← Back to context

Comment by bgarbiak

9 hours ago

How they are “objectively bad”?

Range Rovers are extremely unreliable, and maybe more importantly, not suited for what they're being used for. Offroad vehicle with poor fuel economy being driven in the city. X5 is more reasonable but still definitely an expensive way to get around.

  • I was hoping for something more than myths and cliches.

    X5 - despite its bad reputation - is actually very reliable nowadays. That B58 engine is one hell of a robust machine. And Range Rovers have 4 to 5 year manufacturer warranties.

    Also, they're not off-road vehicles (Wranglers, Defenders and Broncos are); they're family cars that combine practicality with great driving dynamics, advanced tech, and a touch of luxury. Also, both have PHEVs, and now even BEVs variants.

    I'm not a SUV guy myself, I know their bad sides - but calling these two models "objectively bad" is both ignorant, and patronising. Objectively (as in: let's take a bunch of cars and compare them to each other) they're two of the best ones out there.

    • This is what I've been told for years, and still the prejudice against Range Rovers has proven better than the "facts." There's no objective way to say what's unreliable, I'll agree there.

      And even if this all magically changed in the past couple of years, the old reputation applies to all the ones people bought before, going back to the other person's original point that a large number of people buy cars based on looks. Also the ones that aren't off-roaders are a niche in their lineup.