I generally like LRO but some of their articles are so far up Land Rover's backside it's unbelievable.
In the latest issue they're comparing the Defender to the Discovery. The article is not bad although they miss out some obvious things (like complaining about the Disco's body roll without talking about ACE).
But the ratings! :shock:
Off-road, they talk about how the Disco has worse approach and departure angles, and the valances come off, then they give it 4* anyway, the same as the Defender 110. I can just about forgive them this.
But on-road, the Disco gets 5* and the Defender 110 gets 4*. I can only think that nobody from LRO has driven any other vehicles in the last 5 years. The TD5 Disco, which is the best of the bunch, is underpowered, noisy, and doesn't handle that well. 5*? Rubbish. 3* if you were being generous. The Defender is noisier, uncomfortable to drive (bordering on agricultural), and the clutch is heavy. Most people would regard it as pretty dreadful compared to almost any other modern car. So how does it get 4*? I bet Audi, Volvo and BMW drivers are snorting into their Pinot Noir.
This harks back to when they compared the Santana with the Defender, described how the Santana was better in almost every respect, and then rated it lower anyway. I'm as much of a fan of Land Rovers as the next man, but when LRO starts to rate them, all reason and sense goes out the window.
