How widespread is this front differential problem in new generation Range Rover? While at the dealer today I happened across a couple whose RR had failed with this problem at 20,000 miles. A lady a couple of miles away is on her third diff. It doesn't sound good. Both these are with pure road use. The couple mentioned that they had also had the well known steering column seizure and a HVAC problem among others.
Do all front diffs fail in the medium term? Is it going to be an ongoing and repetitive occurrence? What is your experience with this vehicle on the whole?
Maybe not but it is none the worse for that. Actually, I don't know quite where you get that idea from. You might as well say that LR had very little involvement in the new Disco3 or RRsport because they both use Ford engines, ZF gearboxes etc etc.
The obvious fact is that today's Land Rover vehicles have the best build quality ever and it shows in their every fibre. However, their reliability is still patchy by all accounts. There are several known issues with the latest RR and I just wonder how widespread they are.
From some simple local enquiries, the front shaft alignment causing front pinion shaft failure appears common if not universal. It is important to know whether this is now rectified or whether all vehicles will fail on an ongoing basis. Previous experience shows that Land Rover never acknowledge a problem themselves. Never recall vehicles to rectify non safety issues and, worse of all, wash their hands of problems after a period. Look out for diff failures in a few years when LR will not want to know, even though it is obviously a design or build fault from the outset. Remember the Disco peeling dash episode where they would not rectify vehicles without a specific LR service history? As if a local garage changing the oil caused the dash to peel. I ask you!
Don't worry. I have had many LR products and still have an '84 Defender. Nothing mechanical is absolutely perfect but the build quality of the RR and its design is a delight. The front diff is my only worry, and it is only a slight worry. All other initial problems were common to BMW X5's and were more annoying than serious. The steering column not adjusting electrically and the battery discharging were common and have long been sorted. Ironically my LC had a similar steering column problem last winter which cured itself back sometime in the Spring. Came back yesterday but now it groans and stops vertically as before and this time it extends reluctantly as well. I'm hoping it will get better as the snowdrops appear if not sooner :-) My RR has now completed very nearly 3000 miles without the slightest hitch. The performance and economy are great and it is a pleasure to behold and to drive. It does over 500 miles to a tankfull of fuel driven half sensibly and that is after chipping it.
Hardly - LR (and all other car makers) buy stuff off the shelf, *but* they have years of experience of of design and test to rely on. BMW chose to ignore, to a large extent, all that experience. Indeed, had they had their way, their RR would have been built on the BMW platform. The situation was rescued by some LR designers arranging an off-road (and we're not talking slightly bumpy tracks that seems to be considered off-road these days) event in Germany. After a nice hill descent etc, the BMW execs realised that low box, axle articulation, ground clearance, etc etc DID matter.
Current build quality has rather more to do with Ford that BMW I suspect. Certainly, morale at Rover was at an all-time low after BMW took over. After the initial excitement, most staff seemed to long for the Honda days, when quality was *really* improving, despite having old designs an plant to work with.
Like I said - it might be LR's problem (not that any of our customers have encountered it), but BMW created it (personaly I suspect a small batch of duff components may have created yet another LR urban myth).
and BMW's peeling dashes (3 Series) etc. No one's perfect, but it is fashionable to slag off certain marques, and unfashionable to critisise others (Saloon Bar ettiquette).
But is wasn't was it. Actually the similarity between RR and X5 in the areas of chassis, inner wings, HVAC, electronics and switches, rear door handles, instruments and radios and main running gear, is remarkable. Few are cosmetically identical but the main difference seems to be limited to size and shape of the body and cosmetics, particularly the interior of the cab. And yes, the suspension travel and a transfer box of course.
The
That is the version we have been fed from the launch. I take it with a pinch of salt. Of course you may come to the conclusion that the new Range Rover Sport, developed under Ford ownership, is approximate towhat BMW would have designed initially if they had their way.
Is that Rover or Land Rover you are reffering to? I ask because I certainly never noticed a big improvement in LR build quality under Honda. Honda assemble by robot. LR used to partly assemble by idiot, seldom actually finnishing the assembly properly. I have noticed a change for the better over the last three years. I would not have bought a LR product otherwise. I am too old with much experience of about 10 of their vehicles over the years and have lost patience with stories of impoved quality every few years. This time the difference is tangible. It can be seen and felt in the design and build. It is obviously a better designed and built vehicle. So is the new Discovery.
Teething troubles are common with any new design but I would hope they will be sorted quickly and efficiently. It worries me that the Range Rover has not been the subject of a campaign to sort the front diff drive shaft alignment problem. This does hark back to the old days of LR washing their hands of problems and is not good enough. It is best that these things are brought out into the open so that Land Rover, who know they have a problem, know that *we* know of problems so they cannot brush things under the carpet. That is a very major advantage of electronic media such as this. It ensures that everybody has access to information and that problems cannot be swept under the carpet. Every manufacturer has its occasional problems but the difference between a manufacturer that deserves support and one that deserves no repeat custom is in how genuine problems with their vehicles are rectified. The best will rectify before failure, not after. The worse will let the customer suffer a failure and let him suffer the inconvenience and cost.
Until recently LR came in the latter category and from my recent research they still do. Until these practices are exposed they will have no incentive to improve their performance in this area. They have very much to learn from plant and machinery firms in this area. They do not have to go far to learn, just down the road to Massey Ferguson in Coventry would do. This company has improved its quality and new vehicle fault rectification hugely in the last ten years or so and should be applauded for doing so. The slightest fault with a new model is reported back to the manufacturing plants and rectification on the line is done ASAP with compulsary campaigns instituted for both mechanical, electrical and software issues as needed. The company dealers then get in touch with owners and arrange updates as needed.
No, it is an alignment problem at the factory, though whether the whole drivetrain arrives at LR preassembled, I don't know.
As you must know, the front diff on these vehicles is fixed to the engine sump and is therefore an unit with the transmission. This allows the driveshaft to be built with no universal joints. There is a rubber coupling at one end and the other is splined to the diff. It appears that if the alignment of the diff with the transfer box is very slightly out, then the shaft will wobble at the diff end resulting in wear and failure of the diff input [pinion] shaft. It is very common and is well known among individual owners and now, as a result of this technology, is widely known.
I have no axe to grind, having just bought a new Range Rover and being very satisfied with it.
I'll criticise any damned vehicle that deserves it. This diff problem and my post about it is not a criticism, at least it is not the main point of my post. It is an observation of a problem, and as you say, every manufacturer has its problems from time to time so there is no need to be defensive about what is a superb product. The LR company will ultimately be judged by the number of satisfied owners for its new products though. This depends both on initial satisfaction with the design and buying experience, but more importantly on medium term customer service and satisfaction. They cannot continue to fob this off to a long suffering dealer network. It is the Company which decides on warranty and out of warranty repair responsibility and on non-failure modification and rectification of vehicles already in service. This is an area which has caused much customer dissatisfaction over many years and is an area that they apparently still haven't addressed properly. AFAIK they have not got a non-failure modification and rectification policy other than for safety related items. Not an effective one at any rate.
I'd disagree - but I susspect that I'd be wasting my breath ;-) Using "stock" components and just messing about with A Surfaces is standard procedure, but that does not make a Skoda into a VW or a Bently (except where that is intentional).
Like it or not - it's true. Personaly, I think the RR Sport is a very major nail in LR's coffin as an independant marque. Take away LR's reutation for building tough off-road vehicles and whats left? Some marketing flim-flam and badge engineering which *will* lead to the end of the "real" Land Rover marque, i.e. they just become Fords
It made no odds at the time.
I take it you never vistited that factories? Rover, nee Leyland, under the Honda stewardship, led the way for a short time in production technology. The Metro line was the most highly automated in Europe at launch. Indeed, the Chairman of Honda is on record as stating that Honda learned more from Rover than vice-versa.
That would apply to any new vehicle, of any make, as new technologies come through. But, as BMW and VW have found, quality issues are closely coupled with volume and cost base. Look at what has happenend to Bosch since outsourcing work to ex-Eastern Block countries to reduce costs - reputation out of the window........
As for being better designed, well certainly they have become more car-like, and if that is what one wants that's fine. It's of no use to me though, if I wanted a RR or Disco II, I would want the non-existent base model so I don't have to take my work boots off when I get in - exactly the design philosphy of the original Range Rover. On build quality - that, to a large extent is down to morale on the lines, as evidenced by the improvements in Defender quality over the last few years, using exactly the same dasic design.
That always assumes that there is actually a problem in the first place, and this medium (the Internet) is well known for not exactly being a reliable source of data.
Problems are reported back to the factory at LR, in some detail - via warranty claim data. I sure if LR got the same margin as Massey on each unit sold they could also afford address each niggle directly. Comparing verly low volume high margin products with medium or high volume low margin products is hardly reasonable - ask *any* manufacturer of anything.
Is it?
I'm affraid that last sentence is not true - FMEA is the term.
Still, they could do a Mitsubushi, and just chuck everything in the cellar....
The fact is that the similarities between X5 and RR are far more marked than the differences. Just one look at the inner wings, front chassis extensions, engine bay, ventiation system, switchgear apart from temperature switches, etc etc. will convince anyone. None of these are quite identical yet they are only slightly disimilar. The outer body, dash and general cabin are, of course, quite different.
Being realistic, you have to realise that their main reputation worldwide is for building unreliable vehicles. They are now on target for gaining a reputation for quality vehicles. I remember the same attitude as yours [about RR Sport] when the original RR was built. This was a much more radical departure for the company than RRSport or even the Freelander at the time what with those nancy coil springs and all.
Yea right! Made good PR though. And yes, I have been to the LR factory several times to see assembly of series, Defender, Range Rover and Discovery models. And what a shambolic discrace they were. High cost, hand assembled with little real quality control. I have not been for a while now, I couldn't bear the prehistoric feel of the place compared to other modern plants such as Jaguar, Honda, SDF and other plants I visit. Today, apart from the Defender line, I would expect a much more streamlined, modern and efficient plant with many subassemblies joining the line from supplier plants just in time.
That is not what I mean. Well designed means 'fit for purpose', 'easy to assemble properly', refined, reliable, economical, desirable, innovative and durable. Among other things.
It's of no use to me though, if
Well you lost that when they more or less ditched vinyl seats and flooring in favour of velour and deep pile carpets back in 1975. Actually plenty of owners use their Range Rover and Discovery in exactly the way you mention, as work vehicles. Some from new but a lot more second owners. There is a great choice of used vehicle on the market today, in very good condition, that are ripe for work.
On build quality - that, to
Build quality of Defender has always been iffy. It is the nature of the design of the vehicle. In its present form it will always suffer from more issues than rivals just because there is so much more that can be assembled wrongly. So many components and panels that need hand alignment, hand tightening of fastenings and hand finishing. It was a superb vehicle in its time, and still is in many ways, but well built it has never been. Being long lasting and very capable are its main positive attributes.
Do you deny that they have a problem with the front drive shaft alignment? I would be very surprised if you did. Amazed in fact.
Although LR manage to make a loss on every vehicle and MF make a small profit, MF are far more efficient as a company because just look at what you get for your money. You know what you get for £43000 with LR, a top of the range Discovery. With MF you get a top of the range 140hp machine with front and cab suspention, an infinitely variable transmission with various drive modes linked to electronic engine management and hydraulics. A hydraulic system with full electronic computerised control linked to radar and transmission/engine management. A four wheel drive system with various automatic functions including both axle diff locks. A PTO and closed centre 'power beyond' for the use of external implements. Climate control, heated air seat, passenger seat, 600/65r38 low profile radial tyres, electric heated mirrors, rear wash/wipe, extending automatic hitch, a datatronic performance monitoring system which measures work done, work rate, fuel consumption per area, total fuel per job, cost per area, cost per hour, cost per job, a printout of this data if required and an option of sattelite navigation for area mapping and control of implements.
All this in 6500kgs of high quality steel, plastic and glass with a sound level at full power of less than 75dba.
On top again there is three years finance at 1% and a three year warranty option at only £600.
And when it needs a service or breaks down a service van goes out to do the job on site with all parts in stock and for only £25/hour.
Absolutely no comparison. The car industry really are a bunch of useless tankers in comparison.
Comparing verly low volume
How you can say they are 'high margin' is beyond me and just laughable. Nothing sold into agriculture can be classed as more than marginal these days. The competition for the declining volume is ultra intense and margins are slim to non existant.
Most certainly. Are you in denial?
Mitsubishi medium and heavy commercial management is irrelevant to the LR experience. LR should not use Mitsubishi commercial as an example. Best example to follow is a company that practices 'best in industry'. Better still, they should strive to actually be that 'best' at all they do.
LR dealers might well rectify some issues when a vehicle is in for service if they deem it cost effective but they do not actively seek out the vehicles they have sold due for rectification unless it is a safety issue under the compulsory recall scheme. If a vehicle is serviced independently then it is missed and moreover, historically, LR have used the excuse of not having a 'full dealer history' for not rectifying problems in and out of warranty. Again compare that with the above tractor where rectification work is done by appointment and, if possible, at the owners premises, with no quibble or cost and warranty is honoured with no service history other than it being deemed to have received 'adequate' maintenance. An reason to turn down a warranty here would include obvious abuse and obvious lack of maintenance such as no grease or seizure/wear due to lack of oil changes.
On or around Mon, 6 Dec 2004 19:36:21 -0000, "Huw" enlightened us thusly:
mind, my disco came with a full set of genuine disco rubber mats, and they're bloody good at keeping the crud off the carpets, and also a set of genuine waterproof seta covers, underneath which I expect the original fabric is in mint condition.
if such things are available for the newer ones, then you could jump in wearing your muddy wellies and overalls.
And as you know, in your area these things are often worked hard from new. My RR has no tow hitch yet but my LC is great for all work and the leather is easily cleaned. The carpets are a bit mucky on the drivers side even with rubber mats. Nothing sticks quite like cow shit. Having said that, anyone with any common sense will avoid as much and shit as much as practical and will certainly try and be reasonably clean when climbing aboard a dual purpose vehicle. There is no need to be absolute pigs with a half decent vehicle.
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.