RangeRovers.net Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 35 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I am new to this forum, I am a Cadillac enthusiast, considering getting rid of my 2ng Gen Escalade and picking up a used Range Rover. Are there any known issues I should be aware of, any years that I should avoid or prefer? Any advice you just wish to share? Thanks in advance!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
121 Posts
BStiff said:
I am new to this forum, I am a Cadillac enthusiast, considering getting rid of my 2ng Gen Escalade and picking up a used Range Rover. Are there any known issues I should be aware of, any years that I should avoid or prefer? Any advice you just wish to share? Thanks in advance!
Good idea mate! Welcome to the forum.
I personally would look at 2006 and up. Reasons: better engine, transmission and several interior upgrades (bluetooth, sound deadening, asthetic upgrades, etc) Nice to see you getting rid of the Escalade. Not a horrible truck but just not a big fan of the fake wood, GM plastics and rippled metal on the doors (cottage cheese legs).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
141 Posts
07CARRERA said:
BStiff said:
I am new to this forum, I am a Cadillac enthusiast, considering getting rid of my 2ng Gen Escalade and picking up a used Range Rover. Are there any known issues I should be aware of, any years that I should avoid or prefer? Any advice you just wish to share? Thanks in advance!
Good idea mate! Welcome to the forum.
I personally would look at 2006 and up. Reasons: better engine, transmission and several interior upgrades (bluetooth, sound deadening, asthetic upgrades, etc) Nice to see you getting rid of the Escalade. Not a horrible truck but just not a big fan of the fake wood, GM plastics and rippled metal on the doors (cottage cheese legs).
Can only agree with 07CARRERA.
Welcome to the forum and good luck with your upcoming purchase.. :thumb:
 

·
Registered
2010-2012 Range Rover MkIII / L322
Joined
·
144 Posts
Option 3

Find a nice 2004 westminster edition for $20K that has lower miles - 60K. Update the infotainment system, nav and add ipod, reverse cam, dvd video - $1500. Get a thorough indy to go through the cooling system - replace any issues or leaks coming up 300 - 800. Look at the front air springs replace with arnotts if they are rotting out $750. Buy a brand new battery - $100.

All in 23K and more than likely if the thing was maintained well you will have just as good of a ride as a 2007 for half the price. In my mind a high mileage 2007 is not that appealing.

JH
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
jhepworth said:
Option 3

Find a nice 2004 westminster edition for $20K that has lower miles - 60K. Update the infotainment system, nav and add ipod, reverse cam, dvd video - $1500. Get a thorough indy to go through the cooling system - replace any issues or leaks coming up 300 - 800. Look at the front air springs replace with arnotts if they are rotting out $750. Buy a brand new battery - $100.

All in 23K and more than likely if the thing was maintained well you will have just as good of a ride as a 2007 for half the price. In my mind a high mileage 2007 is not that appealing.

JH
I was looking at a 2006 Supercharged. I have been thinking of changing jobs so I am hesitant to pull the trigger...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
405 Posts
Get an 07 or newer. I had an 08 and now an 09 with 0 problems. I wish I could say the same for my brand new 2010 Toyota Tundra. Other than the squirters not working, the tires out of balance and needing an alignment, it has been as reliable as my last 4 Rovers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
952 Posts
They're nice vehicles, just keep in mind they are fairly inexpensive to buy used but expensive to maintain and repair. Plan accordingly. If you are expecting mass produced econobox reliability look elsewhere.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,475 Posts
07CARRERA said:
BStiff said:
I am new to this forum, I am a Cadillac enthusiast, considering getting rid of my 2ng Gen Escalade and picking up a used Range Rover. Are there any known issues I should be aware of, any years that I should avoid or prefer? Any advice you just wish to share? Thanks in advance!
Good idea mate! Welcome to the forum.
I personally would look at 2006 and up. Reasons: better engine, transmission and several interior upgrades (bluetooth, sound deadening, asthetic upgrades, etc) Nice to see you getting rid of the Escalade. Not a horrible truck but just not a big fan of the fake wood, GM plastics and rippled metal on the doors (cottage cheese legs).
I don't think the jag engine is better than the BMW engine. The BMW 4.4 is known for being bullet proof.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
121 Posts
brad s1 said:
07CARRERA said:
BStiff said:
I am new to this forum, I am a Cadillac enthusiast, considering getting rid of my 2ng Gen Escalade and picking up a used Range Rover. Are there any known issues I should be aware of, any years that I should avoid or prefer? Any advice you just wish to share? Thanks in advance!
Good idea mate! Welcome to the forum.
I personally would look at 2006 and up. Reasons: better engine, transmission and several interior upgrades (bluetooth, sound deadening, asthetic upgrades, etc) Nice to see you getting rid of the Escalade. Not a horrible truck but just not a big fan of the fake wood, GM plastics and rippled metal on the doors (cottage cheese legs).
I don't think the jag engine is better than the BMW engine. The BMW 4.4 is known for being bullet proof.
smoother, quiter, more fuel efficient, reliable and more powerful. What's your opinion of better? :think:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,475 Posts
What fuel efficiency? They're basically the same, it would come down to the driver... Smoother? Quieter? My other car has a blown 4.6L engine, it's neither quiet or smooth, but superior to any engine that's ever been in a land rover. That's a matter of taste though, the decibel level and, "smoothness," don't dictate what engine is, "better," IMO.

My opinion of, "better," is stout internal components that don't fail. The BMW 4.4 engine is the tried and true engine in the BMW community, whereas the jag engine, not such a great track record. One of my buds just recently got a new engine under warranty based on a jag engine failure (busted exhaust valve), there were a couple threads going here about internal jag engine failures to boot. Not too many BMW 4.4 fail based on what I've seen aside from maybe head gaskets. Look at how many 4.4L 5 series BMW's are still putting around with 200,000+ on the clock vs jag engines needing rebuilds inside the warranty period.

The BMW 4.4 is the platform for their race cars, and their M cars, these engines are built to last... The jag engine, well, no.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,806 Posts
To be fair there have been more than a few documented BMW engines which failed due to PCV related issues (more specifically the manifold valve). But of course there is fairly easy DIY maintenance which can prevent that from happening.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,475 Posts
linuxfreakus said:
To be fair there have been more than a few documented BMW engines which failed due to PCV related issues (more specifically the manifold valve). But of course there is fairly easy DIY maintenance which can prevent that from happening.
Very true, I will say the range rover you get with the jag engine is nicer than the range rover you get with the BMW engine. When it came down to it, I jumped on the BMW 4.4 because I know those engines have a reputation for lasting forever. `)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
121 Posts
brad s1 said:
What fuel efficiency? They're basically the same, it would come down to the driver... Smoother? Quieter? My other car has a blown 4.6L engine, it's neither quiet or smooth, but superior to any engine that's ever been in a land rover. That's a matter of taste though, the decibel level and, "smoothness," don't dictate what engine is, "better," IMO.

My opinion of, "better," is stout internal components that don't fail. The BMW 4.4 engine is the tried and true engine in the BMW community, whereas the jag engine, not such a great track record. One of my buds just recently got a new engine under warranty based on a jag engine failure (busted exhaust valve), there were a couple threads going here about internal jag engine failures to boot. Not too many BMW 4.4 fail based on what I've seen aside from maybe head gaskets. Look at how many 4.4L 5 series BMW's are still putting around with 200,000+ on the clock vs jag engines needing rebuilds inside the warranty period.

The BMW 4.4 is the platform for their race cars, and their M cars, these engines are built to last... The jag engine, well, no.
Jeepers, do you work for BMW or something? The Jag motor has better gas mileage, quieter, smoother and more power. Blown 4.6L? What Land Rover has a blown 4.6L? So your friend had a bad engine and so have others. Ok. Look at how many BMW motors in Rovers have had issues.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,475 Posts
07CARRERA said:
brad s1 said:
What fuel efficiency? They're basically the same, it would come down to the driver... Smoother? Quieter? My other car has a blown 4.6L engine, it's neither quiet or smooth, but superior to any engine that's ever been in a land rover. That's a matter of taste though, the decibel level and, "smoothness," don't dictate what engine is, "better," IMO.

My opinion of, "better," is stout internal components that don't fail. The BMW 4.4 engine is the tried and true engine in the BMW community, whereas the jag engine, not such a great track record. One of my buds just recently got a new engine under warranty based on a jag engine failure (busted exhaust valve), there were a couple threads going here about internal jag engine failures to boot. Not too many BMW 4.4 fail based on what I've seen aside from maybe head gaskets. Look at how many 4.4L 5 series BMW's are still putting around with 200,000+ on the clock vs jag engines needing rebuilds inside the warranty period.

The BMW 4.4 is the platform for their race cars, and their M cars, these engines are built to last... The jag engine, well, no.
Jeepers, do you work for BMW or something? The Jag motor has better gas mileage, quieter, smoother and more power. Blown 4.6L? What Land Rover has a blown 4.6L? So your friend had a bad engine and so have others. Ok. Look at how many BMW motors in Rovers have had issues.
I was just stating I have an engine in another car that isn't smooth or quiet, yet is vastly superior to anything in a rover... As to say smoothness and volume have little to do with what makes an engine, "better," than another. Maybe you put a lot of stock into an engine tuned to be smooth revving and quiet, matter of taste I suppose. BMW engines rarely have issues that require dismantling the engine. The 4.4 is a proven power plant, check the BMW boards, 300,000, 400,000, those guys don't consider the engine broken in until it's got 200k on it. Jag engines don't have that reputation.

No I don't work for BMW, I just did my research and weighed the options, and opted for the bmw engine.

Just my opinion `)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,806 Posts
I think the 4.6 is probably his mustang? I know he has talked about a mustang before. Gas mileage is slightly better for the Jag engine, but both are big engines which use a lot of fuel. Fuel economy is close enough and there are enough other variables in the fuel efficiency equation that many people with the BMW engine get better mileage than many people with the Jag engine and vice versa. Comparing the stock engines, the jag does have more power and makes less noise though. As long as it works though, I don't care about the noise. I felt like the BMW had a long a proven track record, so that is why I opted for one myself. I don't think the Jag is a bad engine though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
121 Posts
got it ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,475 Posts
linuxfreakus said:
I think the 4.6 is probably his mustang? I know he has talked about a mustang before. Gas mileage is slightly better for the Jag engine, but both are big engines which use a lot of fuel. Fuel economy is close enough and there are enough other variables in the fuel efficiency equation that many people with the BMW engine get better mileage than many people with the Jag engine and vice versa. Comparing the stock engines, the jag does have more power and makes less noise though. As long as it works though, I don't care about the noise. I felt like the BMW had a long a proven track record, so that is why I opted for one myself. I don't think the Jag is a bad engine though.
Yeah my mustang, you have a good memory. `) Forged bottom end, cast iron block, its somewhat crude but painfully overbuilt and reliable. Is it the best engine out there? Absolutely not, but it's stout. We're in complete agreement as far as bmw vs jag. When I was looking it was either my BMW 4.4 or for a few more k the jag with a slightly better interior + exterior update. After endless hours of research and talking to a few mechanic friends, I went with the BMW... If money were no object I'd settle for a brand new supercharger jag though `)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
405 Posts
Buying an earlier Rover based on it having a BMW engine is a mistake IMO. My 04 purchased new burned oil and made funny noises. I have had no issues with the Jag engines but overall they are very similar. It's all the other stuff that was done, not the engine from 06 forward that make the newer Rovers much more reliable and better all around IMO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,806 Posts
Well, I've had zero problems with mine. I also know a guy who has a 1999 BMW 540i with the 4.4 V8 and he is over 250k miles right now. I'm sure there are good and bad experiences with both engines. I just know of so many people who have had good luck with the BMW engine, and I really haven't heard as much about the Jag. The newer rovers most certainly have more and better features, I agree with you there. For me it just wasn't worth extra $$$ when I felt like the 2004 would be fine.

I have done a fair amount of maintenance though, even though it was running fine.... spark plugs, fuel filter, pcv hoses, rear manifold valve, coolant hoses/fluid change, oil/filter, transmission oil/filter, air filter. The only things that have "failed" so far are the battery and the final stage resistor. Perhaps without the maintenance I may have had problems? No way to know really.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,475 Posts
texige said:
Buying an earlier Rover based on it having a BMW engine is a mistake IMO. My 04 purchased new burned oil and made funny noises. I have had no issues with the Jag engines but overall they are very similar. It's all the other stuff that was done, not the engine from 06 forward that make the newer Rovers much more reliable and better all around IMO.
If you could give us some supporting evidence other than, "it's a mistake mine leaked oil," that would be appreciated. :lol:

Fact of the matter is aside from a few small things the 03 is basically the same as the 06... The big difference is the older one has a better engine. So why is going with the proven power plant a mistake again? :think:
 
1 - 20 of 35 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top