curtis73 wrote: There is a reason they are so cheap. Anyone who has purchased one will take pennies on their loan just to unload it before it costs them another $7,000 to repair a windshield that was cracked by a large insect, or an ABS sensor that failed because it rained, or a fuel tank that leaks because they hit a pothole larger than 12mm.
$7k for a windscreen? I hope this is part of the try to, but fail to remain serious.
I'm honestly really really confused here. I don't understand how a vehicle that tens of thousands of people in the UK manage to use daily for decades as a normal, reliable every day transport is viewed as the second coming of Satan to the automotive world over here. Honestly, if they are such utter total piles of crap here, why do they not seem to be over there? It can't just be 'British' pride, as that stops soon after the wallet emptying starts. The Brits would not embrace a vehicle in which every electrical system dies as it pulls off the parking lot(*) I really honestly don't understand. Since Land Rovers in general seem to be tarred with the same brush I really have to question it. My parents ran V8 Land Rovers as only or main vehicles for years through the 80's - 90's. They never did anything except regular maintenance, they just kept going and going. Yes they were thirsty, but gas is still ridiculously cheap in this country so it really doesn’t matter if you’re OK with environmental side of burning so many dead dino's
Seriously...I used my disco2 hard, and the failures it had were certainly not because it was under designed. The suspension was quite sturdy, and held up to numerous "spirited" off road TSD rallies that included getting airborne and blasting through 1 foot deep puddles. The The brakes are almost as big as my 2500 suburban. The windshield never cracked despite numerous rock hits in the winter, and if I needed to replace it, it would have been about $600 because it had the heating element in it.
I certainly wouldn't ever recommend one to someone who didn't know what they were getting into, but they are far from the OMGWTF OT IT WILL EXPLODE NOW!!!!1!!one!!!!
Adrian_Thompson wrote: * Don’t' start on about Lucas electrics. Many cars of the 60's had crappy electrics, especially the Italians, and many of the 'electrical' issues were frequently fuel delivery issues in reality. Also what was 'acceptable' 40-50 years ago hasn't been acceptable foe the last 30 years.
I have found that with italian cars, and my father agrees with english. Keep the ground clean and most of your problems will be few.
Adrian_Thompson wrote: I'm honestly really really confused here. I don't understand how a vehicle that tens of thousands of people in the UK manage to use daily for decades as a normal, reliable every day transport is viewed as the second coming of Satan to the automotive world over here.
I'm guessing that they make special US models, much like VW makes special US models with more faults than I hear about from Germany and the UK 
.
That said, with Land Rovers, maybe one wants to look after them a bit a better than people look after, say, their Suburban appliance.
BoxheadTim wrote:Adrian_Thompson wrote: I'm honestly really really confused here. I don't understand how a vehicle that tens of thousands of people in the UK manage to use daily for decades as a normal, reliable every day transport is viewed as the second coming of Satan to the automotive world over here.I'm guessing that they make special US models, much like VW makes special US models with more faults than I hear about from Germany and the UK
I don't think it's their lack of reliability that's really the problem, but rather the cost of doing said repairs. Land Rovers parts are ridiculously expensive.
Also, you have to remember that reliability is a VERY relative term. I remember talking to a VW fanboy a few years ago about is early 2000 Golf GTI 1.8T. He was telling all about the great qualities of the car and how it only refused to start about 2 times every winter. For him, that was totally normal and acceptable.
I don't think they're necessarily worse than the UK and I doubt they differ, but I think when you spend that sort of coin on a new luxury car or SUV, you don't expect it to suffer those sorts of faults. I think a lot of it comes down to maintenance, and not to be judgy, but the types of folks who usually buy range rover and land rovers probably don't do much other than (maybe)oil changes or bring them in when things break. Like any car, you'll hear more often of the horror stories than the days of trouble free transport. I only speak of personal family experiences with 3 of them, both Disco I and Disco II, and it was enough to sway us away from ever buying another LR product again, new or old. As I said in my earlier post, I know there are some that are going strong with 200k+ miles of little trouble, but our experiences haven't been so rosy. I will say, while the onroad driving dynamic is terrible and reliability was meh, they do hold up well in accidents and saved my sister in a semi-serious wreck while pregnant.
I just spent the morning looking at websites catering to the LR and their parts. The only things that are eye watering in price are those that pertain to the fuel injection. Everything else seems pretty decent in price compared to my other cars (Saab, Volvo, and BMW) I guess it really is a matter of perspective.
As I would be towing, the air suspension (if it has it) would be the first thing out the door. for $800 I can get heavy duty springs and shocks for it to replace everything I need for a nice simple mechanical suspension.
IIRC you want to keep the air suspension - at least on a Range Rover - if you want to tow...
The air suspension seems to be generally reliable if looked after. Yes, you have to occasionally change the bags but the main danger to them (again, at least on the Range Rover) appears to be the tire place that jacks the car up on the frame and thus pops out the airbags...
good to know Tim. Usually I bring rims to the tyre places in the trunk of another car. I will make sure I doubly do that if I get a Disco
I really liked the rear Air suspension for towing. Put on the trailer, it pumps right up, and you have a nice level setup, yet when not towing you get the benefit of a smoother ride and more axle articulation.
I did have to replace one ride height sensor that physically broke from the rubber aging out, and did replace the airbags on both aides when they started to leak, but with used bags that were $20 each and 10 minutes to replace. I specifically kept the air springs instead of switching to coils because of the towing I did.
The used parts market for these is excellent. And new stuff is readily available and though more expensive than Chevy truck parts, most of it was totally reasonable.
Adrian_Thompson wrote: I'm honestly really really confused here. I don't understand how a vehicle that tens of thousands of people in the UK manage to use daily for decades as a normal, reliable every day transport is viewed as the second coming of Satan to the automotive world over here. Honestly, if they are such utter total piles of crap here, why do they not seem to be over there? It can't just be 'British' pride, as that stops soon after the wallet emptying starts. The Brits would not embrace a vehicle in which every electrical system dies as it pulls off the parking lot(*) I really honestly don't understand. Since Land Rovers in general seem to be tarred with the same brush I really have to question it. My parents ran V8 Land Rovers as only or main vehicles for years through the 80's - 90's. They never did anything except regular maintenance, they just kept going and going. Yes they were thirsty, but gas is still ridiculously cheap in this country so it really doesn’t matter if you’re OK with environmental side of burning so many dead dino's * Don’t' start on about Lucas electrics. Many cars of the 60's had crappy electrics, especially the Italians, and many of the 'electrical' issues were frequently fuel delivery issues in reality. Also what was 'acceptable' 40-50 years ago hasn't been acceptable foe the last 30 years.
Perhaps in the UK and continental Europe, transportation is not taken for granted, there is public transit when your E36 M3 breaks, and cars are maintained a lot better?
I'm sure keeping up with a Disco that lived its entire life with an enthusiast or going to the dealer every 4000 miles with a blank check taped to the dash, would be no worse than an equally old BMW. The thing is, that doesn't really happen in the USA, cars, trucks especially, go to the shop when they break, and might get an oil change with bulk fill dino 5w30 every 9000 miles or so, or whenever the "oil bottle light" comes on.
Thus, purchasing a British luxury SUV, is a profoundly unwise decision, as odds are, you are buying a mountain of neglected problems.
My uncle has owned Discos in England from when they first started building them except when he bought a Toyota SUV of some kind in the mid '90s which he sold after a year for being an unreliable POS.
I would say buy a Disco and have fun.
redhookfern wrote: I don't think they're necessarily worse than the UK and I doubt they differ, but I think when you spend that sort of coin on a new luxury car or SUV, you don't expect it to suffer those sorts of faults.
I read somewhere recently, maybe it was a Hemmings publication, that by and large Europeans take better care of their cars than do Americans.
That having been said, I would personally avoid a a Range or Land Rover, which is not to say there is not the temptation.
mattmacklind wrote: I read somewhere recently, maybe it was a Hemmings publication, that by and large Europeans take better care of their cars than do Americans.
They probably haven't met some of the people I have met . Like the ones that drive 2 year old cars with oil smoke blowing out the tailpipe...
Americans tend to be adamant about changing the oil every five minutes and most of the non-enthusiasts don't seem to be doing much else to the car. People like us tend to go and look after our cars much, much better but we're in a minority both over here and in Europe.
In Europe, a lot of cars might get serviced whenever the annual or bi-annual safety inspection is due, whether the car needs it or not.
I'm with Boxhead here having grown up in the UK. Vehicles were serviced only when a) they broke b) when it failed the MOT for some reason. MOT test in the annual inspection for safety and emissions. Not needed until a car is three years old then every year. Don't forget it was the European market that started the trend of 6-8-10-12 even 15k mile oil changes as no one ever changed it, so they had to find a way to make the engines live longer.
I think the misconception that cars are better serviced in Europe comes from the fact you’re 100% going to get a ticket for bald tires, blown lights, cracked windshield etc. Structural rust is an absolute no no. I was stunned when I arrived here and saw cars with completely rusted out rockers, years old accident damage with a mini spare on running about 30degrees camber while killing every mosquito in a 1 mile radius. That would never even get away with being parked in most Euro countries, let alone driven down the freeway in rush hour traffic. That doesn't mean people take a vehicle in for service though.
I still stand by my earlier observation, I grew up regarding Land Rovers as slightly more dependable than the sunrise or taxes as you can miss a sun rise in for and occasionally get away with dodging taxes.
I think I am going to do a more serious search on these. After looking at prices and such, I am not too scared by it
I think one of the big differences between Land Rovers in the UK and Land Rovers in the US is the luxury aspect. In the UK, they're work vehicles. You can get the stripped models and even a panel van of sorts. There have been a few comments in this discussion about how they work better if you "leave the luxury out of them". I suspect they did in a number of the UK Rovers, not so much in the US ones. It's a truck, not a car.
I wonder if the driving conditions in the US are harsher as well. We certainly have the heat and the cold, and we've got a lot more bumps. I'm not sure how many places in the UK have you driving uphill for a half hour starting at 5000' in 100F weather with the AC on.
Old Series Rover owners are the cheapest bastards out there. If they have to fix a part that they only just fixed 20 years ago, it's junk. And they'll probably replace it with a used one from a rusted hulk 
I can say that because I is one.
Keith Tanner wrote: I wonder if the driving conditions in the US are harsher as well. We certainly have the heat and the cold, and we've got a lot more bumps. I'm not sure how many places in the UK have you driving uphill for a half hour starting at 5000' in 100F weather with the AC on.
I'm a Brit, I'm a Brit car fan, but I have to point out a fallacy in your logic. British cars don't have AC, I've been in plenty and never experienced AV in any of them.. Some of them have a pretty button that engages something to add drag to the engine, but they have no means of blowing cold dry air at you.
well thats fine. I don't use AC anyway
On the parts cost, they used to seem expensive, but nowadays they aren't any more than a Toyota, Honda, BMW, etc. I think everyone else got more expensive and LR parts stayed about the same.
that could explain it. I am used to BMW and Volvo prices
BoxheadTim wrote: IIRC you want to keep the air suspension - at least on a Range Rover - if you want to tow... The air suspension seems to be generally reliable if looked after. Yes, you have to occasionally change the bags but the main danger to them (again, at least on the Range Rover) appears to be the tire place that jacks the car up on the frame and thus pops out the airbags...
They do seem to be pretty reliable but they are hit-or-miss. I was massively disappointed in the ride of ours. The front is sprung like a stiff SUV and the rear was more like a 1963 Cadillac. When I went through an intersection, the front oscillated at about 10hz and the rear at about 1hz. It was a massive mismatch. The air on my boss's RR however failed at 25k miles.
To me, the Rovers are one of those cars much like 90's Jaguars or 99-03 VWs and Audis. People who buy them are so enchanted with the status, the marketing, or the loyalty that they fail to see that they are absolute junk.
When I see a Rover driving on the highway, I say to myself, "I'm so sorry for that guy's tiny penis," or, "there goes someone who has never heard of research." After 9 years of running repair shops, I get a remarkably frank view of actual vehicle reliability. I have seen people bring me a 300k-mile Camry and they're totally furious that it needs a clutch and a wheel bearing for $400, and I see people bring me a 60k-mile Audi that don't care that it needs a $1600 TCM and $30-per-quart CVT fluid.
I'm all for being a wrencher. I personally desperately want a Spitfire. They aren't the most reliable vehicle, but I like the challenge of maintaining and repairing a specialty vehicle. There is something about repairing a vehicle that adds to my driving enjoyment. I like to drive a vehicle and notice something like, "it feels as if the control arm bushings are failing," then diagnosing, purchasing $60 worth of bushings, installing them, and then feeling the difference my repair has made. I do not enjoy driving vehicles that fail at engineering and design while resting on the haunches of their ritzy name.
It comes down to this (for my own personal taste). If a $60k vehicle loses 60% of its resale value in 5 years, there is a reason.
BoxheadTim wrote: IIRC you want to keep the air suspension - at least on a Range Rover - if you want to tow... The air suspension seems to be generally reliable if looked after. Yes, you have to occasionally change the bags but the main danger to them (again, at least on the Range Rover) appears to be the tire place that jacks the car up on the frame and thus pops out the airbags...
Are you trying to say the factory suspension system is so poorly designed that it can droop enough to lose a airbag, on a 4x4 vehicle? That's ridiculous. If say, Ford, or GM made a SUV that shat coils out if you jacked it up, there would be riots in the streets, recalls and apologies on the news.
I won't go on a bash fest of them, I watched Sonic live with his for a good long time and although I do recall it being down for repair more than once it was always the same issue so at least it was consistent. And once he sorted that issue for good it held up for the time he had it (and no complaints from the current owner that I've heard either)
That being said, in the same price range you can get a similar generation Tahoe or Suburban (or something Ford flavored if you prefer) which will be cheaper to maintain, more reliable, have over the counter parts availability, better driving dynamics and be a more capable tow beast/hauler.
Why bother with the LR then? I mean I'm all about the different and unusual, I think that goes without saying, but if I'm in the market for a tow vehicle the LR won't even be on my radar.
You'll need to log in to post.
