reliability is part of maintenance.
There you have it. Without a doubt the Rover V8 is an obsolete engine well past its prime, but it has served well and much of the stigma ties back to poorly maintained vehicles and specific issues with the D2s in particular. Note that you don't have the like amount of noise with 3.5, 3.9 & 4.2 engines nor not quite as much with the 4.0 GEMs. I'm not saying they are the best part of a Rover by any stretch, but having gone through several trucks (and several more engines within those trucks) I do look at it as part of doing business.
Something that would make many shudder but is illustrative; I've never had a Rover on a rollback other than when the clutch was grenaded-I cannot say that for my Toyota Tacoma(s). This includes being in the middle of a PCS move when the 4.6 in my D1 took decided it was truly done but I was halfway to Camp Lejeune in the middle of the night. Judgment call was to press on as I knew the upcoming deployment would provide the resources to fix/replace what was wrong; essentially the truck took itself and a trailer the rest of the way on 6 cylinders.
As someone said before, the engines are tough enough-sometimes past the point of sacrifice.
Add onto that the reality that the RRC/D1/Defenders are fairly easy to work on, have fairly limited electronics (particularly the 14 CUX but I don't stress much on the GEMS truth be told) and to me reliability becomes a facet of how well the vehicle is maintained and how well you can repair the things that must be fixed to move on.
It's easy to lose sight of that because the internet is over-populated with stories of people with problems (that's why they are on the internet) and then more people recycling those issues.
Personally the D1 with a 4.6 (built on a 4.0 block) is about the perfect in my book, though I did love my V6 Tacoma crew cab.
r-
Ray