Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 23 of 23

Thread: Freelander 2 or Discovery 3 ?

  1. #21
    mikehzz Guest
    I should add, there are always things that you wish your car had. The only things I wish the fl2 had are height adjustable suspension and a snorkel. Low range has never been on the list. Mike

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Melbourne, mostly
    Posts
    2,442
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Mike, the reason the FL2 auto overheats on long climbs is because there is no low range. What's happening; a given amount of torque is required for the climb. In order to generate that torque the FL2 engine has to run a certain revs, probably around 2000, but at a road speed less than ideal for 2000rpm hence torque multiplication. At that point the torque convertor isn't locked up so the turbine and stator at rotating at quite different speeds. This generates heat, hence the problem. It worsens as vehicle weight increases, length of climb, and the slower you have to go. Using low range pretty much fixes the problem allowing the engine to operate in its best torque band, the vehicle to travel slowly, and even better the low gearing multiplies the torque instead of relying on the torque conventor to do it. The torque convertor is indeed fluid but is the same concept as on the D3, and the electronics don't come into the equation in this instance.

    Basically the FL2 is a capable vehicle for its class -- it is the best non-low-range 4WD -- but it is nowhere near a D3 or similar offroad, and especially not once you put a proper touring load on and consider longevity, offroad safety margins and how easy obstacles are tackled.

    The Jeep has low range and is designed to use it in difficult obstacles, which is why it appears to need it. A fairer comparison would be the Patriot which is designed to get as far as it can without low range, as is the FL2. The Jeep may be heavier with the same power and torque, but its low range gives a torque multiplication effect which would see it kill the FL2 for torque at the wheels.

  3. #23
    mikehzz Guest
    Yes I know all of that. I've had 4wd's since the seventies, about 10 in all. All of them bar the fl2 has had low range. I've done tough tracks in almost every state. I was simply making comment that I have never needed low range nor desire it in the fl2. In EVERY case so far, it's been only lack of clearance that pulls it up, never lack of traction or power. I don't really care how it does it. If they had a low range option on it I wouldn't waste my money and mine has done more off road than most.
    On my last trip, I pulled a new Vitara out of a fix only to find an fl2 traveling with it around the bend. The other fl2 went through without any help as did mine. Neither of them had a snatch strap and a girl was driving the fl2.
    Anyway, cheers mate. It's a damn good little beast and Land Rover should be congratulated for designing it. The D3 is far more suitable for the purpose of this post though. I would take my Jeep grand crd for the same reason, longer range and more space. Mike

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Search AULRO.com ONLY!
Search All the Web!