Shogun to Freelander2 ?

[sparkythecat]

My 04 SWB Shogun has been a reliable old thing in the 6 years I've owned it. As a bonus, I get to practice my welding skills at MOT time.
As the trailers I'm towing are usually under 2 tonnes and retirement means that I don't need to venture out in seriously adverse conditions, so I don't need anything quite as agricultural.
If all the things I've considered as it's replacement, I'm now looking at a 2010 Freelander2. It's quieter and more refined than the Shogun ( most things are) and still has the towing capacity I need and the driving position that I like and have got used to.
So - a good move, or does a load of pain and grief await me?

[sunbeam alpine]

How much low-speed manoeuvrability do you need? I tow trailers most days and I find that having a low-ratio range helps a great deal. I don't think the Freelander has low-range. I would have thought it has significantly less grunt than a Shogun, which if you're wanting to move a 2 tonne trailer in anything other than good conditions, may be challenging.

[Test driver]

I wouldn’t recommend a Freelander 1 or 2. Awful cars with weak drivetrains and very poor reliability.

A Toyota, Jeep, Nissan, Mitsubishi are all better vehicles.

[sparkythecat]

sunbeam alpine said:

How much low-speed manoeuvrability do you need? I tow trailers most days and I find that having a low-ratio range helps a great deal. I don't think the Freelander has low-range. I would have thought it has significantly less grunt than a Shogun, which if you're wanting to move a 2 tonne trailer in anything other than good conditions, may be challenging.

I hear what you're saying about low range,but on paper
Shogun has 158bhp and 275 ft lbs of torque
Freelander TD4 2.2 158bhp and 295 ft lbs

[stevemcs]

As a roadcar the Freelander 2 would be much better, for towing the Shogun would be the better car. Dad had a Mk1 Freelander and the only issue was a rear window regulator and part of the heated screen loom needed replacing (that was done under warranty) the Freelander 2 that replaced it just needed servicing and that was all. He towed with it, although it was only a boat.

[sparkythecat]

Test driver said:

I wouldn’t recommend a Freelander 1 or 2. Awful cars with weak drivetrains and very poor reliability.

A Toyota, Jeep, Nissan, Mitsubishi are all better vehicles.

How long did you have your Freelander, and which bits broke?

[Test driver]

sparkythecat said:

Test driver said:

I wouldn’t recommend a Freelander 1 or 2. Awful cars with weak drivetrains and very poor reliability.

A Toyota, Jeep, Nissan, Mitsubishi are all better vehicles.

How long did you have your Freelander, and which bits broke?

I’m not foolish enough to buy one, but my friends had fuel pump failure, transfer box failure, head gasket, alternator, starter motor, all suspension bushes, and a gearbox. It was actually not driven hard either; awful Solihull stboxes.

[stevemcs]

Test driver said:

I’m not foolish enough to buy one, but my friends had fuel pump failure, transfer box failure, head gasket, alternator, starter motor, all suspension bushes, and a gearbox. It was actually not driven hard either; awful Solihull stboxes.

You will find they are built at Halewood, Suspension bushes are a wear and tear item and the ones we see very rarely fail an mot, the gearbox is pretty reliable and goes in Fords, Pugs, Volvos. Transfer boxes were an issue on the Mk1, Mk2 can suffer from from diff wear but then so do most BMW's. Never seen fuel pumps being an issue on the PSA engine either or Headgaskets ... I'd take one of these over the equivalent Tiguan or X3

[Test driver]

stevemcs said:

Test driver said:

I’m not foolish enough to buy one, but my friends had fuel pump failure, transfer box failure, head gasket, alternator, starter motor, all suspension bushes, and a gearbox. It was actually not driven hard either; awful Solihull stboxes.

You will find they are built at Halewood, Suspension bushes are a wear and tear item and the ones we see very rarely fail an mot, the gearbox is pretty reliable and goes in Fords, Pugs, Volvos. Transfer boxes were an issue on the Mk1, Mk2 can suffer from from diff wear but then so do most BMW's. Never seen fuel pumps being an issue on the PSA engine either or Headgaskets ... I'd take one of these over the equivalent Tiguan or X3

Tiguan or X3 not my preference but infinitely better than a Hippo. I agree bushes are consumables but the Freelander is junk whichever way you look at it.

If you must have a green oval (due to wanting to inflict self harm) the discovery is far better.

[stevemcs]

Like you I don’t own one, just going on what dads two were like and what we see coming through the workshop.

[bangerhoarder]

Dad has an aged but tidy Freelander 2. Lots of mk4 Mondeo under there. It’s a decent car.

[LargeRed]

Test driver said:

sparkythecat said:

Test driver said:

I wouldn’t recommend a Freelander 1 or 2. Awful cars with weak drivetrains and very poor reliability.

A Toyota, Jeep, Nissan, Mitsubishi are all better vehicles.

How long did you have your Freelander, and which bits broke?

I’m not foolish enough to buy one, but my friends had fuel pump failure, transfer box failure, head gasket, alternator, starter motor, all suspension bushes, and a gearbox. It was actually not driven hard either; awful Solihull stboxes.

so you are not foolish, but your friends are ???

[Test driver]

bangerhoarder said:

Dad has an aged but tidy Freelander 2. Lots of mk4 Mondeo under there. It’s a decent car.

Mondeo is ok as a road car. Those parts not really engineered for an offroad application though are they?

[Test driver]

LargeRed said:

Test driver said:

sparkythecat said:

Test driver said:

I wouldn’t recommend a Freelander 1 or 2. Awful cars with weak drivetrains and very poor reliability.

A Toyota, Jeep, Nissan, Mitsubishi are all better vehicles.

How long did you have your Freelander, and which bits broke?

I’m not foolish enough to buy one, but my friends had fuel pump failure, transfer box failure, head gasket, alternator, starter motor, all suspension bushes, and a gearbox. It was actually not driven hard either; awful Solihull stboxes.

so you are not foolish, but your friends are ???

Correct.

[LargeRed]

I come to the conclusion, very quickly, that you don't know what you are taking about.
You now fit into the same category as 'your friends'

[bangerhoarder]

Test driver said:

bangerhoarder said:

Dad has an aged but tidy Freelander 2. Lots of mk4 Mondeo under there. It’s a decent car.

Mondeo is ok as a road car. Those parts not really engineered for an offroad application though are they?

Well, it’s relative. A Shogun is a proper off-roader, but the Mondeo is a big, heavy car with a well engineered platform. Much carry over to the Kuga, and the F2 has to be viewed as a similar prospect. Good for towing a caravan, not for plugging through the desert.

[LargeRed]

..... on road tyres ......

[Test driver]

LargeRed said:

I come to the conclusion, very quickly, that you don't know what you are taking about.
You now fit into the same category as 'your friends'

I can’t post my opinions of you due to the censorship.

[Test driver]

LargeRed said:

..... on road tyres ......

Hardly challenging terrain. A mx5 could cope with that. You keep telling yourself how brilliant your hippo is.

[camel_landy]

sparkythecat said:

I hear what you're saying about low range,but on paper
Shogun has 158bhp and 275 ft lbs of torque
Freelander TD4 2.2 158bhp and 295 ft lbs

The Freelander 2 is a cracking car both on & off road.

All I'd say is make sure you get one with an auto... It'l save burning out the clutch while manoeuvring trailers or when doing anything off-road.

M