Unless you are handy with spanners avoid them.

Unless you are handy with spanners, a hoist, specialist tools, an able assistant and loads of money and time avoid them...

No, not nonsense - just different experiences from yours.

I know people who have had trouble-free Discoveries and Range Rovers: they tend to be older cars which are likely to have fewer electronic gizmos to go wrong. Reliability seems to be either very good or very bad.

The Good and Bad notes on this site are of course sourced from owners' actual experiences which they have told HJ about.

I've had 3 Land Rovers, a Disco, a Range Rover and a Defender, I never had any problems with any of them and we still nostalgically remember the RR as the best car we've ever owned. I read a lot of nonsense on this site.

I've had 3 Land Rovers, a Disco, a Range Rover and a Defender, I never had any problems with any of them and we still nostalgically remember the RR as the best car we've ever owned. I read a lot of nonsense on this site.

I have a neighbour whose constrution business bought ALL its directors new RRs some 7 years ago.. (They obviously got a big discount).

Fast forward a year and they were threatening to return them all as most of them were spending weeks in garage with warranty repairs..

Reliability isn't that high up most people's list when buying.It may turn out to be over the ownership period but it isn't a big thing or consideration at purchase time.

In terms of reviewing a car I suppose it depends on what weighting you give to build and reliability.

I've had some pretty unreliable cars I've actually loved and thought a great car in other respects. I've also had some relentlessly reliable ones I've prayed for a fault on just so I can justify getting rid of the boring piece of s***.

In terms of new car reviews I fail to see how anyone can review or judge long term reliability? If a reviewer says "it's great but my feeling is it will go wrong" what is that based on? Hardly objective.

I personally think that all new car reviews should come with a BIG caveat saying this, as many people take a 5 star review as the car being great on all fronts, which may not be the case reliability-wise.

Don't see the need for this...most people will know that the review is based on the time spent with the car...the people that don't understand that won't take anything else on board either.

I think you over-estimate the average punter's (not more savvy buyers who frequent this site) level of knowledge and common sense when it comes to both car buying, owning and interpreting 'expert reviews'. Bear in mind these same 'normies' are likely the same lot who believe film critics who think X or Y film is great (or rubbish) because they either get paid to say so (not by their employer but by the film companies) or because of some agenda.

The same goes for cars - I mean look how many people buy diesels for use on short journeys only, or DSG/Powershift gearboxes for similar usage, or older German top-spec sports/exec saloons and then wonder why they go wrong in a big (expensive) way not far down the track? Or cars with rubber band tyres and then complain about the ride quality having either never test driven the car or only for 15 mins on smooth roads around town?

There's a reason for the quotation "there's a sucker born every minute" - most people believe what is said in print and don't bother doing any homework. All it would take is a small one to two line caveat statement to say something about reliability etc and at least people would know. Up to them whether they take it in.