Range Rover Sport TD V6 2005

Messages
294
#22
Had 3 landRover products...……….they make Maserati look like reliable, quality well built vehicles with reasonable running costs. I will not be returning to the LR/RR stable again...…..the new BMW X3 is working out very well as well!
 
Messages
11,545
#23
Spoke to soon, RR needs two rear air suspension bellows @ £900, thankfully covered by warranty, not too bad considering they are near on 10 years old. Still only the second bill in two years of ownership, much cheaper than the Maser
 
Last edited:
Messages
11
#24
Another vote for the post 08 RRS... I bought mine (2009 V8 TD HSE) off a friend who had it 3 years and 30k trouble free miles, I then did another 15k in 2 years, had to spend a grand on suspension bushes, then sold to my neighbour 18 months ago and its still going strong...
 
Messages
11,738
#25
The two Disco 3s I had were great, though the DVLA shows that my earlier 2005 one has been untaxed and un-MOT'd since 2011. The second one I had, a late 2006, had one issue with the air suspension in the three years I had it. Other than that the thing was faultless. No record of it with the DVLA any more though. Hmm....
 
Messages
6,352
#28
Regarding the V8 and V6 diesels, my friend who has just bought a new full fat Rangie, swears by the V6. He has had the V8 a couple of times and states it adds very little, heavier, and drinks more fuel.
Not sure if the same units as fitted to the Sport though.
 
Messages
2,168
#30
My neighbour spent £6k on 3.0 TDI full fat RR. It was an interminable pile of dog ****. In 3 years it had the transmission rebuilt, new callipers and brake discs, a misfire, rust holes in the body, the alarm went off most nights and it was finally killed by rusty brake pipes which require the complete dismantling of the car to replace.

His new 2010 TDV8 looks to be light years on from that but time will tell!
 
Messages
11,545
#33
Spoke to soon, RR needs two rear air suspension bellows @ £900, thankfully covered by warranty, not too bad considering they are near on 10 years old. Still only the second bill in two years of ownership, much cheaper than the Maser
Feck, Warrantywise are they the most difficult company to work with, don't think I have ever to work with a business so slippery, talk about trying to wriggle out of a claim.
 
Messages
11,545
#36
Well they are claiming failure is wear and tear and as it's over 9 years old that is no longer covered. However my schedule clearly states wear & tear 10 years or 100,000 miles both of which it the RR is under. Copy sent over for review, let's hope we get a positive review of the claim.
 
Messages
11,545
#37
Well got there eventually, sort of, we came down to a discussion on the English language, when does wear and tear differ from worn out. If the part fails though wear and tear its covered, if it's just worn out it isn't. The fact that the suspension is on the floor would suggest the part has failed especially as it wasn't on the floor last week when it had its MOT.

Anyway bill £1080, £100 excess - so should have been £980 payout, they have agreed £850 as a gesture of goodwill. They started at £600 so I can live with that.
 
Messages
169
#40
I dont think so...
The fact RMS is in the same sentence as IMS is just wrong....(or perhaps that was the point?)
Porshe were sued in the USA.

IMS, bore scoring, constant coil pack failure....
Reads like a well earned reputation to me....!
:confused:
I was just referring to the crankshaft failure being rare in the Jaguar V6 not anything to do with Porsche.