2.7 Vs 3.0 TDV6 is it worth the extra$ ?

Resale value is not really an issue. The last brand new Range Rover I bought was my current RRc vague and back then it was equal to one years salary.

If I go ahead with this purchase I hope I'm still driving it when they take my licence away because of old age, and yes this one is a bit less than a years salary, which on the Land Rover index, means my salary hasn't kept up with inflation or I'd be buying a L322 HSE TDV8! :(

At least this purchase will give me time to do some detailing on Vague.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon3950

I'm going through the same process myself at the moment and am leaning towards the 2.7. Although I'd prefer a 3.0 just because, I struggle to see the value and there's nothing on the 3.0 that I want which I can't get on the 2.7. The deal-breaker for me is the 19" rims, but this sounds like less of an issue for you.

I tow a rally car regularly with my 2.7 Disco 3 and think its great, but then I was happy towing with a Td5. I also load it to the gunwales when camping and think it still goes just fine - lets face it, its a 4wd not a sports car.

I have driven both the 2.7 and the 3.0 and in some ways prefer the driveability of the 2.7. The 3.0 is certainly more powerful and great once its up on the plane, but I find the lag off idle much more noticeable, and annoying, than in the 2.7.

For me the must-haves are leather seats and bi-xenon headlights. Also the e-diff, but not neccessary if you're not doing much off-road. I would also get the high ICE as I've been disappointed with the wireless in the D3.

Cheers,
Jon

---

Jon,

With the sequential turbo's on the 3.0l there can't be any lag....what you probably experienced was the transmission trying to 'think'. It's a well known isssue with all adaptive transmissions, regardless of Brand.

The car you drove may have been poodled around for some time before you drove it.

That reaction issue that you mentioned is real however and used to bother me and freak me out, especially when the engine lit up....it's a handful.

Now I don't even notice it, as in it doesn't happen because I've adjusted to the way the D4 works. No loss in capability, I've automatically adjusted to how it 'thinks'.....in most cases...LOL :D

When in doubt, select sports mode....

I've driven and owned lots of auto cars and the Disco has got have one of the easiest, instinctive transmissision set ups.......move - go, flick to sport - go, select a gear - go!

Easy!!!

It may be heavy but they aren't speed limited to 180 for no reason....;)

Cheers,

Kev.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon3950

.. this is a really tough decision to make!

---

I found it so. Whilst many have foregone the 3.0 for better tyre options I didn't. I had already started down the "standard" 2.7 brake package path when the Compomotive rims were born so continued and run tough 17" Yoko LTs as everyday tyres. With more and cheaper 18" tyres available now, a 3.0 fitted with Compomotive rims is probably an acceptable solution for me, but perhaps fitting oversized LT tyres for occasional very harsh use.

Re: The 3.0Lt TD.
I have modified every 4WD that I have owned in the past, within the first 20,000Klm's. Mainly for the extra torque required for towing.
This includes my last D3 2.7Lt which I had re-mapped at 8,000Klm's.

Two years and 85,000Klm's on, I havent yet felt the need to alter the perfomance of the 3.0Lt. If I did, it would be purely to spend money on it.

Cheers, Craig

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lotz-A-Landies

Took the 2.7 for a drive and was quite surprised, but did notice the turbo lag, particularly on hill starts. It pulls away and when the turbo comes in it rather surprised me with the boost in power.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Celtoid

what you probably experienced was the transmission trying to 'think'. It's a well known isssue with all adaptive transmissions, regardless of Brand.

The car you drove may have been poodled around for some time before you drove it.

---

This is most likely the issue that Diana felt when driving the 2.7. Many people says it is 'turbo lag' but it happens less in Sport mode and not at all in Command shift. If it was 'turbo lag' it would also be happening in Command shift which it doesn't.

Garry

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Disco4SE

Re: The 3.0Lt TD.
I have modified every 4WD that I have owned in the past, within the first 20,000Klm's. Mainly for the extra torque required for towing.
This includes my last D3 2.7Lt which I had re-mapped at 8,000Klm's.

---

Having modified my TD5 D2 to a basic satisfactory performance level if driven hard and with lots of people having remapped their 2.7s virtually from day 1, I was very keen to get the 3.0. Overtaking with the 3.0 is such a breeze.

This descussion of turbo lag Vs ECU processing delay is irrelevant. The same hill stopping at the same place and moving off with the same driver actions. The 2.7 was moving slowly off the mark for what seemed like 2 or 3 seconds then the engine "lit up" as described earlier. The 3.0 lit up immediately.

The reason the delay occurs, doesn't really matter, at times I drive my cars and other times I want to get from A to B relaxed and without driving stress. My purchase is leaning towards the 3.0 because it ticks the boxes on the stress free performance.

Now it all comes down to what my employer and the leasing company will agree to. So I still may end up with a 2.7.

Diana

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Celtoid

Jon,

With the sequential turbo's on the 3.0l there can't be any lag....what you probably experienced was the transmission trying to 'think'. It's a well known isssue with all adaptive transmissions, regardless of Brand.

---

G'day Kev,

Lag was a poor choice of word - as you point out its not turbo lag and command shift is the only way I've found to overcome it too.

I've driven quite a few 3.0s now both in Disco and RRS and have always found the hesitation more noticeable - maybe because when the 3.0 takes off, it really takes off! I guess its just what your used to and I'm sure if I drove the 3.0 on a daily basis it wouldn't bother me. I must admit though I find the 3.0 disappointing in the RRS after the TDV8.

Please don't take any of my comments as anti 3.0 - there's no question its the nicer engine. However, I'm happy enough with the performance of the 2.7 and for me the rim size problem and extra cost outweighs the benefit of the extra grunt.

Of course I reserve the right to change my mind when it comes time to put my money where my mouth is!

Cheers,
Jon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by garrycol

BFG ATs are LT and now legal in most states.

Garry

---

The BFG site doesn't to have any sizing for the ATs. Whats the closest to standard size they are available in?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon3950

The BFG site doesn't to have any sizing for the ATs. Whats the closest to standard size they are available in?

---

265/65R18. In some instances you may have to import them (not a lot around in that size).

In the 285/60R18 size there are a couple of LT-construction tyres, if you're willing to import, eg the Nitto AT.

Yokohama make a 116 rating PT tyre in 275/60R18

Cheers,

Gordon