Offroad capability, in stock trim, and why?

We've seen electronics and driver's aides get vastly more sophisticated with each new generation of Land Rover model, but we've also seen increasing compromise of off-road purpose, traded-off for on-road performance, comfort, and luxury. The Discovery 2 still had solid axles and relatively high-profile tires that could be aired-down for more traction. While the LR3 went to an independent suspension and low-profile tires, it may have made up for it to some degree with an air suspension that could be lifted on-demand, and better traction control. The Discovery 2 itself compromised suspension performance compared to the Discovery 1 with a change to less flexible rear radius arms, but it may have made up for it with traction control. The Discovery 1 or D90 can easily be fitted with lockers or LSD's, but if we start modifying the vehicles, then we'd have to have some kind of limit or our comparison would be pointless.

Even with the most luxurious Range Rover models, Land Rover continued to offer increasingly sophisticated offroad capabilities for many years after it was abundantly evident the purpose of the vehicles had completely changed. Now with the latest Discovery V it seems the offroad capability in stock trim has perhaps for the first time actually declined, and the few off-road features that remain have become merely vestigial. Perhaps you don't agree.

I have heard some argue that the LR3 had greater offroad capability than a Discovery 2 when compared in exclusively stock trim. Of course, the Discovery 2 provided a much simpler path to upgrade with a modest lift and higher profile tires, but with the factory setup, some would argue the LR3 more capable.

Did the LR4 increase offroad capability? What about the V? I've heard some people argue the Discovery V is the most capable vehicle in Land Rover's current line-up. If that's so, when did the Discovery surpass the full-size Range Rover in capability?

I'm not in a market where late model Defenders were sold, but if I understand right, the redesigned "Puma" model was the first to come from the factory with traction control. That may have given the Puma the best capabilities of a stock vehicle. The triangulated 3-link rear suspension should give it a slight advantage over the Discovery 2's radius-arms. There is a difference in wheelbase, but I don't think it is clear whether a 100 inch or 110 inch wheelbase is more advantageous except in specific circumstances. Certainly, a 90 or 110 will either be at an advantage or disadvantage, but it depends on the conditions, the terrain, even the particular obstacle.

I think it would be hard to argue that the leafers with open diffs and no traction control were the most capable. While the first Range Rover was almost certainly more capable than any other vehicle for more than a decade, the Discovery almost certainly improved upon it by increasing cargo capacity and relocating the spare outside the cargo area but where it is still accessible.

So what was or is the most capable Land Rover in stock form?

 

New Disco 5 or Range River Sport

 

You didn't say why. I'm not familiar with the V at all. Does it really improve offroad capability compared to an LR3 or LR4? How? I was more under the impression LR was starting to give up the pretense of offroad capability. I know the V still has a low-range, but what other awesome skills does it hide?

 

Improved suspension, improved power plant over the the LR4, worlds beyond Terrain Response, and Traction control over the 3/4. Bigger wheel wells, for tire choices better brakes can order with a locker as well. Then you can get into MPG, interior refinement etc