Page 1 of 1

Buying a Freelander

Posted: Sun Oct 22, 2006 3:27 pm
by daveSierra
Hello All,

I am just in the process of selling my Sierra in favour of something a little bigger to accomodate the family.

One of my options could be a Freelander so I am just after a bit of advice here on purchasing a 2nd hand one.

I have done a bit of research on the www today and so far I have found only negaitve reports on the Freelander with numerous build quality problems and recalls.

Is this really the case?
Would be interested to hear from someone who owns one.
I am looking at 97-99 models.

Thanks.

Posted: Sun Oct 22, 2006 5:08 pm
by Loanrangie
about 99.99 % will say - WHATEVER YOU DO DO NOT BUY A FREELANDER, they really are pieces of crap. You would be better off with a pathfinder or other similar sized vehicle.

Posted: Sun Oct 22, 2006 5:34 pm
by justinC
I work on them and I would have to agree, Go the Pathy or a Honda CRV etc, the Freeloader was a good idea, it just didn't work.

JC

Posted: Sun Oct 22, 2006 7:44 pm
by Reddo
A fleet manager told me that they had been banned from purchasing them cause the motor is rubbish. Not sure if the latest models are the same, could be that they have fixed the issues now. They sold heaps in Europe though....

Posted: Sun Oct 22, 2006 7:54 pm
by Slunnie
I was told by my service fella when my Disco was dealer serviced that he wouldn't sell one to his worst enemy. Apparently the 4cyl ones blow head gasket, then head gasket then the motor. The V6's have auto tranny dramas, but apparently the TD4's are fine. I'm not sure if they still have funny tyre wear problems when run loaded.

Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2006 7:36 am
by amshaw
Mate dont do it....Try a pajero io....very good car, much better than a Rav 4 or Crv...trust me !

Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2006 11:06 am
by DionM
Welllll ... as an owner of a Freelander ....

Pre-01 I wouldn't touch if it was a Petrol. The 1.8 is just too small and has headgasket issues. The early diesels are not bad however, but I've never driven or owned one.

After 01 the 1.8 and the old diesel were not sold here anymore - you can only get the V6 or the TD4. The V6 is a rover engine and the TD4 is a BMW engine. The auto was available with the V6 and TD4 only. You can get a TD4 manual, but not a V6 manual.

I would stay away from the early 01s as some did have problems. I have a late 02 V6 myself.

The automatic (5spd with steptronic) is the same for the TD4 and the V6 so not sure why the V6 would have any more problems than the TD4? There were some issues with the Auto but they should all be sorted. I have heard various theories as to why there were problems with them. The Jatco autobox is generally quite reliable though.

The funny tyre wear problem was related to the IRD and was fixed with the V6/TD4 versions. Most of the early diesels and petrols would have had it fixed by now anyway.

The V6 does have a propensity to have a failure with the variable intake manifold - not a show stopper, you just end up a fraction down on power. When its working, when you hit 3500rpm the intake length changes and it gets a surge of power - almost VTEC like. Actually the V6 has a superb induction noise ...

The TD4 is pretty good, loads of torque.

They are a great car if you get a good one. Very comfy ride, moderately capable off-road. Great interior space - I'm 6'8" and have more room inside than a Disco. The only drawback is the tiny boot.

Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2006 11:28 am
by Animal Mother
For what its worth I think they are nice, especially in British Racing Green.
I've ridden in one and it was nice.

Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2006 12:11 pm
by Reddo
....but also beware Mitsubishi - they can get horribly expensive to fix and maintain. Mitsu parts are very expensive if not the most expensive of all Jap cars and there's not many aftermarket subsitutes.....otherwise Paj and iO are decently made. Later RAVs are torsionally weak - jack up one corner and the doors won't shut properly. CRVs seem to be OK, perhaps they are the pick of the SYV bunch, although Zook V6 is also reasonable, bit underpowered but cheaper than CRV.

Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2006 12:35 pm
by DionM
The comment about torsion strength reminds me ...

People often claim the Freeo suffers the same problem. I have had mine lifting wheels and no rub marks in the doors etc.

Image

They are moderately capable offroad. Biggest drama is clearance, which means you often have to do this:

Image

Oh, the later model V6 and TD4s all had the traction control and Hill Descent Control. Traction control make short work of steep rutted climbs:

Image

Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2006 8:29 pm
by Reddo
Interesting comments. Perhaps it's the 'Rover' bashing thing - one bad model and they are all ajudged to be crap. I'll have to be more cautious when hearing Freelander criticism. As I said, I was aware they had sold heaps in the EU, and when over there earlier this year, not one word of criticism was spoken about them - except the early petrol models, as has been said...

Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2006 9:52 pm
by aliread
well about the sub frame well my brother test them o the limits
here are some pics of both of his racers. The silver one is 1.8 and the red one is a TD5
And if you read Total Off Road. His is the one flying on the subcribtions page
Image


Image

Image

Image


Image

Image

In the Dakar
Image

Image

And in case you wondered this is what he races against


Image

Image

Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2006 10:12 pm
by Animal Mother
New Freeo looks nice!

Posted: Tue Oct 24, 2006 11:10 am
by Reddo
well about the sub frame well my brother test them o the limits
here are some pics of both of his racers. The silver one is 1.8 and the red one is a TD5
And if you read Total Off Road. His is the one flying on the subcribtions page
I want his job!