I work at a Land Rover dealer in central, Ohio. I meet some interesting, die-hard Land Rover enthusiasts. I'm kind of looked down on by some for owning a Jeep.
I love the 1995 ZJ Limited 5.2 I have, and it gets the same mpg, and I would say is just about as capable as most of the new Land Rovers. But the comparrison between the two is always a hot topic of discussion between the fella's here at work.
What I'm running into now is I'm looking to upgrade my Jeep, and I'll be looking at newer (2000+) models over the next couple of years. Probably not trading my 95 in though.
Anyone want to make the argument of why to get a Jeep over a Land Rover, especially the mid-2000's models? I'm looking at getting another Grand Cherokee but just can't find a model that on paper looks as good as my ZJ to me, but I want the newer features. Is there a solution?
Not owning either, I would side towards a Jeep. My dad always wanted a Land Rover and finally picked one up a couple years ago. (Early 2000's) Loved it, until someone backed into his plastic bumper cover and realized it was a few hundred bucks to replace. Plus the fuel mileage wasn't the greatest either. Especially when it calls for premium.
I think with about the same performance, I'd side with a Jeep just with upkeep and maintenance alone.
Land Rover is consistently rated as one of the least reliable vehicles made. JD Power gives it a 2.5 score on reliability.
“Land Rover's spotty reliability also can't be ignored when considering a Range Rover purchase. Whether the company's new owners can amend the record remains to be seen, but in the past the Range Rover has been one of the lowest-ranked vehicles in mechanical reliability.” -- Edmunds
“Reliability isn’t a strong suit.” -- Car and Driver
I'll chime in for the heck of it... Of course, I just have an old YJ and have never owned a Grand Cherokee. That being said, if money wasn't an issue... I have always sort of liked the Land Rover Defenders (I think the last of the three is a Discovery).... Like these:
I mean, can any later model Cherokee even pretend to get that cool without some serious modifications? I don't know a whole lot about Land Rovers or newer Cherokees but those look like they are built to be offroad capable... Where honestly the newer Cherokees look like typical SUVs for driving the family around.. For that matter, the Discoveries arent much different from the Cherokees probably.....
Here you go (2005 Grand Cherokee):
Or (2005 Discovery):
That's probably a more fair comparison, right? I say get a Defender.
I think the true Land Rover enthusiasts are your Defender and Disco owners, more so the fact that 70% of all the vehicles Land Rover has ever produced are still on the road today. Now that's not just considered to be in North America. Overseas the option of their diesel engine is considered to be one of the most reliable diesels ever produced, close to that of the VW TDI (I work in a highly populated VW area, we -rarely- ever get a VW into the dealership, and most local shops won't touch a german engineered diesel.)
But that's kinda null-void just because we can't get the diesel.
if your looking for an "off road" vehicle that compares to the defender you cannot look at a 2005+ GC without expecting to spend some money to make them compete. a WK just was never designed to be a competitor with the expedition style defender.
Now if you look into a WJ which can be found in the 2004 overland package(4.7HO, 545rfe,247,d44a all with two tone leather, red wood grain(real wood) and navigation) which i must say from experience is probably one of the best jeeps i have ever owned. With its solid axles and durability definitely competes with a defender with nothing more than a 2"bb and 245 mt's. and even at that you still have probably spent less than you would with a defender.
My interest is really peaked, in 2004 was the Overland package like the Limited, Laredo, or was it just an additional featured kit then? What am I looking for to see if something has the Overland packagae or not when I'm looking at used Jeeps?