Buying a New Rangie Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

DiscoWeb Bulletin Board » Message Archives » 2003 Archives - Range Rover- Technical » Archive through March 19, 2003 » Buying a New Rangie « Previous Next »

Author Message
 

Thomas Dahbura (U352)
Member
Username: U352

Post Number: 79
Registered: 10-2002
Posted on Tuesday, February 18, 2003 - 12:46 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

I am looking to buy a new car and couldn't help but notice that the Range Rovers take a huge hit when depreciating. It looks like a 2-3 year old rover is a bargain but it sounds too good to be true. Are they troublesome from a mechanical POV? What is the deal?
 

Bob (Yomtov)
New Member
Username: Yomtov

Post Number: 27
Registered: 01-2003
Posted on Tuesday, February 18, 2003 - 04:52 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

What you gain in cheap to buy price you pay when comes time to fix. Good luck I have been looking too.
 

Jaime (Blueboy)
Senior Member
Username: Blueboy

Post Number: 525
Registered: 02-2002
Posted on Tuesday, February 18, 2003 - 05:24 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

say more like a Land Rover. late model RRs are complicated beasts with many electrical gizzmos that at times do not work. they're made to perform double duty - great off-road capability with luxury trappings. tough act.

so, parts are expensive like most highend foreign vehicles and labor is expensive because of the complexity although many people on this board perform their own maintenance.

also remember the MKII RR was short lived (95-03) and the new MKIII RR is now on the market.

personally like the Classic look RR vs the MKII yet the MKIII would be my choice over the MKII.

good luck.


Jaime
 

Kevin C. Burnett (94rover)
New Member
Username: 94rover

Post Number: 2
Registered: 02-2003
Posted on Tuesday, February 18, 2003 - 06:31 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

I think the second generation RR is the P38A- The current is the MKIII-
 

Jaime (Blueboy)
Senior Member
Username: Blueboy

Post Number: 526
Registered: 02-2002
Posted on Wednesday, February 19, 2003 - 08:59 am:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

yeah the P38A was the code name for the 2nd generation RR. Something to do with the building number where it developed or shit like that.


Jaime
 

Mark & Bev Preston (Markp)
Member
Username: Markp

Post Number: 138
Registered: 02-2002
Posted on Thursday, February 20, 2003 - 12:25 am:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

I think the depreciation is based on several factors. Land Rover does not have the strong, many locations, dealer network that the major vehicles have. A strong dealer network will help slow down depreciation. The result of this sparce dealer network is lower brand name awareness and lower demand. In areas that have many dealers the prices are higher.

As an example I bought a 95' Classic in Austin, Tx. Drove it back to Colorado Springs and once outside Austin I saw one other Land Rover on the 900 mile trip back. Drove to St. Louis during Christmas and once outside Colorado I saw maybe two Land Rovers in 2000 miles. In Colorado you will see a Land Rover every 5 miles or less.

I'll also add that the problems the British car industry had during the 1970's didn't help. Japanese cars used to be junk but they evolved fast. The British industry only began to recover from socialism during the 1980's. People remember.

That said, the quality difference between cars these days is small. Competition is fierce and most vehicles today are very sophisticated. They all cost an arm-and-a-leg to fix.
 

Karl C. (Eurocarnut)
New Member
Username: Eurocarnut

Post Number: 1
Registered: 02-2003
Posted on Friday, February 21, 2003 - 10:15 am:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

I too am looking at MkII Range Rovers. I was wondering if there is a specific year that is more reliable than others (such as there are many recommendations for 98-99 DI Discoverys). I have checked Rangerovers.net, but all they list are the general problems with these vehicles and the different equipment for each model year.

I think it's been said that the 4.6 is definitely a better engine than the 4.0. The question then is "Which year and why?"

Thanks

Karl
 

Nick Hall (Ngh)
New Member
Username: Ngh

Post Number: 1
Registered: 01-2003
Posted on Friday, February 21, 2003 - 04:39 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

Howdy,

From what I have read the engines with the Bosch engine management system are apparently much better. I believe that is the year '99.5 and later models. There was a discussion on this topic on the Rovers North BBS a few weeks ago.

Nick
 

J E Robison Service Co (Robisonservice)
Senior Member
Username: Robisonservice

Post Number: 27
Registered: 10-2002
Posted on Sunday, February 23, 2003 - 09:09 am:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

Late 1999 and new Rovers with Bosch electronics are good, and they are excellent value. I strong suggest you get one from someone (Robison Service, a LR dealer) who can provide the Ford-backed certified warranty extension to 100k miles.

We are delivering buyers low mileage 2000 trucks with warranty to 100k in the low 30s, which is roughly half what they cost new.

There are so many gadgets on these trucks that you can have $10,000 in repairs over a 3-4 year period. With warranty, you won't care. Without it, it will suck. So it's vital. I know you can buy extended warranty over the Internet on a used truck you find in some guy's yard but you have to be careful as some of those warranties won't be accepted by the service centers, and many of them won't fully cover your claims.

There is a small article on our web site on warranties titles "EasyCare" You can go to "Service Department" and click it from there.

John
www.robisonservice.com

Topics | Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Search | User List | Help/Instructions | Program Credits Administration