I’m a big fan of the L322-generation Land Rover Range Rover. I love how they look, and I appreciate the balance between luxury boat and off-road bruiser that only a vehicle like the Range can deliver. Unlike the newer versions, this one is also the right size—big enough to carry anything I’d need to, but not too huge to fit into your average New York City parking space.
I like the L322 so much that I recently bought one. Specifically, a 2008 model-year truck with over 216,000 miles on the clock. I wanted something I could drive into huge potholes without worrying about, but I also didn’t want to spend a lot up front. Most of these SUVs are incredibly cheap on the used market, and for good reason: They’re known to be absolute money pits.
A quick Google search will net you a laundry list of common issues for these Range Rovers. The standard four-corner air suspension is infamous for its tendency to fail in numerous ways, leaving the truck sagging when you arrive to greet it the next morning. Higher-mile L322s will spawn electrical problems out of nowhere that can be hellish to track down. Water pumps often stop working without warning.
But when buying my Range Rover, nothing scared me more than timing chain issues. Of the five V8 engines that were available with the L322 in North America, three of them are notorious for timing chain-related failures. Fixing the suspension is a walk in the park by comparison—it’s usually an airbag, a connection point, or the air pump that goes bad. But if a timing chain fails, that’s it. You’re out a whole engine, and the truck is even more worthless than it was before.
Let’s Start At The Beginning
Source: Land Rover
To understand the L322’s timing chain woes, you have to know about Land Rover’s history at the turn of the century. In the early 1990s, Land Rover was still a part of the greater Rover Group, which also included marques like MG, Mini, and Austin. BMW acquired the conglomerate in 1994, outbidding Honda in an attempt to move downmarket without diluting its brand. Classicsworld.co.uk has a detailed write-up on the deal, which includes nuggets like this:
For BMW, it represented an opportunity to move into volume car making where industry pundits were all agreed at the time that the big money was to be made; the accepted wisdom was that small niche players like BMW operating only in the upper end of the market were vulnerable in the long term.
Rover, the pawn in the middle, had little say in the matter although the deal was naturally presented as an opportunity. Acquiring a new brand would avoid the problems with diluting the BMW brand by producing smaller, cheaper cars.
[…]
It’s also been suggested that the Germans were keen to compete with Mercedes and other premium brands in the SUV market but lacked the resources to develop its own models from scratch – and Rover Group came with the prize of the Land Rover brand.
Upon its purchase of Land Rover, BMW realized the P38 Range Rover—the model before the L322—was already outdated by the time it hit the market in 1995 (those are BMW’s words, not mine). The Germans immediately got to work on the L322 in an effort to keep it competitive by its launch time in 2003. BMW would eventually sell the Land Rover brand to Ford in 2000, before getting any Range Rovers to market. But the first L322s still got a whole lot of BMW parts, since most of the development work had already been done.
It’s BMW’s Fault These Early Trucks (Eventually) Turned Out Bad
Source: Land Rover
BMW’s involvement in these first- and second-year L322s proved to be the truck’s downfall—at least for third and fourth owners (early reviews of the truck gave it high praise). The problem lies with the BMW-built 4.4-liter V8, codenamed M62.
In addition to those early big-body Range Rovers, the M62 found a home in numerous BMW models, including the E39 BMW 5 Series, the E38 BMW 7 Series, and, ironically, the first-generation X5. No matter which engine bay the M62 graces with its presence, it has this tendency to eat through timing chain guides.
Timing chain guides are just that—pieces of plastic, metal, or some other composite material that mount to the front of the engine, responsible for “guiding” the timing chain along a specific pathway, keeping it properly tensioned. The chain rides along the guides as it spins the engine, and, in the case of the M62, the guides eventually wear out or become brittle and begin to break apart. When that happens, the chain loses its tension, causing a horrendous rattling sound:
When I was shopping for my Range Rover, I checked out a couple of these early, BMW-designed models. The first one was advertised as running and driving, but when I got there and turned the engine on, it made a noise identical to the engine in the video above. I walked away, obviously, knowing I’d either have to replace the guides or the engine altogether. That experience nearly scared me away from buying a Range Rover of any kind.
It’s not exactly clear why the guides fail so often. Some theorize the material of the guides is inferior, while others point to the fact that the M62 uses a single-row timing chain rather than a dual-row timing chain like its predecessor, the M60. Some people believe it has to do with a flaw in the design of the guide path. While the M60 used a rotating sprocket to guide the timing chain from one side of the engine to the other, the M62 just uses a U-shaped guide. Theoretically, that means a lot more friction in a spot where there was none before.
No matter what the root cause is, the guides are, at this point in the L322’s life, a must-replace item for any owner of these early models. I wouldn’t consider buying one unless they’ve been replaced or you intend to do the work yourself. That wouldn’t be a big deal if the guides were easy to replace. But as you’ve probably already guessed, they’re a huge pain, with lots of parts in the way and a few specialty BMW tools needed to complete the job. Paying a mechanic to perform the task would likely cost more than the whole truck is worth.
Different Engine, Similar Problem
The L322 got a significant refresh for the 2006 model year, which involved a handful of design changes and two new engines, which Ford, Land Rover’s new owner, sourced from Jaguar—a brand Ford also owned at the time. The AJ-V8, as it was known internally, came in two flavors: A naturally aspirated 4.4-liter unit and a supercharged 4.2-liter unit. For the 2010 model year, those engines were replaced with their modern 5.0-liter equivalents. That’s when problems reemerged.
As with the BMW-powered trucks, these 2010 model-year Range Rovers received critical acclaim from testers when new. It was only when people started piling the miles on that a problem with the timing guides started to emerge. Yes, the same exact part as the BMW motor, despite having no mechanical relation to that engine.
Here, the problem lies with how the guides provided tension to the chain. In the case of these engines, an oil-filled piston pushes on the back of the chain guide, which in turn provides tension to the chain. But over time, the point where the piston and the guide make contact can wear down, allowing slack in the chain. In addition to causing a similar rattling noise caused by the BMW engine, the chain could eventually skip timing or just snap altogether, instantly killing the motor it was attached to.
While no legal action was taken against Jaguar-Land Rover by owners of L322s equipped with these 5.0-liter engines, the company settled with 2012-2014 LR4 and Range Rover Sport owners who filed a class-action lawsuit over a timing chain flaw in their SUVs (they used lightly updated versions of the same engine).
Hence, my reasoning for buying a base 4.4-liter car from the “middle” era of the L322’s lifecycle. My engine, historically, has exhibited fewer problems than the BMW unit or the later 5.0-liter engines. It’s not perfect, of course (I check my coolant levels every time I’m about to drive the thing, and watch my water temps like a hawk). But I rest a bit easier knowing the chain rattle of death likely isn’t coming for my engine. If you’re in the market for an L322, I suggest you follow in my footsteps.
Support our mission of championing car culture by becoming an Official Autopian Member.
Top graphic: Land Rover, BMW, and shedlock2000 on YouTube
Range Rovers are indeed nice. They look sharp, they attract the ladies, and they will swoon all over you. They also can hit 300k miles if you have the money and patience to look after them.
But when they break down, is when the nasty points start.
Range Rovers are like attractive women with lots of makeup. They will continue to be with you AS LONG AS YOU PUT MONEY INTO THEM.
A GMT900 Tahoe does not look pretty (lets leave AFM out of the chat, as even this issue is WAY easier to fix compared to whatever an old RR will suffer from), but it will always be by your side as you as long as you take care of it. And the difference in maintenance costs is HUGE.
There’s something about them that even knowing this and all the other problems (coolant pipes on the V6 and 5.0Ls – looking at you) I still really want an L319 or an early L322 before they got blingy. Well…. what I really want is an L318 but ain’t nobody got time for that.
Maybe someday. Of course I’m getting tired of wrenching on the weekends. I also want to move somewhere walkable and won’t have extra garage space to house my not-working car so, maybe not. Shame really.
I believe there is a VIN breakpoint for the 5.0L cars with updated timing components, I want to say 2013 ish? Not sure if it’s fix once, and it’s solid, or just slightly better, but not great.
Don’t delude yourself into thinking it was actually fixed with the updated parts or wasn’t a problem on the 4.2 and 4.4s. It’s just more likely to last a little longer than the BMW and later JLR efforts.
My SCV6 (which is literally just the 5.0L with two cylinders plugged) Disco 5 started rattling with 42k miles. Took it in for something unrelated (EVAP code) and got the bad news that the chain was pretty stretchy. $100 deductible later I was rolling around with a much better running motor. Thanks Carmax!
Traded it in for a 330i Touring a few months later. Someone got a really good deal on that Disco.
I still want another Land Rover because there really is nothing quite like them when they’re working. I am aiming for a LR3, 4, or first gen Range Rover Sport and just going in with eyes open that it’s actually price + timing job. Still it’s way cheaper than a new Defender or Grenadier.
I also have an LR3, or full fat Jag engined RR on my list. The RRS just doesn’t seem to have an advantage over the other 2 since they pretty much all cost the same now. No third row like an LR3, not notably lighter than a full fat because of hybrid monocoque/ladder frame vs full monocoque, and less interior space.
Just preference for me really. I like the slightly narrower look of the pre-refresh Sports and the interior design vs. the full fat. In the right color combo I’d snag a full size no problem.
Plus, the sport is a way to effectively double your available LR3 buying options if you don’t care about the 3rd row since it’s basically just an LR3 underneath. People also seemed to go a little crazier on the interior and exterior colors with the sports, which is important to me.
Magic wand I’d love a Galway Green LR3 or a Montalcino Red over Tan LR4, but I doubt I’ll ever see one for sale with the HD pack that isn’t wildly overpriced.
L322’s are fantastic – buy a 2007-2009 and you’ll be fine.
Great article. I’m on my 4th JLR product. First 2 had the 4.4 AJV8 (both had PCV valve issues, seem to be common for that engine, cheap fix), and the last two have had the 5.0 SC V8. Trust me when I say the 5.0 SC V8 is worth the cost of getting the timing chain guides fixed. It is a monstrous engine with instant torque. A tune and pulley upgrade will yield 600+ hp all day long. That is 600hp in a SUV originally designed with 300hp in mind. It is bonkers fun.
I always thought it was fascinating that BMW bought Rover from (what it sounds) specifically for Land Rover, spent an absolute ton of money and engineering time on turning the brand around to be the premier choice in the segment and deeply integrating the Range Rover into BMW’s greater product stack and development pipeline…
Then gave up on it and sold the entire company to Ford just before it came out. It’s hard for me to even reconcile the L322 as always having technically been a Ford product, because both the BMW dealers near me had expanded out to sell Land Rovers and did so for quite a few years in the same showroom as E39s and the like.
BMW bought Rover for Land Rover but they got out of what they wanted. BMW wanted the RR suspension technology to build an SUV.
What they actually did was take the original RRS design / engineering and turn it in to the first generation X5, then sold off what they didn’t want. That left LR scabbling and hence why the first RRS was a rebodied Disco which weighed 2.7t. So BMW got out of the whole deal what they wanted and managed to shift on what they didn’t want.
Don’t forget BMW made the best Defenders ever while they owned them. The unobtanium M52 powered examples sold only in South Africa. It’s probably the only RHD car I’d put up with here in the states if I could find and afford a 110.
Ironically it’s the Land Rover touches that make me really appreciate the first gen X5 and the BMW bits that made me love the early L322s. As a fanboy of both companies I really wish BMW had stuck with it. Imagine an X5 with 4 corner air suspension, low range, and the Land Rover rear e-diff. Or a new Defender with a B58. Sign me up.
A new Defender with a B58? Ineos would like a word
Like I said, the only RHD vehicle I’d put up with in America is a South African market M52 Powered 110 which is an actual BMW powered Defender.
I did test drive a Gren…. I loved it, but it’s not something I’d ever want to own while I still live in Texas as it’s essentially useless for anything other than looking cool trying to park at the Domain. Arizona, the PNW, Colorado? Yeah, I’d probably have one as it was pretty much tailor made for me.
They also got Mini, and then proceeded to make cars that aren’t mini.
(They do sell bucket loads of them though)
Here’s what happens with the guides, both bmw and land Rover. At around 100k miles, the (plastic) cooling system starts to go bad. This leads to a minor (sometimes major) overheat as people limp the car home until they get it fixed. This causes the plastic in the guides to get brittle and they become a ticking time bomb. What usually finishes them off is the spring in the timing chain tensioner wearing (it’s only there for startup as it’s otherwise oil pressure fed). So you do a cold start at 130k miles with a previously overheated engine and a worn tensioner spring and boom, a chunk of plastic breaks off the guide and it’s in it’s way out. Use reasonable oil change intervals, NEVER let it overheat (they have level sensors so as soon as it reads low once, FIX IT) and change the tensioner when you do the cooling system and they’ll go 250k miles. I’ve replaced two sets, it’s not a fun job. Also, they had a plastic water pump impellar, so when that breaks it will overheat. When you do the cooling system, replace it with one with a metal impellar.
It’s sort of surprising at how often timing chains cause issues. While I still much prefer them over a belt, I’ve had personal experience with some of their downsides. Case in point- The 2.0 in my Tracker (Suzuki J20) is known for chain issues if not meticulously maintained. My original J20 went 200,000 miles, with the last 50k or so showing pretty serious signs that the chain needed to be addressed YESTERDAY. (Blew a headgasket the week before I had an appointment to get the timing done) I’ve torn down other J20’s that have broken guides, sloppy chains, etc. My BIL has two 2.5 Suzuki’s that make some chain noise. The 4.6 sohc in my Grand Marquis makes some quiet chain noise at idle and in gear, which will probably need to be addressed in the not too distant future.
Gimme timing gears! I don’t care how loud they are, I just want to never need to screw with timing. While it was a slow, underpowered thirsty turd, the 3FA in 80 series land cruisers is certainly not known for unreliability.
I had to replace the timing chain tensioner on the 2012 VW CC I had as well. Same story as the Range Rover, no recall only a TSB and class action lawsuit.
I know this is about the L322, but man… the P38 has aged amazingly well. I didn’t love it back when it came out, but it really grew on me over the years.
Agree, the P38, XJ Cherokee, LR3/4, E53 X5 and Disco 2 are hands down my top 5 SUV designs.
WK2 Grand Cherokees, 2nd Gen Touareg, E70 X5 and pre-bling first gen Range Rover Sport also get honorable mentions.
Your first article on the L322s really sent me down a rabbit hole, looking at whats in my area, watching various Youtubers work on and, not restore, but let say reinvigorate, these things. I’m a huge fan of body swap “restomods” (I own a ’71 Travelall skinned ’03 Tahoe) so this has now led me to thinking that a Land Rover swapped vintage Wagoneer is a way better and cooler fit than the Porsche Cayenne I was previously thinking would be fun.
Its only because your writing made it seem fun to investigate. So nicely done.
The only way I could see owning a land Rover or most BMWs is if it was cheap enough to consider it disposable. I had a neighbor that thought that way. He would buy bmws and land Rovers use them for close to a year then buy another constantly rotating stock. He also had some head gasket in a can he liked. For when things went wrong.
Some of these are $5k near me. Not “disposable” but we’re disposable adjacent. And man that’s a lotta car for $5k. I know it will end terribly and in financial ruin but part of me is sitting here saying how bad could it be??
I know what you mean. I see them for $2k and think about it. But I’ve been down that road before. That guy would pay $2500 or less. He did fairly well with them. Mainly got his money back sometimes made a little.
Yes absolutely.
I guess there is a reason why used Escalades and LX570s hold their value as compared to Range Rovers.
And, air suspension failure is fatal in a Range Rover as compared to an Escalade or an LX (minus the new ones, as they have a lot of issues to fix- the 6.2 grenades are only ONE of them).
They also don’t seem to hold up well in the extreme climate of Qatar. That is why more LX470s and GMT800 Escalades exist.
Definitely a big part of it is they depreciate so fast it doesn’t take much to total them and most fixes you know is just going to break again in short order. I’ve heard it said that just about every bmw and land Rover over 7 years old is mechanically totaled driving on the road or not.
There is also something interesting that happens with most of the luxury cars where their primary market wants nothing to do with them after a certain age. You can sometimes find a Escalade cheaper then a similarn Yukon or suburban and definitely cheaper then then a Silverado or sierra. I’m surprised more people don’t make pickups out of them.
The last few times I’ve been though Dbx there seems to be an increase in range rovers but only newer ones I can only assume its all the expats leasing them. There is no way they can hold up very long there.
Most expats dont keep Range Rovers long term. Of course, I have seen some old ones, but they are few and far in between. I would be impressed to see one with 350k kms still running (am referring to the 2000s and other recent models).
And in Africa the older ones are more preferred (where people seem to swap Toyota engines into them).
May I also add that they are driven by women who are very rash drivers.
Sure, some people don’t mind dumping money into them, but you have a large family and need to get from A to B , a Land Cruiser/Patrol or a Yukon/Tahoe/Escalade are all vastly superior options in the used market.
Do you know if those armoured excursions are still driving in Qutar? I know they imported several.
I haven’t seen any this year.
I have seen a few for sale in the used market.
And Excursions seem to be owned only by Locals here in Qatar, not by Expats.
Kuwait and Oman seem to have more.
Makes sense I don’t think it was much of an expat vehicle. Other then maybe some embassy people. Kuwait probably imported the most of the gulf states. I’ve heard some were brought in from Iraq by contractors too. I think Qatar but might have been Oman had about 200 of some of the last ones built armoured but never imported them. They are become a rarer sight in the US too. But I don’t think they are being junked just not driven as much.
Aside: the stellar outward visibility of those Range Rogers is worth all the drama of the timing change guides.
The AJV8 engines (even the supercharged ones) from the 2000s-2008 are very well built. Plenty of people with these 3.9-4.4 variants over 200k miles, some over 300k, and (supposedly) higher than that. What kills engines from this specific window is something failing in the cooling system, but by the mileage that it occurs, the part should have been replaced anyway.
I can’t comment on the BMW engines, but the post 2008 AJV8 family engines (including the S/C V6 variants) are not worth buying. DI, thinner oils, longer OCI’s, much more fragile cooling system failure points, etc… garbage. If you want a post 2008 engine to survive longer, 5k oil OCIs, put a quality 30w oil in them, and run a quality DI fuel injector cleaner in the tank every so often (to keep the injectors alive).
Even with that, you will probably need to replace the entire timing system with the updated guides that came out in ~2013 (?) to be on the safe side. Or else, they will go boom.
Has anyone LS-swapped one of these?
I know the approved procedure for the horsey set that buys them new is to trade the whole thing in for a Denali (Escalades are too gauche for them, too “ooh, someone called a *fancy* Uber) but I’m thinking more wrench and grime…
There are a few out there. I think cosmic mfg has a kit and someone else does the electronics.
Still a V8. There are millions of the things out there. They routinely run to very high mileage. There’s a fix for every flaw the family members ever had and a very deep aftermarket to use. There’s no downside except originality. But who cares! It’s going to be far more reliable than the original engine.
I would rather have a GMT900 Escalade than a Range Rover. Especially if it were a 09 model (let us leave AFM aside). A much simpler gas V8, a platform shared with many other cars…what is not to like?
And, in some cases Range Rover screams feminine stereotypes- look at all female celebrities who have RRs. Granted, Escalades are also quite flashy, but more or less business man oriented (there are female celebrities who own Escalades too, but given the status, you would be looked down upon if you had an Escalade because they do NOT attract the same attention as a G wagon or a Range Rover will.
Older (and even the problem prone newer ones) Escalades look a lot more “manly”.
But that is just how I see it.
I wonder if Ford ever considered putting in their 4.6-liter V8?
They did put it in the MG ZT = Rover 75….
Range Rover was run by people who thought adding British electronics with a German engine was a good idea—just another data point on why all executives are vastly overpaid.
Maybe throw in Korean styling from the era to have the trifecta of bad decisions.
When you buy a vehicle with a common known issue like this, you either buy one that has the issue already addressed, or you price having to address it into what you are willing to pay for the vehicle. This really isn’t complicated.
BMW has never made a V-anything engine that was worth a damn, much as I usually bleed Blau und Wiess, and I have never owned nor wanted to own a V8 or V12 BMW.
If buying a BMW always get the I6 if you can.
The fours are generally fine too. Just not nearly as exciting. Though my ’91 318is’s (I had two of them) were absolutely OUTSTANDING driver’s cars. The baby M3. And a car I really wish I still had.
As a rule, BMWs are at their best in their simplest forms. Modestly powered I4 or I6, manual transmission, minimal frippery and nonsense about them. The hur-dur versions aren’t worth the disproportional aggravation, IMHO.
The BMW 4-cylinder N20 isn’t well-regarded due to timing chain issues. The N47 engines are well known for being complete garbage, yet BMW continued to put them in cars for years, and the successor isn’t much better. But the N47 is a diesel, so more of an issue in Europe where they are BMWs’ most common engine I believe.
The BMW of the 70s, 80s, and early 90s is dead and shan’t return. But in the classic market, the simple ones are lovely.
The N20 is like anything with a known dilemma. As I said, fix it BEFORE it breaks, and factor that fix into the price you are willing to pay. <shrug> Otherwise, they more powerful, more efficient, and reasonably smooth for a four, if nothing like as smooth or as nice sounding as an N51/52.
N47 is irrelevant in the US, and I can’t imagine why the Hell you would want a BMW with a diesel in it in the first place. Serves you right. Though the diesel they did sell in the US is NOT known for the issues that the Euro version has. But I don’t know what is different about them. One case where I suspect the American diesel owner tendency of racking up big miles helps rather than hurts. Modern diesels HATE short trips.
BMW is deader than Jimmy Hoffa as far as I am concerned. They haven’t really made a thing I have been interested in since the F22 2-series – and I didn’t even like the M235i I bought all that much and kept it less than two years. But the Euro Delivery of that car where I spent a month taking my sainted mother around nine countries in Europe was worth the price of entry. Here in the US, meh, the GTI that replaced it was better for my purposes.
The sole exception is that IF they still allowed European Delivery for Americans, I might have been tempted to order a 6spd Z4 when they re-introduced the manual. But no ED, can’t be bothered, too much money, too much nonsense inside the car. My mint-condition convertible 1-series is just fine. for <1/3rd the price.
The internet doesn’t stop at the border, and this website has contributors from across the globe. The diesels are relevant in that they have been key to BMW’s global survival. Especially the high-volume, low-cost models for which the N47 was the primary powerplant. BMW sold a lot more N47s than any other engine in that time period. The idea that it is a user-caused issue in that it isn’t fixed before it is broken is still a failure of the design.
I agree that BMW is a pointless brand nowadays. I would push back the point of irrelevance to anything newer than the E46.
The e9X and e8X (same car, different wrapper) are simply FAR better cars than the E46 in pretty much every way. And have WAAAAY fewer built in dilemmas. No comparison at all really. As actual cars, the F3X are really even better overall – but BMW lost the plot in terms of how they drove for those of us who are “traditional BMW drivers”. But they set sales records because they were what the average punter wanted. A Lexus with a BMW badge on it.
Lots of cars, I would say most actually, have in-built dilemmas. Fix them before they bite you in the ass. Or buy something else.
I live in the US. I don’t give the first shit about what the volume sellers were on the other side of the pond, they are irrelevant to my life here. And even over there, I would not have bought a poverty spec diesel BMW. That is literally buying a car for the badge alone. The French did that sort of thing rather batter. and frankly so did VW. But the simple reality is that BMW DID sell diesel 4-cylinders in the US in the F30 and F31, and they don’t suffer the same issues that they suffer in the olde countries. So that tells me that unless the engines are radically different (and I don’t believe they are), it’s a use case issue. Buying modern emissions-controlled diesels for the sort of short trip driving that is typical in Europe is stupid, and asking for all sorts of dilemmas. There was a point when direct injected turbodiesels were amazing, combining both good power and excellent fuel efficiency, but that point is long past once they needed serious emissions controls.
Steady there, cowboy.
I was simply pointing out that the above statement needed quite a bit of qualification. Also, the “use case” issue is still 100% on BMW. They put bad engines in models where their flaws were made more egregious.
BMW’s business success is no doubt because they stopped caring about the original enthusiast on whom they built their brand. And there is no doubt that BMWs are now just badge delivery mechanisms. But they sure didn’t go after the Lexus crowd with a model lineup that has for years had one of, if not the, highest cost of ownership in the industry. Regardless of fixing it before or after it breaks.
Sure they did. Because people who buy NEW BMWS today *DO NOT GIVE A SHIT*. They want the Lexus-style ride, and the toys, and the “prestige”. They mostly don’t really care how it handles, because they don’t know any better – it’s going to feel better than their previous CamCord or whatever used near-luxury car they had. They don’t keep the cars long enough to have any idea how much they cost to fix. And given how many end up CPO, the second owner’s mostly don’t either. The third owners who buy then used for pennies on the dollar and clog up the forums whine about it.
The primary selling factor for Lexus has always been its emphasis on luxury and reliability. Not the badge-centric clout chasers. BMW went after the latter, not the former.
Plus, new BMWs largely don’t even ride very well. They often have performance that makes them look great on a spreadsheet. That means they continue to get press for performance and maintain their market differentiation. The fact that the buyers can’t actually tell the difference is immaterial to the marketing. If anything, the buyers believe the fairly stiff ride makes it “sporty.”
Most luxury models are purchased by people who own them for a short period of time since they are the folks who can afford a $1000+/m payment or can trade them in every three years and pay for the difference in cash. That is also the reason that BMW engineers design cars to last the warranty period and not much longer.
Keeping them on the road longer is possible, of course, but it will always be a battle against the design intent of the product.
While there is no clear demarcation, the line that pushed me over was the E90 and E60. The previous 3 and 5 series were worth the relatively small pain they could provide because they were great cars to drive. The E90 and E60 began the march toward complexity, which didn’t provide any real positive tradeoff. They could be monsters on a track, but that isn’t the environment where they are used.
BMW is, for sure, a sad story for anyone who used to like BMWs.
LOL – that sure isn’t true of the Lexus owners I know. It’s ALL about the badge for them. “Reliability” doesn’t cross the mind of the average new luxury car owner. That is why they buy new cars – they have warranties and loaners. BMW of today is completely dead to me – but so is every other car maker.
As I have said on here many times. In 14 years of ownership from new, my e91 has needed a new battery as it’s sole out of pocket “repair”. I did a few additional things preemptively like the OFHG and serp belt tensioner. It is minimally more complex than an equivalent e46. It has an n/a engine, RWD, a manual gearbox, no iDrive, nothing much in the way of frippery at all. It’s faster and more efficient than an e46 330i was, and not by a small amount, and way more than fast enough for me. My e88 128i has had a few more things done in similar time and a few more miles, but also has an impeccable service record (but it lived in a blazing hot climate all it’s life so it’s had the other two common oil leaks and a set of coils). Had a delightful rip in the e91 down to my office in MA and back yesterday, since I am in Maine this week. If you are dumb enough to want/buy the hur-dur versions of these cars, well, good luck to ya.
But overall, they just keep getting better and better, despite the occasional built-in dilemma. My stepfather bough a 528e new in 1983, and he then my mother kept it for 25+ years. Despite being roughly as complicated as a hammer, it had has a stack of service and repair records that looked like the phone book, and when we finally sold it off only had 125K on it. And in mild San Francisco until the last 5-6 years. The good old days weren’t actually all that good.
The badge represents an ideal; Lexus and BMWs have cultivated ideals that are polar opposites from one another. BMW was about engagement, performance, and robust, if not maintenance-free, engineering. Lexus was about offering all the luxury of a Mercedes without the ongoing, pointless headaches. They provided enough performance that very few would ever really care about the difference between Lexus, BMW, or MB. Lexus generally still lives up to that promise; BMW has failed on almost every point these days. One is purchased because it still delivers on a promise, and the other is purchased only for a promise that died years ago.
The capabilities of cars in general have increased significantly; a new minivan would go around the track faster than the original M3. A new M3 likely has a better chance of hitting 100k miles without major issues than the original as well. But we judge products in terms relative to those in which they are offered.
I think we agree that with current BMWs and MBs, the juice isn’t worth the squeeze. Whatever details our personal calculations might include. I’m not sure if you’re saying that BMW and others are dead, or if you think things keep getting better and the old days weren’t so good.
Emphasis on *WAS*. BMW and Lexus sell to primarily the very same target market today. Even M cars are just nonsense when the M5 wagon weighs as much as a freaking Suburban from a decade ago.
BOTH things are true. In terms of being cars, the new cars are simply better than the old cars in every *objective* way. They don’t even cost more – in fact they are wildly cheaper adjusted for inflation and content. Subjectively, I’d prefer the old stuff even if it broke down all the time and has no more infotainment than a radio. If I could buy a brand new ’91 318is I would leave skid marks getting to the dealership. But as a CAR they are terrible. But I am not a modern luxury car buyer in any way. The e9x/e8x were the last BMWs sold with old-school levels of equipment. RWD, manual transmission, non-turbo n/a inline six, no screens inside, just a couple of 2-line info displays. And as such, they are, in my opinion, subjectively the best cars BMW ever made. And they drive to BMW standards of old. The pinnacle of their evolution before they jumped the shark and started giving up on traditional BMW values and making largely consumer focus grouped Lexus competitors full of nonsense technology and largely devoid of driving feel. Because very few people today actually care how a car drives, as long as it is smooth and quiet. Too busy playing with the “infotainment”.
I still think the new cars occupy the same “relative” position as they always have – I would still buy a new 3-series LONG before I ever considered a new Camry. But I don’t want a new Camry either. I don’t care how reliable they are, I still find them completely dire places to spend time. ALL modern cars are just stupid now, and I have no interest in any of them. Similarly, I think my S212 was peak Mercedes overall, though it’s a bit more arguable there simply because the w123 and especially w124 were such amazing cars, and the two generations in-between those and my car seriously dropped the ball. BMW never had that problem like Mercedes did – each generation was better than the previous whether as cars or as driving tools until the fxx cars. Even the Bangle-mangle 5s and 7s while ugly to my eye were fantastic cars to drive – then the next generation was NOT. And the f3x is in many ways a better CAR than the e9x (faster, safer, more efficient, probably longer lasting), it just isn’t better as a driver’s car. It’s a waay better Lexus competitor though. Smooth, quiet, fast, more spacious – and numb, with lots of tinsel to play with inside.
I admit that the Bangle era cars lost me with design more than anything else. I dismissed them because of how offensive they were to the eyes.
I would very much argue that Lexus and BMW have very different core audiences within the luxury car market. The badges each is buying mean very different things, which is the point of each badge, and they split their customers based largely on those differences.
Lexus always promised reliable luxury at a good value, and they still provide that. BMW traditionally attracted a combination of those people who truly wanted a great driver’s car and those who wanted to piggyback on that reputation for the status. But now, BMW has completely given up on the driver-focused side and only cares about the poseur, since they are the ones willing to spend big money on cheap junk. That means BMW undoubtedly does not fill the same niche that it did 20 or more years ago. Today, BMW is always at or near the top of ownership costs, but it no longer provides me with anything I care about.
All cars have seen massive increases in performance, amenities, and reliability over the years. A new BMW’s improvements in those areas are immaterial in the context of its contemporaries. A Civic Type-R is as fast around a track as a 2010 Corvette Grand Sport or a 2019 BMW M2 Competition. And even my bare-bones ’22 Tacoma had as much or more tech as I care about. The E46 had everything I would want in a BMW and very little I didn’t.
My line with BMW is just slightly earlier than yours. I had owned an E36 M3, and while the E46 felt similar to drive, the E90 lost something. I completely admit that part of it was that I didn’t like the way they looked (as Jeremy Clarkson said, they just looked like 16′ of car), but the bigger issue was that the performance improvements hit a point where they didn’t matter on the street, but the complexity still increased.
Now, I would pick a Civic Type R to fill the role that I used to look to BMW to fill. They drive as well as any BMW from the good years (FWD makes it different, but they sure have it figured out) while also benefiting from the industry-wide increase in amenities and reliability.
As it currently stands, I have a Miata and a Sienna. The Sienna is the ultimate do anything tool, and the Miata is my daily for any trip that doesn’t require me to haul more than one person or a few bags of groceries, which is about 90% of my driving.
You are simply wrong. You obviously are not a luxury car buyer. While what you think is true was true 20 years ago, it is no longer true today, and simply looking at and driving a current BMW will tell you in no uncertain terms that it’s the same target market as Lexus today. And realistically, it’s the *Chinese* market they mostly have cared about for much of that time, and they are about as far from the traditional BMW buyer as it is possible to be.
Civic Type Rs make Bangle-BMWs look like works of art. Other than the GTI, the Golf being a premium car in it’s own right, I don’t get the fascination with fast econoboxes. You can’t make a racehorse out of a pig, even if you can make a really fast pig. And the GTI doesn’t try to be a racehorse, just a pig with more fun.
BMW has for sure focused on China. But if you think that Lexus and BMW are synonymous within the luxury car market, you don’t have even the start of a clue.
BMW buyers have significantly higher incomes, they are younger, and they prioritize the appearance of performance and status. The core psychographic appeal of Lexus is rooted in dependability, comfort, and reliability.
The thing about brands and target markets is that they are more about impressions than any real variation in their products. The thing that should make this clear is their model mix. BMW leans heavily into its “M” cars and the various “M” trims as its marketing heroes. Lexus makes no such effort because their target buyers are very, very different, even within the luxury market. This reality isn’t limited by your selective myopia.
You really do seem to find being consistent impossible. Do you care about what a car can do and how it drives or not? Because a modern Civic Type-R is much more capable performance-wise and has a lot more luxury features than any BMW from 20 years ago. All while having steering, shifting, and braking with better feel. In fact, it outpaces an E92 M3.
But maybe your idea of “luxury” is focused on having the “best” of something simply because of a badge or how much you spend. But that would conflict with your desire not to have screens or all the other modern trappings that are the primary differentiation for luxury brands.
But, I have always prioritized how good a car was to drive and not the brand or perceived luxury. I’ll leave the expensive fashion statements to others who are desperate for outside approval.
I care about how a car drives very much- but I also care about how it “feels”. Objectively, a hot Civic (or WRX STI, etc, etc, etc) can be the most amazeballs thing to fling around a racetrack ever made – but that doesn’t mean it isn’t a noisy tin box with the fundamental soul of an economy car. I like a happy medium in all things. Which means subjectively, I don’t care AT ALL about cars that are turned up to “11”. So for me, the only “hot hatch” I have any interest in (and bought) was a GTI. Because, as I said, a Golf is a premium car in it’s own right, and has been since the ’80s. Same as I could not care less about BMW M cars and would never buy one – too much muchness. I had an M2 loaner for a long weekend and I thought it was just silly. Not enough added performance for the loss in comfort vs. the M235i the dealer was trying to get me to swap (and that car was actually more than I really wanted or needed, and I fairly quickly got rid of it). I want a practical car that delivers an excellent driving experience without beating me up. So for me, a 3-series wagon or an E-class Mercedes wagon for the next size bigger are the perfect compromise (and I have one of each). For a convertible, I chose the 1-series because the metal folding roofed 3-series convertible is ridiculous. Almost 400lbs heavier for LESS usefulness. Though if you are looking more purely for the drive and don’t care about practicality so much, IMHO the 1-series coupe is the BMW pinnacle of that in the US. For M cars the 1M is probably the peak. A real throwback to the original e30 and e36 M3s before they started ladling on the luxury. But for me, too much muchness. I don’t think my automotive wants and desires are particularly difficult to understand, but they certainly are MINE.
Otherwise, blah, blah blah. BMWs are the way they are *today* because BMW is chasing a far more mainstream buyer – aka, the Lexus “fancy Camry” set. Whether there are still some holdover differences from the olden days when they actually were distinctly different and very much driver’s cars is neither here nor there. A BMW 3-series of today is FAR closer to being a Lexus IS than it is to being an 80s 3-series. And an 80s 3-series was a HELL of a lot more different from a Toyota Cressida of the day. At this point, I have no interest in either one. BMW stopped making cars I care about with vanishingly rare exceptions 15ish years ago. The ONLY car they make I would even consider owning today is a Z4 6spd, and the interior ergonomics would annoy the absolute shit out of me nearly instantly, no matter how lovely it is to drive. But if they bring back Euro Delivery I will probably do as I did with my M235i. Buy one, have fun with it in Europe for a month, then sell it on in a couple of years. Zero chance of being a pampered car in my fleet for decades as my 1 and 3 are/will be.
BMW fulfills a function much like a Lexus, but premium brands are only superficially about function. They are primarily about status, which is where Lexus and BMW differ substantially, which is why all the data shows that they have significantly differentiated buyers. Ignoring the facts doesn’t make them go away.
I owned an E36 M3, and to me, it was peak BMW. The E46 M3 was very nice, but the 330 was plenty for use on the street. The 1M was a last hurrah of sorts, but was still too heavy and had more power and grip than matters on the street. Making it less enjoyable as a daily than older BMWs.
I have also owned an MK7 GTI and Golf-R. The Golfs were infinitely more civilized and quieter than the E36 or E46 while also possessing more performance capabilities and luxury elements. The steering and brake feel isn’t as direct as an older BMW, but it is better than a modern one. So if those are your priorities over all the other pieces, the Golfs won’t quite get you there.
The car that possesses far more luxury and performance than the older BMWs, with controls and feel that is every bit as engaging, is the Acura Integra, which can be had for about the price of a base 3-series.
But it is a segment that is primarily purchased by people who prioritize brand status rather than the qualities of the product. Acura does not fulfill that need in the market, and BMW does. The few people who will buy an Integra Type-S are the ones who want a car that is an improvement in almost every way over an old BMW and don’t care about status. There aren’t many of those despite how many people like to claim that they are.
If I had a commute, an Integra S or Civic R would be in my garage within the week. Most likely the Civic, since I am not moved much by luxury trappings. I would just need to find a wing-delete kit.
We are always going to disagree on this, so I am out – time to start driving south anyway.
You can’t turn an econobox into a 3-series, no matter how well the numbers add up. A FWD Honda is just a completely different thing to drive, no matter which badge they slap on it. If you like that sort of thing, more power to you. I don’t mind driving Hondas, I just don’t particular care for being in them for any length of time.
Premium cars are still going to give you an experience that mainstream brands won’t – it’s not ALL about the badge. At least once you get past the ones that are literally badge-engineered mainstream cars, and of the Germans, only Audi does that. And the mainstream cars they base their version on are premium cars themselves in the way that an Acura that was literally sold as a Honda every else can never be. A better faster pig is still a pig.
We disagree because my opinion is grounded in objective measurements, facts, and reason. Yours is just rationalizing a prioritization of brand status. Which is why you need to rely on the nebulous idea of “feel” rather than anything real.
If the current Honda/Acura siblings are dressed-up pigs, then an E9x BMW was a three-legged hippo not just in performance but in driving feel, refinement, amenities, materials, and quality. But for people who are obsessed with status, that was never the point.
Whatever mate. If you don’t think all of these cars are cross-shopped, and thus all of them are chasing after the EXACT same buyers today, you are out of your damned mind. It’s primarily 2-box blob CUVs all the way down for all of them. Anything intended for “enthusiasts” is tertiary at best.
There is nothing objective in your argument here at all, particularly in regards to the e9x. There are *objectively* better in every way than the e46 – even if *subjectively* YOU prefer how the e46 drives for whatever reason – you do you. I subjectively think there is nothing in it as to driving feel, and thus I will take the car that is objectively better. Subjectively, what *I* want is a brand-new e30 – but that obviously isn’t going to happen.
I don’t know why I even bother to reply to you – you are very much a fan of tilting at windmills.
My experience was that when new the E46 was more fun to drive, while the E90 may have been technically better. The E90 has a slightly longer wheelbase, but overall the car is bulkier. The later E90 I6 models were incredibly fast, but with suspensions way too stiff for daily driving in the Northeast.
I disagree – I don’t think there is much in it for how they drive, other than certainly the e9x is smoother and quieter. And much better made. And rather more reliable too. Far fewer inbuilt dilemmas (comparing like for like – the turbos are a whole different beast with no e46 equivalent). And that added bit of size makes them a LOT more usable. E46s were very cramped cars, IMHO.
I have owned my ’11 e91 from new in Maine – the suspension is absolutely perfect for the road conditions here. I do agree that the sport suspension is too stiff, which is why my car doesn’t have it.
Having owned an E92 on 19s, I’m of the belief that it was the first 3er with run flats and they just didn’t tune it quite right. Once I switched to Pilot Super Sports it was a lot more bearable and closer to the E46. By the F-generation they had gotten it dialed in a lot better.
Now, the M2 with M Performance coilovers I recently sold? That was 100% way too stiff.
The LCI F30s are fine from a driving point of view. The changes in software and suspension geometry helped quite a bit. Is it E46 or E90 good? No, but few things outside of Porsches of the era were anyway.
Honestly even my F31 330i with the softy x-drive suspension drives pretty well in the twisties. Hard to find something that is competent enough handling-wise, rides as well, is that practical, and will do 35+ mpg on the highway.
It’s a stupendously good vehicle and just an okay BMW. Probably would have been happier in an E91, but those just aren’t good value at the prices people are asking.
I agree, BMW fixed the worst of it in fairly short order. I had no major complaints about the steering, ride and handling of my F22, and those aren’t much different than a late F3X. They all got the same changes. The car was fine, it just didn’t suit me or the use case it ended up being in that wasn’t the use case when I bought it.
I would happily drive an F31 330i. Looked at them used when I bought my S212 Mercedes, but the Mercedes wagon was better value even though more expensive. They drive “fine”, though certainly not on par with my RWD/6spd e91. But if I could have gotten another RWD 6spd wagon I probably would have bought an f31 new and done Euro Delivery again instead of the M235i I bought that way. And regretted selling my e91 forever. Bullet dodged, so I probably should thank BMW!
I wish I had bought a new F31 back in the day. Or picked up a decent E91. I don’t mind the compromises I had to make buying used but I would have been way happier with Coral Red interior and not Dark Oyster.
I considered a S212. I drove my grandpa’s C209 CLK500 for a few months after he passed away and loved it. Never had any 212s come up locally to test drive, and I’d owned 4 BMWs by that point, so figured it was easy to go with the known quantity.
I am very glad I sucked it up and ordered my e91 new. It was a *stretch* financially at the time, but has been worth every cent.
The BMWs are way more fun. The Mercedes is a far better load lugger. All Mercedes drive pretty much the same. Some are just faster than others. The DNA is strong, this is my third Mercedes wagon, having had w123 and w124 wagons as well in the past.
I have the (’03, 3.0) Z4 running again and it reminds me how much I love that car.
On the other hand, it took 15 minutes, youtube, and even then several attempts to figure out the cheat code to reset the oil service indicator on a 2020 330 the other day. (press Engine Start three times rapidly, hold down BC for 10-20 seconds, wait for Diagnostic Mode to appear in the cluster screen, hold down BC again for 10-20 seconds, Reset oil life? will appear, and hold BC until it says reset in progress, which somehow takes so long it needs a progress bar.)
so, range rovers no good but you got one anyways. have fun?
Older Range Rovers are excellent. But you have to go into them understanding that they are no different than exotic Italian cars. They are equal parts brilliant and stupid, and more-or-less built by a bunch of lads in a shed out of random bits. If you can deal with that, they deliver an experience like nothing else on the road. As I used to say about mine, it would cheerfully do 90% of what an S-class Mercedes could do, and 90% of what a Jeep Wrangler could do, while making you feel like royalty in the process.
A LandCruiser or the Lexus equivalent is a lot more reliable and FAR more tolerant of neglect, but also a LOT more agricultural and nowhere near as special to drive. And FAR more expensive to buy used. Pick your poison. You can fix a lot of dilemmas for the price delta between an old Range Rover and an old Land Cruiser. And the dirty secret is that old Land Cruisers with intergalactic mileages break too, and the parts are REALLY expensive when they do. I would say that the couple of scheduled timing belt jobs you would have to do on the Toyota V8 are going to cost just as much in total as the timing chain job that the Rangie is going to need eventually too. The trick is do it preemptively BEFORE it causes other even more expensive dilemmas, than be happy for another 150K.
Maintained *correctly*, which includes addressing the various common dilemmas BEFORE they strand you somewhere, they are perfectly fine to live with. Though I would hesitate to buy ANY complex luxury vehicle with a trip to the moon on the clock. Why bother – it’s not that much more to buy one with low mileage. Buy the best or don’t bother at all.
Buying the ones that have been to the moon and back is a bit like going to the horse track. You’re probably going to lose, possibly everything, but nervous tension of the betting is exciting!
LOL – I have enough excitement in my life already. And I know too much about statistics to do any gambling.
But the Land Cruiser (or even a used Escalade) is still better resale value wise than a Range Rover is.
Sure, yes old LCs can cost an arm or a leg if neglected throughout their life (eg: here in Qatar) , but this depends on what issues they have.
So what? The people who buy them new don’t care. For those of us who buy them used, the depreciation is a MASSIVE benefit. There is no universe where I would pay the Toyota Tax on a Land Cruiser to have something that is just nowhere near as nice to be in as a Range Rover, even if it’s cheaper to maintain. You can do a HELL of a lot of fixing for the price delta. And then that 250K mile Land Cruiser is ALSO going to cost a fortune to fix.
Now to be fair, if I was roaming the Aussie Outback where potentially my life is on the line if there is an issue, then you bet I would pay that tax.
Damn Germans and their timing chains. Also would have been a cool to see the timeline in which Honda bought Land Rover.
Sterling was a nice preview of that, for better or worse.
Well, there was that time when Honda re-badged the Discovery I and sold it in Japan as the ’93-’98 Honda Crossroad…
Interesting didn’t know about those.
I replaced the timing chain guides on an M62TU in a 2000 BMW 540iT. Big job, but nothing really that complicated. How easy is it to take apart the front end of the Rover—removing the bumper, grille, radiator support, etc.? I didn’t have to do all of that on the Bimmer, but I imagine the significant extra height would make it desirable to do so on the RR.
Interestingly, the M62 is generally considered more reliable than its successor, the N62. With the M62, the timing chain guides are the only major issue, and they’re fairly easy to replace.
The N62 doesn’t usually have timing chain issues, but it does have issues with valve stem seals leaking, the coolant crossover pipe leaking (huge PITA to repair), and severe oil leaks from the alternator bracket gasket.
BMW is just not great at V8 engines imho. That’s Mercedes’ forte.
Yep. BMW: Inline 6’s and 4’s is where it’s at.
Of all the BMW’s I’ve owned over the years, the E38 with the M62 was by far the most aggravating to work on (I never had the timing chain guide issue; instead, it had issues with BMW’s version of EGR, which caused me to put a smokescreen down every time I started the car).
BMW doesn’t make universally unreliable stuff (my E36 lasted to 300k, and it was a bad transmission, not engine, that downed it, and my current BMW is at 130k with no issues), but the M62 and N62 are sorta malaise-era equivalent for BMW: tech and design language that was outdated almost immediately, a pivot away from easy-to-service engines (I could change my E36’s oil and spark plugs with the 4 tools in the trunk toolkit), and an attempt to eke out 10% more performance out of engines that generated 2x the maintenance costs.
I like some of BMW’s models too, but the horror stories and repair costs (have heard many in Qatar) steer me towards a used Lexus or even a used Cadillac (depending on the model year) instead.
The engines are good (B58 and 48 seem to be fine), but the electronics is what is their downfall.