Hmmm...Disco II or TLC/LX

[MrKungFuKick]

Hi everyone,

New member here...due to home parking situation change, I finally have room for a 4th car that is the dream of mine to have a SUV which I'll take to where it supposed to go, bad roads or off roads. I started off doing heavy research on Land Rover Discovery II (probably 2003-4 model year) as I had a brand new one back in 2000, but I only had it for a year and traded in for something else as I wanted a sport car back in the days. I've been missing the Disco more and more...

Just when I thought I'm set on finding the right Disco out there, the doubts (or fear) of its reliability is creeping up. It's a bit generic as I have never tried off-roading, at least light off-roading in the beginning, but I plan to mod the car and have fun with it over some muddy roads. I do want a keeper, which the more I think and research about, is starting to lead me to consider Land Cruiser. I want to have fun, but I want come back in my car too.

I'll be looking at the 100 series as it fits in my price range while leaving some budget for mods. I don't really have a preference of TLC or LX (yeah, read some posts about LX is more show due to under the Lexus umbrella)...

Any particular model year I should avoid?

Obviously, looking for some bias view over here in this forum.

 

[TwiceWithHair]

My dad told me a long time ago, "if you ever buy a land rover, make sure it comes with a mechanic." That was all the advise I needed. Land rover and jaguar are just fords luxury lines. I believe the resale values of rovers vs cruisers will tell you a lot.

Slee offroad has a great year by year change list. Members on this site may tell you that the year 2000 seems to have more transmission failures. Otherwise buy the newest one you can afford assuming it has a good service history. Good luck on the hunt.


...via IH8MUD app

 

[Manhattan]

I posed a very similar question on a Land Rover board - a friend wanted a Disco and I was trying to dissuade him. The comments on the Land Rover board were unbelievable. They said it's hard to compare the two, that they were not in same category when it came to reliability - that the Toyota was obviously much much more reliable. They warned that it'd be foolish to own an LR if you weren't able to to all the repair work yourself. I was fully expecting them to be dicks - arguing that the LRs were solid, that that they'd gotten better. Nope. They confirmed that they're terribly expensive to own even if you're a mechanic, and just stupid to own if you're not.

 

[stonepa]

I had a 2000 discovery that I bought new and turned into a fully expedition prepped vehicle. It was mechanically so unreliable I never did a single trip in it. Too bad - it looked great.

 

[uHu]

Let's put it this way:
Get a disco - that will leave more land cruisers for those who have understood it...

 

[iwashmycar]

I think there are LRs that are good to own and will get you home but those Discoverys are not one of them. Too new.. Too many electrical systems to F up. For the price you will probably get your fun and reliability from the LC. Heck, I really want a LC, but I am scared to jump to the solid axle and maintenance of an older rig.

 

[MrKungFuKick]

Great...to be frank, if it isn't the Disco II, I don't really care about the rest of the Land/Range Rovers...giving credit to the LR forum folks, while I didn't post any Disco or TLC questions there since I wasn't thinking a TLC then, they were extremely informative, shared a lot of details, even offered to join me checking out some of the local listings I've found on craigslist.

Anyway, think I'm pretty much set on TLC or LX, don't really care about the Lexus part, but it's more whichever I can find with the least mileage, newer year, and mechanically in good shape.

Again, if any particular year I should avoid, or why LX is a bad idea, I would love to learn! Hope to join you guys in some runs soon.

 

[UnderDawg]

I've own 2 Disco's and I can tell that, 1 was excellent and I loved it. The other was a total basket case and piece of poo. Buy the Cruiser and dont think twice. Toyota is far more reliable than the Rover. Thats why I sold them, it was because I was scared to get stuck out in BFE. The Cruiser wont let you down, wish I would have bought one when I bought my first Disco. Hindsight's 20/20. Good luck.

 

[Manhattan]

I should add that I did own a Disco I. I bought it new, and owned it for 3 years. It was by far, the worst vehicle I've ever owned. It had thousands - like, maybe $10,000+ worth of repairs and TSBs done while I owned it. And it was NEW! I'd take it in for an oil change, and it'd get a new intake manifold... or a new transfer case. Seriously - major (!) parts were swapped/repaired while it was in for routine service.

I actually got a letter once from Land Rover corporate on their oh-so-fancy parchment paper with seals and crests... it warned not to use the cruise control as it may set off the airbag. No s***. That was actually a TSB. Someone at LR mixed up the "sets cruise control" button with the "set off airbag" button.

In a perfect world, the Italians would design the bodies, the English would design the interiors, the Germans would do all the engineering and the Japanese would put it all together. Until then, buy a Toyota.

 

[SmoothLC]

. . . In a perfect world, the Italians would design the bodies, the English would design the interiors, the Germans would do all the engineering and the Japanese would put it all together. Until then, buy a Toyota.

Classic!

 

[landylover21]

This is a hard one... not Working at a Land Rover dealership and owning a Land CRUISER, I can attest that the Rovers are not the best built vehicles out there. There are a lot of the Discoveries in the shop for god knows what, and in terms of age, they are not vehicles that age well! There was a 2004(?) in the shop awhile ago that had a little over 60K and already the doors creaked and popped when you opened and closed them, the transmission shifted harshly and lazily went into gear, and the rear window kept opening by itself.

I've talked with multiple techs at work, and they all say they are a pain in the ass to work on and that they personally wouldn't want to own one, although they are nice to look at! The shop foreman says they are built pretty poorly not only in terms of mechanical, but things such as doors, windows, etc. Parts are also insanely expensive.

I've had my Cruiser for 16 years (it was bought new in 1998 and was handed down to me after I graduated college in 2011), and it's been a wonderful vehicle.

It has relatively low miles (83K) but in that time, it's only given me mechanical problems twice.

1. Once when it sat for awhile when we went on a vacation overseas and a mouse chewed up the wire to the fuel pump.
2. Once when the exhaust finally rotted away after 14 years and caused the engine to go into limp-home mode.

I got my first check engine light a few months ago and that's when I hung a new Borla catback and forgot to plug the O2 sensor back in!

Yes, I did have an issue with my sunroof cables rusting and seizing, but that is not a necessity to keep the car running, and it was fixed relatively easily.

Other than that, it's been a rock solid and reliable workhorse. Admittedly, I'm not a hardcore offroader, but in the situations that my father (who is now deceased) and I had put it through (logging trails, fields, Colorado, Moab) it's been amazing - and that's all in stock form.

The doors close with a solid thud, the tranny (apart from some occasional driveline clunk which these guys are known for and is not a serious issue) shifts smoothly, and the engine spools up to redline effortlessly.

My father chose this vehicle 16 years ago because of its overall durabilty, dependability, and capability.


Edit: for those others who may be considering a 100 Series - this vehicle may not have all the bells and whistles that a newer vehicle may have, but if you think about it, all of the computer technology will be considered outdated in a few years time with all these new gizmos.

I personally think the styling of this particular cruiser has aged quite well considering its approaching 17 years old now. I think the 200 Series will look a bit dated in the future unfortunately...

Yes, in the twisties comparing this to a new Range Rover is a bit different. It's a bit more ponderous around the corners. Granted, you do not buy a 6,000 lb SUV to go head to head with a Lotus Elise in a slalom challenge, but unlike the Range Rover, you will not have bits and pieces flying and breaking off every few miles!

 

[drwapenshaw]

I loved my LR3 and it never left me stranded. BUT it always had smnething going on and I was afraid to take my family on long trips with it because a few times it "almost" broke down. It had electrival issues, and small things were always breaking. I replaced the air suspension with nonair bc it always had a problem. At the dealership people were always complaining about how far they had to drive to get to an LR dealership (another reason I was afraid to travel).
It ran a trail great but was a real priss about everything else.
Even with all that I would have kept it in addition to the Hundy, But it had some serious rust issues i found after purchase so it couldnt stay part of the family.
Parts are much more expensive than Lexus or Toyota parts so that is a whole other issue in addition to frequent costly maintenance. There is more, but you get the picture.

 

[drwapenshaw]

Most important part one of my story is the LR mechanic who owns both Disco IIs and LR3s would always say I had it easy compared to the Disco guys. I was interested in getting one of those too but luckily I have got all the LR out of my system.

 

[El Cid]

In my neighborhood, the Land Rover is continuing proof that women still have a large say in the purchase decision and the male in their household(if at all) doesn't understand product quality.

No sane person buys a Land Rover. It's an expensive way to get stranded.

 

[stonepa]

I had a 2000 discovery that I bought new and turned into a fully expedition prepped vehicle. It was mechanically so unreliable I never did a single trip in it. Too bad - it looked great.

Beautiful but disappointing. Only spent $50k to figure that out.

 

[rusty_tlc]

Unless you have deep pockets I don't feel the 100 is a good starter truck to learn about building/wheeling a truck.
I suggest you get a Tacoma or a 4runner.
Either would be a good choice for a truck to learn about wheeling. Lower entry price and lots more after market support than the 100, and lots more trucks to choose from. After you figure out how to set up a truck the way you want it (an inherently trial and error process) sell the Taco/4runner and get a 100 if you still want to. Everything you learn building/wheeling an IFS Taco/4Runner will translate to the 100 platform and the lessons will be a lot cheaper.

Probably not what you wanted to hear.

BTW the trails in the Sierra are a lot more fun in a smaller truck like the 4Runner.

 

[El Cid]

Rusty, I respectfully disagree only because the supply and demand for 4runners is so strong that even used they fetch high 2nd market prices. If you can get into a 100 series for 10k and are willing to spend 6k, you're not in bad shape. It's hard to find great 4runners at that price point and Tacos are almost as bad.

Anecdote: My experience with my LC has been so positive that I'm considering a 4runner or Tacoma. Biggest issue is gas mileage, would like to lessen that hit as i am the solo driver during the week..

 

[rusty_tlc]

Rusty, I respectfully disagree only because the supply and demand for 4runners is so strong that even used they fetch high 2nd market prices. If you can get into a 100 series for 10k and are willing to spend 6k, you're not in bad shape. It's hard to find great 4runners at that price point and Tacos are almost as bad.

Anecdote: My experience with my LC has been so positive that I'm considering a 4runner or Tacoma. Biggest issue is gas mileage, would like to lessen that hit as i am the solo driver during the week..

Keep in mind the OP is in the Bay Area; lots and lots of Taco's and 4Runners in NorCal, built and stock. A quick look at the SF craigs list turned up half a dozen 4runners under 8K.
This would be a good starting place
http://sfbay.craigslist.org/eby/cto/4819463023.htmlSo rounding up to 6K you have 10K left to play around with. That's a lot of money for armor, lifts, tires and wheels, dual t-cases SAS etc.

For the availability and cost of aftermarket parts the Taco/4Runner is the winner. Additionally there is a much broader knowledge base since the Taco/4Runner population is larger.

 

[El Cid]

yeah, in these parts, the distances are so great, most won't risk a big SUV if they can get their mitts on a 4Runner or Tacoma... 4Runners were arguably the most popular small SUV in Texas for more than a decade..

 

[richardrichss]

I definitely understand briefly owning a vehicle then longing for another one. Buy what you want or you will not be satisfied. But.... It may be worth your time to buy a Cruiser and drive it for a couple of months, possibly doing some minor wheeling to see for yourself if you would be satisfied with it. If not, sell it and get the Disco. The used Cruiser market is strong and as long as you don't over-pay you should easily be able to sell it. Try the classifieds here. Watch for a bit and you will occasionally see a screaming deal.

Something tells me how this experiment would end...