Range Rover info

Hello group,

We are evaluating a Range Rover 4.0 , 4.2 or 4.6 as a vehicle to pull a trailer with racecar (total weight of trailer, racecar and stuff about 2000 kg). I suppose a Range would make a safe, comfortable and relatively swift way to get the trailer to and from the track.

The Range will be younger than 6 years. Any thoughts on where I should pay attention to? Were there no 4.6 Range Rovers with manual gear change? Up till now I only found a manual gearbox in a 4.0 (1999) Range.

The most nibbling question: what about fiability? I know the horror stories from older models, have the news ones their issues? Need I to do something to improve trailer towing? No LPG please: been there, had it and it was a bloody nightmare on a company car.

Other vehicules (no vans, must be petrolpowered) I should look at? I thought about Mercedes Gelande-Wagen but those are rare here. It seems that Brussels is infested with Range Rovers ;)

Thx in advance,

Tom De Moor

Reply to
Tom De Moor
Loading thread data ...

engines can go porous, no shortage of replacement engines, if you dont mind getting an older engine and swapping some bits about, other than that they are slow, nice to sit in, and needs a stainless system.

Reply to
Theo

alt.fan.landrover

get an LPG converted one if you can they are total hog's, my bro saved 40% on his fuel bill after fitting one on his 1996-7 4.0 Vogue SE. I think it was averageing somthing stupid like 18-23 mpg now it never dip's below 30.

burgerman knows alot more about towing weight etc, i'll find his site in my favourites tomorrow which will have his email addy on it, cuz I havn't seen him post here in a long time.

Reply to
REMUS

Unlikely. More likely is that 18-23mpg would become 16-21mpg. The bonus is LPG costs a shade over 30p/litre.

Cheers, Andy

Reply to
Andy Laurence

Well I think thats what the computer came up with either way it does save you about 40% on your fuel bill.

Reply to
REMUS

I've had many Rover V-8s, and never had one go 'porous'.

Also, the bits that wear - like the camshaft - are equally as likely to be worn on a cheap old engine.

New bits are pretty cheap, and the engine easy to work on - provided you take the usual care needed with an alloy unit.

Reply to
Dave Plowman (News)

LPG vehicles do *less* miles per gallon. The running costs are lower, because the fuel is cheaper (less tax). At the moment.

Reply to
Dave Plowman (News)

The "P38a" (metrocab) Range-Rover is improved on the original in terms of body electrisc, tailgate rust, air suspension etc but engines are a weak point. then again, erpairing the engines properly is dirt cheap, as they're an old design with lots of aftermarket bits available. "3G" (new-fangled complicated monocoque with even more toys than before) Range-Rovers are VERY good in comparason, superior roadholding, superior offroad capability (comapred to a P38a), superior reliability. Steer clear of the Td6s thoguh - a 3.0 turbodiesel is about 3 litres too small to move 2.5 tonnes in anything other than a truck-like fashion and will struggle with a trailer on the back too.

If it were me, wanting something big enough to show the trailer who's boss, deadly reliable and reasonably quick/economical I'd look at a Lexus LS400/LS430 - they're about 2250kgs of metal, solo will return

25-30mpg, super comfortable, quiet, reliable. Absolutely bloody mint 'LS400' model shouldn't fetch more than £15,000 for a 4yr old one, 'LS430' pre-facelift no more than £20,000 for a 2yr old one, post facelift models slightly more. It'll hold value as well as the Range-Rover, be much cheaper to run and probably just as good a towcar. In the UK at least they're also "cheap" to service - the £300 for regular services isn't cheap by cooking-car standards, but does include collecting the car from your door, supplying you with a courtesy LS430, dropping the car back off at your door etc - and is a fraction the cost of servicing a Merc/BMW/Range-Rover.
Reply to
marko

Total s**te. Look after the servicing, and they last forever. Neglect oil changes and you'll need a new cam and followers - cheap and easy to fit.

Reply to
Dave Plowman (News)

You'd need a range rover as well, to get the LS + Trailer off the muddy field...

Reply to
Tim S Kemp

That's about my opinion plus the fact that a 4x4 is allowed to pull quite some heavier loads than a RWD car.

Marko's point is valid however: I want a car which can master a loaded trailer. Maximum weight of the trailer (all in) = 4000 kg on 3 axles.

For fiscal reasons the car must be petrolpowered. I have had my experiances with LPG and I don't want them repeated.

A recent Range Rover, Merceded Gelande-Wagen, Toyota LandCruiser are considered. I don't know about BWM X5 or Mercedes ML. Towdistance will be 100 to 200 km one way.

Porsche Cayenne is sadly out of the competition only because I think Porsche won't give me one :(

Seems like Range Rover fits the bill nicely but it needs to be reliable and maintenance costs must be normal.

The only real inconveniant of all cars mentionned is the abundance of comfort related items: it has to be comfortable, it needs not to be luxureous. I don't want seats like a Land Rover and be broken after a 2 Hr's drive but I don't like to feel quilty every time I step in the car with dirty hands either.

Thanks for all replies, they are very interesting.

Tom De Moor

Reply to
Tom De Moor

I don't know about GTW, but I towed a heavy Ginetta G26 on a six-wheel trailer using a 2.2 Legacy. A fantastic car; dual range gearbox made pulling away smooth and pleasant.

An Outback 2.5 manual has the same gearbox arrangement. Maybe worth considering if you only need to tow occasionally and the GTW isn't an issue with it.

Richard

Reply to
RichardK-PB

I confirm your statement, Richard: we have a 2.0l Legacy. Maximum weight ever pulled with it, is about 1500 kg. As you state: the low gear ratio gearbox makes pulling away no issue.

Brakes however are an issue and I don't trust a 1500 kg car pulling a 4 ton trailer. I checked the Outback and the 3.0 V6. The last is -in Belgium- only equiped with a automatic gearbox.

I have had the pleasure of surviving unscratched a tow with about 800 kg when for a reason unknown it began to oscillate severly. Rather scary moment and it moved the towcar (the legacy) as if it weighted nothing. The highway (I was driving at about 80kph) was suddenly a very very narrow path.

I didn't brake, just pushed in the clutch, trailer was on two (of its four) wheels at max amplitude. It decided not to tip over and become steady again. Had to stop to take a breath of fresh air however ;-)

Tom De Moor

Reply to
Tom De Moor

Landcruiser's are VERY well respected and said to be very good. Get an Amazon one just cos they're so DAMN big :D

Reply to
DanTXD

In news: snipped-for-privacy@uni-berlin.de, DanTXD decided to enlighten our sheltered souls with a rant as follows

You want big? Try a Mega Cruiser :-D

formatting link
Heh, those things make a Land Cruiser look like an SJ 410

Reply to
Pete M

That looks suspiciously like a Hummer with Toyota badges. And Hummmer/AM General are sort of tied to GM... Who are sort of tied to Toyota.

Is it a Hummer? Or is it something that just looks incredibly similar?

Richard

Reply to
Richard Kilpatrick

In news:BDBE6D7E.1E81D% snipped-for-privacy@NOSPAMbtconnect.com, Richard Kilpatrick decided to enlighten our sheltered souls with a rant as follows

It's a Toyota, but designed for military use. Slower than walking, but will climb or crush anything in its path. Basically the Jap equivalent of a Hummer.

Reply to
Pete M

I'm almost certain its a rebadged hummer, thats going by memory of what i read when they were launched, not by comparing pics

Reply to
Chet

Everything I've read since seeing Pete M's post and getting a massive attack of WANT IT NOW! suggests that it's a copy, not a licensed or rebadged Hummer, and rather crap with it - only 150bhp, awful approach angle and a

4-cylinder 4.1 litre engine.

Still, be an amusing way of upsetting the school run lot.

Richard

Reply to
Richard Kilpatrick

No, not total s**te. LATE P38a 4.6s are okay, but there is a REAL problem with poor-quality castings on the 4.0s and (I believe) the early 4.6s too. Did the 3.9s EFis also suffer the same issues? (but not he 3.5s - which had smaller broes/thicker walls)

Not eating the camshaft can indeed be sovled by looking after it - but if you've got a casting with thin walls it will eventually break through.

Like I say - no big deal though as they can be bored out and successfully re-linered with a sealant to stop the waterjacket leaking again. Classic symptoms would be a bubbling coolant header tank (but no overheating problems), misfire when first started taht clears after a bit and an unusually clean sparkplug; migrating into a full-on header-tank bubblage as the waterway blows further/is eroded more.

Reply to
marko

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.