Range Rover Sport HSE 2.7 vs Mercedes ML280

Velbon

Looking at 2006 Range Rover Sport HSE's and 2007 Mercedes ML280's. What would be the pro's and con's of both, regarding reliability, service and running costs?

Thanks

lomb

Make sure you tow a petrol station behind you! These vehicles are fast becoming dinosaurs with the high fuel prices and are loosing any street cred. The Rangie is a nice machine though having said that.

Bearcat

RR nicer to look at but expect more maintanence issue with RR. RR sport have been a curse suspension issues. ML more bland but 2.8 v6 diesel is a good motor.

tfitzgerald

If I was buying on looks alone I think the RR wins hands down also on comfort enjoy which ever you buy

cannonballer

The Range Rover is the better of the two, maintenance can be an issue it can be expensive.

I would recommend getting a good independent mechanic to give it a once over, check the air suspension rubber airbags on the struts. And a plugin diagnostic with the laptop.

There is a great guy based in Saggart cant remember his name offhand but his garage is called "on and off road" only looks after range rovers.

Why dont you have a look at the full sized big Range Rover running costs will be the same but the difference in comfort, the interior is a lot nicer than the sport and will be better kitted out and virtually no difference in the prices at the moment.

L-M

Service history would be important with the Range Rover, make sure it was well minded. The timing belt is due around 180,000kms iirc.

Lots of these were bought, used and driven, so any low mileage ones i'd be wary of.

db330

lomb wrote: »

Make sure you tow a petrol station behind you! These vehicles are fast becoming dinosaurs with the high fuel prices and are loosing any street cred. The Rangie is a nice machine though having said that.

You know he is interested in the diesels right?? They will get just short of 30mpg just like most other full sized 4x4s, its not really that bad for the size of them.

Limerick man wrote: »

Lots of these were bought, used and driven, so any low mileage ones i'd be wary of.

What do you mean by this, most people tend to buy vehicles to drive them, these would have been popular for the school run, so there could be quite a few genuine low mileage ones around.

But like said, look for one with a good service history.

lomb

db330 wrote: »

You know he is interested in the diesels right?? They will get just short of 30mpg just like most other full sized 4x4s, its not really that bad for the size of them.

I do indeed ,I didnt want to say diesel station:D
If you got 30 out of it I think thats amazing but I doubt it personally. A friend has Toureag 3l tdi and gets around 22 average I think.

SpannerMonkey

haha 30 MPG , dont believe everything you read
my Mrs parents have that RR only getting 22 mpg and they are very calm relaxed drivers

L-M

db330 wrote: »

What do you mean by this, most people tend to buy vehicles to drive them, these would have been popular for the school run, so there could be quite a few genuine low mileage ones around.

But like said, look for one with a good service history.

i don't know why people think these were bought for school runs, i sold these and very, very few, if any, Discoverys or RR Sports were bought for school runs. Most had high mileage with construction boyos driving around in them, i think this is "school run" crap is a common misconception.

Obviously, like every vehicle, there will be lower milers. But even the ones i thought had low mileage on them came back in with high km's on them. Most of the low milers were the petrols.

Anywho, like you said, a genuine service history will solve any doubt.

L-M

SpannerMonkey wrote: »

haha 30 MPG , dont believe everything you read
my Mrs parents have that RR only getting 22 mpg and they are very calm relaxed drivers

i know of a heavy footed RRS driver (2.7) and she gets a consistent 28 mpg. But between early and late 20's would be the average to be expected.

bkehoe

Limerick man wrote: »

i know of a heavy footed RRS driver (2.7) and she gets a consistent 28 mpg. But between early and late 20's would be the average to be expected.

I've a Disco3 auto which is the same running gear as the RRS except a bit less aerodynamic and I usually get 29 - 31MPG. Confine yourself to a city and you soon see the MPG drop.

ofcork

AFAIK that ML is actually a 3 litre,just lower bhp than the 320 which is also 3 litre.

E39MSport

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=63727411&postcount=2

166man

Bearcat wrote: »

RR nicer to look at but expect more maintanence issue with RR. RR sport have been a curse suspension issues. ML more bland but 2.8 v6 diesel is a good motor.

ML280 has a detuned version of the 320CDi engine. Think it's around 200bhp.

Bearcat

166man wrote: »

ML280 has a detuned version of the 320CDi engine. Think it's around 200bhp.

Everydays a school day. Thanks. V6 diesels in general from Merc are good reliable motors.