Don, I'll echo what a few others have said. If you were running either the stock 255 or even 265 and focused entirely on the EAS system you'd have very few problems (fingers crossed, there's always the odd gremlin...). However running a lift (tool plus rods), larger tires, extra weight, and making what is a great overland vehicle leaning more towards a rock crawler really isn't the way to go if you want factory reliability, and does not give us that much leeway to complain about a system that was designed for a more balanced configuration. Your boating comment I do however agree with. You can do a lot with the 3's up to a point, and then it does seem like the law of diminishing returns comes into play. Where you're at, I can see the frustration with fighting the EAS system. Just because you (or others/whomever) don't like the way it looks or performs stock does not mean it doesn't perform great in a stock configuration. These trucks are capable of doing a whole lot in their stock form (see numerous owner experiences and LR events IE the millionth discovery trip, etc). Beyond an IID tool, all I added was 265's and went at it. Not every overland vehicle HAS to be able to run 285's and a 6" lift to be good. Not every truck NEEDS to be able to crawl up boulders... but I'm looking forward to see the RRC build with that in mind

As for dealing with EAS, I think both the GAP tool's "build mode" and the bbyer EAS kill-switch are solid insurance policies against potential failure points. I know you're running the bump stop lifts so I'd be interested to hear reports about how they function over the long term. I'm hoping in the next few years the market will be at a more critical mass with regards to developing more options for heavier modifications and better trucks.

 

Those who point out my rig is heavily modified are right. I've admitted I suspect a stock truck would be unlikely to have as many issues as I do. Many of them are self-induced I'm sure even if I can't point to a specific mod that is causing a given issue. Perhaps it's more a matter of tolerance stack.

And I further agree that the LR3 platform is quite capable off the shelf. On par or better than most other stock rigs. With some mods, you can begin to approach the capabilities of the highest end stock rigs (i.e. Rubicon) though you won't match them. Of course, that was never the designer's goal. Even the Defender can't go toe-to-toe with a Rubicon when compared stock to stock in terms of technical capabilities. (though it outshines the Rubi in other areas to be sure)

And while I have no intention of running double black diamond stuff with the LR3 - I'd love to see the LR3 that can get through Fordyce or the Hammers - I do use mine on 'difficult' trails that most wouldn't try in one. Of course, I've also realized no matter how much lipstick you put on that pig it will never be a rock crawler. Again - that's not a knock on the LR3 platform so much as an admittance of it's limitations. The LR3 may not have diffs hanging down to drag on the rocks, but the break-over clearance at the sills is miserable. One of the first things I did to mine was Tactical sliders, gas tank skid, and transfer case skid. I knew I couldn't get it very high, so I went full-turtle on the bottom. But you can only drag it over so many boulders before the frustration gets to be too much.

BTW, the first attempt at lift was via the GAP IID tool alone. That got me (as I remember) about 35mm of lift before I ran out of sensor range. That led me to go to the rods. I'm not the only one to find the GAP tool didn't give as much lift as thought and I understand that's typical based on each vehicle's calibration settings. Glad it works for some, but it didn't work for me.

I know it would be easier to simply wheel a Jeep. But I'm not a Jeep kind of guy. I've always done things a little differently. When all my friends were drag racing Chevies in the 80s, I ran a Ford. After that I switched to road racing an Alfa Romeo in the mid-west where most people had never even heard of the (and couldn't pronounce) the brand. I ride Triumphs when a Japanese bike costs less and goes better because I like different. So I guess pushing an LR3 a little beyond average is about average for me.

As for the RRC, that build won't get underway for some time but think 35s, maybe later 37s, and about 16-18" of travel. While I hesitate to call it a 'rock crawler' because the guys who have real crawlers would laugh at that, it'll certainly lean more that way than 'expo' rig. But like I said, that's at least 6 months from even starting. For now the RRC is almost stock suspension wise.

Back on topic, I don't actually plan to go to coils because of the limitations they bring. I do occasionally suffer a bout of frustration at trying to make my particular combination work together and fantasize about the simplicity of a set of Kings or such, but it's going to take a lot to make me get serious about actually making the change. Hopefully the addition of the RRC will sate my desire to over-build the LR3.

 

I have the same issue with the GAP tool only being able to lift a small amount, mine was about a 40mm lift (42 max) because of the way the suspension is calibrated.

I thought about maybe tricking the suspension into extended mode by putting a jack under the frame and dropping the truck onto it. Guys have used this so that the truck thinks it is high centered and goes into extended height to clear the obstacle. Maybe your GAP-achieved lift plus this would be enough for some of the harder trails. Add in a manual disconnect switch to the fuse box and there you go. Might work in a pinch but it will strain the CV angles.

For an extra layer of safety you could "lock" the computer into build mode, but I am not positive that will prevent all changes to the EAS if a sensor freaks out.

Unfortunately with these vehicles it will always be an armor versus weight issue. Maybe a ton of aluminum armor plates in lieu of the steel fronts plus some EAS mods that cut out the weak link (the computer) can offset the issue with trails. That said the EAS has been invaluable for highway driving before and after long trips.

I'd love to take a peek at what under armoring you're running at some point in the future.

 

Don, are you trying to just get as much lift as possible? I think I'm one of the lucky ones in terms of EAS calibration and use the IIDTool alone, but then again I'm really only trying to get tall enough to clear my 32s.

Agree on the breakover angle and getting an extra half-inch or inch isn't going to remedy that much. Make yourself happy and build the RRC up big. Keep the LR3 as tall enough for 32s and armor underneath like you've done. Won't be a rock crawler but one hell of an all-arounder. I've done plenty of black-diamond trails myself (just not double).

You stated this in your post, Don: "On par or better than most other stock rigs."

I've often mused about this. Let's take the Jeep Wrangler out of the equation, and the Hummer H1. Those aren't really "SUVs" anyway. What beats an LR3, stock-to-stock?

I guess what I'm implying is that, especially if you bound this by saying "in the era of the LR3's existence" it is better than all other stock rigs except the Wrangler (which really is in a different category anyway).

 

Good question as to what might be equal or better than an LR3, particularly of it's era. Of course the Wranglers spring to mind but taking that out of the question I guess you look at things like the Land Cruiser (probably the closest match on paper), the FJ Cruiser, maybe the Xterra Pro4X, possibly the Grand Cherokee. I don't know any of them well enough to make a solid argument one way or the other.

I have little love for the H1 Hummer. It's just so big. Heck, I can barely fit the LR3 down a lot of trails...I'd never make that thing fit.

But it does look like I'm reaching the end of the road for LR3 mods. I'm sitting at the tire store now picking up my 33s. Once those go on I've got some minor things like a pair of ARB clone lights for the front, but otherwise it's more or less 'done' I think.

Thus the need for the RRC.

 

Those are good candidates. I'd have to look at the numbers but I'd bet the LR3 beats them all on crawl ratio and wheel travel.

 

As we know, there's a lot more to a wheeler than just the numbers. And I'm sure each has it's strong points. The LC's are known for legendary reliability. The FJC has small size on it's side as does the Xterra which also was quite affordable. The Jeep....HEMI power! But that's all beside the point - I wouldn't trade the LR3 for any of them. They're all sorta boaring. (the land cruisers for example are all beige no matter what color you paint them)

 

Hahahahaha....Beige Land Cruisers!

Numbers aren't everything, that's true. I suppose it's just an easy way to compare since I haven't driven each of them off-road, and I'm kind of a data-driven guy.

 

https://landroverforums.com/forum/lr...version-73855/



https://landroverforums.com/forum/lr...version-73855/


Understand, your asking Pros / Cons of Coil Over kits from die hard LR enthusiasts. :-) You will get die hard responses. There is no right / wrong. To each his own. Here's a bit of info. from the other side of the fence... and yes, in my opinion, the GRASS IS GREENER! :-) I am not here to sway you one way or another. I posted a coil over conversion I did last spring to HELP others on the fence or who want / need more info, pics, reviews, etc... So here you go.


All wheel drive works fine post coil over. Still operates via ABS sensors for traction. You don't have the function of selecting modes. You don't need them. All the 4 wheel drive settings on the LR3 EAS work via ABS as traction control. As far as articulation of suspension... Look at the last pic from the link above... With the AB coil over kit, It still takes quite a bit of jacking to lift a tire off the ground. The AB coil overs are LONG travel, so the LR3 can still articulate the suspension independently on all four corners keeping the wheels on the ground in adverse terrain. What you lose, is the ability to manually control the ride height. Up / down, as Coil overs are a pre set height. However, height adjustment is merely a body lift giving more tire body clearance. NOTHING lifts the axles / differentials other than taller tires. :-) The AB kit with standard coils... leaves too much body roll in my opinion. The EMU springs would be what I'd do differently 2nd time around. Bit higher stance, bit stiffer for less body roll. Win / Win. NO compressors, airbags, valves, lines, sensors, etc... to service / replace / mess with. I did this to a buddy's LR3 last spring. It's been flawless since. He drives it weekends. His daughter drives it weekdays to high school. :-) The coil over kits are gaining in popularity as the LR3's age and suspension component failure is inevitable, time consuming and EXPENSIVE to fix, and fix again etc... Hope this helps. To each his own. NO the LR3 does not drive horrible post coil over install. Yes, the LR3 is still off road capable, even more so if Old Man Emu springs were used.

 

The air suspension to me is what MAKES the LR3. Without it it's just a DII with a good motor.

The air suspension is amazing in these vehicles. It can take overloading to an extent that I couldn't imagine and still provide the lift. More weight no problem the computer adjusts and life goes on. The coil conversion can't do this and from what I saw doesn't take much weight before it is sagging.

I lived in a LR3 for a week with 3 other gentlemen while doing the Vermont Overland Trophy (VOT) we had more gear than you can imagine, f2 OZ Tents, water heater, shower, fridge, stove etc etc. Running proud rhino lift rods, proud rhino SYA spacer kit 33x12.5 Nittos sliders bumpers and skids we completed every challenge the competition threw at us. The red winch helped out to of course lol.

I also have to add that a LR3 with armor and 33's is an amazing toy off road.

Removing the Air Suspension on the LR3 is like removing your ********* sure you can live without them but you live far better with them.