Are Freelanders 4x4 ?

Barr

My Dads looking at these at the moment and I was just wondering if they are 4 wheel drive or just two wheel drive like most cars.

colm_mcm

They're all 4WD

The important thing is not to buy one.

Barr

colm_mcm wrote: »

They're all 4WD

The important thing is not to buy one.

C'mon Colm , in fairness the diesel ones or not that bad.

CharlieCroker

yes, they are. I used to sell them!
Freelander2 is much better but if i were you i'd look at a Santa Fe, CR-v, Rav4 or ANYTHING else before an old model freelander. (except a daihatsu terios, they're crap too) :-)

colm_mcm

Everyone presumes the 1.8 K Series is the only weak point on the Freelander.
AFAIK the problem of the 1.8's liners dropping was rectified in 2001, yet the Freelander 1 was still in the bottom 5 of most surveys right up to 2006.

Also, see how many early 320d's give trouble before assuming that just because the TD4 engine is BMW that it's any good.

Eoin

colm_mcm wrote: »

Also, see how many early 320d's give trouble before assuming that just because the TD4 engine is BMW that it's any good.

Not that many - it was the later 150BHP engine that had more problems, and that didn't go into the Rover cars.

bbam

They have a shocking NCAP star rating and their description of the cabin collapse put me way off buying one..
4WD is no good if you're squashed flat :eek:

sk8board

bbam wrote: »

They have a shocking NCAP star rating and their description of the cabin collapse put me way off buying one..
4WD is no good if you're squashed flat :eek:

+1 on that. their crash rating is simply unacceptable. I would never have the kids in one, let alone take it handy if I was in it on my own

Mr.David

OP - are you talking about Freelander I or Freelander II? Huge difference and I wouldnt touch the former with a barge pole, but the mk II is actually a v good car imo.

mailforkev

Have driven a few of them.

Series 1 - 1.8 Petrol (head gasket went, was compensated for by LR Ireland thanks to a report on BBC's Watchdog programme).
Series 1 - 2.0 TD4 (far better than the petrol but quite agricultural, same cruddy interior, no other problems in 3 years though).

Series 2 is lovely in my opinion, you would never guess the two were related. Just avoid the base E spec as it has a poverty spec interior, S upwards is ok, SE/HSE are pretty well equiped.

Barr

Mr.David wrote: »

OP - are you talking about Freelander I or Freelander II? Huge difference and I wouldnt touch the former with a barge pole, but the mk II is actually a v good car imo.

Its a 2004 model.

Could you advise when the Series II came out?

I must admit I never new about the very poor ncap rating , I thought an SUV should be safer than a car.

mailforkev

Series 2 are 2007 onwards, 2.2 diesel engine rather than 2.0.

zilog_jones

2nd gen wasn't out until 2007 so I think you're out of luck.

It is a common misconception that big 4x4s are safer than normal cars, and the Euro NCAP doesn't take into consideration the fact you're more likely to roll an SUV due to the higher centre of gravity.

colm_mcm

How many Rav4s or Santa Fe's do you hear of rolling over compared to regular cars? this roll over thing is a predominantly American thing where they have ridiculous suspension and weigh a huge amount more than cars here do.

Scruff

As a matter of interest, what would be the best SUV/4x4 out there?

bettywools86

Scruff wrote: »

As a matter of interest, what would be the best SUV/4x4 out there?

I have a Suzuki crossover.It's not always in 4x4 obviously, but it is there ifn and when I need it

mailforkev

Scruff wrote: »

As a matter of interest, what would be the best SUV/4x4 out there?

Would all depend on your budget and usage I suppose.

New LR Discovery 3/4 probably pretty high up the list in my opinion.
But then again I live in nicely tarmaced southside Dublin so what would I know :rolleyes:

Landcruiser or Trooper probably best for proper farm use.

Money no object I'd still always buy a Range Rover TDV8.

Barr

zilog_jones wrote: »

2nd gen wasn't out until 2007 so I think you're out of luck.

It is a common misconception that big 4x4s are safer than normal cars, and the Euro NCAP doesn't take into consideration the fact you're more likely to roll an SUV due to the higher centre of gravity.

I remember watching a car program (think 5th gear) where they had a head on collision between a car and a 4X4 . I dont remember which models but the 4x4 faired alot better.

The reason given was becase the jeep was higher off the ground. The impact bar on the 4x4 was higher so the car practically went underneath it.

I believe a head on between a car and a 4x4 there will be only one winner despite the NCAP ratings.

VolvoMan

colm_mcm wrote: »

How many Rav4s or Santa Fe's do you hear of rolling over compared to regular cars? this roll over thing is a predominantly American thing where they have ridiculous suspension and weigh a huge amount more than cars here do.

You can't argue against the laws of physics in fairness.

colm_mcm

I'm not arguing that at all, but that's like saying a Tiida is more likely to roll than a Corolla. it may well be true, but in the case of a small soft-roader it's not hugely relevant.

Del2005

Barr wrote: »

I remember watching a car program (think 5th gear) where they had a head on collision between a car and a 4X4 . I dont remember which models but the 4x4 faired alot better.

The reason given was becase the jeep was higher off the ground. The impact bar on the 4x4 was higher so the car practically went underneath it.

I believe a head on between a car and a 4x4 there will be only one winner despite the NCAP ratings.

I saw that one, it was 5th Gear. They also crashed 2 saloon cars into each other. 1 was loaded and the other empty. The empty car ended up like the car v's 4x4 crash.

5th Gear also did a swerve test with a car and 4x4, the car just spun a couple of times while the 4x4 barrel rolled down the road:eek:

The moral of the story is only crash into what ever is smaller then you!!