Printable View
Hi Greame, you hear good and bad stories about every vehicle. I had a new vehicle once that many people I know had, and it was nothing but trouble. Kept it 12 months and sold it. Wasn't a LR or LC but it did start with Nis and end in san.
Reliability aside the post was LC v LR. I'll stick with the D4
Hi Graeme and I didn’t word my reply that well, I was trying to comfort you in your hour of need, as I had had a real lemon but it’s good to see you view yours as teething problems.Quote:
Originally Posted by Graeme
Graeme,
A lot of that will be rectified once the Q093 program is carried out.
Yours does have some quirky issued tho' but we will fix em' :p
Cheers
yeah, fozzy can do that too, but only when I use engine oil instead of cooking oil as the fuel.Quote:
Originally Posted by Neil P
Well we had an interesting couple of training days this weekend. Sat was all LR - 4 D4's, 3 D3's and an RRS. Sun was a mix - 1 Prado Kakadu 2010, one Terracan, one Jeep Commander V8, one Kia Sportage, one Pajero, one 2009 Defender. And of course my RRS on both days.
It was fairly pelting down with rain Sat, and sunny and reasonably dry Sun. So here's the breakdown ...... ;)
On the largest sand dune (very steep, very long):
8/10 of the LR's made it up - a D3 2.7 and the Defender didn't quite make it. NONE of the non-LR cars made it! We were disappointingly surprised by the Prado, with it's "similar" Multi-Terrain-Response, locking centre and rear diffs, it just didn't have the torque-spread of the LR's to get to the top. The Jeep (due to power - V8 5.7 ltr) and the Kia Sportage (due to light weight) were the best performers other than the LR's.
In the mud and hill climbs:
Again, the Prado disappointed - the traction takes a little longer to kick in on the front axle, and there is such limited wheel movement that you need the lockers + TC. Crawl control didn't fair much better. Front clearance is pretty shoddy too. Again, the Jeep was the best of the non-LR's, good articulation and the TC only required two or three spins of the in-air wheel for it to grab. The Terracan TC was awful, the Pajero almost as good as the Prado and the Kia non-existent. But to put it into perspective, a coiler D3 (albeit with a 2" lift) with no terrain response was virtually identical to the Prado in performance.
All in all, the D3/D4/RRS cars were better all-round, but also in virtually every off-road situation. The only close competitor was the Jeep Commander, which was let down by it's long wheelbase and slower TC (it didn't have the top-of-the-line Quad-Drive system, which would have given it a lockable rear diff). The Prado was the most disappointing, which matches with my experience in the 2009 LC 200 Diesel V8 and the Lexus Petrol V8.
We're now knackered and off to bed!!
Cheers,
Gordon
Interested and reassuring post Gordon, thanks
Not surprising, really. Land Rover has been developing electronic traction control systems as early as the late P38A Range Rover, whilst the Japanese crowd have been using rear LSDs. And Toyota's LSDs haven't been worth writing home about. ;)
Now that the Prados and Land Cruisers have traction control, they are only just catching up, and not anywhere near as optimised as Land Rover. The Prado also has a relatively underpowered 3 litre motor and the LC200 has to resort to big capacity to achieve what the Land Rover's 3.0 TDV6 motor does. But I suppose the capacity tax in most of the UK probably has something to do with European diesels being that powerful despite their small capacities.
Yes, I'd agree - I think one thing LR have got better than anyone else are the 4WD systems and their control. Still not perfect, but still the best. By far the most annoying trait in the Prado was the layout of the 4WD control systems. Buttons scattered everywhere! Some are in the centre console, some are under the steering wheel (where your knee hides them) and some you have to scroll through the message centre to find! It took 30 ~ 40 secs at each different obstacle to set the car up and check it.
The Pajero was the most surprising - it did almost everything the Prado did, was simple to set up and seemed less 'plasticy'. The Jeep did better, but then we were expecting that.
Cheers,
Gordon
Do you have video from the day Gordon?
Dorko
I agree. Toyota are imitators. You hear a lot about "toyota reliability and build quality". Remember the IFS 100 series front diffs exploding and the suspension collapsing??? All I have to say about this is that they wait for Land Rover to develop a new model then they "borrow" the technology, call it something slightly different, then reap the rewards. My Uncle has toyotas. The older playdo he used to own did not impress me at all, sure is was cushie and comfy but the fake wood on the dash and the weak plastic rear door handle (plus the boring looks) turned me off. He then went out and bought a 200 sahara petrol. Flashy and all bells and whistles but if I had $100K to spend on a 4WD the last thing to look at is a Toyota landcrusher. And while i'm at it, I cant stand "them" referring to their cars as 'cruisers or hungys. The D4 is an incerdible vehicle in all respects, just as the D2 TD5 was back in 1999.Quote:
Originally Posted by gghaggis
Regards Robbo.