Looks like Landrover could have another winner. From what I have seen on their website looks good. No idea on pricing but I will give it serious consideration against the D3 when its time to change cars next spring.
MC
It's actually a mundano.....
With every new car they further from the original idea! But i'm sure it will be a winner with it. I dont like the look of it BTW.
Nige
Aww come on Nige - it looks better than the last one! (mind you that isn't saying much!) although the back looks a bit too much J$$p Grand Cherokee for my liking.
Tho why anyone would consider a F/lander against a D3 I'm not sure. They are miles apart - especially in price!
Matt
Price is important, D3 has moved the Disco further upmarket into Range Rover territory and Ranger Rover has moved into a super 4x4 category. I know there are lots more bells and whistles, but to stay with the model mark when I trade in my D2 TD5, it will be effectively an extra £10k more. The Freelander now being a bit bigger may well be a more cost effective solution. Just my thoughts.
MC
Current Freelander is a winner?
Unless they have upped the head room by a couple of inches I'll prefer the D3. In the current Freelander there is about 1" between by skull and the headlining, have a bad hair day and it's very irritating.
That's what I was trying to say - the D3 is now so expensive that you can hardly compare D3 and F/lander prices - for one that isn't a real bargain basement model it must be £35k+ for a D3 now, Whereas the FL is what - £25k? for a top of the range model - not even remotely comparable in price. I guess from my point of view, if I could afford a D3 I wouldn't even consider the F/lander, and if I could afford a F/lander I'd probably be looking to another manufacturer (sadly) for something that offers better value. Not that I'm in a position to afford either, but there you go!!
Matt
Bah - some of us don't have that much hair to fret over.
"Matthew Maddock" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@bt.com...
I doubt i'll ever buy a new car again anyway, i love my older cars, you can fix them yourself, you get so much more for your money & they are just so naff it's almost cool!!!
New cars are shit.
Can't put it fairer than that ;-)
£5K for a comfy mile-eater that does 47MPG, £8K for a good condition Defender 110, £7K for a six-wheeled monster, £12K for a plastic rocketship, grand total for that lot is £32K which is quite a bit (quite scarily, surprisingly much in fact), but that's spread over 6 years and would buy me a new Freelander. No thanks!Depreciation stacks up well too, rocket ship has lost about £1K tops, pinz won't drop to less than I paid for it (jammy deal), Audi and Landy have lost £2-3K each.
Mind you, that's a lot of loot spent on cars, anyone want to buy a Defender 110?
Don't worry I won't have in a few years time. Much recession and thinning going on...
I'm intrigued... with no transfer box why would you want one? OK, so it's LR's entry into the RAV4 market but surely it's a Chelsea Tractor (or Toorak Taxi!) and not exactly designed for serious fourby work?
Or have I missed the point and LR have suddenly seen the light and produced a smallish 4x4 with a transfer box and serious go anywhere aspirations????
Yes, it's a Chelsea Tractor. From a commercial perspective it will be a roaring success, neatly answering the major shortcomings of the current model.
Within limits of ground clearance the current model is actually very good in many off-road applications, particularly those most often encountered by Chelsea Tractor drivers - wet grass, snow, ice etc. Useless in deep ruts, but pretty good (and user friendly) in many situations.
If everyone wanted a Defender, LR would only build Defenders.
Why do you pin so much importance on a transfer box?
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.