LR3 makes "Worst of the Worst" used car list

[broiler]

From Consumer Reports, the LR3 makes a list of the Worst of the Worst used cars, based solely on reliability.

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/...e-best-worst-used-cars-406/overview/index.htm

 

[toddjb122]

Odd that it is lumped with Discovery in the list. I had heard about reliability problems with the Discovery that differed greatly with my experience on the LR3. Even the dealer admitted that there was much more they had to do (in term of TSBs I guess) to get a new Discovery out the door to a customer...

 

[broiler]

It was for models from 1998 to 2007, so that's why you get the Disco. You have to wonder if they are lumping the LR3 data in with the Disco data and calling it one model. It kind of looks that way, since they separate all of the rest by model, not by brand. If that's the case, then this list is a farce and unfairly groups the LR3 with the well-known problematic Discovery. LR should should sue CR if this is the case.

I friend of mine has a relative that owns a LR dealership, and he said that the LR3 is light years more reliable than the Disco, and is their best vehicle. It was largely because of this, that I made the leap and bought one.

 

[davez26]

Lumping those 2 together is ridiculous. Kinda makes you wonder about the credibility of the publication? Generally I respect what I read from those guys, but this is obviously wrong.
One the Discoverys we had "Operation Pride" where we had a list of things to do to correct issues on cars as they came off the truck.
The LR3's we wash, check the softawre and put them out. As for long term, we don't see half as many issues that can't be fixed w/ a software fix.The days of the 30K service including either an oil pan or intake reseal seem to be going away. Yeah, LR3/Discovery, Apples/Oranges.

 

[SoCalLR3]

Regardless of the issue of the Disco I/II being more or less reliable than the LR3, I think the point is still valid. I know we're all sensitive to the fact that our 'kid' is being called ugly. I love my LR3, but if my mother / grandmother was asking my recommendation on purchasing a used vehicle, the LR3 would not be at the top of the list. She wouldn't care about the reason she has to take it to the dealer....major mechanical issue or software update....its still a trip to the dealer. We have to focus on who this article is written for....the general public; most of whom would never appreciate the things we love about this truck that FAR offset its little quirks.

 

[Houm_WA]

VERY well put, SoCalLR3....let's be honest with ourselves. We didn't buy the LR3 for its reliability, but rather its ABILITY...to kick A$$ !

...but at the same time, we know that our reliability numbers will be skewed because we take the car to the shop for any little thing, as we should, and it gets reported as an "issue." If I had a Toyota that I paid 1/3 the cost of the LR3 for, I wouldn't take it to the dealer for every little thing like I do with the Rover.

 

[Houm_WA]

Plus, it's always been my opinion that CR is run/written by a bunch of pencil-neck dorks who only look at cars based on limited criteria and don't put as high a value on things like performance, style or "personality."

I couldn't care less what CR says. They rated the Mitsubishi Montero as a poor reliability car and berated it back in the timeframe that I owned one ('97 model). I put 208,000 miles on it, and my Mom has put another 10k on it, and it gave us nary a problem.

 

[BoulderGT3]

I'm sure everyone would be singing the praises of CR if they gave rave reviews of the LR3. My experience over just 1.5 years has been pretty solid. Fewer problems than my wife's Rx350 Lexus.

I talked to the dealer last week and their warranty work revenue declined $500K in 2007. That's a pretty steep drop that points to the newer stuff being much more reliable than the old discos and RR's.

I still think the dealer service just sucks. I took the LR3 in for an oil change and they didn't tighten filter resulting in a basketball sized puddle on my floor. They really seem to screw up simple stuff and I always have to wait a week or more to get the car in. The service is worse than any other car I've got including American brands. I want to trade for a Range Rover but the service is a deal breaker for a car that costs that much.

 

[richpike]

I'm sure everyone would be singing the praises of CR if they gave rave reviews of the LR3. My experience over just 1.5 years has been pretty solid. Fewer problems than my wife's Rx350 Lexus.

I talked to the dealer last week and their warranty work revenue declined $500K in 2007. That's a pretty steep drop that points to the newer stuff being much more reliable than the old discos and RR's.

I still think the dealer service just sucks. I took the LR3 in for an oil change and they didn't tighten filter resulting in a basketball sized puddle on my floor. They really seem to screw up simple stuff and I always have to wait a week or more to get the car in. The service is worse than any other car I've got including American brands. I want to trade for a Range Rover but the service is a deal breaker for a car that costs that much.

I know it is a healthy drive for you (1.5 hours or so), but Red Noland in Colorado Springs is fantastic. I've been extremely pleased with them.

-Rich

 

[BoulderGT3]

I know it is a healthy drive for you (1.5 hours or so), but Red Noland in Colorado Springs is fantastic. I've been extremely pleased with them.

-Rich

The two dealers I've used in Boulder and Denver are sub par but I'm glad yours is good. It has such a huge impact on the ownership experience. No way three hours round trip is practical for me to have a daily driver worked on. I don't love anything that much.