| Author | Message | ||
     Blake Monchilovich (Azblake) Member Username: Azblake Post Number: 68 Registered: 02-2003 |
I have a friend who likes my '94 D1 and was wondering what years are best as far as componentry, build, reliability, etc. I really only know the '94. His intended use would be grocery getter and camping rig, along with moderate trail use when I head out. Any years/options to avoid? To recommend? | ||
| Andrew Maier (Newman) Member Username: Newman Post Number: 62 Registered: 04-2003 |
Conventional wisdom holds that for D1's, 97 through 99 are the "best" years because of BMW's quality controls. That said, they'll take my dead body out of my '96.  YMMV. | ||
| M. K. Watson (Lrover94) Senior Member Username: Lrover94 Post Number: 932 Registered: 02-2002 |
94 | ||
| marc olivares (Pugs) Member Username: Pugs Post Number: 100 Registered: 12-2002 |
99 D1 | ||
| Jess Brandt (Disco285) Member Username: Disco285 Post Number: 115 Registered: 09-2002 |
94 and 95 were the most..... dare i say jeep like...... the most trucky.... i think 96 and up D1's are nice but they gradually got more wood, more electronics.....especially once we got the d2.... but 94-95 were the simplest US discos.... my $.02 | ||
| Mark (Mrroverman) Member Username: Mrroverman Post Number: 48 Registered: 02-2003 |
95 easiest to work on. | ||
| Kristopher March (Apexdisco) Member Username: Apexdisco Post Number: 139 Registered: 02-2002 |
99 D1's are da bomb, man! | ||
| Leslie N. Bright (Leslie) Dweb Lounge Member Username: Leslie Post Number: 2384 Registered: 02-2002 |
We currently have a '95, which is similar to the '99 I had, though I feel that the '99 was a bit more refined... better fit-n-finish, nicer trim (wood and leather), nicer stereo, etc. However, the distributorless 4.0L engine is notorious for valve problems, whereas the 3.9L of the '94-'95 years doesn't have the reputation for the same... it can happen, but is no where near as frequent of a problem. The most important thing it to really check out the truck, and pick the one that's in the best condition, regardless of year or mileage, IMO. FWIW.... -L | ||
| Luis Constantin (Luisc) Member Username: Luisc Post Number: 93 Registered: 02-2003 |
I like my 98. Never owned a Rover before this one, so I can't say if one year is better than the other. Never had any valve problems as Leslie notes. But I do drive it hard and run cleaner through the gas every 5K just before oil change. I do like the distributorless ignition because it seems to handle moisture contamination better with less attention to care that a distributed car needs. On the other hand, the car with a distributor is probably easier to fix in the field if something goes wrong. With pre 97 models, the lower row of head bolts could cause problems with the head gasket, though it's nothing that can't be remedied by eliminating them. The 97 and newer don't even have the holes in the casting for those headbolts. From reading, I would have to say that there really is no good year or bad year. More like Monday car, Tuesday car, and so on. I think mine was a Thursday car. | ||
| Scott Scott (Scottoz) Member Username: Scottoz Post Number: 86 Registered: 02-2003 |
http://www.robisonservice.com/servicedep/rover_advice1.asp - check this out. I like the 95 because it had a distributor and HEI setup. You can easily replace things yourself if necessary with better aftermarket gear such as General Motors Holden HEI module and an American Acel coil. |
