Range Rovers Forum banner

L322 06-09 vs 09-12 Model

5K views 23 replies 12 participants last post by  LuisC 
#1 ·
I'm considering buying a L322 and have some doubt on which model is considered the most reliable.

I know I must avoid the early BMW 4.4 engined ones, and I will be avoiding the supercharged models.

But what is the difference between the 06-09 4.4 Jag engine and later 5.0? I believe they are both direct injected and have variable timing, where is the advantage?

I don't mind getting the timing chain and tensioner done, as I have dealt with similar issues many times before with on Mercedes Benz V8s.

Isn't the transmission the weak point on the 06-09?

Thank you

Sent from my MAR-LX1M using Tapatalk
 
#2 ·
 
#5 ·
I've read some comments on this forum that the 06-09 models have less problematic engines, one thing being that they do not have direct injection?

I believe this is incorrect, all the Jaguar engines had direct injection. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Sent from my MAR-LX1M using Tapatalk
 
#6 ·
Only the 5.0 litre JLR engine had the direct injection. Honestly, for how many of them are out there, there are not a ton of complaints. Lot's of manufactures have direct injection and similar complaints with carbon build up and high fuel pressure related issues.

the 4.4l engine has multi port fuel injection that is more common on current cars.
 
#10 ·
How much power does one need in a Rover?
The 07-09 are adequate. I just recently hauled my P38 behind my 4.2 from Austin to Houston. We estimated the weight of trailer and vehicle to be in the 9k range. Well above recommended 7700 towing capabilities.
Didn’t feel like that big of an issue. Still made it up those hills. Granted I kept it at about 60MPH the whole way and took back roads.
I must disclose though, that mine isn’t stock. Magnaflow exhaust and ECU tuned on dyno. The link I thought would be weak was the transmission. Just don’t floor it with a trailer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#12 ·
Well, my reference was actually between the 4.2 and 5.0.
But mine was a timely opportunity that I snagged. I had actually been shopping for an LR4.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#13 ·
Well, how much power does anything really need? My P38 had enough power to do everything I do now. But I really appreciate having around 2x more. Through different cars I have owned, I find that my butt dyno is happy when the lbs./hp is at least in the 12's. I had an Audi in that range and loved its power. My SC is about 11.5 (5900/510) so I'm very happy. At 400hp, that 14.8 lbs/hp, not very inspiring. At 300hp, that's P38 territory due to the extra weight. Before buying, I researched threads about the SC and I didin't find many problems associated with it. And with very little difference in price as a used car, I decided I wanted the power. No doubt that certain pieces are harder to access. I haven't noticed any heat issues (like with hot vee turbos). Change in gas consumption is minimal. We all make our own excuses but for me, having an actually powerful Range Rover put a smile on my face.
 
#15 ·
It's true the SC adds weight, has rotating parts, snout bearing etc. So it's added hardware, even noise, if you don't need it. Good fun and gobs of torque.

The 4.2 is a little rough. The SC mode is on/off, economy isn't great. Any Audi 4.2 will blow it away.
The 5.0 is in german realm in terms of smoothness and performance.
 
#16 ·
It’s interesting to hear perspectives on this.
If I can have only one vehicle in my garage, it would be a RR SC. To me it’s the medium that does everything well.
I do happen to have a second vehicle. A 98 Discovery with some substantial off-road mods. That’s my play toy.
I got away from driving cars when I realized off-road was more fun. Never looked back.
I raced cars in the 80’s. I remember cars of the 60’s with 400hp off the showroom. 70’s saw emissions and Ralph Nadar destroy horsepower.
I remember we would spend lots of money, time, and effort to get an engine to produce 400hp in the 80’s. Now 400hp is common off the dealer lot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: ventogt
#17 ·
Despite my comments about loving 500+hp, I'll admit I rarely call them into action. But its there if I want it plus to me if fits into the "Range Rover does it all" feel of it. My motorcycle out accelerates it easily and my eGolf out handles and costs about 8x less to drive. But the RR does all of these: luxury/comfort, travel, towing, off road. My favorite trio of transport ever.
 
#18 ·
If you don't care about the timing chain, get the 5.0 HSE. It's really a fantastically smooth and surprisingly fast vehicle especially for how big and heavy it is. If you get on the throttle, it absolutely moves. For reference, I have been a BMW M and Pcar owner as well as the Audi S8 V10.

This vehicle is the most impressive all-around that I have owned, especially for what I use it for which is light off road, around town, and highway duty.
 
#19 ·
I have the 2006 NA and I find it has way more power than my old P38 and a far better turning circle despite being bigger and heavier. Also cruises better. I pull a 17.5 Double Eage boat on a trailer with it and it runs great. I will give the P38 higher marks for axle articulation off-road, slightly more comfortable seats (The L322 seats are still great) and a far better tire selection than the L322 19" rims. I did not go for the SC as I like to run regular gas which here in Vancouver is now running about $1.70 a litre, the mid grade and premium are around $1.85 and $2.00 a litre, that adds up.
 
#21 ·
Great, so it seems the 5.0 n/a is the one to get.

Will post my findings.

Sent from my MAR-LX1M using Tapatalk
Firstly a clarification on your knowledge of the Ford-JLR V8. The 06-09 4.4L NA and 4.2L SC are port injected and there is no VVT. The 5L, both NA and SC are direct injection and VVT.

in my experience, the cam chain guide/tensioner and sprocket wear is product of owner neglect and possibly some poor quality parts supplies. I say this due to my family owning 3 5L LR’s; 13 LR4, 11 L322, 19 L405 LWB AB.We are original owners of each vehicle, all are professionally serviced by JLR schedule, except oil services every 7500 miles always using JLR spec 5122 oil, primarily the Motul version. My son has over 240k miles on his LR4, the L322 has 173k and the L405 has 23k. That’s over 400k miles, never any valvetrain noise. As for high pressure injection, the L322 had a high pressure stainless steel line split at a sharp bend near pump at around 100k. We never owned any 06-09 JLR products, my 2003 L322 disaster; 2 head gaskets, transmission, alternator in under 25k miles, chased me away from brand. In hindsight, every failure was BMW related which was further supported by my 07 M5 experience thus I returned to brand in 11. These vehicles, along with my daughters Evoque and my partners’ I-Pace have been quantum leaps in quality and reliability from my earliest Rover experiences, 94 D90, 96 RR County LWB and 03 L322. I would not hesitate to buy any JLR product in future however I’d only buy new unless I really knew previous owner and how vehicle was actually maintained.

I have driven the 06-09 L322 and L320. As V8’s go, it’s on par with the Ford branded Coyote V8 to which it is akin. Not the smoothest, quietest nor is it impressive in hp/L efficiency. Appears durable. The 5L is the version that finished grad school. Far more refined, quiet and efficient.
 
#22 ·
Not to nitpick, but I believe the 4.4L AJV8 has VVT. Only the 4.2 SC didn't. It had the two stage system where the 5.0 is continuously variable.
Also, I've been curious if the AJV8 and Coyote V8 are very closely related. The AJV8 started life prior to Ford ownership and the Coyote V8 was a variation of Ford's modular V8 that dates back to the early 90's. The bore and stroke are similar but the variable valve system is totally different design. Ford didn't use direct injection until 2018, long after they had sold JLR. Aside from displacement, its hard to find much in common between them.
 
#23 ·
I used to have an 04 L322 with a BMW 4.4 engine. After replacing every rubber part in the engine compartment it ran great. By every rubber part, I mean everything including the heater pipe o-rings, and the valley pan gasket, which I think was the cause of the mysterious loss of coolant. Also with new rubber on all the engine covers = no oil leaks.

Currently I have an 08 L322 4.2 SC. I was skeptical of a super charger at first, but now I think every vehicle should have one. You will love the power. And it's not that complicated, especially compared to a turbo charger. The SC is self contained. It has it's own gear oil, which I'd recommend changing -- you can buy a kit on-line for $50. The fill and drain holes are easily accessible on the front. The by-pass valve is integrated into the SC, and it has an independent drive belt. The inter-coolers do add several hoses, and an electric pump to the cooling system, but a Rover already has a complex cooling system.

The only downside to the SC is replacing the heater hose that runs under it. And it seems to be one of the hoses that fails most often. Mine started leaking 3 months after I bought it (~125K miles). So I had to remove the SC to get to the hose, actually that operation is not that bad. It was the coolant manifold, which gave me a lot of trouble, that you need to remove first because the SC snout is under it. There are 6 or 7 hoses connected to the manifold, but my philosophy is replace all the hoses of the same age if one fails, so I needed to remove the manifold anyway. I used that opportunity to replace the thermostat also, which is inside the manifold. In the end, it took me longer to find all the part numbers than the actual mechanics of replacing them. The A/B kit was incomplete.

And just recently refreshed the brakes (new discs, pads and fluid), and replaced the diff and xfer fluid. Now, it drives like new.

One more thing, remove/discard the engine cover. The SC creates a lot of heat compressing the air. You don't need an insulated engine cover trapping that heat in.
 
#24 ·
Got news for you. Turbos aren’t that complicated. One moving part. The turbine. Easy to rebuild.
Yes, difficult to access on the new Rovers without removing almost the complete front end.
My 98 Disco Tdi, the turbo has easy access. Off in about an hour.
But I still love my Supercharged RR.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top