LR3 - why the bad rep?

[kerouac]

When I do a google search related to the LR3 I see many articles that talk about this vehicle being very unreliable. There are many horror stories about dealing with warranty issues. Many consumer guides give it a very poor rating. Yet, the LR3 seems to be picking up some enthusiasm on sites like EXPO and there are some people who just love their LR3. Is/was there really that many problmes with the LR3? What exactly were the issues?

Maybe brands like Ford or Toyota would be a better pick for doing a many months long trip like down through South America simply on the basis of dealer support but for local trips (BC, Utah, Alaska, etc) I just can't get past how nice of a ride this rig would be.

Scott Brady seems to like it as he lists it as one of his top 10 buys for NAS overland vehicles. If someone was shopping for an LR3 what specifically should be of concern?

Happy Saturday everyone

 

[PhyrraM]

I think half of the bad reputation was inherited from the Discos and the P38. I also think that the recent uprise in LR3 "noise" is because they are dropping out of the hands of the original "soccer mom" and "mall cruiser" owners and into the second hand market where we can pick them up fairly affordably. Also, after 6 years on the market, the common problems are well known and the knowledge and tools to deal with them are slowly becoming available.

As somebody who has "lightly" wheeled, gone camping, hauled the kids, and done many Scout events in Jeeps, Monteros, Pickups, even an Outback wagon...the LR3 is hands down the best all around utility 4x4 of the bunch. Once you accept the electronics as an aid, and not a liability, then you can truely appreciate what LR has created for the 99%. Generally speaking those that need that last 1% need a specialized truck that reduces it's comfort and capabilities in the 99%.

Those that know can answer better, but being a Land Rover, I would guess (even with a few breakdowns) it's still far more servicable in the "rest of the world" than much of the stuff we have to choose from in our native North American market?

 

[frank84]

First off I don't own an LR3, but I've talked to some people with them and spent some time on the trails with others that have them. I'm sure others with more personal experience than me will chime in but here's my 2 cents from what I've learned.

The earliest LR3's from '05/'06 were more problematic than the later ones. They have had issues with diffs, electric parking brakes, air suspension faults, prematurely worn bushings, steering column joints, and numerous little things. Those early models remind me more of the DII build quality, though with completely different, but similarly serious issues. Rover started making things better around 2007 and seemed like they were really making a point at improving quality. However, a vehicle from 2007 isn't really that old yet in my book so only time will tell. These are still not a Toyota, but quality is steadily improving. You can always get lucky and get a good egg in an otherwise bad bunch. My dad's DII is still going with 325k miles on the original drivetrain (minus a front driveshaft at 80k) - though it takes a lot of elbow grease on my part to keep the wheels turning.

If I was to travel somewhere outside the US, outside of cell coverage, and/or alone I would never consider a newer Land Rover. Sorry. I'm a huge Land Rover fan but I don't trust the new stuff. I'm an engineer and only trust what I can understand which is why I just spent $15k rebuilding an '89 Range Rover with a Tdi and simplifying as much as possible. We were told in school to follow the KISS approach (keep it simple stupid) and that is something I have embraced. If I was in charge of all new car design we'd probably not have ever progressed past the Model T, so, perhaps having some marketing people making decisions isn't the worst thing in the world...

In my opinion, you're better off with a newer Toyota or Ford for a trip through South America. I've never been to South America, so remember, this is just an opinion based on what I imagine a trip like that to entail. If you're going with a group, then I might be willing to give an LR3 a go, but not if I'm alone. I'd be willing to give it a go alone in an older, non computerized Land Rover, but only if I'd laid my hands on every part of the vehicle before the trip and carried a bunch a spare parts. If you're not trying to do any extreme four wheeling, the only new Land Rover I'd actually trust for a long journey away from civilization is the LR2 believe it or not. This is based on 65k miles experience with one. It has given me no reason not to trust it. The only thing that scares me is the VCR style key. The suspension system is comfy and coil sprung, the e-brake is a traditional lever and has no fault codes, the drivetrain is powerful enough and still efficient and smooth (25 mpg highway is easy to achieve), and it doesn't weigh nearly 3 tons before I've put any gear in it. For light duty exploring, if you must drive a Land Rover that is the only one I'd actually take. A little more clearance and a 2-speed transfer case and I think Land Rover would have had a real winner.

 

[Daryl]

If you're not trying to do any extreme four wheeling, the only new Land Rover I'd actually trust for a long journey away from civilization is the LR2 believe it or not.

I'm not sure how I'd ever be comfortable on a "long journey away from civilization" in a soft roader with no low range. It doesn't take "extreme four wheeling" to require and make use of low range, especially in a truck with fairly little power.

That's great that you are getting reliable service out of your LR2, but I don't see it as much more than a fire road truck at best. It's neither capable enough to take on much more nor large enough to pack enough gear and fuel for anything extended.

 

[Scott Brady]

Every vehicle manufacture has its advantage. Toyota has reliability, but lacks design, refinement and performance. Jeep has performance and capability, but lacks capacity (load). Land Rover has refinement and performance, but lack reliability.

If I am going to drive the Rubicon, I would prefer to take a Jeep. If I am going to do light exploration in North America and photography work, I would prefer a Land Rover. If I am driving around the world, I prefer a Toyota Land Cruiser. None of the brands have a magic bullet and it is humorous to me the people that think any one vehicle is perfect - it simply does not exist.

 

[RugerTrailer]

Every vehicle manufacture has its advantage. Toyota has reliability, but lacks design, refinement and performance. Jeep has performance and capability, but lacks capacity (load). Land Rover has refinement and performance, but lack reliability.

If I am going to drive the Rubicon, I would prefer to take a Jeep. If I am going to do light exploration in North America and photography work, I would prefer a Land Rover. If I am driving around the world, I prefer a Toyota Land Cruiser. None of the brands have a magic bullet and it is humorous to me the people that think any one vehicle is perfect - it simply does not exist.

For the most part I agree, it's all about what your gonna do with the vehicle. Then deal with the shortcomings of the vehicle you choose to make it best it can be for what you want it to do.

 

[frank84]

I'm not sure how I'd ever be comfortable on a "long journey away from civilization" in a soft roader with no low range. It doesn't take "extreme four wheeling" to require and make use of low range, especially in a truck with fairly little power.

That's great that you are getting reliable service out of your LR2, but I don't see it as much more than a fire road truck at best. It's neither capable enough to take on much more nor large enough to pack enough gear and fuel for anything extended.

I'm certainly not saying the LR2 is any good off road compared to other rovers, but when you look around on the different boards here at expedition portal it is amazing what people will do with even more on road oriented vehicles. A lot of people are content with "dirt roading" with their subaru or mercedes wagon and they can get out and explore on foot or bike places where their car can't take them. I think the LR2 is a viable option for trips like that.

 

[blue bomber]

It must be true it's on the interwebs.


Tapatalk sucks, sent from Matthew's IPhone

 

[ZG]

The LR2 is very viable, and the new version is very capable. Don't be fooled by it's lack of features, it has enough power and can go hard off road. Clearance is the biggest issue for that vehicle, not traction. It still probably has a better departure angle than the DII.

 

[Scott Brady]

The LR2 is very viable, and the new version is very capable.

LR2 - I would not call it capable, especially when compared with other options in the price range.

 

[huskyfargo]

OK, as an actual LR3 owner, I'll tell you my 2008 is easily the most capable, best driving/riding, and most reliable vehicle I've ever owned. I'm 36 years old and have owned Fords, Chevys, a POS Nissan, and bigger POS jeep (2008 JKU Rubicon). I've had my LR3 for about 18 months and have driven it coast to coast with only routine maintenance. In the same amount of time that I've owned the Rover, my other vehicles had all been in the shop for something more than routine maintenance. My Nissan Pathfinder was refunded under the Lemon Law, as I had problems with it as soon as I drove it off the lot. Once that nightmare was over, I purchased my Jeep, which was fun to drive and very capable when the transmission was intact. I was much more afraid of getting stuck in the woods in my jeep than I've ever even considered with my LR3. It's powerful, will go anywhere, and has plenty of room to travel cross country with my friend and our 3 labs. Yes, every brand has its problems, and LR has probably had one of the worst reputations of all, but I couldn't be happier with my LR3.

 

[ZG]

LR2 - I would not call it capable, especially when compared with other options in the price range.

Are you referring to compared to other small SUVs? Such as a Honda CRV, Toyota Rav4, Ford Escape? I think it's more capable than those, but I haven't tested like you have.

 

[JimBiram]

Ok, have to jump in on this one. I was one of the early owners of the LR3, having bought mine in January, 2005. Now with 145,000 miles, I've experience lots of repairs, etc., without complaint. But I have taken my LR3 to places that most LR3's will never go, having experienced the various trails of the Great Divide, Moab, many trails of our So Calif deserts, etc. My LR3 has only had one breakdown on the trail in almost 8 years of ownership. Unfortunately, it was major, requiring rebuilding heads, radiator, water pump, etc. and was painful to be flat bedded back home for 125 miles. For me, the cost of owning a vehicle that can do what it does, with the utility, capability, and comfort are well worth the expense. Heck, anyone who drives a Jeep offroad a lot has to deal with constant breakdowns as well, as I have seen many of them limping off the trail.

Yet EVERY, yes.....I mean every Jeep owner who has ever spent time on the trail with me has expressed respect for the LR3 and the capabilities and ride that is unique among offroad vehicles. And today with various simple tools that are now available, the fear of breakdown offroad is becoming less and less. Would I use it for an around the world trip? Probably not...for a variety of reasons, mostly that the rest of the world relies on diesel and not premium fuel. But if I had a TDi LR3 I wouldn't hesitate.

I'm biased, of course, yet I do find myself looking at the simplicity of how a well built jeep can climb rocks, etc. But at my age (59) I'm less interested in showing off my driving prowess, than I am about getting to beautiful places to explore, fish, hike, etc., to find some peace from the insanity of our world today, and not feel beat up from the ride getting there. I have to admit that doing 7 Mile Trail or Kane Creek in Moab caught the eye of lots of Jeep guys wondering what we were doing on such trails...that feels good, yet we weren't there to impress them, just to enjoy the beauty of the area.



Yep, the LR3 has a bad rap, mostly from soccer moms who can't understand why their car has to use premium fuel, parts are expensive, and good repair is few and far between. Hopefully Land Rover can keep improving on that. But Land Rover has never built a vehicle as versatile as the LR3, and they pushed the bar really high when they built that car. I'm really excited to watch Scott's new LR4 build, and to hear about his exploits for the next few years. That he has stepped into the new generation of Rovers is a testament to the capabilities of these vehicles, and I'm sure that the good experiences of many LR3 owners has helped influence his decision to jump in.

 

[nwoods]

Jim says it well.

I think one of the main things to bear in mind about internet comments is that they represent a tiny fraction of the ownership in the platform. Also, Consumer Reports and other reporting agencies like them track ANY return to the dealer as a service item. The LR3 can be a bit complex to a new owner, with lots of bells and whistles and levers and buttons. Going back to the dealer to ask what the snowflake icon is on your dashboard counts the same is having a transmission fall out, so take those ratings with a big grain of salt.

I drove a LOT of off road miles in my LR3, and found it to be incredibly reliable. It never failed me. I and really put it to hard use. I can say with total confidence that Land Rover never intended the LR3 to be be used quite as extensively as I used mine, but having talked to the folks at LRNA HQ on a number of occasions, they were thrilled and enthusiastic about seeing it put through its paces.

Also, the LR3 platform is literally several decades newer in design than that Discovery 2 that preceded it. It has literally nothing in common or carried over by way of parts or electronics or even mfr'g processes. It is a much better vehicle than older Rovers in quality control and build quality. It is fragile? Perhaps. The LR3 is a rolling computer, but with gadgets like Faultmate and GAP now available, the fear factor is removed, and the vehicle's capabilities are expanded even further.

I would not hesitate whatsoever to drive an LR3/4 pretty much anywhere.

 

[reds12t]

While I haven't wheeled it as hard or owned it for as long as as Nwoods and JimBiram, I have enjoyed my LR3 immensely. A wonderful blend of luxury, utility, and capability. While it has been most reliable, when I picked it up it did have a slow leak in the front air suspension valve block, a squeaky external air flap on the heater core, and the thermostat was intermittently throwing a code. Those issues were likely due to the neglect by the previous owner, not design faults. This highlights what I feel is most important for this vehicle, consistent maintenance and care. It is a complex and high performance vehicle, neglect and inconsistent maintenance are not tolerated as well as a simple, low performance vehicle. I feel that any bad reputation stems from people who didn't understand this, and so failed to maintain their vehicle properly. I find my LR3 to be no less reliable then the Xterra it replaced.

I recently picked up a DII, so it is almost weekly I get a real world comparison on how far Rover has come in terms of reliability. I would not hesitate to take the LR3 across the country tomorrow, enjoying the smooth ride on the highway and confident capability when the pavement ends.