RE: Range Rover V8 (L322): Spotted

RE: Range Rover V8 (L322): Spotted

Sunday 21st January 2018

Range Rover V8 (L322): Spotted

Want to play at being lord of the manor while not sitting on a vast inheritance?



I know exactly what the first 50 comments of this Spotted will be: 'Range Rovers break you idiot' and 'It'll cost a fortune to run'. That's fine; please keep going. This just means that those who are brave (or stupid) enough to be interested in a Range Rover can find a tidy example for a tenth of the original price.

Need proof? Take a look at this one. If my maths is correct, this £4,999 example is 10 per cent of what it retailed for in 2002. And this isn't the glacia-slow 3.0 Td6, it's the same 4.4-litre V8 that was used in a contemporary BMW X5. Why do they share the same engine? Well, BMW had a lot of input in the development of the L322 Range Rover (£1 billion as was reported at the time) because they owned Land Rover.


This was until July 2000, when Ford bought Land Rover off BMW and put it amongst its Premier Automotive Group (PAG). BMW needed to sell off the luxury 4x4 maker because they had suffered huge losses during its ownership of Rover. Not that we should scoff too much, since Ford had to do much the same thing after the financial crisis of 2008 brought many American car makers to their knees. Ford managed to survive without a government bailout because it was able to sell off the companies it amassed in the good years.

But, back to the Range Rover, and the L322 to give this car its proper model code. It shared only its name with the previous P38 version, and featured fully independent air suspension, a monocoque construction, brake assist and the ability to switch between high and low-range gears on the move. It was a technological tour de force.


Many journalists described it as being light years ahead of its previous incarnation, finally fulfilling the promise of being the best luxury 4x4 by far. The interior was a mix of wood, metal and leather and it looked suitably opulent. Particularly when the interior incorporates lighter colours - as it does in this particular example. The ride quality was the envy of anything just shy of a Rolls Royce, and while the steering was rather light and lacking in feedback, it was a deft touch to park in town - where most Range Rovers reside.

Now, I am not going to tell you that Range Rover ownership will be trouble free, because it won't. It was a complicated, expensive vehicle; it's now a complicated, affordable vehicle. When things inevitably do go wrong, they'll be expensive to rectify. I imagine that the clamshell bonnet of this car is there not just to give you a clear view of where the front corners of the car are, but also offer a great leaning post for L322 owners to share breakdown stories whilst out on a country shoot or polo event.


So, why buy this Range Rover? At less than £5,000, it's a huge amount of car for the money. The design looks just as good today as it did the day it rolled out the showroom, and it still has a huge amount of presence out on the road. This particular one is very tidy both inside and out, indicating that it has been cared for (many of the advisories on past MOTs have been rectified), plus, it hasn't been messed around with: there isn't stick-on chrome gills or door mirror cappings, and the wheels look to be standard. This could be an absolute steal for those willing to take the plunge. Just ignore those first 50 comments...


SPECIFICATION - RANGE ROVER 4.4 V8 HSE

Engine: 4,398cc, V8
Transmission: 5-speed auto, four-wheel drive
Power (hp): 285
Torque (lb ft): 324
MPG: 22.4
CO2: 389g/km
First registered: 2002
Recorded mileage: 79,000
Price new: £50,000
Yours for: £4,990

See the original advert here.

Author
Discussion

Murphy16

Original Poster:

254 posts

81 months

Sunday 21st January 2018
quotequote all
Excellent looking car, straight pipe that V8 and revell in the noise!

The Moose

22,820 posts

208 months

Sunday 21st January 2018
quotequote all
NICE!

Would be hard not to...

classicyanktanks

295 posts

76 months

Sunday 21st January 2018
quotequote all
We bought one as a family 4x4 and it was rubbish it was 4 years old and had 22k.

We had a cayenne turbo before which was as economical, better to drive, cheaper to run, service, more luxurious inside and far better off-road.

The range over was too heavy (like being in a ship on the bends) and felt like they had dipped into the bad bmw parts bin.

The Range Rover had constant electrical problems, suspension failures. Coolant sensor, horn playing up, radio display, ac was chronic oh and you’d have to make the indicator noise as sometimes it would stop making it so you’d not know if you were indicating or not ! This was a main dealer approved 4 year old car ?!!!

To sum up they are great if you want to portray a country squire image and don’t mind paying £60,000 car plus bills for something worth apparently now £4.8k.

We now have the new cayenne turbo. To say it’s epic is an understatement for a massive Chelsea tractor.

I’ve tested and owned a lot of 4x4 vehicles and my favourites are the cayenne turbo or the absolute jewel in the crown of getting st done and always having your back the pajero / shogun.

Cold

15,207 posts

89 months

Sunday 21st January 2018
quotequote all
In this era of RR many of the bits that fail are BMW sourced. PH favourites of the 5 and 7 series are well represented under the skin.

Cambs_Stuart

2,833 posts

83 months

Sunday 21st January 2018
quotequote all
That is a lot of car for less than 5k. A LOT. Surely most things that would fail have been fixed, or am I being very optimistic?

classicyanktanks

295 posts

76 months

Sunday 21st January 2018
quotequote all
Cambs_Stuart said:
That is a lot of car for less than 5k. A LOT. Surely most things that would fail have been fixed, or am I being very optimistic?
Yes lol.

Turkish91

1,084 posts

201 months

Sunday 21st January 2018
quotequote all
classicyanktanks said:
We had a cayenne turbo before which was as economical, better to drive, cheaper to run, service, more luxurious inside and far better off-road.
Lol

LordHaveMurci

12,034 posts

168 months

Sunday 21st January 2018
quotequote all
Turkish91 said:
classicyanktanks said:
We had a cayenne turbo before which was as economical, better to drive, cheaper to run, service, more luxurious inside and far better off-road.
Lol
Not just me that noticed then hehe

Jammez

656 posts

206 months

Sunday 21st January 2018
quotequote all
Erm surely a Cayenne is meant for ferrying footballers to the ground?

classicyanktanks

295 posts

76 months

Sunday 21st January 2018
quotequote all
Jammez said:
Erm surely a Cayenne is meant for ferrying footballers to the ground?
Not this one

JoeBolt

271 posts

161 months

Sunday 21st January 2018
quotequote all
classicyanktanks] said:
Cayenne owner to actually use it for wha tit was intended for !
I'm saying nothing!

CS Garth

2,860 posts

104 months

Sunday 21st January 2018
quotequote all
JoeBolt said:
classicyanktanks] said:
Cayenne owner to actually use it for wha tit was intended for !
I'm saying nothing!
Used for feeding babies?

JoeBolt

271 posts

161 months

Sunday 21st January 2018
quotequote all
classicyanktanks said:
Jammez said:
Erm surely a Cayenne is meant for ferrying footballers to the ground?
Not this one
Oooh, a dirt track with a small puddle.

Be careful around those brambles. You wouldn't want to feel a prick.

QuattroDave

1,461 posts

127 months

Sunday 21st January 2018
quotequote all
I'm tempted by these but each time I look at the early ones I end up being drawn to the post 2011 FL ones - specifically the 4.4TDV8 but then I look into common problems and then wonder whether it's worth the potential financial pain!

Then I wonder whether it's just the triumph of the "german engineering" marketing that makes me so concerned. After all almost every Audi I've owned has robbed my wallet at some point (A8 4.2V8, UR quattro, S6, A6 +8 others) with only the RS6 not (mainly because I sold it very quickly!)

givablondabone

5,475 posts

154 months

Sunday 21st January 2018
quotequote all
I think brave pills are required to take one of these on personally but if you can find a good one that behaves itself then it's a hell of a lot of car for the money that's for sure.

Unfortunately I only have paracetamol in the cupboard!

Jim AK

4,029 posts

123 months

Sunday 21st January 2018
quotequote all
classicyanktanks said:
Not this one
biglaugh I`d have thought even a Faux x Four would manage that track, White goods hatchback even!!



J4CKO

41,279 posts

199 months

Sunday 21st January 2018
quotequote all
Cambs_Stuart said:
That is a lot of car for less than 5k. A LOT. Surely most things that would fail have been fixed, or am I being very optimistic?
Its a sixteen year old big, complicated old woofer, it has a 4.4 litre V8 engine that will do 22.4 mpg (hmm, really ?) and be constantly needing attention.

They now can look a bit naff with so many of the later ones around as well, this looks ok, could perhaps look like wealthy folk who have kept it around for years, rather than a retired bloke called Roy who tries to make it look super posh with his initials on the back, gold badges etc.

classicyanktanks

295 posts

76 months

Sunday 21st January 2018
quotequote all
Jim AK said:
biglaugh I`d have thought even a Faux x Four would manage that track, White goods hatchback even!!
It's life as we know it. Don't know if you'd get your nissan juke back up the hill Jim. Shazza or whatever you call her might have to get her white trainers dirty.

LandRoverManiac

402 posts

91 months

Sunday 21st January 2018
quotequote all
Hmmm... tempting.

My next purchase could be a difficult toss-up between one of these and a late P38 - both will need 'tinkering' to keep them happy (what LR product doesn't) but when they're working they are excellent things to waft around in.

The only issue with these is that they've become affordable to the point where Gazza on the council estate buys one for a couple of grand and tries to run it on a shoestring - there are a lot of dog-eared examples out there that have a list of avoidable issues due to long-term neglect. That would be true of any high-end luxury barge costing £50K+ when new.


I shall remain silent on the subject of Porsche Cayennes / off-roading to avoid needlessly offended the easily offended. Aren't they only driven by orange women?

schmalex

13,616 posts

205 months

Sunday 21st January 2018
quotequote all
Back in 2008, I owned a 2004 L322 V8. It was an incredible vehicle. Other than having to get the gearbox replaced under warranty when i bought it (yikes), it was totally reliable for the 3 years / 60,000 miles I owned it for and was as equally at home plugging through mud on the green lanes to the local shoot as it was cruising around the M25.

Mine had beige leather and I wasn’t that struck with the colour to be honest. The plastics, in beige, looked a bit more “plasticky” than the same items in black interiors.

Other than that, my only gripes about the truck was that the SatNav was pretty prehistoric and it would struggle to see over 22mpg.

On balance, it was a truly lovely truck.