Subtopic	Posts		Updated
	MPG on a '95 Discovery 3.9L	1		04/15 04:40pm

By ?? on Thursday, March 29, 2001 - 04:17 pm: Edit

Lets take a vote:

Disco 1 -- 1994-1999

Or

DiscoII -- 1999-?

By Jay R. on Thursday, March 29, 2001 - 04:27 pm: Edit

Is this a flame bait ? I will bite anyways..

My Biased Vote : 97 Disco. Especially Willow Green SEs :-)

Well... it is a biased opinion but I kinda like the 97-99 Disco I as they don't have as much electronic stuff like the Disco II. Nothing against the Disco II as I have really enjoyed driving the loaners when my Disco was being serviced. However, I really like the simplicity now as my Disco is out of warranty and I do all the maintenance myself. I am not sure if this would be possible with all the ETC, HDL, and other alphabet soup electronic features of the DiscoII.

JMO. No need to flame if you don't agree with my opinion.

Jay R.

By DiverDriver on Friday, March 30, 2001 - 04:02 am: Edit

94 Disco: Simple, has a distributor and less electrics than later models. No power seats and other bullshit. If I can find them from the UK, I will install regular (manual) window winders too. For what I use this truck for the less complicated the better. MHO.

Also; Does anyone have a source for a fitted rubber mat set to replace ALL the carpet in a DI? Don't need carpet where I go. Also; has anyone ever disarmed the alarm/fuel shutoff/flasher thing?

By ho on Friday, March 30, 2001 - 04:22 am: Edit

they are all wonderful vehicles.

By JEEPETR on Friday, March 30, 2001 - 05:10 am: Edit

Ho Is Right, they are both Wonderful Vehicles...

However, My Vote goes to the Original Discovery Design. Quality of manufacture seems to be better on the 1996 and on Discoveries, but Overall I vote for the Original. Less Rear Overhang, traditional rear Rover Suspension design, No Electronic Traction Control, NO Hill Descent Control, availability of a Manual Transmission and a Manual Center Diff Lock (I know the Disco II has it, but it comes essentially disabled). The Disco II is probably better for the average buyer, but for the enthusiast Land Rover driver and User, I'd Vote for the Original. In Fact I did in December, when I purchased my '96. I considered a new Series II, but went with the original for all the above reasons and more!

~Scott T.
'95 D-90 (JEEPETR)
'96 Discovery (New addition to the Addiction!)

By Joshua Bova (Jbova) on Friday, March 30, 2001 - 05:21 am: Edit

94-95 Best motor (with obvious exception to diesel) No carbon fouling. I run 87 octane and not a knock ever! The less electric the better.

-josh

Ho, stop the peacemaker crap man, stir the pot.

By Ron on Friday, March 30, 2001 - 05:35 am: Edit

DI

But even better are the series trucks. Only vehicle that can be successfully repaired with a dull spoon, and run with only 2 wires.

Ron

hehehehe

1996 Disco co-pilot
1959 SII 88
1964 Dormobile/110 Hybrid
1988 RR on the way, yippee!

By Bill Gill (Bluegill) on Friday, March 30, 2001 - 05:36 am: Edit

I'm running a 96 that's finally up to snuff now that I've kept the dealer's grubby hands off of it, bought the complete LR mechanical and electrical manual, and got my grubby hands on it. I've heard that model year 97 marked a real improvement in QA/QC at the factory. The salesmen AND mechanics at the local dealer here in Scottsdale, AZ say that real QA/QC (quality assurance/quality control) improvements began post-95, helped the 96's, really helped the 97's, really really helped 98's and so on. Of course, they told me this AFTER I bought my 96! They say that they're happy if a 94 or 95 just makes it home with a client after they finish repairs. How's that for goal-oriented service?

At any rate, I'm happy with my '96. And my vote goes to DI for pure utility reasons. I'd like a DII for my wife and baby, however.

By ho on Friday, March 30, 2001 - 07:25 am: Edit

stir the pot?
i am serious.
they are all great vehicles.
it's all up to the owners to make them even better.

By Joshua Bova (Jbova) on Friday, March 30, 2001 - 08:07 am: Edit

Ron: You got a Rangie? Congrats. Where the pics?
Blue Gill: Two words "Dealers SUCK"
Ho: Go get Kyle, he's bound to have a strong opinion.

By Ron on Friday, March 30, 2001 - 08:20 am: Edit

Thanks Josh,
I am picking it up on Sunday. Sent the deposit in this week. Will be taking lots of pics as I am just getting ready to tear into it and I will be documenting that but I am emailing you the one I have from the seller. I got a set of OME HDs for it (used, from someone who upgraded to RTEs). I am doing the full service on it just to be sure. I am putting a rear extended SS brake line and I think I am going to try to make it a roof rack and a custom front winch tray to mount one of my warns. I have to keep the budget low so I still have enough for the 110. It has 245 BFGs on it already or I would be putting ground hawgs on it (ya I know this is supposed to be my driver). Anyway, I just could not take having to drive anything non-rover and it seems like a fair price so I went for it.

Ron

PS we should go wheeling sometime soon

By nadim on Friday, March 30, 2001 - 08:32 am: Edit

D1
why?
less plastic, less electrical stuff, less rear overhang, simple rear suspension, bullet proof equation with tried and tested parts, the engine, gearbox, diffs, and so on....plus i own one!

By Leslie on Friday, March 30, 2001 - 10:28 am: Edit

'99 Disco SD (Series I)

It does have the disadvantage of different electrics than, say a '94, but it is an OBDII system so that, at least, you can get a reader and therefore can STAY AWAY from the dealer. Has all of the other SI advantages over the SII in reference to simplicity. It was the last of the first ones, where they had finally gotten things right, before making the big jump into the next model... it has had the advantage of having had most of the glitches shaken out over the previous production years. IMHO, YMMV.....

Ron: it's not as simple as our Series vehicles, but I'd trust my Disco to get me there:

a) w/o breaking down (it might, but not as assuredly as the Series will)
b) w/o smelling like oil/gas/exhaust
c) w/o getting wet in the rain
d) before the place closes

LOL!

-L


-Leslie

By ross on Friday, March 30, 2001 - 10:31 am: Edit

disco 1 baby. even my rover service manager admitted that disco 1s are tougher.

By Ron on Friday, March 30, 2001 - 10:48 am: Edit

Ya Leslie but you have a SIII. Those extra wires and plastic must be what makes it break down.

That old 90wt smell, I use as a colonge.

Ha

Ron

By pjkbrit on Friday, March 30, 2001 - 10:50 am: Edit

Disco 1...my 94 goes great with all the mods...and of course 94 was NOT the first year of production, 89 was in the UK and the powertrain etc goes back many years before. Electrical simplicity is a must IMHO.

By nadim on Friday, March 30, 2001 - 12:17 pm: Edit

ron..does it sting after you shave...
;)

By Jeff on Friday, March 30, 2001 - 01:24 pm: Edit

Disco I. Simplicity and elegance that can handle anything you throw at it.......

By Mike on Friday, March 30, 2001 - 02:28 pm: Edit

I'm a Series 1 Disco owner and I love it. I'd rather drive a Series 1 Disco around town and off-road. However, for a cross-country jaunt, I'd much rather have a Series II.

I too have noticed that the older Series vehicles (at least the ones that are well maintained) kick our butts off-road. These guys are driving them in water up over the seats of their vehicles. No problems what at all. Well, ok, eventually one got a little water in the distributor. But he had in running in about 1 minute. I marvel at how rugged many of these 30 to 40 year old vehicles are. I hope people say the same about my Disco when I turn it over to my son in about 20 years!

Thanks,
Mike

By MA on Friday, March 30, 2001 - 03:29 pm: Edit

Disco I, my 94' 5-speed is the best first car for a teenager. The prices range from like $8,000-$11,000 for one in good condition. I have owned my Disco for about a year and a half now, and I
absolutely love it(I just turned 16 like 3 weeks ago). When it came down to picking the car that I would drive, I had all the "normal" choices like Ford Mustang, Chevy Camaro, Jeep TJ, GMC Yukon and all that crap(excuse my language). I chose the Disco because of Land Rovers rich history in the SUV world. They are the only true 4x4 company out there. All of those poseur Jeep guys love my Disco, they are all trying to look for one like mine. Whenever my friends and I go off-roading, I always have to wait for them to catch up(sometimes I have to go back and help them out!!). Also the Disco is a relatively safe car(w/ airbags, ABS, etc). It gets marginal fuel economy and it is good in all weather conditions. I plan to drive Land Rovers for the rest of my life!!!

By Mike S. on Saturday, March 31, 2001 - 09:05 am: Edit

Disco I vs. Disco II - OK, I'll bite....
For the average SUV owner, the Disco II iwould probably win hands down. It's bigger, handles better on the highway, and has more available features. Most of the owners on this board have other priorities however, and I suspect the Series one is going to be the winner.
A couple of years ago, Jay Leno took the cameras out to the parking lot and interviewed owners
of SUV's. Only one (a woman) had a reason for her purchase.
1) It sat high and she could see where she was going.
2) It was big and she could haul lots of "stuff" - and boy, was it ever full of "stuff".
Nobody had ever been off road - not even on a gravel road. They were obviously just buying the image. Enough said, I don't "off road" myself. I bought a series 1 to haul the boat, go where
needed on the farm, and to get me out in Winter. The last item means: 4 wheel drive, good
tires, and GROUND CLEARANCE, lots of it! For my needs, the Disco II flunks the test.
While I'm ranting, let me comment on my experience with a couple of "features".
ABS: Quick stops on sand, gravel, snow, if fact probably everything except wet pavement, are longer with ABS. For an explanation, read the owners manual.
TRACTION CONTROL: My wife has it on her car and we frequently have to disable it in Winter
or she can't make it to the garage. In wet snow, slush, or mud, the only way to get traction is to "chew" through the surface slop and grab something solid. If the tires don't spin, they don't dig - and you don't go. Well, this is the opinion of one Michigan owner. Happy Rovering.

By Discoguy on Sunday, April 15, 2001 - 06:51 pm: Edit

Disco I hands down. When looking at models and yrs before I picked up my 98 a few weeks ago, I found the Disco 2 to have to many problems in 99 with the ACE recall and let's face it 8 out of 10 times if you found a 2000, then the owner must have hated it b/c those leases ain't up yet, etc, etc.
98 in my opinion/research was the year that most of the dingbat electrical problems were solved(if there's such a thing for a LR) and the LE models have just the right amount of interior pleasures to keep a weekday executive/weekend warrior happy and not running to the dealer every 2 weeks.