Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Land Rover horror stories

It's hardly news that a LR is a POS on delivery.

It's also not news that LRs have software issues.
Interesting having watched the video that the dealer has no idea what was wrong with it and just swapped a few bits round and bunged some software on it.....this doubtless led to the second issue with the cameras .
LR don't just have software issues they have firmware and hardware issues too......
Watched another video of one being used off road ....what a pile of crap ....no flex in the suspension and a traction control system that has to wait for a wheel to loose traction before it works so it's constantly spinning wheels .
LR have missed the market by such a huge margin you may be led to believe that some of those that signed the Defender off have shares in Ineos .
The natural LR group successor to the Defender is proving to be the Discovery 4 with many of my friends in the farming world , it's pretty reliable and has a 3.5 ton towing ability and a decent 275 bhp engine that unless it shits its crank pulls way better than the puny little engine in the new Defender that also will prove to be highly stressed and unreliable .
 

RBMK

LE
Book Reviewer
New LRs are notorious for software faults.

Probably written by the same Indian spammers that try to convinCe us that there's a fault with our computer.
 
Last edited:
I was reading by chance about the old BTR-60 APC series and one of the many firms who offer upgrades for them and their successor, the -70 and -80,offered a Rover TD engine in place of the original petrol engines. Would a Landy engine really be able to push one of those vehicles around?
 
Interesting having watched the video that the dealer has no idea what was wrong with it and just swapped a few bits round and bunged some software on it.....this doubtless led to the second issue with the cameras .
LR don't just have software issues they have firmware and hardware issues too......
Watched another video of one being used off road ....what a pile of crap ....no flex in the suspension and a traction control system that has to wait for a wheel to loose traction before it works so it's constantly spinning wheels .
LR have missed the market by such a huge margin you may be led to believe that some of those that signed the Defender off have shares in Ineos .
The natural LR group successor to the Defender is proving to be the Discovery 4 with many of my friends in the farming world , it's pretty reliable and has a 3.5 ton towing ability and a decent 275 bhp engine that unless it shits its crank pulls way better than the puny little engine in the new Defender that also will prove to be highly stressed and unreliable .

The 110 is now fitted with a 3 litre diesel, with power outputs of 200, 250 and 300 bh. I believe the 2 litre is only available on the 90.
 
I was reading by chance about the old BTR-60 APC series and one of the many firms who offer upgrades for them and their successor, the -70 and -80,offered a Rover TD engine in place of the original petrol engines. Would a Landy engine really be able to push one of those vehicles around?
300 TDI was about 110 hp and pretty bomb proof ....the V8 in the BTR's is about the same I think around 100hp so a pair of TDI's would indeed make a good pack swap .....not sure it wasn't even an upgrade fitted by a government end user .
 

OneTenner

LE
Book Reviewer
1.Interesting having watched the video that the dealer has no idea what was wrong with it and just swapped a few bits round and bunged some software on it.....this doubtless led to the second issue with the cameras .
LR don't just have software issues they have firmware and hardware issues too......
Watched another video of one being used off road ....what a pile of crap ....no flex in the suspension and 2.a traction control system that has to wait for a wheel to loose traction before it works so it's constantly spinning wheels .
LR have missed the market by such a huge margin you may be led to believe that some of those that signed the Defender off have shares in Ineos .
3.The natural LR group successor to the Defender is proving to be the Discovery 4 with many of my friends in the farming world , it's pretty reliable and has a 3.5 ton towing ability and a decent 275 bhp engine that unless it shits its crank pulls way better than the puny little engine in the new Defender that also will prove to be highly stressed and unreliable .
Point 1 - to me that indicates a lack of training at the dealership. Possibly also a reluctance to use product support properly, granted, there is a problem with the vehicle, however, the way it was addressed is not the correct way to do it and goes against all the pre-release training / product info / diagnostic pathways provided to the dealer network.
Point 2 - that's how a traction control system works - and always have, it has to see loss of grip at a wheel before it can slow the wheel down to provide power to the wheels that still have traction - remember that open differentials are essentially 'lazy' and will send power to the wheels that have least grip, traction control seeks to balance out each 'axle set' of wheels and also front to back power split - which is why you can have a vehicle sat on wet grass with all four wheels spinning (at the same speed) and traction control will do nothing because it doesn't see a problem. variable locking transfer box & rear differential plus the correct amount of inertia are the way to maintain traction, traction control systems can only attempt to regain traction once lost (but cannot help with inertia).
Point 3 - Agree with the Discovery 4 point, the issue with being 'underpowered' is mainly down to the engines having to work harder for emissions compliance. When i've driven New Defender, I didn't feel it was lacking in low down torque at all, proper control offroad is all about granular low speed torque variation - which I feel New Defender has.
 
Point 1 - to me that indicates a lack of training at the dealership. Possibly also a reluctance to use product support properly, granted, there is a problem with the vehicle, however, the way it was addressed is not the correct way to do it and goes against all the pre-release training / product info / diagnostic pathways provided to the dealer network.
Point 2 - that's how a traction control system works - and always have, it has to see loss of grip at a wheel before it can slow the wheel down to provide power to the wheels that still have traction - remember that open differentials are essentially 'lazy' and will send power to the wheels that have least grip, traction control seeks to balance out each 'axle set' of wheels and also front to back power split - which is why you can have a vehicle sat on wet grass with all four wheels spinning (at the same speed) and traction control will do nothing because it doesn't see a problem. variable locking transfer box & rear differential plus the correct amount of inertia are the way to maintain traction, traction control systems can only attempt to regain traction once lost (but cannot help with inertia).
Point 3 - Agree with the Discovery 4 point, the issue with being 'underpowered' is mainly down to the engines having to work harder for emissions compliance. When i've driven New Defender, I didn't feel it was lacking in low down torque at all, proper control offroad is all about granular low speed torque variation - which I feel New Defender has.
Having been on the inside so to speak of new vehicle releases and dealer training it wouldn't surprise me in the least if Landrover themselves have little idea of how to fix it despite what they may be telling dealers. If it requires new software this will have to be homologated and tested for faults before release to the dealer network and that's not going to happen in a few weeks or even months and then as any Range Rover owner will tell you that won't fix it and it will need yet another one , two or three updates and you still face the morning lottery of what ecu is going to sulk today

Disco 4 also has traction control ....from an earlier generation and it is much better than that in the Defender I think possibly because the Disco chassis has more natural traction..... the video I watched with the Defender was just filled with the sound of tyres scrabbling as it fought to get the vehicle up a route that a 300TDI Defender would of driven up with wheels in contact with the ground and no traction control...

The new Defender is clearly relying on tech to mask a chassis that is very road biased , allowing tyres to spin in clay just fills the tread and the tyre , even a decent mud terrain becomes a slick , better to stop the wheel spinning at all by having a capable chassis to start with , watch a standard 80 series Landcruiser with decent flex in it's suspension and 3 diff locks just idle up slopes that will have any modern pick up or Defender / Range Rover lifting wheels and spinning tyres as the tech tries to compensate and get it up the slope .

A 2 litre diesel engine even if not emisionised is never going to hack it when it comes to towing it just lacks cc's and cylinders .
Tractors are following the same route with 200hp 4 cylinder engines but they are always out performed by the 6 cylinder 200hp version when the going gets tough and an engine needs to dig it's heels in and pull

If they have fitted a 3 litre diesel at 300hp then that's a positive....

New Defender will no doubt sell well to school mums and the like ..... I think that's what the target market is and who can blame them as they need to sell units but the hype and comparison to the original Defender and it's capabilities only rings true in one respect ....they both suffer from dodgy electrics
 

OneTenner

LE
Book Reviewer
New Defender, like most modern vehicles has a mix of LIN, HS CAN, MS CAN & FlexRay - not 'new' technologies to LR or any other manufacturer - and TBH, I doubt the data transport is the issue. The 'software' in the dealerships is 'Pathfinder', which has been in use since the introduction of FlexRay / DoIP in 2017MY vehicles, so not something the tech's need to learn.
You clearly have a bias, so nothing I could say about my personal experiences with New Defender and other vehicles will change your opinion of something that you've only seen other people's opinions of. Maybe if you actually drove one you might have a different opinion? - or at least one based upon first hand experience.
 
If biased is not having the slightest desire to drive a vehicle I think is ugly and fails to excite me then you are correct . However that doesn't mean I haven't owned 3 Range Rovers and 2 300TDI Defenders so it's not a brand bias and despite much mickey taking from others I rate the Disco in it's 3 and 4 incarnations as a tow vehicle with excellent chassis dynamics and have driven both extensively .

If they've been using the various techs since 2017 it should be mature by now and not having the issues many R Rover and now Defender owners are having..... why do they have so many reliability issues ?
Hurried development ? rushing tech to market ? Bad design meaning you have to take a body off to change turbos ? Are Tata stripping money out of the company starving development ?

I would love to buy another R Rover but everyone I know who owns one has problems .... a shame because when they are working there are few better cars , you just can't trust them not to go wrong and the cost out of warranty is eye watering hence low residual values . I know a few Landrover Techs and none of them drive the brand they work on.....that must say something . It's a shame they don't seen to be able to nail the reliability / build quality .
 
Interesting having watched the video that the dealer has no idea what was wrong with it and just swapped a few bits round and bunged some software on it.....this doubtless led to the second issue with the cameras .
LR don't just have software issues they have firmware and hardware issues too......
Watched another video of one being used off road ....what a pile of crap ....no flex in the suspension and a traction control system that has to wait for a wheel to loose traction before it works so it's constantly spinning wheels .
LR have missed the market by such a huge margin you may be led to believe that some of those that signed the Defender off have shares in Ineos .
The natural LR group successor to the Defender is proving to be the Discovery 4 with many of my friends in the farming world , it's pretty reliable and has a 3.5 ton towing ability and a decent 275 bhp engine that unless it shits its crank pulls way better than the puny little engine in the new Defender that also will prove to be highly stressed and unreliable .
If that was the comparative SUV/4x4 off-roading I posted earlier, I commented then how slow-witted/slow responsive, were ALL of the "electronic" differentials :( !!
 
Sat in traffic today behind a brand new toyota landcruiser..
I have worked on these things and they even have secondary batteries, let alone v belts and other stuff.
There is a reason that they are chosen by the poeple that need to rely on them when they think that they could find themselves in the shit.
 

TamH70

MIA
Sat in traffic today behind a brand new toyota landcruiser..
I have worked on these things and they even have secondary batteries, let alone v belts and other stuff.
There is a reason that they are chosen by the poeple that need to rely on them when they think that they could find themselves in the shit.

A million or so Da'esh scumbags can't be wrong, after all...
 
I was under the impression the new engines above were petrol ?
New diesels 6 cylinders are replacing the 2 litre 4s. I spec’ed a 110 to replace my DS and could only get the 6 cyl. I may be wrong with the 300 bhp version, but as they make one it may be fitted. The 300 bhp 4 cyl is fitted in the plug in hybrid.

edit to add link.

RP.
 
based upon what sample size?
Average cost of some marques seems odd, there are a lot of LR's below the average, similarly, there are a lot of Mercs & Audi's above theirs
It looks like a tiny bit of confirmation bias has crept in and possibly selective sampling?
The image is from Which?.
I believe the sample was approximately 17000 members.
20200903_115212.jpg

The figures in brackets next to the marques are the number of vehicles, split by age group, 0 to 3 and 3 to 8.
 
I don't understand LRs thinking with the new defender . Why not just base it upon similar lines to the Japanese pick ups that everyone buys but make it look like a defender ?

That way actual farmers and industrial users , maybe the military buys it as well as the people that want it for fashion .

Nothing wrong with a bit of reverse engineering or using the competitions parts to save you some developement costs.

I feel that vanity and egos get in the way of actually making something that the public want .
 

OneTenner

LE
Book Reviewer
The image is from Which?.
I believe the sample was approximately 17000 members.
View attachment 514805
The figures in brackets next to the marques are the number of vehicles, split by age group, 0 to 3 and 3 to 8.
The problem with 'Which?' surveys are they are a self-selecting sample. Looking at the concerns above, there are no suprises to be honest, many are due to emissions compliance causing Mfr's to change technology quicker than it can mature into a stable & scalable add-on. Dacia & MG really do demonstrate that the phrase 'The more you pay, the more you expect' also works in reverse.
 
I don't understand LRs thinking with the new defender . Why not just base it upon similar lines to the Japanese pick ups that everyone buys but make it look like a defender ?

That way actual farmers and industrial users , maybe the military buys it as well as the people that want it for fashion .

Nothing wrong with a bit of reverse engineering or using the competitions parts to save you some developement costs.

I feel that vanity and egos get in the way of actually making something that the public want .
Agreed, but I got a feeling those at JLR aren’t really interested in the original users of Land Rover. ie Military/Farmers etc. The just want the Chelsea tractor set and the up market set!
 

OneTenner

LE
Book Reviewer
... Bad design meaning you have to take a body off to change turbos ?...

...I know a few Landrover Techs and none of them drive the brand they work on.....that must say something .
Body off to change turbo is for 'convenience', have a look at Topix, that has never been part of the repair process, it's just something that has become an urban myth and done by those who don't bother to check. Equally, there was a crank position sensor service action on 3.0l TDV6, 'the internet' said it was a 'body-off job', when in reality the job was a bit fiddly but took just over an hour and only required a turbo mount bracket together with a rubber grommet to be removed.
If you want an example of 'inconvenience' try getting an injector out of a TD5 without having either to smash the cam cover or suspend the front of the vehicle by an injector from an engine crane overnight. Or change an EGR valve on a Defender with a Td4...

Take a look at any staff car park at any dealership, few, if any own the brand they work on day to day.
The Merc. dealership I work at now has:-
Landrover
Renault
VW
Vauxhall
Honda
Ford
BMW
Toyota
As brands owned by the tech's,.
Generally Vauxhall is the brand owned by most tech's at the dealerships where I live - they're cheap, easy to fix (if you have access to a workshop) parts are easily available and running costs are low. Yes, they have a poor reputation, but if your occupation is fixing cars, it's just one more.
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top