Range Rover diesel V8s.

Range Rover diesel V8s.

Author
Discussion

BroadsRS6

Original Poster:

785 posts

46 months

Sunday 27th June 2021
quotequote all
Is the 4.4 a significant improvement on the previous 3.6?

athomp04

165 posts

175 months

Monday 28th June 2021
quotequote all
Yes, however this is also down to an improved gearbox and different power delivery due to the turbo's. I have had both and you will not feel shortchanged, and I am now on my third FFRR. Buy on condition

BroadsRS6

Original Poster:

785 posts

46 months

Tuesday 29th June 2021
quotequote all
Thanks, it's just an idea for next year when i will be changing the cars around a bit. Selling a few and buying a few.

Zerosumgame

114 posts

47 months

Wednesday 30th June 2021
quotequote all
I'm currently debating this...my worry with the 3.6 is that it if/when the turbos go that will be a £3k bill. I don't mind working on cars myself but it seems this is a particularly challenging job (albeit not as challenging as the RRS by all accounts).

BroadsRS6

Original Poster:

785 posts

46 months

Wednesday 30th June 2021
quotequote all
The 4.4 is the one to go to according to people on another forum. Great torque from low revs apparently.

camel_landy

5,080 posts

190 months

Wednesday 30th June 2021
quotequote all
BroadsRS6 said:
The 4.4 is the one to go to according to people on another forum. Great torque from low revs apparently.
The 3.6 also delivers great torque, low down... IIRC: 640Nm @ 2000rpm

The 4.4 is a good drive but some of that is down to the 8spd gearbox too.

M

cologne2792

2,144 posts

133 months

Wednesday 30th June 2021
quotequote all
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gl51reRXxgE

Harry makes some well observed comments

BroadsRS6

Original Poster:

785 posts

46 months

Saturday 3rd July 2021
quotequote all
Sounds like either would be good.
What i can't fathom is how a 2.7 tonne car can possibly be good off road. Ok it might have a good wading depth but surely that sort of weight counts against in deep mud or on horrible surfaces? I'm also amused by aluminium doors and bonnet? To me if it's still 2.7 tonnes why bother? You are saving like a tiny part of a % of the overall weight. Is that not like a double decker bus having a plastic engine cover instead of metal and aluminium grab rails for passengers?

camel_landy

5,080 posts

190 months

Saturday 3rd July 2021
quotequote all
BroadsRS6 said:
Sounds like either would be good.
What i can't fathom is how a 2.7 tonne car can possibly be good off road. Ok it might have a good wading depth but surely that sort of weight counts against in deep mud or on horrible surfaces? I'm also amused by aluminium doors and bonnet? To me if it's still 2.7 tonnes why bother? You are saving like a tiny part of a % of the overall weight. Is that not like a double decker bus having a plastic engine cover instead of metal and aluminium grab rails for passengers?
As they say, every little helps... But the lighter body panels also means the hinges and mountings don't need to be as strong, therefore saving even more weight.

Weight can be used in a number of different ways when off-road, the main one being momentum: "Momentum's your friend". Even in the slippy mud, you need weight to allow the tyres to push through the slippery stuff, down to the firmer layer underneath.

M

bakerstreet

4,822 posts

172 months

Tuesday 6th July 2021
quotequote all
BroadsRS6 said:
Sounds like either would be good.
What i can't fathom is how a 2.7 tonne car can possibly be good off road. Ok it might have a good wading depth but surely that sort of weight counts against in deep mud or on horrible surfaces? I'm also amused by aluminium doors and bonnet? To me if it's still 2.7 tonnes why bother? You are saving like a tiny part of a % of the overall weight. Is that not like a double decker bus having a plastic engine cover instead of metal and aluminium grab rails for passengers?
Electronics help a lot, but there are of course moments where a Suzuki Jimney will simply scamper past as its over a tonne lighter and they have next to no electronic aids apart from traction control and ABS. Certainly no Terrain Response.

Power and torque will help too. Even the 2.7TDV6 has 314lbs ft and TDv8 is 472lbs

A.J.M

8,011 posts

193 months

Tuesday 6th July 2021
quotequote all
Tyres.
Driving abilities.

Tyres is obvious.
When the correct set of Continentals for 22” inch cost nearly a grand. You end up with some rubbish tyre being fitted. Like trying to climb Ben Nevis with all the gear bar having some flip flops instead of walking boots.
Perfectly, no LR should be fitted with anything bigger than 20”. Above that and the tyres are too skinny to be useful and the wheels can get cracked on pot holes etc.


Driving abilities will carry them pretty far.
Work with the car, actually learn how to use the TR systems and work with the car.
Smooth inputs when needed and turn DSC off at times to get the power down.

It’s actually very impressive to watch my D3 clear obstacles, wheel in the air but the car still going forward, where my mates 90s have cross axelled and got stuck.

camel_landy

5,080 posts

190 months

Tuesday 6th July 2021
quotequote all
A.J.M said:
Driving abilities will carry them pretty far.
Work with the car, actually learn how to use the TR systems and work with the car.
Smooth inputs when needed and turn DSC off at times to get the power down.
^^^ This...

M

NomduJour

19,485 posts

266 months

Monday 12th July 2021
quotequote all
BroadsRS6 said:
What i can't fathom is how a 2.7 tonne car can possibly be good off road
When you get properly stuck, ask how much the big tractor that pulls you out weighs.