MK1 Freelander really as bad as reviews make out?
Discussion
300bhp/ton said:
In production for 9 years pretty much unchanged.
Does that say anything about the design, or does it say that the company who designed it didn't have any money or will to change it?There is precedent for that.
Being in production for 9 years doesn't mean the thing was designed or tested properly before they started producing it.
300bhp/ton said:
Europe's best selling compact 4x4 until 2002.
References please. How did it compare against the rav4, CR-V, Panda 4x4 and other small 4x4s? Actual numbers would be quite interesting.300bhp/ton said:
1000's in use every single day as daily drivers.
This doesn't say anything about the design. How many of them break down?300bhp/ton said:
If it was as bad as some in this thread claim then such facts simply wouldn't exist.
There are thousands of lada rivas still in use as daily drivers. They are good at starting in cold weather, but other than that I can't see an upside.There are thousands (in fact, there are millions) of -frankly- s
t cars in use as daily drivers.There were thousands of Ford Pintos used as daily drivers, despite them having catastrophic (and well known) design flaws, like the fact they tended to explode when in rear-end accidents.
Ford knew about that and decided not to fix it because it was cheaper not to.
Your points all seem to boil down to "if it was s
t, rover would have fixed it", but there's clear precedent for that not to be true from the Ford Pinto story.C
kambites said:
There is a good argument that the inability to survive certain levels of abuse is a pretty serious flaw in a modern car. As cars have got more and more reliable, I think the expections on their ability to deal with lack of servicing and/or mechanical abuse has also risen.
But this is abuse of an extreme sort. It's akin to leaving a Defender in diff lock, or a Jap pickup truck in 4wd and then driving it as speed on dry tarmac. Any of the others would fail under such abuse.I don't know for certain, but I suspect any Haldex based AWD system, or fwd biased ones like on the X-Trail also have viscous couplings that need replacing, and if they aren't probably cause similar damage.
Krikkit said:
mat777 said:
I wouldnt touch a £3k Disco Mk2 with a bargepole but that budget will buy a totally mint top spec D1.
Why would you have a D1 over a D2 if veg oil isn't your thing? Purely out of interest.Mr2Mike said:
LuS1fer said:
Friend has one. Had all manner of issues and had it converted to 2WD.
Read this as: "A friend has one and the viscous coupling has gone. He's too tight/stupid to replace this relatively inexpensive component, so removed the rear propshaft instead"300bhp/ton said:
But this is abuse of an extreme sort. It's akin to leaving a Defender in diff lock, or a Jap pickup truck in 4wd and then driving it as speed on dry tarmac. Any of the others would fail under such abuse.
But people who buy defenders and pickups are much likely to know that they shouldn't leave the diff locked. The Freelander was marketed predominantly as a family car, so it was bought by family car types who (reasonably enough) knew nothing whatsoever about 4wd systems. I'd have some sympathy if the VCU had been part of the standard service schedule (I assume it isn't?), done at the same time as the cam-belt or something.
CraigyMc said:
....
Wiki has some info, although I couldn't find specific production figures.However as so many of you seem to be against the FL. Can one of you actually explain in detail the design flaws and why they are so??
Because honestly I'm not seeing a lot of factual evidence that they aren't very good or badly designed.
300bhp/ton said:
CraigyMc said:
....
Wiki has some info, although I couldn't find specific production figures.However as so many of you seem to be against the FL. Can one of you actually explain in detail the design flaws and why they are so??
Because honestly I'm not seeing a lot of factual evidence that they aren't very good or badly designed.
I like Land Rover - I'm actually thinking of buying a defender at the moment.
I dislike the damage the FL1 did to the reputation of the manufacturer.
As for factual evidence, there's nothing more factual than actually experiencing a head gasket failure on the Rover K to prove that it actually does happen. The photo above wasn't a stock image, it was from my car (I have others, if you're interested).
I think a more relevant question is this: despite all the evidence to the contrary from several posters on here, anecdotal and otherwise - why do you think it's such a good, reliable vehicle?
C
The general afflictions on the Freelander 1's in my circle of friends and family relate to gearbox replacement, numerous electrical faults, consistent starting problems, leaking doors, wheel bearings, premature clutch wear and the car in general being a massive PITA. All of these numerous factors point to a car that has fundamental problems in its design, the quality of components and the stresses they suffer, and the quality of manufacture.
They have all moved on, but I remember a time when 3 or 4 people seemed to have their ownership of a Freelander 1 overlap with each other and it was the regular talk in the local pub, comparing problems with each others cars and generally rolling their eyes at the stness of it all.
One poor chap had his FR1 breakdown at Ikea in Croydon, only after he had loaded a new kitchen in the back , on the roof, and in the small trailer he had. It had only just been fixed a couple of weeks earlier after refusing to start on his driveway and being towed away for repair. Recovery was a long and protracted affair and I well remember borrowing a van and going to help him, so that he could get his kitchen home ( having a kitchen-less house ).
He sold the car immediately thereafter and got a Hyundai Terracan.... ( but thats another story).
They have all moved on, but I remember a time when 3 or 4 people seemed to have their ownership of a Freelander 1 overlap with each other and it was the regular talk in the local pub, comparing problems with each others cars and generally rolling their eyes at the s
tness of it all.One poor chap had his FR1 breakdown at Ikea in Croydon, only after he had loaded a new kitchen in the back , on the roof, and in the small trailer he had. It had only just been fixed a couple of weeks earlier after refusing to start on his driveway and being towed away for repair. Recovery was a long and protracted affair and I well remember borrowing a van and going to help him, so that he could get his kitchen home ( having a kitchen-less house ).
He sold the car immediately thereafter and got a Hyundai Terracan.... ( but thats another story).
kambites said:
But people who buy defenders and pickups are much likely to know that they shouldn't leave the diff locked. The Freelander was marketed predominantly as a family car, so it was bought by family car types who (reasonably enough) knew nothing whatsoever about 4wd systems.
The Discovery 1 was aimed at a similar market and that had diff lock, as do things like Jimnys and Vitaras )well 2wd/4wd selection which results in the same).Also 70,000 miles (or even if it lasted 50,000 miles) is still quite a large interval. It's not as if this is a yearly thing to change.
kambites said:
I'd have some sympathy if the VCU had been part of the standard service schedule (I assume it isn't?), done at the same time as the cam-belt or something.
I don't think it is, which is one of the biggest downers tbh on LR's part. But if you are buying at the price point the op is talking about, then this is by the by really.Just do your homework, know what to look for and you can get a very capable compact 4x4 that is genuinely good to drive on the road too.
I looked at buying a MK1 Freelander 2.5 as they looked like a bargain.
The reality is that they are cheap for a reason. Most people that own them seem to have major electrical, engine or transmission issues by the 80,000 mile mark.
That isn't to say that that the car can't be reliable, I'm sure it can, but whatever the owner base are doing, it doesn't seem to be working out.
It's from that very pool of vehicles that you are buying.
If you are going to buy, do so knowing all of the risks before you do so.
The reality is that they are cheap for a reason. Most people that own them seem to have major electrical, engine or transmission issues by the 80,000 mile mark.
That isn't to say that that the car can't be reliable, I'm sure it can, but whatever the owner base are doing, it doesn't seem to be working out.
It's from that very pool of vehicles that you are buying.
If you are going to buy, do so knowing all of the risks before you do so.
300bhp/ton said:
Krikkit said:
mat777 said:
I wouldnt touch a £3k Disco Mk2 with a bargepole but that budget will buy a totally mint top spec D1.
Why would you have a D1 over a D2 if veg oil isn't your thing? Purely out of interest.Looking at the workshop manual the D2 isn't a hard car to work on, although it does have some more complication if you leave in the ACE and air suspension systems.
I had a blue, 5 door, 1.8 ES Freelander on a V Reg. It had done 60,000 miles, and I did about 5,000 miles in it. It was spacious, comfortable, and relatively cheap to run. It felt safe - I did a stack of long runs in it, down to the South of France, all round the UK - it was great.
Then the head gasket blew, without warning, on a cold, rainy day, as my wife was driving on the A12. Engine lunched. £3,000 bill for a RECON engine from those robbing bds at land rover. Then almost everything else went wrong immediately afterwards - electrics, clutch, when the gears started sticking when warm I thought "this car is st" and I sold it on.
I'd never have another. My wife tried to persuade me to get a Discovery, and I remembered the cold, sneering, stbox service from the cockend dealers, and I simply couldn't even face going back into one of their fk-ugly showrooms.
Dont let any of this put you off, obviously.
Then the head gasket blew, without warning, on a cold, rainy day, as my wife was driving on the A12. Engine lunched. £3,000 bill for a RECON engine from those robbing b
ds at land rover. Then almost everything else went wrong immediately afterwards - electrics, clutch, when the gears started sticking when warm I thought "this car is st" and I sold it on.I'd never have another. My wife tried to persuade me to get a Discovery, and I remembered the cold, sneering, s
tbox service from the cockend dealers, and I simply couldn't even face going back into one of their fk-ugly showrooms.Dont let any of this put you off, obviously.
As an previous owner of 2, both facelift 04 TD4 SE hardbacks, i feel i can comment.
Some are terrible, my 2nd was a total bag of ste. If it could go wrong, it did. Repeatedly.
3 failed master cylinders, 1 slave cylinder, 1 fuel pump, 1 IRD, 1 VCU, 3 rear diff mounts 1 propshaft, 3 propshaft bearings. All in a car that went from 37-74k with me.
The 1st was perfect, for the 7 weeks i had it before a lorry wrote it off, Cat C it went. I was uninjured in that crash so they are strong cars, it's also been repaired and is back on the road. 2nd one was bumped into twice, again. I was uninjured.
Practical, roomy and well equipped, it never failed to get me home, despite the above breakdowns.
Superb in ice and snow with the right tyres, only a lack of ground clearance stopped it.
Also, very good off road, if you plan ahead to get round the lack of ground clearance, the drivetrain and TC system got it into places that RRC and 90s couldn't.
Mine was remapped with twisted performance, had the egr blanked and was noticeably quicker than a standard one. I took mine on Scottish PH runs, i was far from the slowest car in the groups.
I would still recommend one, if its been looked after and has a nice bill of receipts to show its history
Some are terrible, my 2nd was a total bag of s
te. If it could go wrong, it did. Repeatedly.3 failed master cylinders, 1 slave cylinder, 1 fuel pump, 1 IRD, 1 VCU, 3 rear diff mounts 1 propshaft, 3 propshaft bearings. All in a car that went from 37-74k with me.
The 1st was perfect, for the 7 weeks i had it before a lorry wrote it off, Cat C it went. I was uninjured in that crash so they are strong cars, it's also been repaired and is back on the road. 2nd one was bumped into twice, again. I was uninjured.
Practical, roomy and well equipped, it never failed to get me home, despite the above breakdowns.
Superb in ice and snow with the right tyres, only a lack of ground clearance stopped it.
Also, very good off road, if you plan ahead to get round the lack of ground clearance, the drivetrain and TC system got it into places that RRC and 90s couldn't.
Mine was remapped with twisted performance, had the egr blanked and was noticeably quicker than a standard one. I took mine on Scottish PH runs, i was far from the slowest car in the groups.
I would still recommend one, if its been looked after and has a nice bill of receipts to show its history
My dad had one for a year or so. In fairness to it, it never let him down, and the only issue he had was repeated failure of the tailgate latch. However, with the 1.8 K, these are gutless and drink fuel. There was always the ever present niggle in the back of his mind about the head gasket as well.
With a diesel, it's probably a decent car. OK with a petrol if you can accept the appalling performance / economy compromise.
With a diesel, it's probably a decent car. OK with a petrol if you can accept the appalling performance / economy compromise.
CraigyMc said:
I'm not *against* the freelander. I simply think it's quite an unreliable car compared to the alternatives.
I like Land Rover - I'm actually thinking of buying a defender at the moment.
I dislike the damage the FL1 did to the reputation of the manufacturer.
As for factual evidence, there's nothing more factual than actually experiencing a head gasket failure on the Rover K to prove that it actually does happen. The photo above wasn't a stock image, it was from my car (I have others, if you're interested).
I think a more relevant question is this: despite all the evidence to the contrary from several posters on here, anecdotal and otherwise - why do you think it's such a good, reliable vehicle?
C
I think it's a good vehicle and as reliable as most alternatives because we are on our 2nd, my cousin also has one. And in total I think we are somewhere between our 15th and 20th K-Series engine - all in different vehicles.I like Land Rover - I'm actually thinking of buying a defender at the moment.
I dislike the damage the FL1 did to the reputation of the manufacturer.
As for factual evidence, there's nothing more factual than actually experiencing a head gasket failure on the Rover K to prove that it actually does happen. The photo above wasn't a stock image, it was from my car (I have others, if you're interested).
I think a more relevant question is this: despite all the evidence to the contrary from several posters on here, anecdotal and otherwise - why do you think it's such a good, reliable vehicle?
C
We did have the HG go in one FL, but in all honesty once it was fixed properly it really wasn't an issue. It didn't write the engine or the vehicle off, and it cost no different than doing a cambelt and cheaper than a clutch on a fwd hatch.
The K Series does have a risk of HG failure, but so do other engines, only less publicised. The 2.0 L-Series diesel is a brilliant engine however and has almost no vices.
Krikkit said:
As what the Disco is intended for - a reasonably capable 4x4 which doubles as a comfy (ish), spacious daily hack. Every mention of D1 v D2 that I've seen has basically said that the D1 was marginally less reliable and significantly more agricultural than the D2.
Looking at the workshop manual the D2 isn't a hard car to work on, although it does have some more complication if you leave in the ACE and air suspension systems.
The main difference with the D2 is:Looking at the workshop manual the D2 isn't a hard car to work on, although it does have some more complication if you leave in the ACE and air suspension systems.
-ACE (if fitted)
-rear air suspension (if equipped)
-traction control
None are overly complicated, but all require additional maintenance over a D1. And sadly the air suspension and ACE are items often neglected by owners, so can cause more problems.
The D2 has better NVH and you are more likely to find them equipped with more electrical goodies. Early D1's could be had in a very basic spec, so very little to actually go wrong.
Both are good, just depends what you are after really.
300bhp/ton said:
Krikkit said:
As what the Disco is intended for - a reasonably capable 4x4 which doubles as a comfy (ish), spacious daily hack. Every mention of D1 v D2 that I've seen has basically said that the D1 was marginally less reliable and significantly more agricultural than the D2.
Looking at the workshop manual the D2 isn't a hard car to work on, although it does have some more complication if you leave in the ACE and air suspension systems.
The main difference with the D2 is:Looking at the workshop manual the D2 isn't a hard car to work on, although it does have some more complication if you leave in the ACE and air suspension systems.
-ACE (if fitted)
-rear air suspension (if equipped)
-traction control
None are overly complicated, but all require additional maintenance over a D1. And sadly the air suspension and ACE are items often neglected by owners, so can cause more problems.
The D2 has better NVH and you are more likely to find them equipped with more electrical goodies. Early D1's could be had in a very basic spec, so very little to actually go wrong.
Both are good, just depends what you are after really.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff