You are here: Forums SUVs Land Rover Land Rover LR3

Land Rover LR3

4512 messages,  Last post on Aug 06, 2009 at 3:42 PM

You are in the Land Rover Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & tidester

What is this discussion about? Land Rover LR3, SUV

Messages Page 7 of 452 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 452 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

#61 of 4512 Explorer by tyresmoker Oct 27, 2004 (3:48 am)
WHO SAID IT FIRST??? My dealership in town finally got a silver SE yesterday..I pulled into the lot as someone was coming back from a test drive. Seeing it drive through the lot at low speed, all I could think was "that thing looks like an Explorer". Upon closer look, the black interior is just bland. Lots o' plastic. One color plastic to boot. Totally agree with pricing..it just does not scream "$50k". While I am NOT a fan of the GX, I can see the "value" in that vehicle. Quite frankly, if I really want something that is decent offroad, VERY reliable with most of the latest in technology and does not scream "look at me" I might reconsider a Land Cruiser....
#62 of 4512 LR3 gets Motor Trend's SUV of the Year by grommet Oct 27, 2004 (7:43 am)
This year's contenders were: Chevrolet Equinox, Ford Escape Hybrid, Ford Freestyle, Jeep Grand Cherokee, Infiniti QX56, Land Rover LR3 and Nissan Pathfinder.     http://motortrend.com/features/news/112_news041027_suvoty/
#63 of 4512 by ypshan Oct 27, 2004 (5:32 pm)
Now that several people mentioned it, LR3 starts looking like an Explorer to me as well. I looked at an Explorer parked at our YMCA last night and found a lot of resemblance.
#64 of 4512 Explorer vs. LR3 by blckislandguy Oct 27, 2004 (6:12 pm)
If you're the kind of person that buys a vehicle, cares for it and keeps it for 10 years, which would you rather have in your family fleet, a 10 year old Explorer or a 10 year old LR3? If your answer, like mine, is LR3, then the price difference today amortized over 10 years won't matter. (And if you are a Section 179 buyer, the Explorer is MORE money initially.)   As an additional thought about styling, I think that the LR3 will wear well over the years. Much better than the FX35/Armada/etc. group.
#65 of 4512 LR3 is no Explorer by grommet Oct 27, 2004 (6:14 pm)
I personally don't see it. It's about the same width & length, and it has a basic SUV/truck shape... beyond that, nothing. The LR3 has a clean & rugged utilitarian look. What do you want, an Infiniti FX? Replies to this message: tincup47 (Oct 27, 2004 6:28 pm) sam818 (Oct 28, 2004 4:27 pm)
#66 of 4512 Re: LR3 is no Explorer [grommet] by tincup47 Oct 27, 2004 (6:28 pm)
Replying to: grommet (Oct 27, 2004 6:14 pm) I agree, besides the same basic two box shape that almost all SUV's share I see virtually no similarity. The LR3 is sharp edged and has the stepped roof with the wrapover quarter glass. The front end is most similar to the Range Rover. I wonder if this comparison would be made if Land Rover were still owned by BMW instead of Ford?
#67 of 4512 form follows function by davidc1 Oct 27, 2004 (6:28 pm)
I doubt too many people will think it's an explorer. Even then, so what. You know what you are getting for your money. Boxy designs wear better than curvacious ones. Isuzu trooper looks similar too. But it's not the same thing now, is it?
#68 of 4512 Re: LR3 is no Explorer [grommet] by sam818 Oct 28, 2004 (4:27 pm)
Replying to: grommet (Oct 27, 2004 6:14 pm) The ONLY element of the LR3 that has a "hint" of Explorer is the wide trailing edge frame on the rear passenger door. While this is a significant styling element on both cars, the two cars are otherwise as different as chalk and cheese. The LR3 being much more crisp and folded. The Explorer, while attractive is simply not as architectural in its surface treatments.
#69 of 4512 Land Explorer.... by tiggerguy Oct 28, 2004 (5:20 pm)
You could probably make the argument that they share the basic design of the "canted" headlight look, which is originally from the Range Rover, and Ford robbed the look for the Explorer right after buying Land Rover.    What I find interesting, is that according to the SUV/Year article, is that going by the data, the LR3 weighs MORE than the MUCH larger Infiniti QX56. It also has 90.7 cubic feet of max cargo capacity, whereas the QX has 97.0. (that's also a lot more than a Range Rover) That's pretty impressive considering the overall size difference. I would imagine most of that is due to the height of the roofline on the Rover. My Armada (same as QX) has a very high load floor due to Nissan's folding seat design, and not a lot of height. I could barely get a lawn mower in the back. Seems like they came up with a pretty useful cargo space in a not so huge package. Only thing I do not understand is why they didn't come up with crossbars for the roof rack?
#70 of 4512 tiggerguy by tincup47 Oct 28, 2004 (7:10 pm)
Cross bars are available, they are a dealer (or owner) installed accessory. Land Rover has traditionally offered them this way. Replies to this message: tiggerguy (Oct 29, 2004 6:46 pm)

Messages Page 7 of 452 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 452 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

You are here: Forums SUVs Land Rover Land Rover LR3