RangeRovers.net Forum banner

1 - 20 of 39 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
18 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
After owning a dozen Classics and P38's I am now looking at 3rd Gen Rovers and wondering which version was more reliable, the 2003,2004,2005 with the BMW drive train or the later Jaguar versions? I worked for BMW as technician for many years up to 1990 so I have respect for their engineering but I also like the idea of having a supercharged 400 HP Rover but Jaguars reputation for durability is questionable. Any thoughts would be helpful.

Thanks
 

·
Registered
2010-2012 Range Rover MkIII / L322
Joined
·
323 Posts
I had an NA 4.4L Jag engine in my LR3 for 200K miles and it never let me down.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,462 Posts
The BMW is a great engine when it works. Having owned both for several hundred thousand miles over multiple cars the jag is the way to go. Way more reliable, smoother power and easier to work on... Yes the supercharged is nice also.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,758 Posts
Glad to hear that just as our new to us 4.2 has a 2 second noise on startup ( when temps below 30F) which may be chains? or sc coupling? and then a noise on running which seems louder on drivers side which first sounds like injectors but then maybe valve train noise. My life has also strongly recommended a compression check for #7 and 8 running hot and possibly blowing the head gasket. I really hope that is not the case as it also seems that if it has run low on oil (which could mean the engines use oil) then a real problem.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,462 Posts
Glad to hear that just as our new to us 4.2 has a 2 second noise on startup ( when temps below 30F) which may be chains? or sc coupling? and then a noise on running which seems louder on drivers side which first sounds like injectors but then maybe valve train noise. My life has also strongly recommended a compression check for #7 and 8 running hot and possibly blowing the head gasket. I really hope that is not the case as it also seems that if it has run low on oil (which could mean the engines use oil) then a real problem.
The engine def uses oil over time, pretty normal on a supercharged car...
 

·
Registered
2002-2005 Range Rover MkIII / L322
Joined
·
169 Posts
I like the BMW engines more, but I may be biased since I work on BMW's for a living. The M62tu is a fantastic engine that has been known to go well past 250k miles when taken care of. Its only real issues are oil leaks and the timing chain guides which like to go out around 160k - 180k miles. It's not terribly expensive to repair that though, as parts are readily available and pretty affordable (you can get the whole chain guide system refreshed for like $700 in parts). Once that's handled, the engine doesn't really have any other major faults. Funnily enough, a lot of the Jag engines have timing chain issues too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
338 Posts
I agree with danny , m62 engine is fantastic i have had minimal issues with mine and im pushing 240k miles , still powerful and still roars.. but i do take good care of it.
I like the BMW engines more, but I may be biased since I work on BMW's for a living. The M62tu is a fantastic engine that has been known to go well past 250k miles when taken care of. Its only real issues are oil leaks and the timing chain guides which like to go out around 160k - 180k miles. It's not terribly expensive to repair that though, as parts are readily available and pretty affordable (you can get the whole chain guide system refreshed for like $700 in parts). Once that's handled, the engine doesn't really have any other major faults. Funnily enough, a lot of the Jag engines have timing chain issues too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,462 Posts
I like the BMW engines more, but I may be biased since I work on BMW's for a living. The M62tu is a fantastic engine that has been known to go well past 250k miles when taken care of. Its only real issues are oil leaks and the timing chain guides which like to go out around 160k - 180k miles. It's not terribly expensive to repair that though, as parts are readily available and pretty affordable (you can get the whole chain guide system refreshed for like $700 in parts). Once that's handled, the engine doesn't really have any other major faults. Funnily enough, a lot of the Jag engines have timing chain issues too.
Yeah you're bias, it isn't nearly as good. While it's a great engine, it doesn't serve the land rover nearly as well as the jag does. I've owned both for years on end, the BMW rig was a constant problem. When it ran perfectly it was good, but still falls short of the jag in terms of performance.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,423 Posts
I can't speak for the Jag engine in the LR, but the one (5.0L) in my wife's XJ has been worry-free and great. Not a single problem with only 125,000 miles so far.
A few (and too few) forum members will swear by the brief BMW foray into LR custodianship.

But in my experience, the 4.4L in my RR is the neediest engine I've ever had.
Between periodic oil leaks (more often than any other vehicle I've ever had), complicated PCV system that fails periodically, timing chain finickularities, heated thermostat failures, cooling system ruptures and transmission tantrums... just to name a few... I have considered ditching my 2003 (with almost 190k miles) giving a 2013+ MY a try.
Then there are the myriad problems all over that generation beyond the engine.
I know that things fail after 15 years & 189k miles, and if they were proportionately after or towards the tail of those years/mileage, I'd be more understanding. But it's way more needy than any of my other vehicles, a couple with more years and equal miles.

So it may be a great engine with proper care, if proper care includes relatively major maintenance each year of hundreds of DIY $$, or thousands of service shop $$.

"it is what it is". I hate that saying, but it feels like it fits the 2003 - 2005 RR.:doh:
Of course mine may be the exception rather than the rule. But if that's the case, there are a whole lot more 2003 - 2005 RRs on the road than I'm seeing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,423 Posts
I didn't notice that your question was your first & only post in the forum...

"WELCOME TO 'THE FORUM'":clap::dance::clap:

And to really get a better idea of the differences that you're asking about, take some time to browse the digital tomes of knowledge that this forum's collected since the beginning, and you'll get the best answer with more than a few opinions.
 

·
Registered
2002-2005 Range Rover MkIII / L322
Joined
·
169 Posts
Another reason for preferring the BMW-engined Range Rovers is the value. You get so much vehicle for the money!

I got my 2003 Range Rover for $800 with 102k miles. Granted, it needed some work and is pretty trashed cosmetically, but even if I put $2k worth of parts into it, it’s still cheaper than just about any of the Jaguar-engined Rovers. As somebody that enjoys a bargain, that can’t be beat.

For me, the Jag-engined Rovers didn’t really add much that I would consider to be super necessary in day to day use.

Lastly, my reason for loving the BMW-engine Rovers is that I don’t need to buy any different tools to work on them— pretty much all of the BMW-specific tools at my shop work for them, so it fits into my lifestyle nicely.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,462 Posts
Another reason for preferring the BMW-engined Range Rovers is the value. You get so much vehicle for the money!

I got my 2003 Range Rover for $800 with 102k miles. Granted, it needed some work and is pretty trashed cosmetically, but even if I put $2k worth of parts into it, it’s still cheaper than just about any of the Jaguar-engined Rovers. As somebody that enjoys a bargain, that can’t be beat.

For me, the Jag-engined Rovers didn’t really add much that I would consider to be super necessary in day to day use.

Lastly, my reason for loving the BMW-engine Rovers is that I don’t need to buy any different tools to work on them— pretty much all of the BMW-specific tools at my shop work for them, so it fits into my lifestyle nicely.
And for the people who aren't bmw mechanics...

It isn't just the engine either, the trans is MUCH more reliable... The interior is slightly upgraded, the electronics etc. Lux SC get heated/cooled seats. The air suspension is more reliable, the headlights actually work as they should without blowing up ballasts, the memory seats don't occasionally try to crush you, the message center doesn't decompose, the cooling system actually lasts more than a year + the alternator doesn't have coolant pumping through it. Obviously the SC engine is a nice bump in power. The engine isn't a dripping mess, the bushings and suspension components are a bit more robust. Yes buying a BMW powered range is a lower cost of entry, but the cost of ownership is much more substantial.

You may prefer one over another for your own reasons which is cool, but jag vs bmw... factually the jag is a much better vehicle. Lots of things got ironed out by ford. I wouldn't touch a 5.0L with a 10 foot pole though with all those timing chain issues. That doesn't seem to be an issue on the 4.2/4.4
 

·
Registered
2002-2005 Range Rover MkIII / L322
Joined
·
169 Posts
And for the people who aren't bmw mechanics...

It isn't just the engine either, the trans is MUCH more reliable... The interior is slightly upgraded, the electronics etc. Lux SC get heated/cooled seats. The air suspension is more reliable, the headlights actually work as they should without blowing up ballasts, the memory seats don't occasionally try to crush you, the message center doesn't decompose, the cooling system actually lasts more than a year + the alternator doesn't have coolant pumping through it. Obviously the SC engine is a nice bump in power. The engine isn't a dripping mess, the bushings and suspension components are a bit more robust. Yes buying a BMW powered range is a lower cost of entry, but the cost of ownership is much more substantial.

You may prefer one over another for your own reasons which is cool, but jag vs bmw... factually the jag is a much better vehicle. Lots of things got ironed out by ford. I wouldn't touch a 5.0L with a 10 foot pole though with all those timing chain issues. That doesn't seem to be an issue on the 4.2/4.4
The Jag Rovers used the 6HP automatic... dunno if the Range Rover version is significantly different from the ones that BMW used in their cars (they also used the 6HP in the same era), but I see plenty of BMW's at the shop that have issues with their 6HP transmissions, particularly with the mechatronic (valve body), internal seals, and solenoids. It's not a 100% trouble-free transmission. I have multiple BMW's with the 5HP transmission and have owned 2 Range Rovers with it, and no real trouble there as long as I serviced them with fresh fluid and new filters. Maybe I've just been lucky, I dunno. Just giving my perspective.

You have valid points regarding the air suspension, cooling system, alternator, and cluster pixels, I'm not gonna argue that.

However, your point about the bushings is not entirely accurate— I just checked the part numbers for the control arms and bushings in the front suspension and it appears that they are all identical from 2003 to 2012.

Not arguing, just debating because I'm bored.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,462 Posts
The Jag Rovers used the 6HP automatic... dunno if the Range Rover version is significantly different from the ones that BMW used in their cars (they also used the 6HP in the same era), but I see plenty of BMW's at the shop that have issues with their 6HP transmissions, particularly with the mechatronic (valve body), internal seals, and solenoids. It's not a 100% trouble-free transmission. I have multiple BMW's with the 5HP transmission and have owned 2 Range Rovers with it, and no real trouble there as long as I serviced them with fresh fluid and new filters. Maybe I've just been lucky, I dunno. Just giving my perspective.

You have valid points regarding the air suspension, cooling system, alternator, and cluster pixels, I'm not gonna argue that.

However, your point about the bushings is not entirely accurate— I just checked the part numbers for the control arms and bushings in the front suspension and it appears that they are all identical from 2003 to 2012.

Not arguing, just debating because I'm bored.
I could have sworn some of the rear bushes were different material/quality OE... that could be my mistake, good catch if so :) I want to say the rear upper. The BMW rig likes to eat up torque converters for whatever reason, or the TQ itself is just terrible. The welds end up developing pin holes. Common issue to take a 2002-6 up a hill and hear that dreaded drone :( Obviously neither are perfect... I've always had way more issue with the BMW rigs, and I used to advocate for them.
 

·
JACK'S GRANDAD
Joined
·
9,242 Posts
We had a '03 for @6years.Paid $12k for it, sold it for $5k as a quick sale. Not a bad loss in my view.
Now have a '11 SC. Paid $7500 for it, threw @$2500 into it, and it's now fantastic.
I think a lot of the difference is time. Obviously the '11 is more "reliable" as it isn't as old!
The interior is night and day though, with the clear advantage going to the later models. No peeling coatings etc. I compare the wife's '11 to my own P38 in terms of quality of build. The '03 felt like a China knock off compared to my P38.
Working on them is about the same in my experience. They are both a lot of motor in a smallish space. Not near the weak spots on the '11 as the '03 though.
If you can financially spring a '08 or later, go for it. Otherwise the earlier ones will provide luxury motoring for bargain prices. Best thing to get is the diagnostics for whatever you buy.
With some help from the great guys here, I did the timing and VANOS on the '03. Not a massive job, just time consuming

Martin
 

·
Registered
2002-2005 Range Rover MkIII / L322
Joined
·
515 Posts
I've just hit 200K on the 2005 with the M62. Did the Chains and Rails, VANOS, Water Pump, and Alt, PCV, and all Heater hoses at around 190K. The engine has been bullet-proof so far. Regarding the other parts of the truck, Front Air Springs at 180, Xfer Case Shift motor, and just this weekend the SAS. Truck has been super reliable.

I am sure the newer ones are much nicer, and agree with the Chinese Interior, but it's still a nice truck.

tim
 
1 - 20 of 39 Posts
Top