Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
2005 Discovery
caneau
Member Posts: 14
I should have titled this discussion the "wussification" or "castration" of the next Disco but I don't want to jump to too many conclusions...yet. I really don't understand Ford. Their trucks are some of the best in the world. They use the money they make off their wonderful trucks to play around with a bunch of other, smaller ideas, say Volvo, Jag, Aston Martin, or even cars inside of their circle, or should I say oval, for example the GT or T-bird. Then somewhere along the lines they buy one of the three most well respected off road nameplates (Jeep and AM General/Hummer being the other two). So far so good for Ford, they've saved one of the few remaining British car companies, gained access to some great off-road technology, and added yet another mark to its global network. This is where the good ends and bad begins.
One would think that a company like Ford who sells over a million half-ton pickups per year, many with the quite capable FX4 package, and incorporate some of those ideas into their Land Rover brand. Unfortunatly, that's too obvious and common sensical of a solution. Instead, the new Disco, LR's last remaining true SUV (apart from the Defender which isn't of course isn't imported to the States) will be based on the current Explorer, complete with an IRS.
Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against Explorers or IRS's, the former is a wonderful soccer mommy car and the latter makes my Intrepid handle great, but neither should be ever seen in one of the world's expedition vehicles (and this is coming from a long-time Jeep owner). First of all, the Explorer platform isn't a great platform to begin with. The body-on-frame design makes the cars too heavy for city driving but the IRS makes them next to useless on anything more challenging then a dirt road. The platform has already seen it's first casualty, the Lincoln Aviator, which will be canceled in '05. Word of advice to any Ford Execs if they read this, if something fails, don't use it again. If something's working, improve on it, and sell it to the same clientelle.
Second, the Independent Rear Suspension. Not to try to sound poetic, but I think the incorporation of an IRS on an SUV (an H1 being the exception) automatically dooms the car as a mommy mobile. Many people bought the Disco simply to a vehicle that you could turn on the TV and see it blazing through the Sahara or being floated on a raft through the Amazon. When was the last time you saw an Explorer leave the pavement? These same people already HAD a choice before to buy a "wussy" SUV and guess what, they chose a Land Rover. That being said, there is a good chance they ,or others like them, will again choose a Land Rover. I simply do not understand why one would want to take that choice away and replace it with nothing more than a glorified Explorer?
So, rather than complaining without a solution, here is my idea for Ford. There are over a million F-150's being sold per year. That tells you something: you must be doing something right. Take the new F-150 platform, shorten it (the Disco only has just over a 100 inch wheel base), and give it an IFS and a live axle in the rear standard using the Rancho shocks from the FX4 package, with a live axle up front as either a no charge option or part of a greater off road package. That way, you'll be satisfying two birds with one stone. First, you'll make the soccer mommies happy by giving them the go-anywhere feeling of owning a truly capable SUV that's still managable in the city. Also, you'll make enthusiasts happy by giving them an improved version of their beloved truck rather than trying to ramming a rebadled, overpriced Explorer down their throats all the while trying to convince them that it's still "the real thing".
Just my humble opinion.
One would think that a company like Ford who sells over a million half-ton pickups per year, many with the quite capable FX4 package, and incorporate some of those ideas into their Land Rover brand. Unfortunatly, that's too obvious and common sensical of a solution. Instead, the new Disco, LR's last remaining true SUV (apart from the Defender which isn't of course isn't imported to the States) will be based on the current Explorer, complete with an IRS.
Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against Explorers or IRS's, the former is a wonderful soccer mommy car and the latter makes my Intrepid handle great, but neither should be ever seen in one of the world's expedition vehicles (and this is coming from a long-time Jeep owner). First of all, the Explorer platform isn't a great platform to begin with. The body-on-frame design makes the cars too heavy for city driving but the IRS makes them next to useless on anything more challenging then a dirt road. The platform has already seen it's first casualty, the Lincoln Aviator, which will be canceled in '05. Word of advice to any Ford Execs if they read this, if something fails, don't use it again. If something's working, improve on it, and sell it to the same clientelle.
Second, the Independent Rear Suspension. Not to try to sound poetic, but I think the incorporation of an IRS on an SUV (an H1 being the exception) automatically dooms the car as a mommy mobile. Many people bought the Disco simply to a vehicle that you could turn on the TV and see it blazing through the Sahara or being floated on a raft through the Amazon. When was the last time you saw an Explorer leave the pavement? These same people already HAD a choice before to buy a "wussy" SUV and guess what, they chose a Land Rover. That being said, there is a good chance they ,or others like them, will again choose a Land Rover. I simply do not understand why one would want to take that choice away and replace it with nothing more than a glorified Explorer?
So, rather than complaining without a solution, here is my idea for Ford. There are over a million F-150's being sold per year. That tells you something: you must be doing something right. Take the new F-150 platform, shorten it (the Disco only has just over a 100 inch wheel base), and give it an IFS and a live axle in the rear standard using the Rancho shocks from the FX4 package, with a live axle up front as either a no charge option or part of a greater off road package. That way, you'll be satisfying two birds with one stone. First, you'll make the soccer mommies happy by giving them the go-anywhere feeling of owning a truly capable SUV that's still managable in the city. Also, you'll make enthusiasts happy by giving them an improved version of their beloved truck rather than trying to ramming a rebadled, overpriced Explorer down their throats all the while trying to convince them that it's still "the real thing".
Just my humble opinion.
Tagged:
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
For fire roads and ski trips and the usual campsite jaunts, I don't feel IRS would be detrimental. If you're planning on rock crawling/Moab and that type of activity, it would be more of an issue, but really, of all the LRs sold, how many are actually going to do that?
There are also the issues encountered when lifting vehicles, IFS and IRS, have their own set, about caster /camber, and CV angles,change in track, where as people have lots of history with the issues encountered when lifting solid axles. bumpsteer, caster, tracking rods, etc
Ford should make some LR version to compete in the BMW / Lexus class and a 4 dr defender for the hardened 4x4 crowd. I agree that the exploder is not the optimal foundation for that market if they want to compete with X5 an the Lexus 330
Regards
I must say though, for fire roads and ski trips, I've taken my Intrepid and it's done just fine. I really think that there are enough SUV's on the market which can handle any sort of level terrain. Heck, even the commercial for the H2 shows it traveling in a straight line across the most level snow I have ever seen. Ford even has quite a few of these, the Escape, Freelander, Explorer, Expedition, and Range Rover, just to name a couple. I honestly think that they have every possible market segment covered when it comes to around-town SUV's.
As for lifting, in all my years of off-roading, I think I may have seen one seriously lifted Disco. Their stock suspension is actually decent for most rock crawling or awkward terrain. I agree though, each type of suspension has its own tricks when it comes to modification.
When it comes to the luxury SUV segment, I really think that Ford has it's contenders already in place. The Range Rover is the top of the heap, uber-SUV. The Navigator is the glorified rich mommy-mobile with xenons and a nav system. Now the Aviator nameplate is being replaced with a luxo cute-ute (see NAIAS article) to compete with the RX 330, X5, MDX, and the like.
LR has been making a 4 door Defender for years though, called the Defender 110. The Defender lineage is actually one of the longest running and successful lines of cars in the world, being sold as hard working British SUVs for around 50 years. They were just overpriced when brought to the states ($40k for a VERY simple car). If I were in Ford's spot, I would take the D90 and D110, give them those safety and emissions requirements, and give the $26k Wranglers a run for their money. The Disco would then take it's rightful spot as the ultimate expeditionary vehicle to complement the Defender.
On a final note, there already is a British-built Escape, it's called the Freelander. The Disco will be around the same dimensions as the current Explorer, hence why they're building it on its platform.
Happy rock hoppin'
FYI, Land Rover, along with Aston Martin, Jaguar, and Volvo are part of the PAG, or Premier Auto Group, owned by Ford. Ford has owned PAG for several years now.
Right.
Sorry but your last post confused me. First you say "Ford isn't as involved in Land Rover as you might think", but at the end you say "ties with Ford are further than you think." Which is it?
Yes, they are replacing the Aviator with a cute-ute type SUV. Check out the Edmunds report on the North American Int'l Auto Show from Detroit to read more about it. The Aviator in its current form was a failure because few people wanted a rebadged Explorer for almost the price of a Navigator or for more than a nicely equipped Expedition.
Next, IRS is really good off road...so good that my rock hoppin' Dodge Intrepid uses it and it'll put a lifted Wrangler to shame on the Rubicon. It's simple physics. I remember seeing a picture comparing a Jeep Liberty (which has an IFS) going through the same ditch as a Jeep Cherokee. The Liberty had it's front two wheels helplessly in the air while the Cherokee had straddled the ditch and had 3 wheels on the ground. The way this works in a live axle suspension, if one wheel is pushed up, it pushed the other side down for greater traction or at the very least, contact with the ground. In an independent suspension the wheeels are, well, independent, so no matter what one wheel does, the other does it's own thing. This is great for road handling because each wheel independently conforms to the road providing maximum traction on fairly flat surfaces. And yes, independent suspension is even used on one of the greatest off road vehicles, the Hummer (H1). The reason being is force at speed is much better adsorbed by an independent suspension allowing the Humvee to blaze across enemy terrain at speeds of 60+ mph. Each vehicle has it's purpose and the purpose of a Disco is to get places no other cars would ever dream of. This is usually done at very slow speeds (<15 mph) and may involve rock climbing, traveling at steep side angles, or navigating narrow paths; things nearly impossible in a Humvee. That's what made the Disco or Grand Cherokee so special, they are expeditionary vehicles capable of going places few others can. So why does Range Rover (or most luxo-SUV's) use an independent suspension? For the same reason it uses the BMW 4.4 liter V-8 rather than a heavy duty, nearly bulletproof, lots-o-low-end torque engine: I have yet to see one leave the pavement. And can you blame people for not wanting to? The car costs $70k+, has leather seats, HID's, and all sorts of cool gadgets. The replacement cost of one of it's headlights alone is around a grand. Therefore, the car is aimed at a certain market: rich families who need to show off their "wilder side", not off road enthusiasts. And yes, I have ridden in a new Range Rover and yes, I will still take my former, old, beat up Cherokee off road over it any day simply because that car is designed with one purpose. Enough said about this subject, there are plenty of websites about this subject if anybody wants to read more about it.
About any confusion as to what the next step will be with the Disco or its replacement. Edmunds might be wrong or the information being fed to dealers may be wrong. I've seen both happen in the past (sometimes projects get changed without dealers being notified or Edmunds doesn't update their website, who knows). So, since I doubt anybody in this forum is the chief product manager for LR, we can only guess as to the next step from the bits and pieces of info we hear. If the Disco stays true to it's heretige and capability even if it is renamed, great. Using a Jag 4.2 may be questionable, but with some retuning, who knows, it might turn out to be a good engine for the job.
As for the Escape vs. Freelander, of course I know they're not the same car. I sat in a European Freelander years before they hit American shores or the Escape even existed. The reason I made that comment was because they are very comparable cars made by the same automotive group. Both use a V-6 engine, both have independent front and rear suspension, and both are around the same size and actually look somewhat similar. The last time I was in Europe (a little over a year ago), the Escape was not imported there, so that's why I called the Freelander a British-built Escape. Sorry for the confusion.
As for involvement in the company; although I'm not closely associated with any car company, I do understand their business workings fairly well. The normal progression of a buy-out usually begins with some exchange of executives and slowly progresses to the exchange of parts and finally, models. That is why you saw the 4.4 liter V-8 in the current Range Rover, it was simply BMW's first step in integrating LR as a company before they sold it to Ford. With the Jag world, since it was brought up, the integration process is even further along with a cross sharing of models, namely the X-type which is a rebadged Ford Modeno with all wheel drive. Since none of the current models in the LR lineup were designed when Ford was the owner, we haven't seen much integration yet. Since the Disco or its successor will be the first, it is not unlikely that it will use many parts right out of the PAG or Ford parts bin. Whether that is for better or for worse remains to be seen when the 2005 models roll out later this year. We can only hope that someone at Ford will make the right decisions in the meantime.
Also, I have driven my 2003 Range Rover on many off-road events, and it is more capable than the previous model with solid axles, just a phenomenal vehicle overall. What else could you expect for $75k!
Also, for the '05 Disco replacement, the 4.2 litre Jag engine will be heavily modified to handle the extreme off-road conditions the current 4.6 litre V-8 is able to handle. The BMW 4.4 V-8 had to be heavily modified because it couldn't handle the extreme angles these vehicles drive in. (I know a customer who bought an '03 RR and said his vehicle didn't tip over until it was tipped sideways at a 60 degree angle!) I'm not sure why he would want to do that to a $70K+ car, but I didn't ask. So I think you are right on that one, if things go as planned, a modified Jag V-8 would be great for the new car.
There are only so many things you can control in a car, the brakes and handbrake, the gas, the steering, and sometimes the clutch. Regardless of how many computers you have on board, in the hands of a skilled off road driver, there are only several things that matter in a vehicle: ground clearance, wheel base, wheel movement, approach and decent angles (overhangs being a bit part of this), and low end torque. Satisfy these criteria well and you have a good off road vehicle, a Wrangler or Defender come to mind. Neither of these vehicles though have any on-board computers to aid the driver when the pavement ends, so the person behind the wheel has to make the decisions. That being said, a Range Rover is designed to make as many decisions for you as possible so you can focus on turning the wheel and not ending up in a ditch (although I am sure the next generation Range Rover will have something to the likes of "Trail Navigation Control" where its GPS and optical sensors automatically choose the easiest path for the vehicle to take and then drive for you).
Personally though, you won't see me in a Range Rover off road any time soon...most likely because I don't have the money to own one. Even if I did, I still would invest my money in the current generation Disco or another less "advanced" vehicle. I still want to make the decisions about what my vehicle does...that's the fun of off roading.
The new Disco will be completely redesigned from top to bottom. Just where it will sit in the continuum from soccer-mommy-mall-mobile to rock-crawler remains to be seen. As for the use of Ford components, Jaguar and Volvo have survived just fine under the Ford umbrella, with only the X-type arguably having gotten too much Ford DNA.
Try reading back through some posts on the regular Discovery topic to find out more.
This offroading nonsense is a big Lie!
Mailslot rear passenger doors - ever try getting a woman in a dress in there?
Terrible rear cargo compartment with not a bit of soft material.
Creaks and groans everywhere
Underpowered engine.
I have a theory that only reason people buy these things is that they think there is some prestige in owning a British made vehicle. Talk to some vintage British vehicle owners, they [British] are not known for building the finest vehicles, that's for sure.
Mailslot rear door? New Disco's wheelbase will grow more than 10 inches and entry and exit will be easier, all you will need to do is push a button and the vehicle will lower more than 2 inches.
This active air-suspension will also give Disco a great ride and handling on-road.
Unreliable? New Disco will be the equivelant of Jaguar. Jaguar frequently scores above Mercedes, BMW, Audi and Toyota in JD Power reliability surveys.
Quality of current models has not been poor, it has been abyssmal, perennially the bottom of almost every survey by a significant margin. Hopefully the new model corrects that, although I expect pricing will reflect the significant upgrades.
http://www.thecarconnection.com/index.asp?article=7003
http://www.autosite.com/Previews/2005-land-rover-lr3.asp
As to comments on the Disco II, wife and I purchased a 99 with 32k on it 14 months ago. We love it, no problems so far. Are the back doors tight? Yes. Do I have the headroom of a God once I get in there? Yes. And I'm 6'2.
I lived in Peru for 10 years (never saw a LR in the amazon ... FYI, there are no roads in the amazon ... maybe the one in the commercial can float ... that's the only way you get around) and the roads in MS are about as bad as the roads in Peru. We are loving the Disco in this land of the F350. My $.02.
Anyway, it looked great!
Thanks!
Light Cahill.
Also, there are a lot of people criticizing Land Rover's chosen nomenclature for the new model. The reason they decided to call the new model LR3 (or Land Rover Series 3), is because the American market is unlike practically every other market in the world. We are very brand conscious and like to have the latest and greatest. Since the LR3 will be an entirely new vehicle, sharing no parts whatsoever from the old Series 2 except maybe interior door handles, they decided the American market would become more excited about an all-new model, instead of saying it is a revised version of the discovery. Also, since the LR3 will be an average of $10,000 more than the '04 disco ($50k+ with some options), Land Rover decided that this new model needed to shine by itself, and not be compared with the old Discovery. For the rest of the world, the Discovery model line has had extreme success and maintained great loyalty across many markets. For this reason, Land Rover decided to continue the Discovery legacy.
Secondly, current LR customers and potential customers shouldn't worry about Land Rover losing its British-ness because of Ford ownership. Every acquisition is different and Ford realizes that Land Rover occupies a specialty market, and the last thing you want to do to a small manufacturer like Land Rover is to assimilate them. Ford has a relatively hands-off approach to Land Rover, allowing their engineers and designers to maximize Land Rover's potential. The new LR3 (Disco III) is going to be a huge hit, blowing all of the competition out of the water. Our regional managers have informed us that Terrain Response (LR's new patent) is incredible, and the off-road capability of the LR3 surpasses the Discovery Series II hands down. It will also utilize an all-new air suspension, similar to the new Range Rover. Our reps tell us that the LR3 not only rides like the RR, but gives the Porsche Cayenne a run for its money on the race track.
This new model is pure Land Rover, through and through.
Thanks for the detailed info on the new LR3. I should say thanks on everything but the price! $50K. Ouch! It was a stretch to come up with the cash for the'03 Disco.
Well, I must admit that the photos that I have seen of the LR3 do show a vehicle that would easily be over $40K, so I should not be surprised. It looks like it will knock the socks off the BMW X5. I am still looking forward to seeing it in the flesh, and driving it when we can. Thanks.
Light Cahill.
This better be one hell of a vehicle to be able to throw a 40% price increase on the market. Considering the reputation for quality (or lack thereof), and the fact that for $57K you can get an X5, H2, Escalade, Navigator, Land Cruiser, Cayenne, FX45, QX56, GX470, Touareg, and others, I truly hope Land Rover has more market info than the rest of us do, because if not, they're going to be in trouble.
http://136.8.154.52/downloads/Discovery_Preisliste_FINAL.pdf
End of Rant.
So even if you eliminate the tax, or whatever it is listed, we're looking at a HUGE price increase. Give them the benefit of the doubt and apply a 36% increase to US prices, and you're left with an HSE starting at $56K. So I may have been off by $1K.
Personally, I think that Land Rover should continue to produce this current model alongside the LR3, it will cater to those LR fanatics that want live axles and a nice Disco for around $40k.
Also, please give me any feedback on what you have seen on the LR3, I relay this type of info to my regional managers. They like to receive any information they can about public option on how the company is doing.
If anyone has any questions about what Land Rover is planning or about any of the models, I'll be happy to help. Since I work for a Land Rover centre and we receive a lot more information than the public, I should be able to answer any questions you may have.
lrover1
$$$ is realy high in my opinion!!!
That's a much happier price to see. If that's duplicated in North America, Land Rover has itself a sale.
19" alloys
Auto as standard on diesel and petrol
Sat nav upgrade
Off road, information centre, voice recognition. TMC (not sure what this means)
Blue tooth
Park sensor front
Front electric sun roof Fixed rear glass + Sun blinds
Rear AC
Roof rails
Metallic paint
Premium ICE pack
Harmon Kardon LOGIC7
13 speakers
Active sub woofer
DSP amplifier
rear seat headphone modules
Options:
Active rear locking diff
Privacy glass to rear of B post
Adaptive headlights
tow pack
(thanks to the poster at Land Rover Pub)