Do we like/dislike Range/Land Rovers?

I ask because I "kinda" want a new 4wd ride. All I have ever heard is that they are electrical nightmares, such that a blown taillight causes the whole vehicle to shutdown (newer LR3 owner story). I also know one member had some rather extensive expenses either a Discovery I don't remember if it was a Series 1 or 2.

Looking at mid to late 2000's Range and Land Rovers seem to be pretty freaking cheap. I personally like the looks of the Range HSE (not that I know what that entails) But I do worry about "luxury" cars that are now cheap. I also worry about any "off-road" capable vehicle with an airbag suspension. This would be replacing a 2 door TJ Wrangler. I do not want a Grand Cherokee, Cherokee, Tahoe, Blazer, Suburban, Expedtion, Explorer, Escape, Liberty.

So....

Did all Landies and Ranges have airbags?

Were they all electrical nightmares?

Considering I only use 4wd at the hunt cabin or when we go to the mtns looking for snow, would it be unrealistic to think one could handle those tasks?

Are the ones to avoid at all costs?

And the catch all were any of them worth a fart?

I have seen all kinds of nightmares when I did roadside assistance for Land Rover. I would still like to try a first gen Discovery or Range Rover.

This is relevant to my interests. There are lots of them showing up cheap around here. Although I would probably go with several of the SUV's on your "do not want" list first.

The 2003-2005 range rover is a no-go. They eat transmissions and air suspension parts. 06-09 are better engines, somwhat better suspension. Discovery 2 has engine issues more than disco 1. 3.5/3.9 is the better motor, but pretty gutless. 3.9 disco 1 stick is a ounicorn, but the best. Motor swaps are out there, 4.3 chevy high on the list. Look close at ecu's, they get exposed to elements and need better protection. Coil spring kits for air suspenion range rover is a must. One air repair is the cost of a kit.

Just the other day I saw a DOT safety/response pickup preemptively following an old Discovery down the highway...I almost drove off the road, I was laughing so hard.

When I told my coworker with a similar Discovery about it the next day, and she told me how she had to get towed THREE times the previous weekend.

I picked up a 2001 range Rover 4.6 HSE for a grand a few months ago. Wife drives it now and absolutely loves it. It is nice not having to get up at 5AM to snowplow the driveway so she can get out for work. That thing goes thru anything. Had to put a new back half of the exhaust on it when I first got it. That was $260 and the reason I was able to get it for only $1000. Bought a new battery because the old one was 6 years old and didn't want to deal with that. Another $130. Bought replacement tailgate struts for $40. Changed the oil and washed it a couple of times. Thats it. I keep seeing them going strong with 200,000 all over the local CL, so how bad can they be? Only electrical gremlin seems to be the rear child safety locks on the rear doors. Can't shut them off with the switch on the door, but I haven't had a serious look at them yet. For now, we have to open the doors for the kids. The other day I pulled into a local auto parts store to get carb cleaner. There was a guy in a suit watching his BMW suv get loaded onto a flatbed. I laughed and said something wise like bet you bought the BMW because you figured it was more reliable than a Range Rover. Hows that working out for you?

the 2002 through 2004 4.6 is -the- worst engine. Which is a shame, as it is not a bad design, just badly put together. All it takes is one overheat and it can drop a liner. Once a liner starts moving, it is a ticking time bomb. If you find one for sale with "new headgaskets" run away.. HGs are bandaid at best.

it is a shame, it would not have cost rover much per engine to "tophat" the liners like the engine I put in mine has. A simple machining job that would have kept the liners in place for hundreds of thousands of miles..

As for electrical issues, I have -none- at 90,000 miles. My Disco2 also does not have the air springs in the back, so one less system that needs maintenance and repairs.

Overall it is a very nice truck that can go anywhere (2002 and 2003 Discos do not have a locking transfer case, but it can be retrofitted easily).

If I had to do it all over again, I would have gotten a Range Rover Classic and dropped a smaller LS engine into it.. but honestly, I am pretty happy with my Disco now that it is working at 100%. It looks great, It goes down the road well, and I can take it from the backwoods to Broadway and it would look at home in either place.

The only drawback.. it's thirsty. 13mpg of premium fuel

Interesting. But kinda what I figured. I knew there had to be a reason $85k vehicles were selling for pocket change less than 8 years later.

Classic with a motor swap has me thinking...

As for why those and not the host of other (probably more capable, and probably cheaper) vehicles. Idk. Other than I love the looks. Kind of a refined ruggedness.

Mark "refined ruggedness" right up there with "lumber-sexual."

Swaps are tricky as the tcase and axles are pretty marginal at stock power, or so I've been told.

Loved my Defender ... When it ran. Had it for around 10 years and really got to know it inside and out. Coolest lawn ornament I've ever owned. There is a reason they call Lucas Electronics "The Dark Lord". When things go wrong, holy mother of god does it get expensive fast. Some parts can interchange at a decent price of you take the time to dig through details. But the more modern things got, the less interchange there was. Still not sure why there was never a recall on the NAS Defenders due to all the rolling fireballs when the oil lines let loose. Big number of total fire losses, I'd estimate 10-15% of US spec trucks were lost to fire. That's what happens when you have a rubber oil line less than an inch from an exhaust manifold.

If properly assembled, a 4.6 with the Thor intake is a great motor. Problem is they had issues with porous block castings, and improperly installed liners. So lots of issues with oil/coolant intermix and slipped liners. Not sure what the reputation is now on the new blocks that were being done by an alternate source after LR stopped making the motors internally.

I'd only own one again while under a bumper to bumper warranty. Just too time and money expensive to maintain.

I love how mad_machine glosses over the fact he spent $10k on just the motor for his.

Chump change and all that jazz

My wife has had a 2001 Range Rover for a few years now. We bought it with about 120k on the clock, had to get the head gaskets done pretty much immediately (but I had factored that into the purchase price).

Overall it's been pretty reliable, the air suspension needed a couple of O-rings, the heater core (replaced by the PO) had to have the connector O-rings replaced a couple of times and it now looks like we may need to get the transfer case resealed.

The main issue we keep running into is that it occasionally decides to eat a bunch of coolant for no apparent reason, most likely in protest against short journeys. Other than that it's been pretty reliable and it's also one of the few SUVs I actually like driving.

What helps is that we have a competent local Land Rover specialist who does most of the work on it and who knows how to repair things rather than throw parts at it. One of the reasons the air suspension gets a bad rap is that dealers tend to throw parts at it when you have a leak, and those can quickly cost thousands. When ours started listing due to a slow leak, the repair was an hour's worth of our mechanics' time and a few bucks for O-rings.

I've also owned a Classic back in the UK - the P38 we have now is a lot more complex (the Classic is mostly on Jeep XJ levels of Tonka-toy-truckness) and I liked that, but it was pretty underpowered. What didn't help was that it also had had an LPG conversion and while that mostly ran right, I still preferred to run it on (expensive) Petrol instead.

I wouldn't mind another Classic, but finding a good one is getting harder.

HiTempguy wrote: I love how mad_machine glosses over the fact he spent $10k on just the motor for his. Chump change and all that jazz

why do you think I give the 2002 through 2004 4.6 a "no go" those were the worst engines.

It also does not help that I got completely ripped off by my "mechanic". he came to me highly recommended by a friend as he keeps her Volvo up and running. What should have been a 15 hour "book" job of R&Ring the engine that I made all the easier for buying all new hoses, new radiator, and all the parts that would ordinarily have to be taken apart carefully.. turned into a 40 hour job (at 120/hr). He also ripped me off for a grand because a payment I gave him partway through this 4 month job was not written on his receipt (even though I watched him do it) and then.. a month after I got it back, the oilpan was leaking like a sieve because bolts were missing out of it.

Now I know why he is barely able to keep her 745 running.. he does just enough to keep her coming back again and again and again.

I love the discovery with the stick axles and coil springs, as brave as i am, i am so scared of the motor.

Anyone ever swap to something more common/reliable

IIRC the years without the locking transfer case just don't have any any of the cabling/interior parts required to move the actuator. The actuator rod is still sticking out of the transfer case.

Here's what I gather. We really WANT to like these vehicles. They are cheap and tick so many boxes. However, the care and feeding seems to be a bit much, even for this crew.

I have always like them, but everyone I knew that had them said they would never buy another. I found my manual trans BMW X5 which has the size and most of the capabilities. I has been very good for 6 years.

Opti wrote: I love the discovery with the stick axles and coil springs, as brave as i am, i am so scared of the motor. Anyone ever swap to something more common/reliable

The D1's had probably the least concerning of the Rover motors in the 3.9. It may not have a huge amount of power, but the engine itself only has a couple minor foibles to worry about. Use the revised composite head gaskets, with the updated torque specs, and you're going to be as reliable mechanically as any other American V8. Don't forget ... it's essentially the old aluminum Buick engine, just with a bit bigger bore and EFI on top. Fresh oil every 3,000 miles and that's essentially all they need. But they NEED those 3,000 mile oil changes, they run sooty. Rotella-T is what I always used.

The fuel injection isn't too bad either if it's running the Lucas Hot-Wire system. Just another copy of the Bosche LH-Jetronic. The distributors are the main source of trouble. Mallory Uni-lite's were the go-to swap to take care of that issue.

from what I have read.. the 3.9 is the best of the Rover V8s. not a lot of power, but not a lot of issues either.

And no, from everything I have been told and read, the 2003 (that I have) has -no- provision for locking the transfer case. the 2002 still had the guts but no connection, the 2003 had nothing. 2004 brought back the locking the transfer case in all it's glory

I've never met a mechanic who worked on them who didn't call them the biggest POS he's ever worked on.

I've owned two classics - a 1988 and a 1990 - and my dad has one, a 1989. There's a reason that Land Rover is consistently at the bottom of everyone's reliability rankings. They break a lot and are expensive to fix. I totaled up the receipts on my dad's once. He's had it a long time (22 years or so?), but it was more than the cost of a new Mustang GT just in repairs. And that was mostly at a good independent shop after he got tired of the excessive cost of the dealership repairs.

that is the problem. Most people who buy them, don't do any work to them. The premium to own such a vehicle generally precludes the need to do the work yourself.

Like any English vehicle, it requires constant tinkering.. yes, most of those issues are just poor engineering choices at the factory, but we are also not talking about a Chevy Trailblazer here with it's "just fill it with gas and go" mentality

I had a 1988 Range Rover. I was terrible and I loved it. The early ones at least rusted horribly. Much of the outer skin was aluminum, but everything underneath was the same good old fashioned English steel from the 70's/80's that British cars are famous for. Electrically they fail pretty similar to any other British car, but the pieces are (or were when I has mine) brutally expensive. The drivetrain with the small V8 and full time 4wd was pretty robust, or at least so much more robust than the rest of the truck that people didn't complain about it much.
I still occasionally look for a good rust free southern/Western one. As part of a multi vehicle fleet where you can spend an outsized amout of time and effort dealing with small problems, they're fun. The thought of relying on one for daily transportation is horrifying.