D4 vs RRS (L320) width

[Arapiles]

The L320 was based on the D3 and online info gives it as being about 94mm narrower - but is it actually that much narrower?

Wouldn't that mean that the D3/D4's body pan and suspension couldn't be carried over?


First generation (L320; 2005–2013)


First generation (L320)


Wheelbase
108.1 in (2,745 mm)


Length
2005–2009: 186.5 in (4,737 mm) Since 2009: 188.3 in (4,783 mm)


Width
2005–2009: 75.9 in (1,928 mm) Since 2009: 76.1 in (1,933 mm)


Height
71.5 in (1,816 mm)




Discovery 4 / LR4 (2009–2016)


Discovery 4 (L319)


Wheelbase
2,885 mm (113.6 in)


Length
4,838 mm (190.5 in)


Width
2,022 mm (79.6 in) (mirrors folded)


Height
1,970 mm (77.6 in) (including roof rails)

[Tombie]

Look at the shape of the body. The D3/4 bulges more.

[DazzaTD5]

what is more interesting is the D4 is 140mm longer in wheelbase

[Arapiles]

... the reason I ask is that my wife has been driving the D4 instead of her own car but is finding the width a bit intimidating in the inner City, so maybe an L320 could be an option.

[DiscoDB]

Wheel track is the same and I think the true difference in width at the widest point is closer to 20mm.

[Tombie]

... the reason I ask is that my wife has been driving the D4 instead of her own car but is finding the width a bit intimidating in the inner City, so maybe an L320 could be an option.

It’s more illusion than anything. The squarer profile of the Disco just seems bigger.

The RRS slopes away more, actually harder to physically see the extremities.