| Author | Message | ||
     Jorge D. Hinojos (Tenoch) Member Username: Tenoch Post Number: 45 Registered: 02-2003 |
I am looking into buying a range rover and I would like to learn more about the main differences between a 2002 and 2003 model. I am Disco II owner and I off road somewhat, and I would like to buy a rover that I can call a "true rover!" specially now that Ford might take over the design. I understand BMW designed the 2003 model, and the suspension differences, but what also is there that a 2003 might have that a 2002 does not? Thanks | ||
| Geoff 93 RRC (Geoff) Member Username: Geoff Post Number: 86 Registered: 11-2002 |
Apples and oranges. The RRIII is a monocoque design with independent suspension. The RRII has traditional body on frame construction and solid axles. The RRIII has a BMW v-8, the RRII the Rover 4.0L or 4.6L v-8 with roots in the early sixties Buick engine. The RRIII has arguably a much improved 4-wheel drive system with sophisticated Torsen center differential and the new hill descent control, etc. The differences are so vast that I would do some independent research on the web for more details. The RRIII will be much more expensive, however its depreciation should be less horrific than the RRII's. | ||
| Max Thomason (Lrmax) Member Username: Lrmax Post Number: 213 Registered: 11-2002 |
In comparsion, the only thing the 2002 and the 2003 models have in common are the power steering pump resivors! They are totally different in every aspect. In fact, it is a totally new truck that shares that one part and nothing else. The 2003 feels bigger and has more power. In fact, it is bigger! The vehicle is wider (forgot if it is longer or not). The 2003 also has a "all in one" display screen which can be a bear to figure out and work. The two models are both fairly nimble when driving around town. Both have air suspension which has its pros and cons (pros include easier loading, cleaning of vehicle, and off road ability, etc. Cons are mainly reliability). Overall, the 2003 is much more comfortable and is a better highway cruiser (IMO). It seems to have a bigger "trunk" (for a lack of a better term). As said before, a mildy used 2002 will be anywhere from 10k to 15k cheaper. If you get a 2003, future expenses might be bad. Example: look at tire prices for 16" rims and 19" rims. The 19" rim tires are more. Also, the 2003s have Goodyear Wrangler HPs on them which is a terrible tire (not just for LRs, but for Chevys, fords, etc). As for relibility across the board, they seem to be better. Although it is too early to see (I see a lot more 4.0/4.6 RRs in the shop than 2003s b/c there are more 4.0/4.6 RRs than 2003s). FWIW, my local LR dealer is selling more 2003 RRs and the new disco and Freelander combined. 2003 RRs are moving off the lot at a swift pace, while discos and Freelanders sit and wait. I suggest that you go down to your dealership and drive both models. You will be able to decide better by doing so. My .02 cents Max T. | ||
| Ivan 94 LWB (Montoya) New Member Username: Montoya Post Number: 11 Registered: 01-2003 |
There was an article in Automobile magazine about a year ago saying that people will look back at the RR3 saying, 'they don't make them like they used to'. The article referred to how well BMW engineered the RR3 and how Ford will likely do significant parts sharing in the new design as they do with the Jag S-type, Lincoln LS, T-Bird, and upcoming new Mustang. If they bring the Defender back, imagine which Ford chasis will be used. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but you also seem to care about driving the 'real thing' by independent car company's like BMW and Porsche. Not sure you can consider the RR2 or RR3 the 'real' rover either as it was under BMW's hands most of it's life. I get a kick out of driving my 94 LWB and seeing other RR Classics and Defenders driving around. It's like driving around a little piece of history. I never warmed up to the RR2 except for those with light tan seats and dark piping. Depreciation rates on new Rovers are just terrible. I still can't get over the thought that someone purchased my Rover for $55k new and less than 10 yrs later, I picked it up for $7.8k. You can buy 10 RR Classics (at $5-7k each) for the price of a new RR3. If you want a 'real' rover, I say get a RR classic. Maintain it well and you can still drive it to nice events. You won't be afraid to take it off road. Door dings look good on it. When you valet park, you can use the Eddie Murphy line, 'park this in a good place this time. all this stuff happened last time i parked here'. | ||
| Sean Roberts (Pokeyyj) New Member Username: Pokeyyj Post Number: 5 Registered: 11-2002 |
I have some seat time in both models and I think that I would take a 4.6 HSE 02 model. I like driving the 03, but for 70+K I don't think that I would want abuse it offroad. |
