Optimus Prime
Well-Known Member
strange knocking sound on the forum, every time someone says they are thinking of getting a freelander...........
Blippie
Well-Known Member
I drive an 05-plate Honda CR-V at work. I then drive home in an 02-plate Freelander.
They do have many similarities - The teams at Honda and Rover worked very closely back in the 90s. So they are both permanent 4x4, no diff lock, no low box. They are both car-like to drive.
The CR-V is more car like, but this is partly because of a less commanding and confident driving position. It has a more car like gear ratio, though the LR has its gearratios for a very good reason. It has less roll and pitch than the LR. However, its overall handling package isn't as good. I can drive more progressively in the Freelander. To give an example, a roundabout that I drive round dozens of times a day will have the Freelander leaning in to the corner, with room for acceleration, but leaving the roundabout balanced and poised to go. The same speed and line in the CR-V will have the poor little thing's tyres scrabbling for grip and it will leave the roundabout unbalanced.
The CR-V is quirky and fun. However its dash controls are scattered and disorganised. The seat adjustment is a little better than the LR and you can pull the rear seats forward to increase the boot size (but why not just fold them forward? If you have the CR-V's seats all the way forward, you can't fit an passengers in anyway!). It has quirky - no, fiddly- little gadgets like a useless foldaway central console between the front seats and the boot cover is just rotten. The fold open rear window is handy. The Freelanders opening rear window tries to answer the same question, but the bigger door means that it isn't really practical to load stuff through it. The Freelanders dropping rear window is also a little to clever for its own good because it is a bummer to fix if it breaks. If it is really cold it can freeze shut meaning you can't get into the boot (only happened to me once).
I have no confidence in the CR-V off road and I wouldn't want to tow with it - it just doesn't have the balance of the Freelander. The Land Rover has more than just off road heritage - it is suprisingly capable and has excellent TC/ABS/HDC system, which the CR-V lacks. The CR-V is an on road car. The Freelander is a road biased Land Rover.
The Honda has been quite reliable and done 130,000 in two years. Never been off the road for more than a week. But then our Freelander has never missed a beat and has never been off the road for more than a service.
Well, you know what I'd choose.
I'd learn to like a CR-V. But I love the Freelander.
Cheers
Blippie
They do have many similarities - The teams at Honda and Rover worked very closely back in the 90s. So they are both permanent 4x4, no diff lock, no low box. They are both car-like to drive.
The CR-V is more car like, but this is partly because of a less commanding and confident driving position. It has a more car like gear ratio, though the LR has its gearratios for a very good reason. It has less roll and pitch than the LR. However, its overall handling package isn't as good. I can drive more progressively in the Freelander. To give an example, a roundabout that I drive round dozens of times a day will have the Freelander leaning in to the corner, with room for acceleration, but leaving the roundabout balanced and poised to go. The same speed and line in the CR-V will have the poor little thing's tyres scrabbling for grip and it will leave the roundabout unbalanced.
The CR-V is quirky and fun. However its dash controls are scattered and disorganised. The seat adjustment is a little better than the LR and you can pull the rear seats forward to increase the boot size (but why not just fold them forward? If you have the CR-V's seats all the way forward, you can't fit an passengers in anyway!). It has quirky - no, fiddly- little gadgets like a useless foldaway central console between the front seats and the boot cover is just rotten. The fold open rear window is handy. The Freelanders opening rear window tries to answer the same question, but the bigger door means that it isn't really practical to load stuff through it. The Freelanders dropping rear window is also a little to clever for its own good because it is a bummer to fix if it breaks. If it is really cold it can freeze shut meaning you can't get into the boot (only happened to me once).
I have no confidence in the CR-V off road and I wouldn't want to tow with it - it just doesn't have the balance of the Freelander. The Land Rover has more than just off road heritage - it is suprisingly capable and has excellent TC/ABS/HDC system, which the CR-V lacks. The CR-V is an on road car. The Freelander is a road biased Land Rover.
The Honda has been quite reliable and done 130,000 in two years. Never been off the road for more than a week. But then our Freelander has never missed a beat and has never been off the road for more than a service.
Well, you know what I'd choose.
I'd learn to like a CR-V. But I love the Freelander.
Cheers
Blippie
Thanks for that, but the CR-V will at least do 75 without problem. I have just changed a Daihatsu 4 track to buy this Freelander and I must say that the freelander is far more comfortable, but the 4 track would do 80 without missing a beat, whilst the freelander packs it in at 72mph. Up to that speed the freelander is all I could ask for and I am very pleased with it, but why does it caffle out when the going gets tough?
Ive said it once and ill say it again,BUY BRITISH.I think hippos r ok.Mine is a td4 and has done 152000 miles with very little problem.It has a roverron gismo fitted so isnt to bad on the motor way and doesnt drink to much either.Any motor is going to cost u a £ or two,if your lucky u will get a good one, if not dig deep in those pockets.No 4x4 is cheap to keep on the road but u pays your money and takes your choice.
ming
SPACE TWOT
gaylander doozles r good motors ,best orft roaders int class ,best on road ,best mpg ,best lookin, dunt buy er slitty . . . . . .spit!!!!!
Optimus Prime
Well-Known Member
which freelander is it ?
My Td4 Auto will quite happily cruise at 85-90 (tom tom speed, not speedo, so pretty accurate). Don't generally drive at those speeds, as I have a fair bit of mechanical sympathy, most of my cars get fairly gentle treatment. 3000 revs is the upper limit for cruising I think. But I would be concerned at only being able to do 72mph.
(not trying to be smug, just trying to help)
ming
SPACE TWOT
porky had 110 outa are gaylander, no problem. . . . .
Optimus Prime
Well-Known Member
how did it feel ?
ming
SPACE TWOT
EZE ALL FURRY UN FINGS [UN GOT ER WET NOSE]. . . .
ming
SPACE TWOT
Blippie
Well-Known Member
There's something up there, I would say. Perhaps understandable if it was a worn, high mileage vehicle, they are never going to be too sprightly...
The TD4 can comfortably manage over a ton. In fact, we used to have early L-series diesel Freelanders which we used for caring medical intensive care teams up and down the motorways between hospitals in the south west. Loaded with the team, equipment and with the added air resistance of the blue lights, etc., they could still do better than the speed you are doing!
(As an aside, the Freelander wasn't the right vehicle for this job and they were replaced by people carriers - extra seating for trainees accompanying the team, far more space for equipment.)
Thinking about it, my high mileage R-reg L-series can still manage respectable speeds (down hill with a follwoing wind) even with half a ton of rollcage/Camel extras?winch?roof pod/roof rack.
Cheers
Blippie
john t
Active Member
old shoey,,, not sure what motor you have , but i have to be carfull ( td4)when on motorways, that i dont get carried away, 90 mph is so easy and , cruises at 3000 rpm / 80mph all day, and still gives good mpg,
freelanders are not perfect , but when they are running well , they are a great allrounder,,,
john t
freelanders are not perfect , but when they are running well , they are a great allrounder,,,
john t
