Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So i'm in the market for a used Range Rover Sport, especially since I'm sure it could also tow my boat (21ft Searay) and I don't want one of those large Ford/Chevy/GMC trucks. But I keep hearing these "they're always at the dealer service shop" comments. Is this just a maker quality issue (like Harleys always having an oil drip) or does this mostly apply to older models?
Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.
You can check out the range of Range Rover problems with a few minutes of on-line searching. These vehicles typifiy problematic vehicles ... decent performers when and if they are running (although poor fuel economy compared to the trucks you could use for your purposes), but you'll pay dearly for those few minutes. Parts failures of poorly designed and manufactured components are standard, and repeat failures of those items are common.
I used to have a shop next door to a window tinting/gold plating shop which had the local dealerships business for dolling up the new vehicles. Over the years, I saw a lot of brand new, never titled/sold vehicles need to be towed back to the dealership because they wouldn't start/run. The guys had many times when window regulators/motors would fail when doing the window tinting, and they'd ask me to fix it so they could do their tinting project. But the dealers wouldn't pay me to fix their new vehicles, they'd pick it up and then bring it back to the tint shop.
I had a number of customers with aspirations of being the show-offs of their neighborhoods with these vehicles. I warned them that the uptime could be a problem compared to the SUV's that they were already driving ... any SUV, foreign or domestic. They used to laugh at me and go ahead and buy the Range Rover products ... and then see only 1 or 2 months of use in 12 due to the under warranty new vehicle broken, waiting for parts, or waiting for a diagnosis/fix from the manufacturer.
Competent, knowledgeable techs are few and far between for these vehicles. You'll pay dearly for parts and labor to keep one on the road. The people who seem to be most satisfied with these vehicles either do all of their own work or simply don't have to rely upon having the use of the vehicle when it breaks down and goes to the dealership.
Bottom line: there are far superior vehicles in the marketplace for your consideration.
RR have been consistently at the bottom of any/all reliability/dependability ratings for decades.
Heck, even TopGearUK make fun of them on this issue. TopGear USA just had a recent (dumb) episode with the RR Sport vs Escalade vs Grand Cherokee SRT where they ragged on RR's reliability (and it stalled mysteriously in the snow in that episode, lol).
Worked on a few rovers in the 90s. They look and ride nice, but the quality is not there. I would buy a land cruiser and be done with it.
yeah, 'cause used vehicles in teh '90s have all sorts of bearing on what cars are like 20+ years later. I see the same crap about all brands: "I worked on them/owned an old one 20 years ago, new ones must suck."
I've had 3 Range rovers, and worked on others. I WANT people to keep spouting nonsense about them like they are unreliable and you shoudl buy something else, that keeps prices down on them so i can own them cheaply.
My lat one, a 2001 HSE cost me all of $250 to maintain over a 3 year period. Then, because it was cresting 100k miles, I replaced all 4 air ride bags and o rings (with OEM parts) for $400 so that the next owner wouldn't have to think about it for another 100k miles.
My next SUV purchase will be a RR Sport supercharged.
Yeah, it's funny how I've seen both "too high maintanence" vs. "not a problem with mine" type positions. Can argue against the 10mpg though. That's boozin on gas for sure, almost cab fare rates.
Range Rover goes back and forth on reliability. The older ones are so simple, there's nothing to go wrong. In the late 80's / early 90's, they started piling on the electronics. The Brits aren't known for their electronics (just check out the Lucas Electronics used years-past). Around the turn of the 2000's, they started to get good again. A few years later, and they started to go back down. I've got a friend with a 2010 RR Sport. It's a great truck when it's running, but goes to the shop once or twice a month. It's usually something small / insignificant, that won't stop the truck from moving, but is really expensive to replace.
Fargobound has the right idea -- find a 90's / early 2000's Toyota Land Cruiser. You want either an 80-series (1989-1997) or a 100-series (1998-2007). If you want a bit nicer interior, find a Lexus LX. It's the same truck, but done up by Lexus. The 1st gen is the same as the 80-series, and the 2nd gen is the same as the 100-series. In my opinion, probably some of the best trucks ever built. Bullet-proof Toyota reliability, comfortable ride. They can even be kitted out for some serious cross-country travel.
yeah, 'cause used vehicles in teh '90s have all sorts of bearing on what cars are like 20+ years later. I see the same crap about all brands: "I worked on them/owned an old one 20 years ago, new ones must suck."
I've had 3 Range rovers, and worked on others. I WANT people to keep spouting nonsense about them like they are unreliable and you shoudl buy something else, that keeps prices down on them so i can own them cheaply.
My lat one, a 2001 HSE cost me all of $250 to maintain over a 3 year period. Then, because it was cresting 100k miles, I replaced all 4 air ride bags and o rings (with OEM parts) for $400 so that the next owner wouldn't have to think about it for another 100k miles.
My next SUV purchase will be a RR Sport supercharged.
Well, Merc, you're not the average car owner ... you have the mechanical knowledge/experience, time, energy, and space to work on your vehicles.
I'm going to quote a comment from a Range Rover (enthusiast) forum poster: "If you need to ask about reliability before purchasing, then the RR is not the vehicle for you."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
