I agreed LR should comment on this, but I don't agree that every new car should perform such test, unless the test is either a legal requirement, or part of the design criteria for the car, but this is again for LR to comment.

Reading the manual on RSC

Quote:

RSC works in conjunction with DSC to try and
prevent vehicle roll-over. If the system senses
that the vehicle is approaching roll-over it will
reduce engine power and use the ABS system
to reduce the chance of roll-over.

Anyway we do not know what "several inches" are. Maybe it was not enough to trigger the ESC because if it would have more than the trigger limit and the ESC did not work then obviously the car would have rolled over. So what if the several inches were not so dangerous at all? Of course raising two wheels from the ground would make me feel uneasy to say the least but how dangerouse was it actually?
I don't really think that a software update could solve such a problem because at the end of the day, as said allready, the rollover is dictated by the laws of physics. FREELANDER 2 TD4 SE (XS UK) IZMIR BLUE SIDE STEPS COLD PACK BI-XENON TINTED WINDOWS - AND PROUD OF HER

Matei wrote:

Anyway we do not know what "several inches" are.

I'll ask the wife  Former Mod/Member, with the most post & Chicken George Arch nemesis

npinks wrote:

Matei wrote:

Anyway we do not know what "several inches" are.

I'll ask the wife

 FREELANDER 2 TD4 SE (XS UK) IZMIR BLUE SIDE STEPS COLD PACK BI-XENON TINTED WINDOWS - AND PROUD OF HER

Matei wrote:

Anyway we do not know what "several inches" are. Maybe it was not enough to trigger the ESC because if it would have more than the trigger limit and the ESC did not work then obviously the car would have rolled over. So what if the several inches were not so dangerous at all? Of course raising two wheels from the ground would make me feel uneasy to say the least but how dangerouse was it actually?
I don't really think that a software update could solve such a problem because at the end of the day, as said allready, the rollover is dictated by the laws of physics.

The article says

"we think that no vehicle should ever display this behavior"

and

"In 2003 we experienced a similar behavior with the previous generation BMW X5 3.0i. A software change fixed the problem"

That makes me think something is wrong and hopefully a software update will solve it


I also want to add that I went to Gaydon for a RRS Supercharged day and was a passenger with a LR test driver putting one through its paces. I could not believe it's ability - 140 mph, some pretty scary weaving and bends on the test track leads me to believe they can solve this if there is a problem

Maybe the dealers would care to comment ? FREELANDER 2 TD4 SE (XS UK) IZMIR BLUE SIDE STEPS COLD PACK BI-XENON TINTED WINDOWS - AND PROUD OF HER

I think some of you are missing the boat on this. I know we all love our FL2/LR2's, and some of us want to come up with excuses based on physics for why this test came up the way it did. But the fact remains, as was pointed out by muddywheels and gorjant, that the LR2's poor response to this maneuver is one that is simply not to be expected for vehicles in its class/type. The LR2 simply did not do what other comparable vehicles have routinely done in the past to maintain a secure driving environment. 53 mph may seem like a lot of speed to some of you, but it's a speed that is far below that of most cruising/highway speeds and is one that other vehicles had no difficulty with.

Please don't make excuses for Land Rover or the LR2 simply because you like other aspects of the vehicle. Personally, this would've been a deal-breaker for me had I known this before I purchased the car. If the car has a SERIOUS safety flaw like this, we shouldn't be coming up with excuses that allow LR to ignore the issue. They should be compelled to act on this ASAP. I for one am hoping that a software update could be employed to better sense the changing driving parameters indicative of an impending rollover.

I agree!

I would not have purchased my FL2 if I knew there was a safety issue - one of the reasons I did buy it was the 5 star euro ncap.

4wd's instability has been an issue in the past for some brands and will seriously damage the FL2 image if not fixed ASAP.

Mercedes A class problems were very damaging to their brand and it takes a long time to recover.

Maybe being naive here but if the FL2 got a 5 star rating in the Euro NCAP tests surely they looked at this aspect of the FL2's handling?

Pete S. wrote:

Maybe being naive here but if the FL2 got a 5 star rating in the Euro NCAP tests surely they looked at this aspect of the FL2's handling?

I would say this about the same test done on any car not just about the FL2/LR2. What the reprot does not say is that they repeated the test multiple times to see the result, but also they mention no figures as to roll and G and how those compared to other vehicles.

These tests are usually done on a test track and aren't very scientific in their approach, i.e. get it up to speed and swerve between point A and B....but that doesn't allow for variations in driver reaction etc. and that is what figures would give.

There may well be a problem but I don't think it right to decide based on a report like this, especially as other cars that have had problem in the past were reported by many motoring reports if I am not mistaken.

My own view is that the on road handling is probably slightly compromised for the offroad ability of the FL2/LR2, but I am yet to find a fault with its handling and really push it round the twisty bits.

If I am not mistaken the ESC system came from Volvo and was probably developed with them in the FL2, so surely they would have done the Swedish Elk avoidance test.....?????

Matei wrote:

The results of the test can aloso have other causes. I remmember a test done by a German paper on a Romanian made Renault (Logan) in which they said that the car capsized after brousque manoeuvers at 65 Km/h. There were several speculations : alloy wheels beeing too weak, a.so. After replicating the test after Renault protested it was discovered that the reason was that the tyres were worn out during the previous tests.
As long that this so called problem is not properly documented I think that we should not take it at face value.
Anyway when was this test made ? Just after TATA took over ?