Oh yeah, saw it with my own two eyes not less than 2 weeks ago. I'll send you one for you FJ when it wins (maybe three...one for both side windows & the back...wouldn't that be really swell!!!)FJockey said:What? :jawdrop: I was just kidding. They actually MAKE those stickers?
I don't understand your logic in that statement. Are you talking about the reliability, or the function? If it's function, you are way off. The LR3 is very capable both on- and off-road. If it's reliability, MT doesn't have data on new vehicles to disqualify them for reliability.FJockey said:Hey look! The LR3 is on there, too! I couldn't imagine a worse SUV to win an award, except maybe the Toureg.
Oh wait! It made the list in '04!
That's a very good point...and if memory serves, I remember reading that article when it came out and all the off-roading control the LR3 introduced was pretty impressive for at least the staff writers. I'm pretty sure that's why it won the award. Maybe they were really, really hoping it wasn't going to continue Rovers past reliability woes and gave the new kid the benefit of the doubt, but either way, a lot goes into the selection process that even straight data numbers don't relay.Michael1 said:I don't understand your logic in that statement. Are you talking about the reliability, or the function? If it's function, you are way off. The LR3 is very capable both on- and off-road. If it's reliability, MT doesn't have data on new vehicles to disqualify them for reliability.
Maybe this is why their picks turn out to be duds (OK OK, not always). *Innovations* introduced to new cars tend to lead to problems. So, if new innovations win the prizes, then those prized cars may inherently (sp?) be problematic.moby33 said:I've noticed over the last 10 years that they really lean toward new, innovative design ideas...hence the reason so many 'newcomers' take home the trophy. If the vehicle introduces a couple of new drive train ideas, a couple of cool, different doors and a bunch of 'out of the box' interior creature comfort features, and very bold, new styling lines, usually that vehicle will tally a lot of votes. It may not be the best, but they really love the 'next best thing' idea (whether it proves to be or not).
Unfortunately, most LR3s won't see dirt, which is a shame. You're right about them being a suburban hauler. I test drove two of them, and was impressed. The off-road reviews described them as "unstoppable", mainly due to its Terrain Response System, and a rear locker. The tires are essentially street tires, which makes it even more impressive. Even the articulation RTI numbers are very good, 519, especially considering they have all independent suspension. They will ford 27" of water, have over 9" of ground clearance, and the approach angle is even higher than the FJ, with departure and breakover very close to the FJ. The downsides are the price, which keeps going up, and reliability.FJockey said:Anyway, my rant on the LR3 comes from my bias against the Discos. If they're capable machines, I haven't noticed. Maybe I should test one before criticizing. But I see them all over around here carrying kids to school and soccer practice. You see, I don't dislike LR; on the contrary, I think the RR and Defenders were/are great vehicles. The Disco has given them a bad name and I don't think the LR3 (at least the targeted market, anyway) is going to improve their status. :shrug: