.
 
To begin with gasoline refiners lower the octane ratings in the fuel according to the altitude. Octane ratings provided by car manufacturers are printed for use at sea level i.e. 93 octane rating would be at seal level could relate to a 91 octain at Denver's altitude. So since less octane is required at higher altutude the refiners automatically blend it that way.
To answer your question specifically it has to do with the mass of the air. Air has more oxygen at sea level and is normally heavier. The weight of the air can depend on humidity. Heavier air is harder to ignite requiring more
octane to create a hotter flame or bigger bang. The weight of the air at our altitude is generally lighter and we have less oxygen which requires less octane to create the same combustion. So if your vehicle owners manual says to use 91 octane you could probably use 89 octane at this
altitude. What you have to keep in mind is....if your mfr. is referring to a higher octane gasoline with the unwritten idea that along with higher octane comes a premium fuel with more additives because they feel that motor
needs a strong additive package i.e. detergents, etc. than lowering your octane which may also reduce the additive package in the fuel. Most engines are affected by the swirl effect of the air as it passes the motor.
Carbon buildup will disrupt that part of the engineering. It will also soak up fuel. So if you drop from 89 octane midgrade fuel to 85 octane unleaded fuel you may likely building up more carbon which will result in what we
call octane requirement increase or ORI. This can cause the engine to ping or detonate, run poorly or decrease fuel mileage.

#3850 of 4548 Just saw this.. by british_rover

Aug 07, 2006 (9:38 am)

On the NECAP web site.
 
Land Rover LR3/Disco III crash test.
 
All Large Off-roaders tested.
 
The NECAP test is more closely related to the IIHS test then probably any other crash test although in my opinion I think the NECAP test is a little more demanding.

#3851 of 4548 New Tire Option by lr3maybe

Aug 08, 2006 (6:54 am)

General has a new tire that looks good for off road use. Their website says available fall 2006. It looks to be the same size as the factory 18 inch size. Called the General Grabber AT2
 
See link below (I don't know how to make it so you can just click on it).
 
http://www.generaltire.com/generator/www/us/en/generaltire/automobile/themes/van- /all_terrain/grabber_at2/master_en.html

Messages Page 386 of 456

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement