Printable View
OR a reprogrammed TD5!
My LSE soft dash uses around 14l/100km around town; down to 10l/100km on trips.
Mine's up with a 4.6 V8 to 100kph, then the V8 starts to creep ahead.
Will touch 160kph.
Tows 3 1/2/4t all day at 100kph; and then back to around 15/16l/100km; if a V8 this would be around 24l!!!
This 2.5L engine is quite amazing what it can produce.
And all "std" parts for refit! No extra weight a la Isuzu's/Mazda's or (heaven forbid) Chev V8 diesels.
On lpg my classic and p38 run cheaper than a td5 on fuel, servicing and parts, and the 4.6 can really move too!
You're so right jsp, my 93 classic seats were the comfiest of the lot, but after seeing how little framing is in the roof and pillars we've now got the kids in the hse. Going to miss the VougeSE when it goes though, that shape gathered an icon that the 38's will never have.
I dearly would love to restore my softdash lse though, with injected lpg and a 4.6 block.
I tend to agree with Dougal re boot space.
Some years ago I put my soft dash LSE beside mate's P38 and we measured almost everything.
Wheelbase same at 108".
Almost same length C pillar to tailgate, but Classic just pipped the P38 inside. ( I think the P38 rear seat back further. As I had the spare out back, I always seemed to fit considerably more in when we went fishing/camping.
The backseat legroom of P38 was abysmal compared to LSE; it's because the made such an intrusive and big dash on P38, they had to move B pillar and front seat further back.
Getting the maximum efficient use of internal space has never been a Range Rover strength...
Comparing my (100 inch) Classic Vogue SE with it's predecessor... the '89 Pajero (106 inch) wins on rear seat legroom (and comfort, according to my 3 sons) and boot-space.
I'd say the P38 would be more 'user-friendly' regarding the boot space and access.