So is it a disavantage then or an advantage as mowog asks? Definatly an advantage for simplicity and time of hook up!Quote:
Originally Posted by garrycol
Printable View
So is it a disavantage then or an advantage as mowog asks? Definatly an advantage for simplicity and time of hook up!Quote:
Originally Posted by garrycol
take look at post #66 and as Garry said the WDH topic has been done to death.Quote:
Originally Posted by bcl
http://www.aulro.com/afvb/d3-d4-rrs/...vehicle-7.html
And the earlier, longer post:
http://www.aulro.com/afvb/d3-d4-rrs/...sco-3-a-5.html
Cheers,
Gordon
if only the (off road) magazines would test these cars with off road tyres fitted. Most (majority?) readers of Overlander use their cars off road at least some of the time dont they?. I feel like writing to Landrover Australia and suggesting they keep a set of 19inch rims and MTR's for use with all RRV, RRS and D4's they lend to Overlander etc They can have the car - but here are the wheels you get with it. Give the option to all other manufacturers - I'd bet they'd follow suit. Oh well.
Are the OEM tyres fitted to the Cruiser any better than the OEMs on the D4?
hmmm... good question. I looked at their website, the tyre specs are 285/60 R18 116V and looking at a few reviews they talk about road tyres being "out of their depth".Quote:
Originally Posted by garrycol
That's about all I could dig up not having one handy.
Oh and came across this in my travels:
The Toyota Landcruiser 200 "Oh What a Lemon..."
The disco would have to win the race in attaching trailer and heading off.
No messing around with wdh has been so much better for the wife and I. When you use a 750 pound version like we did, you really appreciate the airbags.
I have so far found it smoother on the road with the air bags with much less pitching from the trailer ball weight, as opposed to using the wdh.
This will be interesting. I think they would go with the yota.....just because.
Umm,correct......no particular reason,just because...Quote:
Originally Posted by discotwinturbo
I hope they also don't forget to do a braking test,the D4 should pull up way better.
Or they may do it & then forget to publish it...........
I think the OP makes the obvious point that the majority of 4WD magazines are heavily biased toward Toyota. Rarely do I read a review that highlights any failings of the LC and if they do it is downplayed as being "heavily outweighed" by such and such a feature.
Didn't one magazine exclude the D4 from it's 4WD Of The Year because there was insufficient difference from the D3. Whether this is the case or not I am unsure.
Things that aren't mentioned are bangs for bucks. The LR is still the most capable family 4WD straight off the showroom floor whereas the others have to have aftermarket equipment fitted to match them. Suspension and tow hitch immediately come to mind. Okay the tow hitch is poorly designed but it is still fitted.
The LC comes with a long range tank so they have the advantage there.
Then the price difference. According to redbook.com.au, the HSE is $95,600 while the LC Sahara is $116,400. I'm pretty certain you can get a lot for $20K. Offroad rubber on smaller rims, long range tank, ECU remap, mitch hitch, bull bar etc, etc.
Anyway that's my 2 bobs worth. I still have the D3, it's costing heaps to get stuff fixed because it is 6 years old and it needs to be fixed but it tows a 3 tonne van like a dream without a WDH. Would I like a new D4 or LC? I'm not sure. Toyota have been trading off their reputation for too long and LR are now owned by a company that makes, in my opinion only, probably one of the worst cars in world.
Which car is that?