2006 Land Rover LR3

I know a lot of people on here have experience with them, or at least I thought so.

 

My friend is looking at a 2006 LR3. He said he did some searching but didn't come up with much info on them. I was under the impression that they were shitty and had lots of problems back then.

 

Anyone care to chime in?

I know a lot of people on here have experience with them, or at least I thought so.

 

My friend is looking at a 2006 LR3. He said he did some searching but didn't come up with much info on them. I was under the impression that they were shitty and had lots of problems back then.

 

Anyone care to chime in?

 

 

I am about to turn in an 07 RRSS off a lease, same chassis. It's my wife's car, she hates it, she hates the service dept even more. They just won't take her seriously, I have to go into the service dept all guns blazing to get a result. It's the worst culture, I had a lemon jag that they took back (don't ask, I must have been on drugs) 10 years ago, nothing has changed.

 

Has had at least $10k in warranty repairs. AC failed, steering rack failed, multiple suspension problems, nav failed. Great off road or in the snow, it's really good, gotten us out of a total white out in Mammoth once, was able to drive around a road block in 7 or 8 inches of snow and just keep going. Roads where closed but we made it thru slowly without a problem. Bluetooth sounds like you are on an aircraft carrier under fire, launching F18's...Considering how heavy it is, how big it is, cargo capacity is pathetic....LR3/4's have more space.

 

I don't drive it very often, but it feels very heavy, very inefficient and the cabin is super cheap. Been thru at least three sets of tires and three sets of brakes pads in 3 years. Brakes are great and really have no fade, considering the weight, but they just need frequent replacing. Engine is very good, with the supercharged engine the power delivery is very linear, no lag though however with some supercharger whine under max acceleration. But it only averages 15 mpg when my wife drives it like an old lady, I get around 9-11 mpg. Car has shut down three or four times for no apparent reason when driving. Restart and the problem goes away, disconcerting to say the least.

 

But they look good, but that's about it. Plus I am not convinced they would do very well in an accident, though they are very very heavy, everything seems to built to the standard of "not quite acceptable, cause we don't have the money"....no reason to think the crash engineering isn't the same.

 

Audio system isn't bad, the interface is from the 80's. A map in Russian would be easier to use than the Nav system. Plus I love a car I can start without hitting the brakes, but can't use the nav unless you are stopped. Cheap cheap cheap....corner cutting everywhere.

 

I think LR3's are even worse. I wouldn't own any RR or LR that wasn't under a full warranty. The air suspension when it fails is super expensive to fix. Seen many examples of air suspension failures from other owners, fortunately we have yet to experience that one. I wouldn't recommend it unless you were running an uninsured mod shop under the shadowman alias.

 

Long story short........next truck for us is a X5 diesel. Oh and I am English, so I am sugar coating this review.

Tell your friend when he turns the other way, to run not walk... POS.

Yeah i was considering picking up a rr ss, heard too much negative.

 

It's a shame, what a sexi looking car

Thanks, those few remarks were good enough for me to tell him to look for something else.

For the money I would pick up a used Cayenne S. You can find some great deals on them and they are pretty sturdy.

For the money I would pick up a used Cayenne S. You can find some great deals on them and they are pretty sturdy.

 

I'm thinking it would just be better if he bought a newer Ford Explorer than a used luxury SUV. I think he just liked the looks of the LR.

 

The Cayenne doesn't look like anything special other than a Porsche badge imo. I'm thinking a newer Ford Explorer or something domestic like that probably has new, better stuff and won't come with Porsche sized repair bills.

 

He's getting something new because he has 100K on his current Explorer and wants to sell it before the expensive repairs start to come in. Any suggestions on a used SUV around $20K? Reliability and repairs are of biggest concerns.

Is he located in US or the UK?

I'm thinking it would just be better if he bought a newer Ford Explorer than a used luxury SUV. I think he just liked the looks of the LR.

 

The Cayenne doesn't look like anything special other than a Porsche badge imo. I'm thinking a newer Ford Explorer or something domestic like that probably has new, better stuff and won't come with Porsche sized repair bills.

 

He's getting something new because he has 100K on his current Explorer and wants to sell it before the expensive repairs start to come in. Any suggestions on a used SUV around $20K? Reliability and repairs are of biggest concerns.

 

Toyota 4 Runner with Nav and leather. Couple year old one should be close. They are pretty bullet proof.

For the money I would pick up a used Cayenne S. You can find some great deals on them and they are pretty sturdy.

Id only pick up an 08 and up..the others had a lot of problems...I used to have one...and the re design in 08 I think has fixed a lot of things...

He's in the US. He said he'd actually prefer a luxury car, but because he needs a truck he wouldn't mind a luxury SUV.

 

I'm personally of the opinion that luxury SUV's don't really exist. Other than the exterior and the engine, I've never seen anything that screamed luxury in an SUV. Even the $130K G55, Cayenne Turbo's, and RR's look pretty average inside. Maybe I just don't get the whole SUV thing. We both agree that the G class is the ultimate SUV, but that's out of his price range.

 

Funny enough, when I first sat in his Explorer I practically fell asleep the leather seats were some comfortable. I found it more comfortable and had more space than any luxury car

 

I've suggested he look at Japanese cars for now. I think old luxury SUV's are worse than new regular ones in probably almost every way.

Brian, if this is the case, I suggest that one of the only things that may suit him will be a GX/LX 470 Lexus. That is a wonderful truck, great amenities and luxury ride. They still have SUV DnA and are offroad capable. He would likely enjoy this truck immensely.

 

He's in the US. He said he'd actually prefer a luxury car, but because he needs a truck he wouldn't mind a luxury SUV.

 

I'm personally of the opinion that luxury SUV's don't really exist. Other than the exterior and the engine, I've never seen anything that screamed luxury in an SUV. Even the $130K G55, Cayenne Turbo's, and RR's look pretty average inside. Maybe I just don't get the whole SUV thing. We both agree that the G class is the ultimate SUV, but that's out of his price range.

 

Funny enough, when I first sat in his Explorer I practically fell asleep the leather seats were some comfortable. I found it more comfortable and had more space than any luxury car

 

I've suggested he look at Japanese cars for now. I think old luxury SUV's are worse than new regular ones in probably almost every way.

For the record, he asked for a LR3, not a Range Rover Super Sport. Yes, both cars has the same chassis but that's about all the similarities they share. The RRSS is a neither nor, i.e. neither a true luxury SUV like the real full-size Range Rover; nor a semi-utilitarian but extremely capable off-road SUV like the LR3. I agree that the RRSS truly sucks as it tries to pack all the BMW electronics (which is what the full-size RR has) into a complete different car that only LOOKS like a RR. We all know that electronics were never the British cars' forte and the RRSS isn't an exception. That car was destined for doom from day 1 especially when Land Rover tried (and failed) to mate all the gizmo to the Jaguar power plant. I concur that one should run far away from the early RRSS.

 

The LR3 is a different story. It's a quantum leap from the Discovery series (those were really a POS) and because it's design from the ground up to be a different car with a different philosophy (more utilitarian than luxury), it works a whole lot better than the RRSS because it uses simple electronics (the only "sophisticated" circuitry it has is the All Terrain Response System which is a scaled-down version from the already proven full-size RR). Most of the other circuitry are "shared" from Jaguar & Volvo (all of them owned by Ford then) and were manufactured/supplied by Nippon Denki with proven reliability. The LR3 isn't really luxurious --- way too much plastic, the leather is mid-grade at best and it drives and feels like a truck (because that's what it really is) but it soldiers on like one too. This is a vehicle for really adverse weather and terrain. You don't need to pamper it because it's built to handle the rough ends. The RRSS is suppose to be equally capable for off-road but it's quirky & unreliable electronics is always its Achilles's heel.

 

Brian, you should check out the 2011 full-size RR Autobiography if you want to know what defines a luxury SUV. It has a FULL leather interior including a full leather headliner like the Bentley's, the Rolls Royce's and the Italian exotics. Even the rear seats have power recline with heat/cold function. There are vanity mirrors and, of course, video screens + IR cordless headsets for the rear passengers too. It even has self-deploy/self-retract running boards. Plenty of leather & wood choices for the cabin with contrast pipping & stitching. But you might find the high-grade leather a bit hard. And lastly, it is fast for such a large & heavy car.

 

But if the above is a bit out of budget, the I agree with Chris --- check out the GX/LX 470. It should basically satisfy all of your friend's need. The leather isn't as nice but it is softer. Some might not like the overall "feel" of a Japanese truck but it is indeed capable. And the Japanese would deliver on all the personal amenities.

Well, I've just recommended he go with something newer and with cheaper repairs. Even if the LR3 is decent, I'm sure the repair bills will be a lot higher and he is looking at and out of warranty, 40-50k mile car. I think he'd be better with something cheaper and regular.

 

As for the Autobiography, I saw one on ebay for like $120K and thought it was a complete joke at that price.

 

This, to me, is luxury. It has style, interesting design, lighting, electronics, and good quality materials. It seems like anyone today calls their cars luxury by just wrapping everything in leather with some contrasting stitch. Kinda like the G55. Amazing looking, high-end SUV, but has a 5K interior that looks like garbage.

 

I want to see an SUV with this kind of interior.

 

As for the Autobiography, I saw one on ebay for like $120K and thought it was a complete joke at that price.

 

This, to me, is luxury. It has style, interesting design, lighting, electronics, and good quality materials. It seems like anyone today calls their cars luxury by just wrapping everything in leather with some contrasting stitch. Kinda like the G55. Amazing looking, high-end SUV, but has a 5K interior that looks like garbage.

 

I want to see an SUV with this kind of interior.

 

 

Anything European that had passed its warranty will be expensive. But do check out a Lexus/Toyota.

 

You completely missed my point on the luxury definition. It's not just the leather & contrast stitching but the quality of the leather and craftsmanship; coachwork so to speak. Don't just ebay, go sit in one and you might understand: it checks all the boxes that you had mentioned above and more. It might not be an Arnage cabin but it certainly matches or surpasses the CGT's. And $120k for this kind of coachwork is almost a bargain. And the RRSS isn't even remotely close.

For the record, he asked for a LR3, not a Range Rover Super Sport. Yes, both cars has the same chassis but that's about all the similarities they share. The RRSS is a neither nor, i.e. neither a true luxury SUV like the real full-size Range Rover; nor a semi-utilitarian but extremely capable off-road SUV like the LR3. I agree that the RRSS truly sucks as it tries to pack all the BMW electronics (which is what the full-size RR has) into a complete different car that only LOOKS like a RR. We all know that electronics were never the British cars' forte and the RRSS isn't an exception. That car was destined for doom from day 1 especially when Land Rover tried (and failed) to mate all the gizmo to the Jaguar power plant. I concur that one should run far away from the early RRSS.

 

The LR3 is a different story. It's a quantum leap from the Discovery series (those were really a POS) and because it's design from the ground up to be a different car with a different philosophy (more utilitarian than luxury), it works a whole lot better than the RRSS because it uses simple electronics (the only "sophisticated" circuitry it has is the All Terrain Response System which is a scaled-down version from the already proven full-size RR). Most of the other circuitry are "shared" from Jaguar & Volvo (all of them owned by Ford then) and were manufactured/supplied by Nippon Denki with proven reliability. The LR3 isn't really luxurious --- way too much plastic, the leather is mid-grade at best and it drives and feels like a truck (because that's what it really is) but it soldiers on like one too. This is a vehicle for really adverse weather and terrain. You don't need to pamper it because it's built to handle the rough ends. The RRSS is suppose to be equally capable for off-road but it's quirky & unreliable electronics is always its Achilles's heel.

 

Brian, you should check out the 2011 full-size RR Autobiography if you want to know what defines a luxury SUV. It has a FULL leather interior including a full leather headliner like the Bentley's, the Rolls Royce's and the Italian exotics. Even the rear seats have power recline with heat/cold function. There are vanity mirrors and, of course, video screens + IR cordless headsets for the rear passengers too. It even has self-deploy/self-retract running boards. Plenty of leather & wood choices for the cabin with contrast pipping & stitching. But you might find the high-grade leather a bit hard. And lastly, it is fast for such a large & heavy car.

 

But if the above is a bit out of budget, the I agree with Chris --- check out the GX/LX 470. It should basically satisfy all of your friend's need. The leather isn't as nice but it is softer. Some might not like the overall "feel" of a Japanese truck but it is indeed capable. And the Japanese would deliver on all the personal amenities.

 

 

RRSS and LR3 have the same chassis, same electrical loom, same air suspension, same basic engine, similar interiors and many shared parts. The only problem with the LR3 is, it is built to an even lower standard than the RR.

 

An LR3 being a quantum leap over a Discovery is like telling a new owner they just moved from square wheels to cheese triangles. Both are awful and I doubt many current owners would recommend them. Plus it is easier to rob a bank than get a RR/LR service department to actually fix your problems on the the first, second, third, fourth, fifth visit...........please remember this is a real world owner's perspective not just somebody who would like to own one.

RRSS and LR3 have the same chassis, same electrical loom, same air suspension, same basic engine, similar interiors and many shared parts. The only problem with the LR3 is, it is built to an even lower standard than the RR.

 

An LR3 being a quantum leap over a Discovery is like telling a new owner they just moved from square wheels to cheese triangles. Both are awful and I doubt many current owners would recommend them. Plus it is easier to rob a bank than get a RR/LR service department to actually fix your problems on the the first, second, third, fourth, fifth visit...........please remember this is a real world owner's perspective not just somebody who would like to own one.

 

 

If anything else, we have plenty of owner's perspective: one of our companies has gone through 2 LR3's and is currently on a new LR4; the same establishment is also on its 2nd full-sized RR. All have been very reliable. We change cars because we like to, not because we needed to. The dealer gave us a loaner RRSS for 10 days and we returned it on the 6th day and never looked back. You probably can tell that our relationship with the dealership is not bad at all and from the service records that they revealed, the RRSS had the most issues. By the same token, we are quite aware that the electrical loom between the LR3 and the RRSS is quite different and as is the interior. As said before, Land Rover tried to shove all the gizmo from the full-size RR into a different car (RRSS) that wasn't made for that purpose; hence the imminent failure. The LR3 is not built to a lower standard than the RR/RRSS; the coachwork materials is inferior as in lower-grade leather and more plastic. It actually has a better sounding stereo than the full-size RR; on a per capita basis, the RRSS has the lowest build standard. Perhaps we have been very lucky; service has been and continues to be excellent. Perhaps we have much less cars than the US and henceforth the QC is better or the cars adopt better in this part of the world? There are plenty of LR3's & RR's in my town and there seems to be just as many returned customers. To be fair, Land Rover definitely had its share of lemons prior to being sold to BMW. BMW definitely upped the QC & Ford maintained it well too. The current range of vehicles are leaps and bounds better than say the Freelander/Discovery/2nd-gen RR. Let's see what Tata will do...

 

I concur mostly with your description/experience with the RRSS from your first post though.

Anything European that had passed its warranty will be expensive. But do check out a Lexus/Toyota.

 

You completely missed my point on the luxury definition. It's not just the leather & contrast stitching but the quality of the leather and craftsmanship; coachwork so to speak. Don't just ebay, go sit in one and you might understand: it checks all the boxes that you had mentioned above and more. It might not be an Arnage cabin but it certainly matches or surpasses the CGT's. And $120k for this kind of coachwork is almost a bargain. And the RRSS isn't even remotely close.

 

It could be made of real elephant ivory and endangered tiger fur and it still wouldn't feel luxurious because it lacks style. I'm not going to be rubbing my hands on the headliner or feeling the wood or sitting in someones blood, sweat, and tears. It just has to look the part. I'm not interested in paying for manual labor and craftsmanship. I just don't perceive much luxury in the design, that's all.

 

To be fair, you're right, I haven't sat in one, but I can tell by the pictures that I wouldn't want to. Just like I could tell by photos of the 458's front end that it was ugly before I saw one on the road.

It could be made of real elephant ivory and endangered tiger fur and it still wouldn't feel luxurious because it lacks style. I'm not going to be rubbing my hands on the headliner or feeling the wood or sitting in someones blood, sweat, and tears. It just has to look the part. I'm not interested in paying for manual labor and craftsmanship. I just don't perceive much luxury in the design, that's all.

 

To be fair, you're right, I haven't sat in one, but I can tell by the pictures that I wouldn't want to. Just like I could tell by photos of the 458's front end that it was ugly before I saw one on the road.

 

 

For a true SUV, that's probably as much "style" as you can get but that's your preferences and taste which I am not going to dispute (factoring in your taste in watches ). I too dislike the looks of the 458 but I cannot discount its performance or what it is capable of. Looks certainly play a role and everyone has his own preference; but the way a car feels (its soul so to speak and whether it's rolling or not) is also an important factor. Anyway, you ask for an opinion, you got one; whether that sits well with you or not is at your discretion.

Heh, Corum actually had a pretty big display at the mall today. The watches didn't look as cool, but still kinda neat. The original Golden Bridge looked way better than the new one. New one was insanely thick. Unfortunately all of them were decked out in ugly jewels though.

Well, he's definitely going with another Ford/Mercury.

 

He was in a near head on collision the other day. Guy driving the wrong way down the road, probably drunk, hit him while they were both probably going 40 mph. He swerved and took the hit to the passenger corner. The guy driving the Taurus took the hit near head on. My friend walked away with some bruised ribs. Drunk guy didn't walk away. Car looked like an accordion. Explorer passenger compartment was fine. Leg room kept in tact.

 

 

 

WOW! Thank God your friend was able to walk away...unfortunately the drunk guy didn't, consequences, consequences.

 

Anyways, for someone on a budget and looking for an SUV with actual utility, Ford is a great choice. I've owned both a Ford Explorer XLT, GM Yukon Denali, and Jeep Grand Cherokee Limited...between the three, the Ford Explorer was my personal best choice...the "fully loaded" option provides enough convenience..plus, just checking out the Ford website, looks like they have new products that, IMO, puts Ford ahead of its direct competitors.

 

Plus, the maintenance and repairs are significantly more affordable than anything from overseas that's not a Honda, Kia, or Hyundai.

 

I agree with you, completely, on the concept of "luxury SUVs"; I also find the concept of "luxury pickup" an absolutely absurd concept...a complete joke.