include

[troverman]

The off-road disadvantage of the LR3 seems to be its size, the breakover angle will be greater. Approach & departure are still good. Solid axles have the advantage of being stout cheaply and providing articulation to lift the low side of the vehicle over obstacles. The LR3 has a stout ind. susp, and the cross-link feature allows it to articulate. No, I don't like the computers. But think about it: the old Disco II (1999-2004) had no center diff lock which could be easily engaged / disengaged, and so relied solely on a computer to manage ALL of its traction. And the P38 Range Rover, although it still had the VCU also used a computer for side-side traction, and its EAS system was very unreliable. How good is that truck riding on its bumpstops off-road? And that started in 1994. Ind. suspension has another advantage, which is clearance. The diffs are mounted fixed to the floor pan of the truck, and the entire underside is clean and high, no axles with low diffs hanging in the way. How do you think the Humvee gets 16" of clearance? Even the Range Rover (Series III) has 11.1" [The VW Toureg has 11.8!]
Back to the LR3, for the first time ever, land rover has a manual center diff lock AND a rear differential lock. Plus, ETC.
What other rides can you get for between $45k-50k? You could get a Volvo XC-90, no frame, front / AWD, no lo-range, S-80 car platform, and ugly styling. (Now with Yamaha V8 option!) You could get a BMW X5, no frame, AWD-no low range, a 3.0 six-cylinder, etc. You could get a
Mercedes ML, with ind. suspension, not much clearance, perm. 4x4 with lo-range, but three open diffs and only a computer to provide traction, plus basically poor styling. And the new for '06 ML is even more hideous, and low-range is now an option. So the LR3, with unibody-integrated frame, cross-linked air suspension, 300hp Jaguar V8, Terrain Response, permanent 4x4 w/lo range, locking center and rear diffs, 4-wheel ETC, liftable suspension--conservative styling, great brakes, roomy interior--its a bargain!