2003 Land Rover Range Rover: Road Test
Archived Review
2003 Land Rover Range Rover ▼
Select a Trim ▼
- MSRP: $71,200
- Invoice: $64,792
Features & Specifications
Compare Vehicle
Related to Land Rover Range Rover
Previous Year's Reviews
View Another Vehicle
Our road test for the 2003 Land Rover Range Rover includes a full evaluation of the 2003 Land Rover Range Rover from the inside out. We evaluate not only engine and handling performance for the 2003 Land Rover Range Rover, but also interior cabin and cargo space. Let our comprehensive road test ratings for the 2003 Land Rover Range Rover help you decide if a 2003 Land Rover Range Rover is right for you.
Advertisement
ACCELERATION
| HSE | Class Average |
|---|---|
| 6 | 4.4 |
Full-throttle 0-60 mph feels close to Land Rover's 9-sec claim, though midrange acceleration can feel a bit labored in this heavyweight SUV, despite a smooth, quick-acting transmission.
FUEL ECONOMY
| HSE | Class Average |
|---|---|
| 2 | 1.9 |
Test models averaged 12.3-13.6 mpg in mixed city/highway driving. Range Rover requires 91-octane or higher fuel.
RIDE QUALITY
| HSE | Class Average |
|---|---|
| 7 | 5.4 |
Taut, but almost luxury-sedan composed on smooth surfaces, with little tire thump on expansion joints. Air suspension can't quite keep up with some pavement undulations, however, resulting in minor but annoying vertical jitters or side-to-side rocking.
STEERING/HANDLING/BRAKING
| HSE | Class Average |
|---|---|
| 5 | 3.3 |
A mountain goat off-road and quite carlike on-road. Impressive grip, but tallish build still overwhelms the suspension to allow fairly marked cornering lean and limit twisty-road agility. Relatively compact turning circle a parking-lot convenience, but low-speed steering effort a bit high. Brake performance quite good for a big SUV, though some testers say pedal feel can be touchy.
QUIETNESS
| HSE | Class Average |
|---|---|
| 6 | 5.2 |
Rivaled only by Lexus LX 470 for overall refinement. Engine smooth and hushed. Tire noise generally low, but noticeable wind rush sets in from as little as 60 mph, a penalty of the tall, blocky build.
CONTROLS
| HSE | Class Average |
|---|---|
| 5 | 5 |
Numerous features means numerous switches. Though most are handy, not all are clearly marked, and each takes time to learn. Especially true of navigation system, which adds to frustration by requiring multiple inputs for simple operations. CD changer deep in glovebox. Silken switchgear movement and cabin's top-grade leather and tasteful wood reflect BMW's high-end design influence, though test models suffered some minor interior rattles and buzzes.
ROOM/COMFORT/DRIVER SEATING (FRONT)
| HSE | Class Average |
|---|---|
| 9 | 7.4 |
Tall driving position. Clear sightlines to all corners, but narrow rear window complicates backing up in close-quarters even with standard obstacle detection. Step-in a little steep for shorter people. Seats comfortably supportive, but allow occupants to slide around in fast cornering or at steep off-road angles. Generous head and leg room.
ROOM/COMFORT (REAR)
| HSE | Class Average |
|---|---|
| 7 | 6.4 |
Theater seating means only adequate 6-footer head room. Ample leg space, but cushion a bit short for best leg support. Narrow thresholds combine with tall ride height for awkward entry/exit.
CARGO ROOM
| HSE | Class Average |
|---|---|
| 7 | 6.9 |
Maximum volume among lowest of luxury SUVs, but ample room for most needs behind rear seat. Load deck is relatively high, and accordion-fold hard cargo cover awkward to remove or install. Small glovebox, but adequate small-items storage elsewhere. Fold-out front cupholders--one in dashboard, one in console--are afterthoughts with limited usefulness.
VALUE WITHIN CLASS
| HSE | Class Average |
|---|---|
| 4 | 3.4 |
Range Rover stands out among luxury SUVs for its balance of on-road manners, off-road ability, and high-class accommodations. There are less-expensive alternatives that match it in one or two of these areas, but for Range Rover's well-heeled buyers, little else will do.
Total Score
| HSE | Class Average |
|---|---|
| 58 | 49.3 |
Total Score: 58
Scores for all Premium Large Sport-utility Vehicles














