By Andrew on Thursday, July 19, 2001 - 04:22 am: Edit

Hey guys...

I'm looking at a Jeep Grand Cherokee and a Disco SII. The purchase is being made for an every day driver that will spend a fair amount of time off road. The first plans will be for some meatier tires, and skid plates, but later on down the line I might go for a lift.

The Jeep will probably be a Selec Trac V8 (I'll have to order to get this combo). Someday (as soon as they make 'em!), I'll get an ARB locker for the rear aluminum Dana 44 axle. I simply do not like the Quadra Drive system.

The Land Rover will be an ACE-equipped SE. My dealership has said they will switch the the 18" wheels for 16s. I'd like to get SLS, but that seems to be impossible to find without getting the third row seat. And it will take forever to order a Land Rover vs. a Jeep.

So, tell me your experiences! Why should I buy a Land Rover over a Jeep?

Thanks!!!

By gp (Garrett) on Thursday, July 19, 2001 - 04:41 am: Edit

this had been talked about a ton on ths board and you may not get a ton of respones due to the fact that many of the folks will just be repeating what they have said time and time again. try using the 'keyword search' under 'utilities' to see past posts on this type of discussion. of course we are all extremely unbiased!!!!!!!

PS: J**ps suck. I've had three.

By Bud on Thursday, July 19, 2001 - 04:54 am: Edit

Spend a few hours in the Photo Gallery. Don't try to go to these places in a GC. In my own simple way, it's like this: A Disco is a direct decendent of the original Land Rover. You will find it to be quite capable in Moab and at the Mall. A GC has the J**p name on it. Other than that, it is just like the vast majority of the other 4WD station wagons out there. You will have ample traction on snow and wet pavement. But is that where you really want to be?

Open to attack,

Bud

By Andrew on Thursday, July 19, 2001 - 05:30 am: Edit

No, Jeeps actually do go off road. I've been lurking here and at Jeepsunlimited.com. There are some very heavily built new Jeeps. Off road, there are advantages to both the Jeep and the LR.

Thanks for the advice on the search function. I hadn't seen that!

Andrew

By Bill Bettridge (Billb) on Thursday, July 19, 2001 - 05:50 am: Edit

If you actually want to spend a "fair amount" of time on the trails - why bother with the ACE and air suspension? - All that is highway oriented stuff that will not give you any real advantages (and be a detriment off road)

The DII with out all the bells and whistles seems to do just fine in both on/off road environments

By Steve (Steve2) on Thursday, July 19, 2001 - 06:49 am: Edit

prior to getting my disco - i had a totally tricked out 'white tiger' cherokee. it was a pretty good car with wierd mechanical faults the dealer could never find/fix. the dealership treats you like dirt and the servicing was more $$ than on my rover. at mr l/r centre they treat you like a real person and really try to fix you problems if you have any. if i am not mistaken the new d2's come with free maintainence? if so that is head and shoulders above the jeep.

the jeep is a great CAR, the disco is a great TRUCK. also if you ever fancy doing any work on you rig - the land rover disassembles with the most logic and ease of any vehicle i have ever worked on. the jeep is a haphazzard array of screws, bolt, torque heads etc in metric and standard!! it makes you nuts!

i enjoyed driving the jeep. i LOVE driving my disco. but in the end it's your call. best of luck either way.

steve

By aparlin on Thursday, July 19, 2001 - 06:50 am: Edit

Bill,

Actually, ACE gives you a big advantage off road. You have a much larger amount of rear wheel travel (the swaybars disconnect). The only compromise about ACE is the whine you hear.

Alyssa

By bud lane on Thursday, July 19, 2001 - 06:51 am: Edit

Andrew - Didn't mean to slam the Cherokees. I just know that I returned from some trails in a stock Disco2 that I woulndn't have dared to run in a stock GC. Another way to look at it, although I doubt there are hard statistics to back it, is the number of repeat owners of each model. Percentage wise, I have to believe that the number of Discos sold to owners who intend to off-road is significantly higher than for the Cherokee. The tech discussions on this site are probably very similar to those on Jeep sites. I tend to think, though, that the Grand Cherokee doesn't really fall in to the "modify-and-do-Golden-Spike" category. Just my .02.

Bud

By Bill Bettridge (Billb) on Thursday, July 19, 2001 - 07:30 am: Edit

I still think the added complication of the ACE system does not warrant its purchase price, nor the possible maintenance $$ outside of warranty. If in fact someone wants to spend alot of time off-road - all that extra hydraulics is just soemthing else to get caught/bent/torn off etc - I imagine it could get pretty pricey to replace a trashed cylinder and the associated hose/fittings/valve body, etc

all this IMHO of course

By Anonymous on Thursday, July 19, 2001 - 08:03 am: Edit

3000 for basically the same effect off road of junking the swaybars. On road a boon, off yank the sway and it does the same thing.

By Andy Nix (Andy) on Thursday, July 19, 2001 - 08:11 am: Edit

hmmmm...As far as dependability goes, LR's are just as good or better than the "others"...For Example, a good friend of mine bought a 2000 Chevy silverado 4x4 the same time i bought my 4.6 (1996 with 60k on it) and he's already had to have the engine replaced (at 25k). Everyone has horror stories on any vehicle, but LR's make you feel proud to be driving them, unlike feeling like a lemming. i see those damned cheeps everywhere.

the only problem i see with owning a LR is- rich people have them too.

the GC is "nice" but it's also an american made P.O.S- and it's NOT as safe as a LR. I'd hate to be in a GC when it rolls.....

IMNSHO buy a 1999 disco series I, series II are...snobby.

my dos centavos

Andy

By Bud on Thursday, July 19, 2001 - 09:20 am: Edit

Andy - Didn't realize vehicles had personalities. Do you mean the owners are snobby?

Bud

By RVR OVR (Tom) on Thursday, July 19, 2001 - 11:27 am: Edit

Andrew,

Once you get into mods, you will find more stuff available for Jeeps at a lower cost. I have seen some Jeep Grands and regular Cherokees in various stages of modification doing some serious stuff that I have never seen a Disco do. Once you get into the mods, it really becomes truck vs. truck more than brand vs. brand. Each brand is not without it's nuances and lemons that everybody points a finger at.

Personally, I just like the way the Disco feels and the high level of visibility it provides. Plus, I also like the fact that it sits on a frame rather than being of unibody construction. However, I would appreciate the power that the Jeep has. Pick whatever rocks your boat and remember that on the trail it is all about the wheeling and not which brand is king.

Tom

By Eric N (Grnrvr) on Thursday, July 19, 2001 - 11:41 am: Edit

On Tom's note. Any thing can be made into a killer trail rig.. It is just a matter of how much you have to spend on it. Yes, Jeep mods are cheaper so the money you spend will get you more. I have seen some really nice Jeeps run some trails that I wouldn't take a someone elses Disco through much less mine. Heavily modified D-90 maybe but not a Disco. Drive them both see which one you like and then get it. The mods are just a matter of money. I would say that off the lot a Disco is better built (solid, heavy duty parts) then compared to the Jeep.

By Andy Nix (Andy) on Thursday, July 19, 2001 - 12:14 pm: Edit

LOL. the people are snobby, and the vehicles have a mid of their own, yes...

he he he

Andy

By Roverine on Thursday, July 19, 2001 - 02:15 pm: Edit

I also agree in the same vein as Eric and Tom ... I have an '01 Disco II SE7. I passed on the ACE (felt the money could be spent in better ways at the time). I recently took a freind of mine who is a die hard j**p fan (on her third one right now) out on a little romp on the trail with some of the guys from LR. When comparing the two (GC & Disco II) on purely a stock basis, she was amazed. Said she would never have taken her J**P on the trails we hit, and was amazed at what the Disco could do just in it's stock form. As far as stock goes on the Disco II, even though it seems like the Taction Control takes forever to kick in, that and the Hill Descent Control are very impressive. (And, no, she's not a lightweight either - she knew more about offroading than half of the guys there.)

Andy: As far as snobby goes, remember, I'm looked down upon where I live from many of "The Grey Poupon Crowd" driving their brand new Range Rovers that will never see anything but pavement. (Well, not all of them are like that - but there are enough, LOL).

Just my 1.000135 cents worth.

Kim

By RVR OVR (Tom) on Thursday, July 19, 2001 - 06:01 pm: Edit

Eric- Yes, I would agree with that. Take all the lemon stuff out of the equation for both trucks and put the Disco head to head against a Jeep and the Disco is the better built of the two for the long haul. Especially with added off-road wear and tear.

Tom

By Bud on Friday, July 20, 2001 - 12:26 am: Edit

OK, to summarize:

Not all Rovers are better than all Jeeps.

Not all Jeeps are crap.

Not all D2 owners are snobby.

Your humble (D2 owner) servant,

Bud

By gil on Friday, July 20, 2001 - 03:07 am: Edit

kim, the traction control doesnt kick in until roughly 1200 rpms, so you have to train yourself to drive with rpms up a little bit so that your ETC is available on demand. In the Range Rover, the ETC system is constantly under something like 1000 lbs of pressure so it is there instantly and on demand whenever. Unfortuantely, the Discos is not quite as sophisticated. Not that this has anything to do with the original thread topic, but it is useful info.

By Chris Merritt (Smokinbro) on Friday, July 20, 2001 - 05:46 am: Edit

I don't know if this fits - but the Jeeps I've driven don't seem to have the interior room that the Disco does. I.E. fighting for elbow room on the console. I'm 220 lbs. 6'-1" - space is at a premium for me!

By Roverine on Friday, July 20, 2001 - 06:58 am: Edit

Thanks Gil, I'm still trying to test and get used to what my new Disco can and will do stock. Also still working on protection and proper recovery gear. I still get a little (overly) irritated with my stock front bumper clearance and that stupid brush bar I had slapped on (without bothering to check it out more thoroughly). I'll grow up and deal with it, LOL. All in all, I'm still impressed with what it can do - more than what I expected. I know that had I been in my old 4x4, when we blew the 2 tires in Anza Borrego, there probably would have been some damage in the undercarriage. (Found out since that several others I know with modified rigs blew tires and broke stuff in that same exact spot, so my hubby has been granted a little redemption by me on that one ;-)

Bud, I love your summaries

Have a nice day, all!

Kim

By Roverine on Friday, July 20, 2001 - 07:12 am: Edit

P.S. - Chris, we came to the same conclusion as you on the passenger/driver space issue when comparing it to certain other vehicles. My dh ( - "dear husband", unless I'm mad at him) is 6'-3" and weighs approx 230 - 235lbs. We also found that to be a good point, and have a few friends even taller/larger that have said the same.

Kim