Range Rover Sport

Nickindublin

A friend of mine is looking at buying a used Range Rover sport. Looking at 2011/12 models. He notices that the the 2011 models road tax is 2350 while 2012 is 1200. He was looking at the following cars on done deal and is wondering why such different price variations.

http://cars.donedeal.ie/cars-for-sale/land-rover-range-rover-3-0-litre-diesel/6953675

http://cars.donedeal.ie/cars-for-sale/land-rover-range-rover-sport-se/7710456

http://cars.donedeal.ie/cars-for-sale/land-rover-range-rover-sport-2-9-litre/7258173


http://cars.donedeal.ie/cars-for-sale/land-rover-range-rover-sport-3-0-tdv6-h/8116306

Also is there anything they should be looking for fault wise or that will need to be done like timing belt etc

Thanks

mickdw

He should be looking for a new arse for his trousers if he buys one of those. They are stupidly expensive to maintain by all accounts and they do go wrong quite a bit. Many repairs require a full body removal from chassis so silly money involved

Up to 225 g/km cO2 is 1200 per year, over 225 g/km CO2 is 2350 per year.
If Range Rover improved emissions only slightly from for example 230g to 220g, the tax bill would be altered as you describe. Im not aware of exactly what the emissions are for that particular car.

discodavie

I had a range rover a couple of years ago.

Dream to drive. No bother with it mechanically.

Serviced it three times due to the mileage it was doing and wasn't expensive.

Had to do rear discs and pads and shoes with one service and still less than 400 quid total.

Biggest problem with them is the shocks and air compressor in the boot. Had to buy a shock. RR In greenhills quoted over 1400 if I remember right.
Got it for less than 900 up north though.

Biggest problem was depreciation. Bought It 5 years old for over 40k with 50,000 miles. Sold it 1 year later for just over 20k touching 90k miles.

If he buys it the drop in price will kill him. A customer of mine just bought one a few weeks ago 07/08 for 12k.

Nickindublin

I was saying to buy the cheapest one at 51k and pay the higher tax but i warned him from what i know that Land Rover reliability is not great and bills can be expensive. He wants to buy one around that age as he plans to keep it for at least 5 years. He wont be doing a lot of miles but wants something that can tow and is good off road and can be used as a daily driver also. Comparing the 4 cars like for like the price differences are severe. 67k for the 12 reg and 65k for the 131 down to 51k for the 11 reg. Not much difference in the spec IMO.

Theanswers

They are wonderful cars. Very few compete at being such a good all rounder. I'm speaking about the full fat RR, not sure about the sport - however I'm sure it well capable in alot of regards.

Maybe he should consider a slightly older TDV8? Should be cheaper to buy and at the end of the day was a more expensive model and more capable.

lovelyoner

There's no two ways about it, they're a costly car to keep. Mum has the 3.6 and Dad has the 4.4 V8, and they've both been littered with mechanical problems since we got them. They have around 110000 and 150000 miles on them respectively so admittedly they are going to have issues, but to name a few; two gearboxes a piece, air suspension compressor several times, electrical niggles, shocks go regularly enough, and one recently had a whole new block dropped into it after turbo failure. Then there's the normal expenses, tax, mpg, pricey servicing, they love tires, etc.

Relative to their competitors (X5, Cayenne, Q7 etc) they're just not up to scratch in terms of reliability and running costs. However, as the last poster said, competitors aren't as capable. Only reason the parents really keep them is because they're fairly stand alone when it comes to work on the farm when things get slippery. They're gorgeous to drive, hold the road very well, have real presence and the cabin is a nicer place to be compared to their German counterparts. The V8 is a real peach of an engine too, in either size. Bit of a head vs heart decision!

Edit; mileage 121000 on 3.6, 162000 on 4.4

NewApproach

lovelyoner wrote: »

There's no two ways about it, they're a costly car to keep. Mum has the 3.6 and Dad has the 4.4 V8, and they've both been littered with mechanical problems since we got them. They have around 110000 and 150000 miles on them respectively so admittedly they are going to have issues, but to name a few; two gearboxes a piece, air suspension compressor several times, electrical niggles, shocks go regularly enough, and one recently had a whole new block dropped into it after turbo failure. Then there's the normal expenses, tax, mpg, pricey servicing, they love tires, etc.

Relative to their competitors (X5, Cayenne, Q7 etc) they're just not up to scratch in terms of reliability and running costs. However, as the last poster said, competitors aren't as capable. Only reason the parents really keep them is because they're fairly stand alone when it comes to work on the farm when things get slippery. They're gorgeous to drive, hold the road very well, have real presence and the cabin is a nicer place to be compared to their German counterparts. The V8 is a real peach of an engine too, in either size. Bit of a head vs heart decision!

These are FFs I presume rather than sports? What year?

FrontDoor

lovelyoner wrote: »

There's no two ways about it, they're a costly car to keep. Mum has the 3.6 and Dad has the 4.4 V8, and they've both been littered with mechanical problems since we got them. They have around 110000 and 150000 miles on them respectively so admittedly they are going to have issues, but to name a few; two gearboxes a piece, air suspension compressor several times, electrical niggles, shocks go regularly enough, and one recently had a whole new block dropped into it after turbo failure. Then there's the normal expenses, tax, mpg, pricey servicing, they love tires, etc.

Relative to their competitors (X5, Cayenne, Q7 etc) they're just not up to scratch in terms of reliability and running costs. However, as the last poster said, competitors aren't as capable. Only reason the parents really keep them is because they're fairly stand alone when it comes to work on the farm when things get slippery. They're gorgeous to drive, hold the road very well, have real presence and the cabin is a nicer place to be compared to their German counterparts. The V8 is a real peach of an engine too, in either size. Bit of a head vs heart decision!

:eek::eek::eek::eek:

I was at a hunt the other day and a lad I know appeared with a Land Cruiser. It was a bit battered looking.

He couldn't remember the last time it gave any significant bother and it had 300k miles on it.

lovelyoner

NewApproach wrote: »

These are FFs I presume rather than sports? What year?

Nope, both Sports, both 08. The thing is that they always need something done at this stage, when it comes to servicing there's a mirage of things that we're told are on their way out. The father decided to drop the new engine into his and keep it for another 2/3 years until it claps out again, the eye watering cost of having it done is still a fraction of the price of depreciation on a new one.

Nickindublin

Well it's bit of hit and miss with them as I kinda guessed. I work near a land rover dealer and I seen a 141 Sport and it's been back in about 6 times that I have seen.. A customer of mine bought a new discovery this year and it's been back in 3 times 2 of those it had to be towed in. I will give him all the info off here and from what I have seen.

Stallingrad

Worked in the Middle East a while back and the golden rule amount locals was never go into the dessert in a Range Rover, says it all really.

MadYaker

The old RR sport was based on the freelander wasnt it?

Marcusm

MadYaker wrote: »

The old RR sport was based on the freelander wasnt it?

ON the Disco3/4. It's a shortened version of the Disco chassis.

josip

Stallingrad wrote: »

Worked in the Middle East a while back and the golden rule amount locals was never go into the dessert in a Range Rover, says it all really.

Same in Australia. Once you start getting into the outback it's nearly all Land Cruisers.
The older station hands said that up to around 30 years ago, it used to be nearly all Land Rovers.
But once they started getting more complex and electronic rather than purely mechanical, it was safer to put your trust in a Land Cruiser than a Land Rover.

Nickindublin

Anyway was giving my friend feedback and he has had a second thought. Think he is now going to look at a Landcruiser..... He thinks he can get a nearly new or new one for the same price.