I need another Rover! As a previous owner of two Discos (96 and 01) I recently got rid of my 01 and bought a Saab 9-3 as I needed a sporty sedan. Anyhow, my plan all along was to get a 94-95 Disco, but I think I would prefer an 88-91 RR if I can find the right one. Anyhow, I have found an 89 with 78k documented miles. It is red and in excellent condition. It has had some paintwork but it looks good. There is no rust to be found, no major leaks (probably means there is no fluid) and all the electronics work well--except for the sunroof. The hang up I have deals with how much it will cost me to keep running. I am a fairly skilled mechanic and would do all but the most techinical work on the vehicle and I dont mind having to occasionally fix things. I also dont mind if it leaks a bit, has warning lights on, etc. In other words, it doesnt have to be perfect. I will drive it about 100 miles a week. Would this be a wise purchase for me? What I dont want is to be constantly working on it and spending money on parts just to make it run and drive. Please share your opinions.
Need opinion on 89 RR purchase
- Thread starter disco01
- Start date
disco01 said:
Buy it!that is the best year its a pre abs system and its a lot less trouble an abs pump and abs ecu on a 90 RR even use couls cost dearly and to bleed the brakes on a 90 is a bit of a nightmare.The 89 is pretty basic.If your looking in those years go 89.
Thanks! As I said, I am familiar with the vehicles and expect certain faults. What is the liklihood the window regulators, window motors, power seats, etc will take a dump if they are working now? I figure a 94-95 Disco would have manual seats which is one less thing to break, but then again it does have ABS. I have driven it and it shifts perfect, no smoke, has relatively new XPCs, rides smooth, cold AC, etc. The leather has no rips or tears and the headliner is solid, so it must have been repaired at some point as it should have been sagging by now. It has the original radio, but the seller doesnt have the code. Oh well, I would replace it anyhow. I do have the original I took out of my 96 Disco still, would this unit work in the 89? I know it was used in the 95 RR classic.
I will look over it again for rust. I had the rear selt belt anchors begin to rust on my 96Disco, so I did look there and it was solid. I did not check the bottom of the floors or A pillar, but I did check the cargo area and tailgate--all solid. I dont mind a little rust though, from what I can tell they all rust party due to the electrolytic (sp?) reaction between the aluminum and steel.
I compare costs this way, and it typically holds true:
Rover parts costs the same as a Honda's parts with installation. For example, if it costs $300 to have something on your Honda replaced by a mechanic, the Rover part probably costs $300.00 and you are the mechanic, so it works out the same in the end.
I love my 1991 RRC, but having non-abs would be a pro.
Where in Tennessee are you?
Joseph
Rover parts costs the same as a Honda's parts with installation. For example, if it costs $300 to have something on your Honda replaced by a mechanic, the Rover part probably costs $300.00 and you are the mechanic, so it works out the same in the end.
I love my 1991 RRC, but having non-abs would be a pro.
Where in Tennessee are you?
Joseph
Joseph,
I live in Knoxville. I dont mind paying more for the parts and I dont mind if some of the non essential things dont work correctly.....for example, If the driver seat motor breaks but it is adjusted the way I like it....who cares. I know that the engine, tranny, axles, t case, etc are pretty tough as long as they have been serviced correctly. The cooling system may be a weak point. I would be buying this vehicle as a second car and would see it for what it is: an old truck that I can drive around town some, possibly take on a short trip, and do some recreational wheeling with.
I live in Knoxville. I dont mind paying more for the parts and I dont mind if some of the non essential things dont work correctly.....for example, If the driver seat motor breaks but it is adjusted the way I like it....who cares. I know that the engine, tranny, axles, t case, etc are pretty tough as long as they have been serviced correctly. The cooling system may be a weak point. I would be buying this vehicle as a second car and would see it for what it is: an old truck that I can drive around town some, possibly take on a short trip, and do some recreational wheeling with.
Shit man 100 miles a week? I wouldnt if I were you. I did that for a couple weeks in mine, just about drove me crazy.
ptschram
Well-known member
if you update it and keep it relatively stock, nothing is wrong you will probably enjoy it. but with no sway bars, once you put taller tires on, lift, and etc then it becomes work to drive.disco01 said:
I have been driving an 89 for about ten years. Well actually I have had two, the first was totalled when I was rear ended. The rust is the big thing to look for, my first truck was rusted in the floor boards, whch is hidden by the carpet. It is easy to lift up the carpet in the rear and remove the mats in the front. You will need a small regular and phillips screwdriver. Other than dirty switches I have not had problems with seats or windows. Transfer cases have been replaced on both of mine with the LT230. I drive at least 250 miles a week and this is my only driver.
The '89 is pre abs and has different stub axles which have a wider bearing spacing, actually a better setup than abs stubs. You do get the 1.1" 10 spline integral drive member axles though. They have a much better reputation than Series 10 splines , better metalurgy. If you want to go to 1.25" HD axles you will have to switch out the stub axles(spindles) or have the stubs bored out a tiny bit. I have 2 sets of 10 spline rears if you want some spare axles.
I'm driving an 89. I had a '65, a '94 Disco, and an '03 Disco. I like the '89 best all around for many reasons. But I would say definately check out the rust. Mine had minimal rust in the foot wells, but it did need to be taken care of. I used Por-15. And I also took out the carpet pad, the carpet, the rug, and the carpet, then put back the rubber mat, and the rubber floor mats. So, unless I get more than an inch of water in there now, it pretty much doesn't matter.
The only other issue I have had is electrical stuff. My alternator is wierd. I have loose grounds all over the place, they play havoc with all systems, and the previous owners often did really good wire jobs that are well hidden, or really bad ones that are causing a lot of problems. I have had the lower dash panels off for as much as 1/2 the time I have owned the car and am only now getting all these issues under control.
Other than that, it has always been drivable, never let me down. And the mechanical issues are A+. It runs great with the original head and original transmission. I am probably pushing it between 150 and 200k miles -- but the odometer broke at 114k.
The only other issue I have had is electrical stuff. My alternator is wierd. I have loose grounds all over the place, they play havoc with all systems, and the previous owners often did really good wire jobs that are well hidden, or really bad ones that are causing a lot of problems. I have had the lower dash panels off for as much as 1/2 the time I have owned the car and am only now getting all these issues under control.
Other than that, it has always been drivable, never let me down. And the mechanical issues are A+. It runs great with the original head and original transmission. I am probably pushing it between 150 and 200k miles -- but the odometer broke at 114k.
draaronr said:
Mine does alright. I'm running pretty thin 235/85's. The OME suspension is great for these trucks, keeps body roll very minimal during normal turns. I notice it though in long fast turns. Also, I noticed the no sway bar immediately after taking it off road. The body fish tails over the axles on the rolling bumps.