> The "model year" bit was what I was missing. I noticed that some parts
> places sell by VIN, others by MY... I knew about VIN, but wasn't sure what
> the MY was.
No prob, although when ordering parts it's always best to go on VIN
ranges as the "model year" is rather imprecise. Most of the time I've
used VIN or MY on other vehicles it's been OK in the context, usually
something would be referred to as e.g. a 2002MY even if it was made in
2003, then if in 2004 a major update is made then post-update machines
get described as a 2004MY, but the practice seems to vary, VIN ranges
are much more logical.

Signature
Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!
http://youtube.com/user/tarcus69
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tarcus/
Dougal - 01 Mar 2008 11:57 GMT
>>The "model year" bit was what I was missing. I noticed that some parts
>>places sell by VIN, others by MY... I knew about VIN, but wasn't sure what
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> get described as a 2004MY, but the practice seems to vary, VIN ranges
> are much more logical.
As someone mentioned earlier, model years are a marketing thing rather
than an explicit statement of the actual calendar year of manufacture.
There is a tendency, however, for there to be a connection in that for
example a 2002 model year vehicle will meet any regulations which are in
effect after 1 Jan 2002 even though it may have actually been built in
the latter months of 2001.
The model year defined in the VIN number is what manufacturers
(specifically including Land Rover) recognise for the purposes of parts
etc. which, I suppose, is the only thing that need bother us.