Overview & Reviews

Pedigree means everything at the top end of the sport-utility market, and no luxury SUV has more pedigree than the Land Rover Range Rover. The Land Rover name dates to 1948, when the Rover group began building bare-bones 4x4 vehicles with extraordinary off-road capability. The Range Rover emerged from this off-road tradition in 1970, billed as the first Land Rover civil enough to be driven by a person in a business suit. This two-door SUV was stylish, yet quite primitive by today's standards, but it was immediately popular among wealthy U.K. consumers with a taste for the safari aesthetic. Sales in the United States started in 1987, though quite a few Range Rovers were imported through the gray market in the years preceding.

Now in its third generation, the Land Rover Range Rover still carries considerable prestige. From an off-road perspective, it's one of the most capable SUVs available at any price. From a luxury perspective, it's probably the most elegant and distinctive utility vehicle on the market, despite a few rough edges. High pricing keeps all but the very rich from buying a new Range Rover, a fact that only adds to the appeal of this elite 4x4.

2013 Range Rover Specs
The 2013 Range Rover is a five-passenger luxury SUV available in two trim levels, both featuring 5.0-liter V8s. The HSE model produces 375 horsepower and 375 pound-feet of torque, while the Supercharged's V8 develops an impressive 510 hp and 461 lb-ft. Both engines are paired with a six-speed automatic transmission with manual shift control.

A permanent four-wheel-drive system is standard on all Range Rovers, along with low-range gearing and nearly 11 inches of maximum ground clearance. The standard Terrain Response system allows the driver to customize powertrain, suspension and electronic stability and traction systems to best handle five predetermined off-road conditions.

Engineered in the late 1990s during the brief period when BMW owned Land Rover, the Range Rover is nevertheless aging quite well. It employs unibody construction (instead of body-on-frame architecture) and a fully independent suspension (instead of solid axles). These changes make all the difference when cruising on pavement, as the Range Rover now delivers the composed ride and secure handling expected of a true luxury SUV. Yet BMW engineers went about their work carefully so as not to compromise all-terrain ability.

Cabin design is a mix of traditional and modern in the new Range Rover. The upright seating position, blocky dash and large steering wheel evoke the feeling of an old-school Land Rover, while supple leather seats (with contrasting piping), walnut inlays and a navigation system with both on- and off-road mapping assure you that this is indeed a contemporary luxury vehicle. The cabin, like the exterior, manages to be both retro and modern at the same time, especially with the new gauge cluster that is, in fact, a large LCD screen. Nevertheless, its controls can be rather arcane in fine British tradition. A roomy reclining rear seat makes it possible to carry a pair of adults or three children in back, but cargo room is only average due to a high load floor.

If you're looking for a premium SUV with unparalleled off-road abilities and a legendary pedigree, the new Range Rover is an obvious choice. If you want to save some money and get a bit more on-road talent with that same legendary pedigree, the Range Rover Sport is a good compromise. However, any Land Rover has an albatross slung around its neck in the form of disappointing reliability. Buying one has been known to cause headaches (and breakdowns), which is certainly ironic given their status as go-to vehicles for adventures to Outer Mongolia.

Used Land Rover Range Rover Models
The present-generation Range Rover dates back to its introduction for 2003. Between then and '05, a BMW-sourced 4.4-liter V8 rated for 282 hp was the only engine available. It came with a five-speed automatic transmission. However, in 2006, then-parent company Ford replaced this engine with a pair of Jaguar-sourced V8s. The HSE featured a 305-hp 4.4-liter V8, while the Supercharged had a 4.2-liter V8 that was (surprise!) supercharged to produce 400 hp. The same number of transmission gears and four-wheel-drive system were employed as in the current Rover. The current 5.0-liter V8s showed up for 2010.

Buyers interested in technology will want to pay particular attention to year-by-year changes when shopping for used Range Rovers of this generation. The navigation system was CD-based until Land Rover upgraded it for 2005 (although it's once again a bit behind the times). A rear back-up camera and adaptive headlights were added to the standard equipment list for 2006.

There were significant changes made for 2007 when the interior was given a mild refresh, with twin gloveboxes, new cupholders and a slightly more intuitive control layout. The customizable off-road settings debuted that year along with an upgraded rear differential and an electronic parking brake. Airbags were also relocated for better performance and a driver's knee airbag was added. For 2010, there were minor exterior updates, a new LCD instrument cluster and navigation system, adaptive cruise control, blind spot monitoring and a 360-degree parking assist camera. Updates were also performed on the adaptive suspension, Terrain Response and stability control systems.

There were two previous generations of the Range Rover. Both are coveted on the used market, but potential buyers should know what they're getting into, because Range Rovers have been phenomenal off-roaders, but reliability is poor and repair costs are high.

Sold from 1995-2002, the second-generation Range Rover is the better bet of the two for buyers seeking a luxury experience. Note that 1995 was an overlap year: Rovers bearing a "4.0 SE" badge are the new model, while those with "County Classic" or "County LWB" badging are the old design. For 1996, Land Rover added a high-line 4.6 HSE model, and for the sake of acceleration alone, this is the better bet: The Range Rover 4.0 SE was powered by a 188-hp 4.0-liter V8, while the 4.6 HSE took a 222-hp 4.6-liter V8 with considerably more torque. A four-speed automatic transmission and four-wheel drive were standard on all models, as were leather upholstery, wood trim and a high-end audio system. Interior furnishings were opulent by the standards of the day, with ample comfort for front and rear passengers.

Second-generation Range Rovers still had solid axles front and rear, but engineers fitted self-leveling air springs to improve their manners on pavement. There's only so much you can do with old-fashioned hardware, though, and compared to other high-end SUVs, the Land Rover Range Rover's ride quality was harsh and body roll was excessive around corners.

Shopping for a first-generation Range Rover could make sense if you're looking for a dedicated off-road vehicle and don't mind repair bills or doing your own repair work. Only a four-door version of the Range Rover came to the U.S., and initially it had a 3.9-liter V8 (rated for anywhere from 178-182 hp, depending on the year) and a four-speed automatic transmission. A long-wheelbase model known as the County LWB joined the lineup for 1993, and not only did it have another 7 inches of rear legroom, it upgraded to a 200-hp 4.2-liter V8.

User Reviews:

• 

  Worse vehicle ever - 2001 Land Rover Range Rover
  By tripper - October 6 - 2:46 pm

  This has been a terrible vehicle. Since owning i have replaced the transmission at 45k, replaced air shock system, and now a new head gasket with only 72,000 miles on it and it has never been off road or out of the garage in the weather. Land Rover and Bear Valley Rover have not stood behind their product. It is a poorly made vehicle. I have owned BMW, Chrysler, Pontiac, Fiat, Oldsmobile, Buick and they were all better than this product. Even the car tag screw holes were drilled off-level so the car tag sits crooked.

• 

  Waste time going back & forwd to dealer - 2008 Land Rover Range Rover
  By Lemon - May 14 - 10:30 pm

  What the....this guys writing about excellent car seems like from marketing department to counter bad feedback AC leak into interior carpet. Gas suspension dead one after another. Gas pump kaput. Radio/Audio need to be reset by dealer for some strange reason this is just some. Going back and forward to dealer ship like i have free time to burn. Thats why the sales never top BMW or Lexus as a new comer finally I settle with Lexus No Headache at all.

• 

  Bought this junk to prove my daughter wrong 4/8/17 - 2006 Land Rover Range Rover
  By mike Marshall - November 23 - 12:21 pm

  Admittedly bought this 2006 RR with 135K miles in mint condition, 2 owners, proper maintenance ONLY because my 17 year old daughter is a car lover like her dad but knew RRs were horrible in quality and reliability and very expensive to work on. So, against my better judgement bought this RR. Within the first 2 weeks one of the front air suspension struts blew out. Cost $800 to repair. Basic oil change was $150. Front brakes due for replacement but British mechanic says CANNOT TURN RR ROTORS SO ONLY NEW ONES AVAILABLE. Got suspicious of this mechanic so took to my regular mechanic who simply put on after market brake pads, but still cost way less (still $250) than the $800 the "British Mechanic" repair shop was trying to soak me for. Rear view camera works about 25% of the time. SUV sits up so high with no running boards or handles on front pillar that very difficult to get in or out for us shorter people and puts heavy wear and tear on sides of both front seats creating upholstry tears and paint wearing off plastic trim parts that are very cheaply made. Even the rubber key was so worn it barely worked=poor design and material usage and they are $400 to buy and have programmed! After 2 weeks and $1000 in repairs with more to come on those expensive air bags suspension ($800 PER wheel!) I decided to sell it. After driving a 2001 Lincoln Navigator which was of average quality, I would choose the Lincoln for less expensive repairs for both labor and parts. I myself bought a 2008 Infiniti QX56 SUV with 119K miles and cannot say enough good things about this SUV in EVERY category. It is a FAR superior SUV to the RR in EVERY way (and all others that I tested/researched). The RRs are currently the "cool SUV" to drive thus my young daughters lust for it but knew it was going to be a mistake as is the case with most English cars. (owned a 99 Jag XJ8 for 5 years=huge repair bills done all at under 69K miles!) Owned an 86 Bentley Mulsanne for a year just for fun but just after one minor repair it costs $2000, so got that out of my car loving system. English make some beautiful cars but some of the most unreliable and expensive to work on. Got disgusted with American cars as well despite trying to "be American, buy American" but quality still not where it should be at any of the Big 3. Finally broke down and bought a Japanese car, something I swore Id never do as they have always been so UGLY but many have finally figured out how to actually make a car look nice looking. If you want a really nice HUGE comfortable, powerful, high tech SUV. Def. try the Infiniti QX56 with almost 400 ft lbs of torque it does zero to 60 in 7 seconds, rides like a big Cadillac sedan in the comfort area and lots of room for hauling things when needed. Even my 17 year old daughter loves it, esp. with the technology upgrade package (BOSE, Nav, rear view camera, rear entertainment) and the roar of the factory exhaust is quite nice as well. One of the nicest cars Ive ever owned and have had almost 100 cars over the years. Stay away from RRs unless you want to spend a lot of time at the repair shop spending ungodly amounts of repair money. Heck, I dont even like the looks of it! Too top heavy on windows making it look like a "green house on wheels" and interior is WAY to small for serious Costco trips, minimal storage, many cheap parts at dash/console areas as well, esp for the high price that is charged when new. When driving it, it reminded me of driving something out of the 80s. Very outdated. Power is just average, esp. when compared to my former Lincoln Navigator and ESP. the Infiniti. And note** your car insurance will increase significantly compared to other same year or older SUVs like Lincoln Navigator being that RRs are so expensive to repair. I got a $600/yr increase in premiums "just because it was a RR" according to my AAA rep. Sold the RR within 3 weeks just to save my money and sanity! "It pays to be cool" but I aint no fool! Sold the RR and got her an 2007 Infiniti FX35 which is also far superior to the RR in every way except the view height of sitting high in the RR.

• 

  Poor Quality/Poor service - 2004 Land Rover Range Rover
  By doobie856 - October 25 - 11:13 pm

  I own a 2004 RR and in the time that I have owned it, it has been a constant problem. I had a problem with the recall service that was completed on the vehicle 2 years ago and LR simply said that it was not there issue and that I would have to eat the cost. Within 2 years I am having to replace the front differential and drive shaft, after LR said it was properly replaced. Understand, I do not off-road my vehicle, or take it through any type of rough terrain. I believe that the quality of product (parts) and service are very poor and not worth the money. For those of you looking to purchase one, I would consider alternatives.

• 

  Lets try this again! - 2010 Land Rover Range Rover
  By doc1899 - October 21 - 4:43 pm

  First I would like to apologize to anyone who purchased a Range Rover based on my first review. I should have waited more than a month to write it. Im actually on my 2nd 2010 RR HSE because I had way too many issues with the first one. My dealer was kind enough to get me into a new one with no hassle. HOWEVER- Ive owned the second vehicle for a little over a week and it has already been back to the shop for an equipment failure. I fear that 90k just went straight down the drain.

• 

  need 2 for in is always in the shop - 2003 Land Rover Range Rover
  By now - September 21 - 10:00 am

  had it for 2 years in for repairs 25 times. Told this car needs alot to twicking by the shop manager. Something was either broken or a warning lignt always on Trade in lost more than half its value. Would not recommend this suv to my worse enemy.

• 

  Money pit - 2006 Land Rover Range Rover
  By Gem Elliott - September 2 - 1:29 pm

  These types are only good for one thing and thats leasing. Make sure to get out of this vehicle by the time the warranty is up. The engine works well but all of the peripherals along with electronics are suspect. Also the air suspension will fail around 80K miles. The dealer freely admits to this. Each corner is $1500 to repair. So youll end up spending about $6,000 on all for corners at some point. Then you will most likely get the dreaded steering column lockout. This is actually a safety feature that eventually craps out. Replacing this unit with a new one is $6,000. If youre smart you can get a salvage unit for around $1200 and then spend another $500-700 on installation or try doing it yourself. Of course thats if you get one that works to begin with. The cars electronics are also very temperature dependent. Here in Chicago it suffers from many cold related ailments. The rear trunk section will get loose and will need to be rebuilt at some point before 100K miles.

• 

  Horrible Reliability and Service - 2008 Land Rover Range Rover
  By Mike - November 19 - 10:00 am

  Dealerships has had it for the last month and a half trying to fix multiple problems. In the last 4 months it hasnt started about 40% of the time Ive had it in my possession. The last two times I have picked it up from the dealership after they have stated they fixed the problems, Ive had problems with in one day. Customer Service at Land Rover North America is horrible and wont return phone calls. They also dont provide a rent car when they keep it for weeks at a time.

• 

  Owned 2003 and 2006 SC Rovers...2010s? - 2010 Land Rover Range Rover
  By roverrider - December 20 - 7:50 am

  Having owned a 2003 Range Rover HSE and a 2006 Range Rover SC thought 2010 Range Rover would have a better overall ride,(i.e., bounce and jarring on concrete roads, not to mention a vibration in the steering wheel and the seats that Land Rover cant seem to remedy in 2006 RR SC, which car did not have when purchased)given the reviews- not the case..These cars are taken off-road in our household and long trips,(daughters own 2001, 2004 Discoverys ).Bought 2010 Range Rover and gave it back to Land Rover; the quality of the interior has gone down hill, it looks and feels like the interior of a Range Rover Sport! Ride is soft and bouncy and all over the place...

• 

  Its a Lemon - 2000 Land Rover Range Rover
  By Sad in Mass - October 4 - 10:00 am

  I just sold this car back to the dealership I bought it from. I drove it for 8 months/ 5000 miles- 4 trips to the dealership and one breakdown. The car had 20,000 miles when I bought it.