Is the LR3 a Serious Off-Road Competitor?

[LR3_OWNER]

The crawl ratio is a good metric for determining how much control you'll have going over rocks and such, but lost here is the fact that the LR3 also has Hill Descent Control (HDC). While the HDC pretty much sucks on ice/snow, on rocks it is amazing. Coupled with the independent suspension, it provides even more slow-speed control over rocks and really does feel like the vehicle is carefully walking down a rocky slope. It affords ridiculous control of the vehicle.

The H3 is quite capable....more so in my opinion, than the (big for the sake of being big) H2. However, the LR3 could easily keep up with the H3, and do so with style. That is the difference....

For what it's worth, I think the Jeep Wrangler Rubicon would beat BOTH vehicles for pure off-road duty.

[ZigsRig]

Holy Old Post Batman....

[RazM]

Originally Posted by LR3_OWNER

The crawl ratio is a good metric for determining how much control you'll have going over rocks and such, but lost here is the fact that the LR3 also has Hill Descent Control (HDC). While the HDC pretty much sucks on ice/snow, on rocks it is amazing. Coupled with the independent suspension, it provides even more slow-speed control over rocks and really does feel like the vehicle is carefully walking down a rocky slope. It affords ridiculous control of the vehicle.

The H3 is quite capable....more so in my opinion, than the (big for the sake of being big) H2. However, the LR3 could easily keep up with the H3, and do so with style. That is the difference....

For what it's worth, I think the Jeep Wrangler Rubicon would beat BOTH vehicles for pure off-road duty.

I like what Four Wheeler recently said, that the H3 can do 95% of what a Rubicon can, but in comfort and style (and in the case of the Alpha, more on-road power)

The LR3 simply would not be able to follow an H3 through many obstacles, Put 35's on an H3 (with no lift required to do so, I might add) and the LR3 just doesn't compare.

[dochummer]

I own an LR3 and an H2. The LR3 can't keep up even with A/T tires.

[LR3_OWNER]

Actually...just look at the two rigs (H2 and LR3). The fact that we are even having this conversation is an indictment of the H2. Look at it! Why should the LR3 be able to keep up with that beast? The H2 is big just to be big. Look at the measures of capability; gear ratios, wheel travel, ground clearance, power-to-weight. The LR3 is right there with the H2; and I don't believe for a second that the LR3 cannot "keep up" with anyone's H2, EXCEPT in the case where approach/departure angle becomes an issue.

...of course with 35s on an H3 that brings size and clearance issues into play. Likewise with an H2. Physical stature aside, I won't buy that the LR3 can't compete with the H2's traction and handling off-road. There is no reason for me to believe that based on what's on-board.

I like the H3. I actually think it's far superior to the H2. I didn't know it had a 4:1 low-range; that's impressive, like the Rubi. No front lockers though, right?

[RuggedH2]

Originally Posted by LR3_OWNER

I like the H3. I actually think it's far superior to the H2.

This statement alone proves that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

Far superior how?

I have both, and would like to hear your answer in spite of the fact that just about everything else you've stated here was stupid.

If you're going to resurrect ancient threads, at least say something intelligent.

[LR3_OWNER]

It's superior because of its gear ratio and it's the "right size" instead of being too big for its own tie-rods !

Plus...pay attention, look at my screen name. I'm obviously trying to push your buttons, which was remarkably easy.

I just feel like the H2 is too big. ...and for all that brawn its specs are unimpressive.

...and this may be an old thread but I'm a newcomer. If you are uninterested then don't reply.

[dochummer]

Well, unlike you, I also own the H2 and have had chances to wheel both under similar circumstances. The H2 in stock form outperforms the LR3 with oversized all-terrain tires. Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against the LR3. It would be my fourth choice after the Hummer(1,2,3). It has impressive abilities on paper and on/off-road but my personal experiences show that it is not as capable overall. My most recent test came with some access road wheeling. There was a small stream running across the trail, and the LR3 got stuck in the mud. Even with the LR3 in extended height mode, it didn't go anywhere. Ended up scratching the rims pretty badly as I was trying to get some momentum to get unstuck. The mud was up to the front bumper and driver's side sill. I had my cousin's stock H2 pull me back out, and then tried 2 more times to get through the same area. No good. I finally had to take a completely different line to get around the newly dug hole. Immediately afterwards, the H2 was driven through the middle of the hole, following my original line and had NO issues making it to the other side.

[LR3_OWNER]

...better (low) gear ratio for starters. Better fuel economy. Not too big so that it can't even fit down trails. Doesn't bust tie-rods because it's overweight.

...should I continue?

To be honest I don't know much about the H3 except that I PERSONALLY like it better. Take that for what it's worth. If you want to compare against the LR3 I can do that intelligently all day long.

The fact that this thread started by someone comparing the HUGE H2 to the comparatively dimunitive LR3 is an indictment on GM's inability to get it right with that model. It is, shall I say, "big for the sake of being big." This only indicates a lack of creativity and/or real design effort on the part of GM's Engineers.

Finally, look at my login name, Einstein....you have to expect that part of my mission in resurrecting this post is to irritate you and push your buttons. Mission accomplished.

[Vettster]

Originally Posted by LR3_OWNER

...better (low) gear ratio for starters. Better fuel economy. Not too big so that it can't even fit down trails. Doesn't bust tie-rods because it's overweight.

...should I continue?

To be honest I don't know much about the H3 except that I PERSONALLY like it better. Take that for what it's worth. If you want to compare against the LR3 I can do that intelligently all day long.

The fact that this thread started by someone comparing the HUGE H2 to the comparatively dimunitive LR3 is an indictment on GM's inability to get it right with that model. It is, shall I say, "big for the sake of being big." This only indicates a lack of creativity and/or real design effort on the part of GM's Engineers.

Finally, look at my login name, Einstein....you have to expect that part of my mission in resurrecting this post is to irritate you and push your buttons. Mission accomplished.

Let me see. No profile and only 4 posts. (All to the same thread)
Dissing a vehicle that you admit to never having driven. (but, You say you like the pictures .
Admitting that you come onto the forum just to stir up things.

Seems to me that you should change your user name to LR3_Troll.

Come back when you have done your homework.

[RazM]

Originally Posted by LR3_OWNER

Actually...just look at the two rigs (H2 and LR3). The fact that we are even having this conversation is an indictment of the H2. Look at it! Why should the LR3 be able to keep up with that beast? The H2 is big just to be big. Look at the measures of capability; gear ratios, wheel travel, ground clearance, power-to-weight. The LR3 is right there with the H2; and I don't believe for a second that the LR3 cannot "keep up" with anyone's H2, EXCEPT in the case where approach/departure angle becomes an issue.

...of course with 35s on an H3 that brings size and clearance issues into play. Likewise with an H2. Physical stature aside, I won't buy that the LR3 can't compete with the H2's traction and handling off-road. There is no reason for me to believe that based on what's on-board.

I like the H3. I actually think it's far superior to the H2. I didn't know it had a 4:1 low-range; that's impressive, like the Rubi. No front lockers though, right?

Your arguement runs in circles. The whole idea behind a well designed offroad vehicle are its proportions, and how those proportions relate to obstacles. It's very accurate (and amusing) when you say "...the LR3 [can] "keep up" with anyone's H2, EXCEPT in the case where approach/departure angle becomes an issue." I don't know what trails you've driven, but even the most basic will have you encounter obstacles where approach and departure angles are key.

You can have all the traction control systems in the world, if you can't get your tires on an obstacle, you're going nowhere, atleast without body damage.

The H2 and H3 both allow for the most wheel clearance of any competing 4x4, allowing them to run larger tires than the competition, without requiring a lift. This alone gives the H2 and H3 an edge over an LR3. Add to that the better angles, and it's not that hard to see why it would outperform your precious Land Rover.

BTW, on your final question about H3's and front lockers, yes, they're getting them in the '09 models.

Finally, the only mission you've accomplished it to show us all how little you understand on the basics of offroading. If that's what you set out to do, well, mission accomplished

[dochummer]

I wouldn't consider 12mpg in the city and 15mpg on the highway much of an "improvement" over the H2....