New RRC Buyer Needs Assistance Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

DiscoWeb Bulletin Board » Message Archives » 2003 Archives - Range Rover- Technical » Archive through June 23, 2003 » New RRC Buyer Needs Assistance « Previous Next »

Author Message
 

Bret Young (Bret)
New Member
Username: Bret

Post Number: 4
Registered: 06-2003
Posted on Sunday, June 15, 2003 - 12:14 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

Hello,

I'm looking at buying a RR classic and would like some feedback as to the years that one should avoid, or that might have more problems than the others and cost of repairs and parts being hard to come by do to the problem or year.

I have been told that the 94-95 are the ones to get, but have seen some real good prices on a couple of 91-92. advise or personal experience in any year RR classic is welcomed.

Thanks for your time,
 

Rob Davison (Nosivad_bor)
Senior Member
Username: Nosivad_bor

Post Number: 507
Registered: 02-2003
Posted on Sunday, June 15, 2003 - 01:12 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

what are you planning on useing hte truck for? offroading , towing, family car... each year seems to have it's place. they all shard the same basic transmission, t-case and engine.

rd
 

Bret Young (Bret)
New Member
Username: Bret

Post Number: 5
Registered: 06-2003
Posted on Monday, June 16, 2003 - 09:56 am:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

My plans are mainly for the vehicle to be a family car with light off roading on some weekends for camping trips.

I dont plan ondoing any mods to it, just keep is stock or close to it.

Thx,
 

Madison Smartt (Madison)
New Member
Username: Madison

Post Number: 4
Registered: 06-2003
Posted on Monday, June 16, 2003 - 10:29 am:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

My 2cents - I have the short wheel-base model and back seat space is at a premium. If your plans involve toting the family around, I think the long wheel-base models are the way to go. Then, you're pretty much talking '93 on up. Also, it is hard to fold the rear seats down completely in the swb model. I can't do it on the drivers side (I'm tall with the seat all the way back) and the passenger side requires the seat to be slid all the way forward. Hope that helps a little.

Madison
 

Ed Hart (Adifferentedh)
Member
Username: Adifferentedh

Post Number: 81
Registered: 12-2002
Posted on Monday, June 16, 2003 - 10:57 am:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

try finding a lwb that has had the air suspension removed , common problems are head gaskets (not sure about 4.2l)and viscous coupling in transfer case . also check for rusty sills rear tailgate and floors
 

Rob Davison (Nosivad_bor)
Senior Member
Username: Nosivad_bor

Post Number: 513
Registered: 02-2003
Posted on Monday, June 16, 2003 - 11:57 am:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

the interior on the 1995 is like a disco so the heater controls are superior (dual climate and that stuff)

i like the air suspension and from the prices i've seen it's worth repairing if it goes out because it is sexy smooth on the highway.

i'd agree the 94-95 are what you are looking for.

LWB is smoother on road with more room, i'd go for that.

good luck

rob
 

John Booth (Jboothmtnbkr)
New Member
Username: Jboothmtnbkr

Post Number: 11
Registered: 05-2003
Posted on Tuesday, June 17, 2003 - 09:33 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post

I have a 94 LWB and all the posts are correct about the family-friendly virtures of the extra rear space. Also, using that extra leg room and a cargo basket on top, I've been able to take 4 boys camping for a week, bikes and all.

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