|
300bhp/ton
26,483 posts
59 months
|
camel_landy said: Hmmm... - Low-Range. OK, I'll let you have that one... The Auto is the best of the bunch as it helps compensate for the lack of without burning out a clutch.
The auto is an ok compromise, but the crawl speed sucks big time, way too fast for some off road use. Steep ascents might be an issue too when you need lots of power quickly but don't want to be travelling at 25mph. I'm not knocking the Evoque here and I'm a huge fan of a Freelander 1's off road prowess, but there's a golf of difference. For some off roading tasks even tickover low 1st in a Defender is still slightly too fast! camel_landy said: - No locking centre diff. True... but it has a locking Haldex unit. This type of 4WD system doesn't require a centre diff. Actually... What are the benefits of an AWD system WITH a centre diff??
The biggest issue is you need to somewhat lose traction with the Haldex unit before it engages AWD. A lot of the time this might not be an issue, but it might be enough to bog you down or cause undue and un-needed wheelspin. It also means you've got to be a bit more lairy on the throttle at times. camel_landy said: - No full time AWD. Wrong... It _is_ AWD but there are 2WD options.
Was referring to the Haldex unit and how it works. Fwd until it slips then AWD. camel_landy said: - Wheel travel. It helps but not strictly necessary these days. It's more a hangover from the non-TC & TR days where as soon as you lift, you loose traction.
It's HUGELY important these days, as much as it ever was. It creates stability and helps to stop vehicles rolling over. It also allows you to navigate much larger obstacles. camel_landy said: - Articulation. See above... Don't read too much into this as it is an old 'yard stick'. It is mainly an issue if you DON'T have locking diffs or DON'T have traction control.
Disagree 100% even with TCS and again TCS means you have to lose traction before it kicks in. But it's about stability, reducing body roll off road and keeping the bumpers/body work away from the ground and obstacles. camel_landy said: - Approach & Departure angles. Well... Every car is different and TBH - Evoque isn't bad at all!
M It's ok for what it is, but when compared (which it was) it's not so good  
|
|
|
camel_landy
1,504 posts
52 months
|
I'm in a hurry but I'll pick up quickly on the Haldex unit...
It only requires 15degrees of movement for it to lock. I defy anyone to notice that!
M
|
|
|
camel_landy
1,504 posts
52 months
|
Ayahuasca said: camel_landy said: Hmmm... - Low-Range. OK, I'll let you have that one... The Auto is the best of the bunch as it helps compensate for the lack of without burning out a clutch.
- No locking centre diff. True... but it has a locking Haldex unit. This type of 4WD system doesn't require a centre diff. Actually... What are the benefits of an AWD system WITH a centre diff??
- No full time AWD. Wrong... It _is_ AWD but there are 2WD options.
- Wheel travel. It helps but not strictly necessary these days. It's more a hangover from the non-TC & TR days where as soon as you lift, you loose traction.
- Articulation. See above... Don't read too much into this as it is an old 'yard stick'. It is mainly an issue if you DON'T have locking diffs or DON'T have traction control.
- Approach & Departure angles. Well... Every car is different and TBH - Evoque isn't bad at all!
M Reading that I am not quite sure why I just bought a Defender! Frankly, the Defender isn't built for comfort or speed... and driving around town, it can be a right PITA! I have seen 40' trucks with tighter turning circles!! My 'weapon of choice' for off-road work, is the Disco4 Auto. That said, there is something about the Defender & I love mine. It's part of the family. M
|
|
|
camel_landy
1,504 posts
52 months
|
OK, so the original comparison you were making was against the Disco3/4. The Disco has a clear advantage in ruts & wading depth but frankly I would take the RRE into most of the places you would take a Disco. The RRE does have some other distinct advantages... It is over 1tonne lighter and a much better departure angle, so it is much better when the going gets soft! So: Crawl speed. Yeah, you do end up feathering the break on the FL2/RRE. Steep ascents have never really been much of a problem as you can get the power down quite easily. I’ve always said that the Freelander has to be driven with ‘Passion’. Haldex. I partly covered it earlier and as there is so little movement required, you don’t have to be lairy with the throttle at all. In fact, that is part of the trick with Traction Control systems and the thing that people forget is that you have to balance the throttle. You need enough to get the TC doing its thing but not too much that you end up spinning all wheels!! In theory, if you get it right, the only wheel spinning will be the wheel that’s not doing anything anyway. FWD / AWD. Technically, the rear wheels ARE being driven all the time... Just not very much! Articulation. “TCS means you have to lose traction before it kicks in.”... Yes... But you typically still have 3 wheels still in contact, providing traction. The spinning wheel is quickly stopped, re-distributing the power to the other wheels. As mentioned earlier, it doesn’t take a boot-full for it to start working. Also, did you mean to say that articulation helps REDUCE body-roll? If anything, it increases it?? M
|
|
|
300bhp/ton
26,483 posts
59 months
|
camel_landy said: OK, so the original comparison you were making was against the Disco3/4. The Disco has a clear advantage in ruts & wading depth but frankly I would take the RRE into most of the places you would take a Disco. The RRE does have some other distinct advantages... It is over 1tonne lighter and a much better departure angle, so it is much better when the going gets soft! Weight and size I agree are huge factors against the current Disco3/4. And I accept many won't off road them that far (not in the UK). But there are some places that their better off road capabilities make them far superior. camel_landy said: So:
Crawl speed. Yeah, you do end up feathering the break on the FL2/RRE. Maybe we are talking different levels of off roading, but 5mph (what HDC in a FL sticks too) is WAY too fast for some proper off road situations. And there are occasions when using the breaks, even with abs are not that helpful. camel_landy said: Steep ascents have never really been much of a problem as you can get the power down quite easily. I’ve always said that the Freelander has to be driven with ‘Passion’. Lol, but again no. I'm not trying to be difficult here, but a turbo diesel motor will not be making boost or HP at very low revs. Some off road situations without a low box will mean you are way off the power band and the only way to get engine power is high wheel speed. But you may not have room and the ascent may be too great. Off roading I've seen Series and 2.5TD 90's fail ascents due to this, despite having low range to assist. Even with more power from the current 2.2d motor, it doesn't have the gearing to support it. camel_landy said: Haldex. I partly covered it earlier and as there is so little movement required, you don’t have to be lairy with the throttle at all. In fact, that is part of the trick with Traction Control systems and the thing that people forget is that you have to balance the throttle. You need enough to get the TC doing its thing but not too much that you end up spinning all wheels!! But you still need slip first. I'm not saying it's a huge issue, but if you're balanced on a slippery boulder at very low speed, or from stationary, the last thing you might want is to induce slip just to gain AWD. As I've said before though. I'm a huge fan of how good a Freelander is off road. They are capable - just not as capable overall camel_landy said: Articulation. “TCS means you have to lose traction before it kicks in.”... Yes... But you typically still have 3 wheels still in contact, providing traction. The spinning wheel is quickly stopped, re-distributing the power to the other wheels. As mentioned earlier, it doesn’t take a boot-full for it to start working. erm that's not articulation. This is sort of IFS vs live axles, but since the Disco simulates live axles via the air suspension I think it's a valid difference between a Disco and Evoque off road.   Lack of wheel travel means one vehicle is far more stable than the other. In the top pic the rear wheel is almost off the deck too and should it lift then the entire vehicle would suddenly lurch forward. I've seen many a vehicle go on its side/roof due to lack of stability (even with live axles). camel_landy said: Also, did you mean to say that articulation helps REDUCE body-roll? If anything, it increases it??
M Not at all.   Lack of wheel travel and articulation mean for the front wheel to remain in contact with the ground, the body has to lean over much further, i.e. more body roll. This again causes stability issues as you can see it's once again trying to lift the rear wheel off the deck. Yes TCS means you'll probably be able to maintain forward motion (although this would depend how steep or slippery the conditions were). But the vehicle will always be at increased risk of digging body work (front bumper) into the dirt or approaching more extreme side angles. With a Disco's live axle simulation it will be much more stable on such terrain. And if really slippery where you might need to spin all 4 wheels will have a huge traction advantage.
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
camel_landy
1,504 posts
52 months
|
300bhp/ton said: As I've said before though. I'm a huge fan of how good a Freelander is off road. They are capable - just not as capable overall I know we're sort of splitting hairs at times... We're actually sort of saying the same things as I know that the D3/4 is more capable than the FL2/RRE but I firmly believe that the FL2/RRE is far more capable than people think. You just need to understand the physics and adjust your driving style to suit the vehicle/environment... The more you understand where the mechanical 'grip' comes from and how the electronic systems work, the more ground you will cover. (e.g. If you take a competent Defender driver, teach them how the electronic systems work and how to adjust their driving, they will get the FL2/RRE far further than a complete novice who just jumps into the driving seat.) HDC - Are you aware that the 'Target Speed' on HDC is adjustable on the FL2 & RRE? The later generations offer much more control than the original system fitted to the FL1 and even the D3/4 Ascents - I've never had any problems with the FL2/RRE climbing and as they are quite light, they accelerate pretty quickly. You don't want to be climbing in too low a gear anyway, so 1st usually gives enough 'oomph'. The auto is a perfect match for climbing hills, always maintaining the 'highest practical gear'. Don't forget that you do drive the FL2/RRE differently to a D3/4. 300bhp/ton said: But you still need slip first. I'm not saying it's a huge issue, but if you're balanced on a slippery boulder at very low speed, or from stationary, the last thing you might want is to induce slip just to gain AWD. Don't you see that the only wheel 'slipping' is one that isn't doing anything, anyway? Stability & Articulation - I think 'Stability' was the wrong word, I think a better choice of word would be 'upright' or even 'level'. As for articulation itself, understand why articulation is important. In the 'old days' (pre-TC, lockers, etc...) articulation was important as when you lifted a wheel, you lost ALL traction on that axle and you could find yourself in a cross-axle situation very quickly. The longer you could keep your wheels on the ground, the less momentum you needed and the more controlled you were. This is where the Landys came into their own with their suppleness. The added benefit is that the body was also kept quite level... Introduce lockers/TC and technically you now only need traction on 1 wheel to get forward motion. So, as long as you are comfortable being in a car while it is leaning over, you are no longer as reliant on the articulation... but yes, when we're talking about the 'extremes', you will have an advantage with the articulation. Now those pics... C'mon, let's keep it sensible & compare with standard cars!! I wouldn't do to a FL2/RRE what was being done to the Land Cruiser... But then I wouldn't do that with a standard D3/4 either!! However, you should be OK following the Hilux but the body will move around more. The FL2/RRE doesn't have as much articulation as a D3/4, so the rigidity does mean that it will lean a lot more. That in itself doesn't necessarily mean it looses traction but it does affect your comfort zone and you have to think about the bodywork more! Phew... It's turning into a bit of an epic this. Your turn... M
|
|
|
300bhp/ton
26,483 posts
59 months
|
camel_landy said: 300bhp/ton said: As I've said before though. I'm a huge fan of how good a Freelander is off road. They are capable - just not as capable overall I know we're sort of splitting hairs at times...  camel_landy said: We're actually sort of saying the same things as I know that the D3/4 is more capable than the FL2/RRE but I firmly believe that the FL2/RRE is far more capable than people think. I agree fully. But that was my original point  camel_landy said: You just need to understand the physics and adjust your driving style to suit the vehicle/environment... This is true. Although it has to be said, to get an FL or I daresay an Evoque over the same ground can require quite a brutal driving style in comparison to a Disco/Defender. This is fine to an extent, but it is potentially far more damaging and stressful on components, not to mention increased risk of hitting something or something going wrong. camel_landy said: HDC - Are you aware that the 'Target Speed' on HDC is adjustable on the FL2 & RRE? The later generations offer much more control than the original system fitted to the FL1 and even the D3/4 I know the cruise control buttons can adjust the speed. I admit I didn't realise that the Evoque could do this as well. Do you know what range of speeds you now have? I still stand by the fact that lack of low range is a serious downer though. And HDC's biggest failing is it only works down hill and will not control speed on the level or as you climb an obstacle. camel_landy said: Ascents - I've never had any problems with the FL2/RRE climbing and as they are quite light, they accelerate pretty quickly. Honestly not trying to be funny about this. But they mathematically don't have the wheel torque for some things. They may well also struggle to spin the wheels from a standing start and it's not really anything to do with speed. You don't want a wheel speed of 20+mph for certain things, but you might require large amounts of wheel torque at say 7mph. My current Landy is geared for between 8.1 and 9.3mph in low first and it can deliver all 150hp and 260lb ft of torque at those speeds. I don't know the gearing of an Evoque, but I suspect for it to use it's powerband you'd have to be doing 22-26mph. Which in a confined slippery situation is a huge difference. Not too mention low range will allow me to gain this wheel torque in but a couple of yards while a Freelander/Evoque would likely need several cars lengths. Not a great picture, but imagine sitting at the foot of this ascent and imagine it being twice the height. High range would not have enough wheel torque to get up it. Sure you could maybe backup and take a run up at it. But you really don't want to be going too quickly as you'll end up air borne as you crest the ridge. I mean, why do you think they put low range on other 4x4s if it isn't needed?  And terrain more foreign to us Brits, but if you're doing this type of "wheeling" low speed is hugely important. The current Jeep Rubicon comes with a super low crawl ratio just for this purpose.  camel_landy said: Don't you see that the only wheel 'slipping' is one that isn't doing anything, anyway? It can destabilise a vehicle and cause it to slide sideways. camel_landy said: Stability & Articulation - I think 'Stability' was the wrong word, I think a better choice of word would be 'upright' or even 'level'. Dunno. I certainly meant stability camel_landy said: As for articulation itself, understand why articulation is important. In the 'old days' (pre-TC, lockers, etc...) articulation was important as when you lifted a wheel, you lost ALL traction on that axle and you could find yourself in a cross-axle situation very quickly. The longer you could keep your wheels on the ground, the less momentum you needed and the more controlled you were. This is where the Landys came into their own with their suppleness. The added benefit is that the body was also kept quite level... Introduce lockers/TC and technically you now only need traction on 1 wheel to get forward motion. So, as long as you are comfortable being in a car while it is leaning over, you are no longer as reliant on the articulation... but yes, when we're talking about the 'extremes', you will have an advantage with the articulation. Now those pics... C'mon, let's keep it sensible & compare with standard cars!! They are just pics I had that illustrated the point. Happy to use other pics if you have them. camel_landy said: I wouldn't do to a FL2/RRE what was being done to the Land Cruiser... But then I wouldn't do that with a standard D3/4 either!! However, you should be OK following the Hilux but the body will move around more. The FL2/RRE doesn't have as much articulation as a D3/4, so the rigidity does mean that it will lean a lot more. That in itself doesn't necessarily mean it looses traction but it does affect your comfort zone and you have to think about the bodywork more! Phew... It's turning into a bit of an epic this. Your turn... M On grass, snow or even just a slippery surface I fully agree and champion that a FL/Evoque on equal tyres will likely fair better than an open diffed non TCS 4x4. But on proper off road terrain the lack of clearance, control and stability will play issues. I can picture exactly what I mean in my head, but it's hard to convey in text
|
|
|
300bhp/ton
26,483 posts
59 months
|
Camel_landy, I guess we've gone a little off topic here. But might as well persevere This is sort of what I was meaning in terms of stability and lack of articulation.   The Freelander's wheel is what, 3 maybe 4 times higher in the air than the Disco's (pic angle isn't great, but you can see it better on the vid). The live axle simulation and extra wheel travel of the Disco make it far more stable in such a scenario. Here's the vid: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BE1_9ml5kM&fea...1m 30 sec for the Disco3 3m 35sec for the FL2 Note that despite going 2-4 times slower in the Freelander how quickly it pitched over and how much it wobbled when doing so. On the level this was ok and as you say, the TCS aloud it to continue. But imagine coming down a very steep slippery decent with such an obsticle at the bottom. In the Freelander you'd likely damage the bumper/headlight/wing and run a large risk of it toppling onto it's side. It certainly isn't impossible to use it, but a D3 would be a magnitude of ability more stable and safer.
|
|
|
camel_landy
1,504 posts
52 months
|
HDC - I can't remember off the top of my head what it goes down to but I'll try and find out. However, it does work when you're on the level... What it doesn't do is maintain a crawl speed, so uphill, you use a combination of gravity & throttle to set your speed. Basically, if you have it on (and in 1, 2 or R) it will always try & limit your speed to the target speed, unless you are using the throttle or brake. If you're touching the brake, it lets YOU take control of the braking system. If you touch the throttle, it modulates the target speed... The harder you push the throttle, the further it moves the target speed. However, as soon as you lift off the peddles, it puts the target back to what it was before. camel_landy said: Ascents - I've never had any problems with the FL2/RRE climbing and as they are quite light, they accelerate pretty quickly. 300bhp/ton said: Honestly not trying to be funny about this. But they mathematically don't have the wheel torque for some things. They may well also struggle to spin the wheels from a standing start and it's not really anything to do with speed. You don't want a wheel speed of 20+mph for certain things... I know what you're saying but that's where you'd use the auto-box and feed in the power progressively until things start to move. The other option is to hold it on the left foot and 'launch'!! Don't forget that if you're using torque, you're going to need grip as it's torque that causes wheel-spin. In that example pic, I'd be looking at using the torque converter & feed in the power progressively until the car starts to move... It's also the same technique I'd use in a D3/4 Auto. camel_landy said: Don't you see that the only wheel 'slipping' is one that isn't doing anything, anyway? 300bhp/ton said: It can destabilise a vehicle and cause it to slide sideways. ...only if you spin up the wheel with the traction. Feed in the power progressively, the wheel without grip will start to move... Slowly... and this will be enough for the traction systems to start responding. As long as you're not putting too much power down, you'll then be able to use the wheel with traction. Back to the articulation vid/stills... I know what you mean and it does look much more dramatic in the FL2 but I never said that controlling it would be easy.;) That said, that chap in the vid did make a bit of meal of driving through the dips, I'd also wager that he probably didn't make best use of Terrain Response either. /SPLIT_HAIRS_ON I'd also say that the FL2 is just as stable as the D3, it's just that the D3 doesn't move as far... /SPLIT_HAIRS_OFF So yes, out of the box, the D3/4 is more capable when you're pushing the extremes but the differences between the two are not as vast as people think. FWIW - The RRE has a more advanced set of traction systems than that of the FL2, which does make it much more capable and more controlled at lower speeds. Anyway, I suppose we should come back from this slightly OT ramble and try to get this thread back on course at some point!! M
|
|
|
300bhp/ton
26,483 posts
59 months
|
I'm good with all of that.
|
|
|
camel_landy
1,504 posts
52 months
|
camel_landy said: HDC - I can't remember off the top of my head what it goes down to but I'll try and find out. On FL2, when HDC is engaged, the HDC Target Speed starts off at 8mph but you can drop it down to 4.4mph... I believe that the RRE is the same. M
|
|
|
Ayahuasca
16,065 posts
148 months
|
Hi Camel Landy - did you take part in the Camel Trophy?
|
|
|
camel_landy
1,504 posts
52 months
|
Ayahuasca said: Hi Camel Landy - did you take part in the Camel Trophy? No... M
|
|
|
benjj
3,092 posts
32 months
|
Good thread.
On the FFRR, RRS and Disco the HDC speed can be altered by the + and - buttons on the wheel for the cruise control (even if cruise is not on). HDC can also be used in reverse. I've had my FFRR down to >2mph on steep descents using this method backwards and forwards. Dont know why LR dont crow about it more. Its an excellent feature.
|
|
|
ED209
2,932 posts
113 months
|
Did the landrover experience in an evoque si4 yesterday, i was blown away by it off road, sure its no defender but I was amazed at some of the inclines and decents it coped with. The hill descent control seems a great bit of kit.
|
|
|
sunbeam alpine
2,046 posts
57 months
|
camel_landy said: ...but frankly I would take the RRE into most of the places you would take a Disco. Don't worry, we'll come and tow you out! The Evoque must be enjoying major sales success - there are loads on the road over here (Belgium).
|
|
|
camel_landy
1,504 posts
52 months
|
sunbeam alpine said: camel_landy said: ...but frankly I would take the RRE into most of the places you would take a Disco. Don't worry, we'll come and tow you out! Thanks for the offer but I wouldn't want you to get your shoes muddy... Remember, Land Rovers never get stuck; It's always the driver. M
|
|
|
insurance_jon
2,335 posts
115 months
|
I've just completed 5 months in a petrol si4 dynamic lux, after a FFRR. And I'm now shopping to swap back again. Diabolical fuel consumption, even worse than the vogue
|
|
|
benjj
3,092 posts
32 months
|
You got worse mpg in an Evoque than a Range Rover?
Jesus.
I've got just about the most economical Rangie one can have (mapped TD6) and I have averaged 24.7mpg over 23,000 miles in 17 months.
|
|
|
Coolbanana
153 posts
69 months
|
benjj said: You got worse mpg in an Evoque than a Range Rover?
Jesus.
I've got just about the most economical Rangie one can have (mapped TD6) and I have averaged 24.7mpg over 23,000 miles in 17 months. I'm getting exactly the same - 24.7 mpg - from my RRE Si4 in Sport mode over 4000 miles in 6 months. The car has done an equal mix of fast motorway (4 passengers and luggage mostly) and slow, short urban trips with just me. No complaints from me since that's to be expected from this engine.
|
|
