1995 Land Rover Range Rover 2.5L Diesel · M944 AWX

A thirty-one year old Range Rover of this vintage will always warrant close scrutiny for structural corrosion, and this particular example carries exactly that warning on its MOT record. The 2023 test sequence is the only data point we have, but it is revealing: on 20 June 2023 the vehicle failed with a Dangerous tyre tread depth breach on the offside rear, a Major headlamp aim defect on both lamps, a torn nearside front suspension arm ball joint dust cover, and a nearside front tyre cut deep enough to reach the cords. Ten days later, on 30 June 2023, it returned and passed, but only after those defects were addressed, and the inspector still recorded an advisory for corrosion on the offside front integral body structure noting that structural rigidity was not significantly reduced at that point. The overall picture is one of a vehicle that has had to be actively maintained to remain on the road, with both consumable safety items and corrosion beginning to demand attention. Recorded mileage stands at 123,112 miles against an age of thirty-one years, giving an average annual accumulation of roughly 3,971 miles. That figure is notably low for any vehicle, and particularly so for a Range Rover of this era, which suggests either extended periods of light or irregular use, or considerable time off the road between MOT tests. There is only one testing window on record covering 2023, meaning we cannot confirm annual mileage progression through the usual MOT cross-reference method, and any large gaps in the vehicle's life on the road cannot be ruled out. Mechanically, low mileage on an ageing 4x4 of this type is a mixed signal: it reduces wear on the engine and drivetrain internals, but it frequently correlates with dried and cracked suspension bushes, seized brake calipers, perished cooling system hoses, and flat-spotted or aged tyres, all of which are common after long static periods. Buyers should therefore not assume that low miles equate to a sound chassis. Given the specific advisories and failures recorded, a prospective buyer should focus their physical inspection on the offside front structural area first, looking for any progression of the noted body corrosion, particularly around the inner wing, chassis leg, and suspension mounting points, as this is the location where the advisory was raised and corrosion can advance quickly once initiated on a monocoque-style body of this age. The test drive should include firm pressure over uneven road surfaces and speed bumps to listen for clonks or looseness from the front suspension, paying particular attention to the nearside front lower arm ball joint area where the dust cover had failed, as a perished cover will typically lead to accelerated joint wear and subsequent knocking or wandering steering within a relatively short period. Steering should be checked for any vagueness or pulling, as the recorded headlamp aim defect on both lamps can occasionally be symptomatic of worn front suspension geometry allowing the front end to sit lower than designed. Brake feel should also be evaluated carefully on the test drive, with attention given to any binding, judder through the pedal, or pulling to either side under steady braking, as seized calipers and corroded brake discs are a known issue on low-mileage classics of this vintage and were not specifically recorded but remain likely. Inspect all four tyres for age-cracking in the sidewalls regardless of tread depth, since the recorded dangerous tread finding and a deep nearside front cut suggest that tyre condition has been borderline at best, and budget for a full set as a matter of course. Finally, examine the underside on a ramp if possible, checking for any oily residue around the engine, gearbox, and transfer box, and verify that all cooling hoses are pliable rather than hardened, given the likely prolonged static periods implied by the low annual mileage.