Mechanically very little changed; it was in the 4's that they started to fool with the engine.

The code for the 3 was written circa 2002/03 and updated as required until they got it pretty stable by the 2008 models. For the 2010 model year, new code was formally introduced, not necessarily for the better.

Some of the new code was tried out in the 2009 models - this is something all manufacturers do in anticipation of a model change out as in the showroom, any problems can always be claimed to be corrected and why you should purchase the new one. It is just business.

 

schwaggy, I think he answered your question in his post...he noted a different programming language. As for how that manifested itself in the driver interface and functions....not sure.

Army, people can daily-drive on bigger tires, sure....but I think the statement is that the LR3 is a better DD on stock-sized tires. As someone who does both (32s April - Oct, 30" Nokians the rest of the year) I will attest that the difference is night and day. The LR3 feels way more nimble and easier to drive on the 30s. It feels badass and unstoppable on the 32s for sure....

....but it's kind of like the difference between hiking boots and light running shoes. You can hike in running shoes but why would you? Likewise, you can run (or walk the streets) in hiking boots....you can do it. There are guys doing it.....but that doesn't mean it's as good as using the proper footwear.

QED.

 

I understand what your saying Houm, but it clearly says they are not daily drivers.

It is a bit quicker and the MPG is better but as far as ride and handling I have noticed no difference when mine was on stock tires to the 32.5.

The 07 is on stock tires currently, so I have driven both ways this week. I think it boils down to the trade off and if you are willing to accept that. I am.

 

I appreciated the kind comments, by the way.

Re he software changes, as long as they worked, they did not affect the driving - it affected the fixing.

I guess I am a Luddite, but LR had a near perfect world class all season, all climates AWD/4x4 in 2008, and to try to make a 3 tonne box fuel efficient, they start messing about! The D5 is the result and they still are stalling on the Defender!

I might add I have a simple answer for the Defender, the D4 Commercial that they already build - that means all coil suspension, downscale interior, no glass roof, a simple radio, and only an engine computer.

A note to the bean counters would be that the plant and tooling already exist and are written off as are the development costs. The Commercial already meets all the safety codes and the world knows how to fix them. I might even concede 32" wheels on 18" rims if the wheel wells were bigger.

As I said, I am a Luddite.

 

I won't try to argue something that cannot be proven. You don't notice much difference; I do. I also have experience with both setups, but on the same LR3... the difference is palpable.

 

I have ran stock tires on both trucks as well. Honestly the ride was a bit more plush with the 265/70R18. I think the added sidewall was the difference.

In the end we are arguing preference or seat of the pants feel. Which is a no win.

I just wanted to make the point that plenty of folks daily drive them with big tires.

 

Agree with bbyer, on the wheels. 18" wheels will give a better all round driving experience, not too soft or too harsh on road with just the right amout of flexibility for off road and for the tyres I'd go for 255/60R18 which have a little wider footprint in the pavement.

Another consideration (at least one I'd think about and eventually I did on mine, at around 110K) would be a gearbox mega-flush (full box and TC oil change). Land Rover originally sold the LR3 as not requiring a gearbox oil change for life. But we now know that to have been rubbish advice, to say the least.

Fortunately the 4.4 V8 gearbox seems to fair better than the Diesel engines’ in this respect, but if what you buy is close to or in excess of 75K you should think about it, especially as now the LR4 does have a service interval for the gearbox. LR learnt from the number of failed LR3 TCs and boxes that perhaps an oil change is a good ideal.

 

I certainly agree with the necessity of changing the oil and filters on the ZF 6HP26 automatic transmission.

It is annoyingly expensive and no fun for the mechanics either - invariable burned arms from the exhaust pipe, but to date, my tranny continues to work fine.

In my now 190,000 miles, I have done it 3 times so I guess I service the tranny a bit more often. The reality is the Expedition has about the same tranny, (but Ford license built per the link below), and it seems to get by with less service - the oil sure is cheaper anyway as one is not purchasing the Land Rover ZF tranny oil with the Stardust and Unobtanium additives.)

I am also a big fan of replacing the engine coolant every couple of years, not because it looses it antifreeze properties, (it does not), but the corrosion inhibitors do break down. I have yet to replace my heater core nor is there any evidence of aluminum engine internal corrosion, so I think that is good preventive maintenance; same with the transfer case and differential oils - every two years or so. One would never do this fluids change frequency on a Ford or Chev pickup.

I finally had to replace the front wheel bearings - first time however so that was not bad, however on an Expedition, probably they will never require replacement, but then the Expedition is not a race truck.

https://www.disco3.co.uk/gallery/thu...php?album=5059

 

Dude, Bruce...I love your commentary buddy, but "race truck" really? 0-60 in 8+ seconds...doesn't qualify!

I did a flush of the tranny fluid at ~100k. That really means drain as much as you can and re-fill. Kept the old filter. I'm not sure when I'll address it again, maybe 150k...? At my rate that will take me 9 years, though. Whenever that happens I'll likely keep the plastic pan and just go through the painstaking filter change.

 

houm-wa, what you're doing is little more than removing 4litres (7 pints) of fluid, which amounts to about 35%. It needs a mega-flush carried out by a service shop to do a full 100% fluid change.

This small 'service' (that's only suited to doing a filter change) only serves to dilute the old fluid with a little fresh stuff. It's rather like draining 1/3 of your engine oil and topping it up, instead of doing a full oil change. How many of you would do that? The engine wouldn't last if you did. It’s as if LR were relying on the filter to catch all the contaminants and so the fluid wouldn’t need changing.

With Tranny fluid being so expensive it's a false economy not to change it all at regular intervals, especially if there are more than 75K on the clock. There after I'd do what LR now recommend for the LR4 and change the oil every 60K (I think it is)

A mega-flush removes all the old fluid from the tranny, torque converter and fluid cooler. You'll notice the difference, especially if you're experiencing an little slipping, and it'll prolong the life of the tranny.