Disappointed in the D5 / waiting for the Defender

There are quite a few subjective statements here, and given "beauty is in the eye of the beholder", can understand. However, I prefer to look at the specs which matter the most when determining if it is more capable:

1. D5 is circa 400kg lighter
2. D5 has less clearance (284mm vs 310mm)
3. D5 has a longer wheelbase (2923mm vs 2883mm), which would imply longer rear/front overhangs as the car is circa 130mm longer
4. D5 has a higher wading depth (900m vs 700mm)
5. D5 has Terrain Response 2 as an option (or is it standard?). But is TR2 just an automated version of TR1 or an upgrade?

So based on these facts, any weight saving is offset by lower clearance and angles (approach/ramp-over/departure). I am not convinced the increase in wading depth will matter much as you would be at a severe risk of floating if you start to approach those depths, especially if there is a current. TR2 will only matter if it is an upgrade, not just an automated version of TR1. Both can come with 19 inch rims, so this is a moot point.

So which is more capable out of the box? Tough call. On sand, I say the D5 as it is lighter. On rutted tracks, I say the D4 given its greater clearance/angles, but that's just the theory. My 4wd club (Range Rover Club of NSW) will get the keys to a D5 in a few weeks and will be comparing it against other unmodified Discoveries, including my D4. We shall find out then............... :-)

Mario

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PAT303

So tell me,what stock 4wd will do the Tele track?.Prado/Paj/200 series [bigwhistle][bigwhistle][bigwhistle]. Pat

---

All three I reckon.....

My mate has driven nearly all the tracks of including canning stock route, telegraph and he doesn't modify his cars apart from front bar and roof rack, he even runs OEM tyres and shocks

He has owned the following
Patrol
Prado
And now a hi-lux

Never seems to have issue in touring mode.

The biggest issue they have had traveling aus is with his mates D2 on the canning with a leaking fuel tank.

1. D5 is circa 400kg lighter But at what cost?
2. D5 has less clearance (284mm vs 310mm) Negligible
3. D5 has a longer wheelbase (2923mm vs 2883mm), which would imply longer rear/front overhangs as the car is circa 130mm longer Your maths is wrong it is only 30mm on those figures not 130mm
4. D5 has a higher wading depth (900m vs 700mm) Plus
5. D5 has Terrain Response 2 as an option On option I believe not available on base??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mfpoli

There are quite a few subjective statements here, and given "beauty is in the eye of the beholder", can understand. However, I prefer to look at the specs which matter the most when determining if it is more capable:

1. D5 is circa 400kg lighter
2. D5 has less clearance (284mm vs 310mm)
3. D5 has a longer wheelbase (2923mm vs 2883mm), which would imply longer rear/front overhangs as the car is circa 130mm longer
4. D5 has a higher wading depth (900m vs 700mm)
5. D5 has Terrain Response 2 as an option (or is it standard?). But is TR2 just an automated version of TR1 or an upgrade?

So based on these facts, any weight saving is offset by lower clearance and angles (approach/ramp-over/departure). I am not convinced the increase in wading depth will matter much as you would be at a severe risk of floating if you start to approach those depths, especially if there is a current. TR2 will only matter if it is an upgrade, not just an automated version of TR1. Both can come with 19 inch rims, so this is a moot point.

So which is more capable out of the box? Tough call. On sand, I say the D5 as it is lighter. On rutted tracks, I say the D4 given its greater clearance/angles, but that's just the theory. My 4wd club (Range Rover Club of NSW) will get the keys to a D5 in a few weeks and will be comparing it against other unmodified Discoveries, including my D4. We shall find out then............... :-)

Mario

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CraigE

3. D5 has a longer wheelbase (2923mm vs 2883mm), which would imply longer rear/front overhangs as the car is circa 130mm longer Your maths is wrong it is only 30mm on those figures not 130mm

---

Just to clarify, the car is circa 130mm longer overall, so if the wheelbase is 40mm longer, then the front/rear overhangs would be 90mm longer by implication.

Mario

Attachment 128958
Attachment 128959

Maybe we need to line them up, like for like...

In most measures, the D5 is 'better' - deeper wading, more ground clearance, better ramp-over, better departure angles.

The D4 has a marginally better approach angle, though I'd question if you'd notice it in real-world applications. The D4 has a dramatically better turning circle - 85cm smaller!

I mentioned earlier in the thread, the D5 shouldn't be dismissed in offroad capability. Out of the box, it should be better than the model it replaces in many ways.

Does that mean I intend to trade in my trusty steed any time soon? Not on your life!

OK so here are the specs
Wheelbase Length Height
D5 2923mm 4970mm 1888mm
D4 2885mm 4838mm 1841mm
D3 2890mm 4850mm 1880-1890mm
D2 2540mm 4700mm 1940mm
D1 2540mm 4540mm 1970mm

So yes overall 132mm longer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mfpoli

Just to clarify, the car is circa 130mm longer overall, so if the wheelbase is 40mm longer, then the front/rear overhangs would be 90mm longer by implication.

Mario

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by weeds

All three I reckon.....

My mate has driven nearly all the tracks of including canning stock route, telegraph and he doesn't modify his cars apart from front bar and roof rack, he even runs OEM tyres and shocks

He has owned the following
Patrol
Prado
And now a hi-lux

Never seems to have issue in touring mode.

The biggest issue they have had traveling aus is with his mates D2 on the canning with a leaking fuel tank.

---

I don't modify my vehicles either and I've done countless outback miles,the Connie Sue a week or so ago[bigsmile1],but there is no way I would do the Tele track again without a rear locker and lift,and my warn high mount:cool:.The chicken tracks are getting just as cut up as the main track. Pat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by veebs

In most measures, the D5 is 'better' - ....... more ground clearance ...........

---

p.62 of the D4 brochure states ground clearance of up to 310mm.

http://australiancar.reviews/_pdfs/L...ure_201406.pdf

The website now states 269mm for the D4. Either 41mm of clearance has "vanished" since the D5 became available in order to make the D5 look good, or the 310mm was overly inflated based on a different measurement to make it look good against it's predecessors. Probably a bit of both, particularly if such "official material" is published by the marketing department.

Mario

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zeros

Because many Disco owners keep comparing their Discos to Defenders in terms of bush ability and since the D5 is so lux oriented now, many think (wish) the next Defender will be more like a D4...

---

That comparison has been made because, off the showroom floor, the capability of the D4 and defender off road is similiar, though they are both very different. But there is already another thread for that. [emoji14]

What I'm getting at is that people complain the D5 is not like a Defender...

Maybe some are but I think a lot of D3 and D4 owners are concerned that D5 more of a compromise of good off-road ability than is desirable.

There was a comment above that the D5 reduction in clearance is neither here or there. The reduction is not only significant (at 2.6cm) but shows the direction LR went with D5. Cheers