RangeRovers.net Forum banner

1 - 20 of 31 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I'm considering a 2010 Sport after driving BMW coupes, sedans for many years. I am finally ready to have more space and only want an SUV that has a sporty ride - options are limited with RR Sport, Cayenne (not worth it), X5 (boring).

I'm most concerned with Range Rover's (bad) reputation on reliability and don't want to be spending my weekends at the dealer's service dept. My husband is particularly concerned about spending $60k+ for an unreliable SUV (he would rather me get a Lexus - no way!). Can anyone share their experience with repairs/ issues? I read a thread on the whole software issue, and that sounds like a pain. Not sure if Range Rover has made any reliability-specific improvements to the 2010 model - thoughts? Thanks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
It seems that the early 2010's had some electrical issues. Not sure about the current batch, but I think they are good now. Since the 2011's are coming out in a few months (Sept) I have ordered a 2011 to be delivered when I get home. The bugs should be worked out by then...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
Welcome aboard!

I was in the same situation here a few months ago.

Reliability seems to be hit and miss with all makes and models, especially luxury SUVs.

Also, as with you, the hardest determining factor for me was the reliability or perceived lack there of. Ultimately, I have decided that a thorough inspection, a tight maintenance schedule, and an extended warranty will put most of my concerns at ease.

Not to add more food to your plate, but have you checked out the MB GL 450/550?

In US News rankings, it is ranked #2 amongst Luxury SUVs, of note the RRS is ranked #7. The reliability for that is 6 out of 10 same as the 2010 score as the RRS. The number #1 ranked Cadillac Escalade has a reliability score of 7.

http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/cars-trucks/Mercedes-Benz_GL/

What I've learned thusfar is that out side of JD Powers, the people that voice their disatisfaction for a particular brand seem carry more weight in regards to the perceived perception of reliability of a particular vehicle. To an extent it would seem to hold true that if an overwhelming number of people are not satisfied for a related specific reason or a number of specific reasons then the product is bad. However, you have a few that little or no problems, and to top it off, some good or bad do not state their opinion at all.

The 2011 Porsche Cayenne is stated as having 20% fuel savings across the line and in the hybrid an additional 20% on top of that. While nice, the BMW IMO lacks identity/prestige.

Another important factor is the treatment of the consumer after the sale. The reason that Lexus was successful is because of their service. Last time I visited service for BMW, I was not that impressed. Porsche, same deal. Lexus goes out of its way to make you feel special, their lounges are near living room quality; you feel confident and lucky. In BMW/Porsche that feeling is the total opposite. In the five Land Rover Dealers in three states that I have visited in the last four months. I somewhat enjoyed visiting the dealership (I may be spending a lot of time there). It's not Lexus level, but it seemed better than my memories of BMW and Porsche.

In summary, true reliability remains to be seen; TATA is trying to make the Jaguar/Land Rover (Jaguar is already there) brand number one. Because I believe in what they are trying to do with the brand, I'm willing to give the 2010/11 RRS a try.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
38 Posts
The 2011 BMW X5 50i is far from boring - will arrive in dealerships in several weeks and has been redesigned. It has 400 hp/ twin turbo. 0-60 in 5seconds and handles much better than RRS. Even Faster than the RRS supercharged. I currently have a 2010 RRS and will be trading it in. Spent over 16 days in services already for myriad of issues all of which have been outlined on this board. The RRS is very top heavy around turns with lots of body lien - not very sporty at all. The supercharged version is sportier if you want to spend $75K. Yea the RRS has all this offroad prowess and can drive through rivers, mountains, sands, etc but who cares?! Anyway, all I'm saying is don't dismiss the X5 as a viable alternative. Wait a few weeks and test drive the new 2011 X5.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
66 Posts
Most of the current issues with the 2010 RRS are software related and can be fixed easily with the software update. Latest models and every new vehicle leaving the dealership must have the newest software installed.

LIke you I spent the last 15 years driving BMWs and recently I ordered the RRS SC after testing several SUVs including BMW X6 50i, X5 M, Cayenne GTS, Panamera 4s, and the RR full size Supercharged. I liked the overall driving experience of the RRS SC, but at the end of the day, it is you who is sitting behind the wheel, keep all these comments and opinions in the background but trust your instinct.

Good luck shopping.

Cheers
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
66 Posts
swimmingriver said:
It has 400 hp/ twin turbo. 0-60 in 5seconds and handles much better than RRS.
BMW also claim that the X6 go 0-60- in 5.3 sec. (They claim the same for the 2011 X5), but in real world the X6 go 0-60 in 5.7 and you should expect the X5 to move a bit slower due to its aerodynamics and additional wight.

In my opinion the point is not how fast it goes 0-60, who care about +/- 1 second? if you look for drag-racing car why SUV? The point is, that if you look for these type of vehicles off-roard and winter driving capabilities are more relevant than 0-60 time.

Congrats on your new X5
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
Swede, Here is a Long-term report on an LR2: http://www.carmiddleeast.com/article-7-91-land_rover_lr2_hse/1/

-----------

X5 is capable onroad, but it does not come across a being a capable as a RRS. I understand why, they feel that a majority of people will not take their +60k SUV of the beaten path, and if they do x-drive will be more than adequate. However, most people do not like to buy things that have a ceiling. BMW doesn't give you the option of making the vehicle capable offroad. The X5 is slanted towards making it a fast good handling rasied up station wagon. That is where I feel it misses the mark. The RRS is more balanced, but if ultimate sporty luxury SUV is what you want, then Porsche is what you want or SAV X6 it's pratically the same vehicle as the X5.

Right now, no one is the best: For RRS, it appears that reliability is hit and miss, the vehicle is heavy and it burns too much petrol. If TATA can fix those few; however, large items (moreso the perceived reliability) then it would be one of the best SUVs!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,739 Posts
swimmingriver said:
The RRS is very top heavy around turns with lots of body lien - not very sporty at all. The supercharged version is sportier if you want to spend $75K. Yea the RRS has all this offroad prowess and can drive through rivers, mountains, sands, etc but who cares?!
Don't be bitter, you just went cheap and bought the wrong vehicle for your needs. If you want sporty, you should have gone with a sports car or at least the SC version.

These threads from prospective owners start every few weeks, "I'm worried about the reliability, yada yada." Here's some advice: don't get one. It's really easy - there is no way you can be disappointed with an debatably reliable vehicle if you don't own it in the first place! Go get the Japanese version and live happily ever after.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
38 Posts
Instead of adding any relevant info to this board there are those RRS owners that get all defensive and throw insults toward anyone who doesn't worship TATA motors.
Drevs - You act like I just insulted your mother or asked your wife her favorite sexual position. Relax.. I'm sure you love your RRS very much. Keep in mind were talking about a vehicle and user experiences. Didn't realize paying $65K for my 2010 RRS was going cheap. Where you from that you have it like that... Palm Springs?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30 Posts
swede said:
I'm considering a 2010 Sport after driving BMW coupes, sedans for many years. I am finally ready to have more space and only want an SUV that has a sporty ride - options are limited with RR Sport, Cayenne (not worth it), X5 (boring).

I'm most concerned with Range Rover's (bad) reputation on reliability and don't want to be spending my weekends at the dealer's service dept. My husband is particularly concerned about spending $60k+ for an unreliable SUV (he would rather me get a Lexus - no way!). Can anyone share their experience with repairs/ issues? I read a thread on the whole software issue, and that sounds like a pain. Not sure if Range Rover has made any reliability-specific improvements to the 2010 model - thoughts? Thanks.
Have had my 2010 HSE LUX for two weeks...and almost 900 miles. Highway, around town, and off road up in Joshua Tree park. It performs beautifully. I'm using standard mode and sport mode. Have used a couple of the off road settings. Avg fuel is hitting 16.9 MGP. I've had zero issues. None of the electronics issues that have been seen in earlier builds. Am using Sirius and iPOD - and oddly, my iPhone 3Gs is charging. As is my iPod Nano 5th edition. Go figure. Mine was built in Jan 2010. Dealer and I went over the required s/w updates before I picked it up.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,739 Posts
swimmingriver said:
Instead of adding any relevant info to this board there are those RRS owners that get all defensive and throw insults toward anyone who doesn't worship TATA motors.
It's not so much insulted as it is annoyed. There are some stupid things I HATE about my truck (try locating the horn buttons when you're making a turn and someone pulls out in front of you). I like my truck but am not blindly brand loyal. It, like most automobiles, has it's issues.

However, your comments are just silly!
-You bought a truck whose entire reputation, marketing campaign, engineering, and design are focused on offroadabilty, then complain about it once you're an owner? Huh?
-You bought the slower version of the RRS that doesn't come with all the handling bells&whistles, dynamic response, etc and then complain about how it's slow and doesn't handle well? Test drive an SC; the road manners are significantly different. The RRSC is so enjoyable on the road that my supercharged Z06 barely saw the light of day after the rover moved in. Thankfully the garages in Palm Springs are enormous so I have room for them all. 8)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
Drevs said:
swimmingriver said:
Instead of adding any relevant info to this board there are those RRS owners that get all defensive and throw insults toward anyone who doesn't worship TATA motors.
It's not so much insulted as it is annoyed. There are some stupid things I HATE about my truck (try locating the horn buttons when you're making a turn and someone pulls out in front of you). I like my truck but am not blindly brand loyal. It, like most automobiles, has it's issues.

However, your comments are just silly!
-You bought a truck whose entire reputation, marketing campaign, engineering, and design are focused on offroadabilty, then complain about it once you're an owner? Huh?
-You bought the slower version of the RRS that doesn't come with all the handling bells&whistles, dynamic response, etc and then complain about how it's slow and doesn't handle well? Test drive an SC; the road manners are significantly different. The RRSC is so enjoyable on the road that my supercharged Z06 barely saw the light of day after the rover moved in. Thankfully the garages in Palm Springs are enormous so I have room for them all. 8)
You guys are making me regret not getting the SC... I want my cornering a stoplight to stoplight street cred. `)

----------

Swede, Have you seen this recent road review from CNET on the RRS SC? The video starts in between the 30:30 to 30:40 mark. Funny (at the 38:40 mark) they talk about BMW and Porsche nickel and diming customers for items that are included standard in most luxury vehicles. Shame in BMW in order to get "good" leather (base price X6 x50i 68k) you have to pay extra in addition to daisy-chaining other needless options you don't want. I can imagine the bean counters chomping at the bit. "Yeah, if they want leather ($2400) then we will make it mandatory for them to get the sport package ($4100), which includes the bun warmers." :naughty:

IMO instead of sloping the rear of the X5 and naming it the X6, they should have renamed it the X5 coupe. The X5 and GT are close too (hard to see a big differenc)...I don't get what BMW is doing over there with all of those models and variations of the same models with a gazillion engine choices and eh...it's a mess. However, more power to them for offering a mulititude of choices to the consumer.

http://reviews.cnet.com/car-tech-live-165-fiat-rethinks-chrysler-maserati/9742-1_53-50086685.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
swimmingriver said:
The 2011 BMW X5 50i is far from boring - will arrive in dealerships in several weeks and has been redesigned. It has 400 hp/ twin turbo. 0-60 in 5seconds and handles much better than RRS. Even Faster than the RRS supercharged. I currently have a 2010 RRS and will be trading it in. Spent over 16 days in services already for myriad of issues all of which have been outlined on this board. The RRS is very top heavy around turns with lots of body lien - not very sporty at all. The supercharged version is sportier if you want to spend $75K. Yea the RRS has all this offroad prowess and can drive through rivers, mountains, sands, etc but who cares?! Anyway, all I'm saying is don't dismiss the X5 as a viable alternative. Wait a few weeks and test drive the new 2011 X5.
The BMW X5 50i should be a blast to drive fast and corner well; have fun with that.

Here is an article from Edmunds pitting the RRS SC against the X5M.

http://blogs.insideline.com/straightline/2009/11/il-track-tested-2010-land-rover-range-rover-sport-supercharged-vs-2010-bmw-x5-m.html

The X5M weights 500lbs less than the RRS.
The X5M skidpad numbers are considerably better than the RRS.
I like the rear split gate hatch better than the RRS.
Reliability is subjective for both.
The X5 2010 has up to 7 seat seating capacity (not sure about the 2011?).

The X5 is a good piece of kit, both are, it all comes down to flavor/whatever floats your boat. (I could use a rootbeer float)

Again, have fun with your X5, I have a feeling that you will be very pleased. :thumb:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,739 Posts
AppleChilli said:
You guys are making me regret not getting the SC...
It's pretty good on the tarmac, but (certain) people seem to discount that it still has all the offroad bits weighing down both the performance numbers and the MSRP. It'll never be able to compete on the roadways with the purpose built street SUVs.
 

·
Registered
2018 Velar R-Drynamic HSE P380
Joined
·
101 Posts
BGht my 2010 Blk RRS in jan 2010. I love the way it looks and the power but it has been to the shop 3 times and I have 2000 miles on it.
1. Third mounted stop light not working
2. rear passenger window would close and open right back up
3 software recall which started another issue with sat radio playing weather channel on ignition

I knew buying the RRS would prob entail issues w/ quality and electrical gremlins. However the truck looks awesome and power is great. I guess you have to take the good with the bad. On a 60k plus truck you shouldnt expect it but Land Rover is known for its electrical gremlins. My wife has a 2007 Lexus IS 250 and the dealership does treat you really well with a killer waiting area when you bring it into service with food all day plasmas teas coffee's..etc..my dealership in MA is not open on the weekends which is kind of a pain..oh well..

But I really wanted the truck so im tolerating the quality issues.
 

·
Premium Member
2006-2009 Range Rover Sport
Joined
·
5,175 Posts
swede said:
I'm considering a 2010 Sport after driving BMW coupes, sedans for many years. I am finally ready to have more space and only want an SUV that has a sporty ride - options are limited with RR Sport, Cayenne (not worth it), X5 (boring).

I'm most concerned with Range Rover's (bad) reputation on reliability and don't want to be spending my weekends at the dealer's service dept. My husband is particularly concerned about spending $60k+ for an unreliable SUV (he would rather me get a Lexus - no way!). Can anyone share their experience with repairs/ issues? I read a thread on the whole software issue, and that sounds like a pain. Not sure if Range Rover has made any reliability-specific improvements to the 2010 model - thoughts? Thanks.
Since you have read about the software issues you are versed in what some of the recurring issues w the 2010 are. And with any new car you always take the chance that the one you buy has issues no matter the brand. But, it seems for every person on this board that has issues w their 2010, there's another w/out any. Although a slightly different animal, my '08 has been a very trouble free car, the only time I've had to see the dealer is for scheduled servicing and a few minor problems that have been easily fixed.

IMO there are SUV's out there with equal or better on-road performance than the RRS. Where the RRS really shines is offroad and in less than perfect road conditions (snow, etc.) If plan to do (or try) any offroading, the decision to get an RRS vs. other similarly priced SUV's is very easy. If you don't ever plan to turn the terrain selector knob on the RRS, you are getting lots of extras (body on frame construction, complicated suspension, air compressors, etc) that don't add anything to performance on-road and actually may detract from it.

You should consider that in your decision.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,739 Posts
gooseyloosey said:
If you don't ever plan to turn the terrain selector knob on the RRS, you are getting lots of extras (body on frame construction, complicated suspension, air compressors, etc) that don't add anything to performance on-road and actually may detract from it.
You should consider that in your decision.
Well said... perhaps you could give me a lesson or two in diplomacy! :lol:
 

·
Premium Member
2006-2009 Range Rover Sport
Joined
·
5,175 Posts
Drevs said:
gooseyloosey said:
If you don't ever plan to turn the terrain selector knob on the RRS, you are getting lots of extras (body on frame construction, complicated suspension, air compressors, etc) that don't add anything to performance on-road and actually may detract from it.
You should consider that in your decision.
Well said... perhaps you could give me a lesson or two in diplomacy! :lol:
With only a single shot, bolt action Crossman .22 cal air pistol capable of [email protected] F at my disposal, I have to be diplomatic.

:D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
Every make has a horror story. Here is one that I ran across for the RRS (not a 2010) over on Jalopnik:

http://jalopnik.com/5277286/range-rover-owner-advertises-faults-on-lemon-parked-outside-dealer#comments

The comments after the article are overwhelming negative, but they tend to start off with "I knew or I saw"; however, there are a few that said I have owned.

TATA has a lot of work to do in order to change the perception of the reliability of Land Rover. It remains to be seen if they are taking it to task.

However, they are providing an upgraded RR for 1 percent more in price as last years outgoing model and the RRS at 2.1 percent price increase and a 2.7 percent increase in price LR4; however, decrease in price for the LR4 vs the MY08 LR3. This is a result of customer feedback and common sense in these times. The only other luxury car company that is Infiniti with the QX 56.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEgWWPbxCys

5:39 is where they talk about the RRS.

GL.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
Thanks Everyone! Appreciate the advice. Clearly there are a lot of passionate RR owners on this forum. :) I'm not really considering any other SUV at this point - it's either the RRS or a BMW. I will let you know what i decide . . .
 
1 - 20 of 31 Posts
Top