found some good pics on www.carenthusiast.com click on the pics

Haggi

Best set of pictures I've seen so far.

I still can't work out if the spare wheel is slung on the underside or if it's in a well inside the boot?

The sectional photos seem to indicate a well!

Geoff

It is inside and has a reversible floor above it, oneside carpet the other is plastic. Photos in LROI

draughtsman wrote:

I still can't work out if the spare wheel is slung on the underside or if it's in a well inside the boot?

Tons and tons of photos added to the LR Official albums on here

https://www.freel2.com/gallery/index.php?cat=3

Interesting to see the 'normal' grille:

Click image to enlarge

wonder why the different grill for the diesel, it looks weak in comparison, the only thing I can think of is maybe to do with engine air intake or cooling if not it could be- as Bill Murray (MudAllOverIt) says the first after market accessory change. ( Michty me here I'm lookin out my hak saw and pliers already.)

My, my....

...How handsome my next car looks!



RodC
--
www.expodition.com - for iPod users who love to travel

only joking Rod..... In the autocar mag next week the pictures show it is a full size spare in the boot, an alloy wheel.

I am going to be controvertial and say I don't like the new Freelander. The rear end, rear quarters, side, in fact everything up to the A pillar looks nice, but I just don't think the front end goes with the rest of the car.

I know a lot of you like it and will probably hear no bad said, so apologies in advance, but it looks like two consortiums have designed it and then thrown their two halves together.

Maybe a RRS type front would have looked better, but the Freelander1 front looks wrong in my mind.

I have been reading a few reports which are already criticising performance. They are not fond of a 3.2 322PS engine doing 0-60 in 8.9s, big factors here are apparently that its 0-60 LR have quoted, whereas the normal benchmark is 0-62mph (0-100km/h). They were also critical of the 25mpg economy.

Don't know how true these criticisms are and whether they make much difference, but it reminds me of the RRS and Disco3 launch, LR raved about their new engine (TdV6), but they're not that quick, maybe smooth and powerful for their cc, but compared t the Merc 320CDi, BMW X5 3.0d, Touareg 3.0V6 TDi, etc. they were behind on pace. Again I accept that die hards will say the above are all crap and not worthy contendors, but they are the exact vehicles LR pitch against. I was hoping that LR would use the opportunity of producing a new vehicle to really kick some ass!

Could LR not have dropped the 2.5 5cyl turbo in? If it can hit 0-02 in 6.x secs in a Focus (which the Freelander is based on) I don;t think it would be far off 7-8secs in the Freelander. How about the 18Xps 2.4 5cyl diesel? That would surely allow LR to p1s5 all over the X3, Rav-4 D4D 180, etc. Instead LR had the chance to go top of the league, but in true LR fashion fall short by only doing 95% of the job.

I for one would love to see LR become top dog and really beat the competition into oblivion by merit, whereas off-road they have the merit, but on-road they seem to rely more on pedigree and kudos.

Awaiting the hosue being burnt down now

Cheers H

harveyg77 wrote:

I am going to be controvertial and say I don't like the new Freelander. The rear end, rear quarters, side, in fact everything up to the A pillar looks nice, but I just don't think the front end goes with the rest of the car.

Or I could even say house, NOT hosue

I suppose its like all things, it needs to be seen in the flesh. I did like the look of the old one but was not sure of the rear lights on the 04MY face lift, I didn't get the sticking out thing at all. I do agree with you on the looks from the C back. In fact I think the 3dr looked larger and more attractive than the 3dr.

Engine wise the Td4 always frustrated me when Jap 4x4 would roar off and leave me behind. It doesn't have to be as quick as an Evo, but atleast able to stay pace with the opposition would be nice. I guess it will do this with some.

Anyway, I won't be changing cars for a longtime now, so I can look as that costs you nothing

Cheers H

harveyg77 wrote:

Or I could even say house, NOT hosue

I suppose its like all things, it needs to be seen in the flesh...

Engine wise the Td4 always frustrated me when Jap 4x4 would roar off and leave me behind. It doesn't have to be as quick as an Evo, but atleast able to stay pace with the opposition would be nice...

Seen in the metal and sat in it does look and feel the part !

As for performance, why worry if you get outpaced at the lights ? To be honest its all rather irrelevant, unless you floor it at exactly the same time and your quick on the gears, a vehicle thats even slightly less powerful will always beat you up to whatever the surrounding traffic speed is. Get them mid range and your torque will beat em each time.

Or buy a car

Some say the D3 is slow... its not. Actually its damn nippy and chuckable if you have confidence in the handling. Will leave most other SUV's flagging in the real world and away from straight line performance... even an X5 !

The design spec for performance is biased towards low end torque, not high performance. LR do the right thing - but that my opinion.

You either buy an X3 or Jap machine that won't cut it on all terrains or you buy a Land Rover that will.

cheers