Range rover classic vs discovery
- Thread starter Rover De Land
- Start date
David Harris
Expedition Leader
I second this appraisal. Somehow for me there is a special something about the Range Rover Classic that is hard to put my finger on. . . Along with the Series and Defender it just seems to embody everything that defines Land Rover and British heritage.
BTW: I checked your website out, Nick, and really enjoyed it. I'm thinking of building a site like this chronicling my Rover and Jaguar journeys.
David
Snagger
Explorer
Sorry to go off topic, but thanks, David. I'm remodelling the site at the moment, and it'll be more cleanly divided into the three vehicles with subsections for each the way it current is set up for one. I plan to add some other features too, like reviews, links and so on. I might even do some video tutorials if I can work out how...
Anyway, back on topic, the DI is sort of classic, but the RRC is undeniably so. Curiously, though, the RRC doesn't look dated, unlike the DI - it's such a classic that it's timeless.
David Harris
Expedition Leader
Hello from NZ,
Just reading the posts with interest as I am going through a similar dilemma. I have a 300Tdi Range rover, 1995 soft dash, spring suspension, ex Landrover (M443KAC) 2 owners apart from Landrover which has 200,000 miles on the clock. The problem is it failed compliance when we bought it back to NZ from the UK due to rust in the firewall / bulkhead. It has languished in the garage for 7 years waiting for me to make a decision and I am still undecided as to whether or not to rebuild it
. In the meantime I have been using a 300 Tdi 110, a XEDi Freelander and a 300 Tdi Manual Discovery. Each has their own set of attributes and vices. The Classic RR was a fantastic vehicle. Very reliable, economic, quiet and comfortable. But the rust is a killer. I looked after it very well, washed it regularly, water blasted it, had it dinitroled - I was going to keep it forever. I even bought another 1995 soft dash to use as a donor for the body but when I peeled back the windscreen rubbers, the windscreen pillars were rusted through. The discovery doesn't have the charm and the personality of the RR, but I find the seats better and it is definitely better for the middle row passengers. It is also better for carrying bikes on the back as you can still open the rear door with a bike carrier on. It's height is a limitation as it won't fit in my garage while the RR breezes in. The RR would go anywhere with decent tyres especially with the traction control on the rear. Plus it had brakes that I haven't bettered with any other vehicle. Whereas I have embarrassed my self by getting stuck with the Disco probably due to having the road tyres on it. At the end of the day I am still undecided which is the better vehicle. I think it comes down to specifics such what the vehicle is going to be used for, how many people do you want to carry, do you want all the bells and whistles, what's available at what cost.
Graham Russell
Auckland,
NZ
Just reading the posts with interest as I am going through a similar dilemma. I have a 300Tdi Range rover, 1995 soft dash, spring suspension, ex Landrover (M443KAC) 2 owners apart from Landrover which has 200,000 miles on the clock. The problem is it failed compliance when we bought it back to NZ from the UK due to rust in the firewall / bulkhead. It has languished in the garage for 7 years waiting for me to make a decision and I am still undecided as to whether or not to rebuild it
. In the meantime I have been using a 300 Tdi 110, a XEDi Freelander and a 300 Tdi Manual Discovery. Each has their own set of attributes and vices. The Classic RR was a fantastic vehicle. Very reliable, economic, quiet and comfortable. But the rust is a killer. I looked after it very well, washed it regularly, water blasted it, had it dinitroled - I was going to keep it forever. I even bought another 1995 soft dash to use as a donor for the body but when I peeled back the windscreen rubbers, the windscreen pillars were rusted through. The discovery doesn't have the charm and the personality of the RR, but I find the seats better and it is definitely better for the middle row passengers. It is also better for carrying bikes on the back as you can still open the rear door with a bike carrier on. It's height is a limitation as it won't fit in my garage while the RR breezes in. The RR would go anywhere with decent tyres especially with the traction control on the rear. Plus it had brakes that I haven't bettered with any other vehicle. Whereas I have embarrassed my self by getting stuck with the Disco probably due to having the road tyres on it. At the end of the day I am still undecided which is the better vehicle. I think it comes down to specifics such what the vehicle is going to be used for, how many people do you want to carry, do you want all the bells and whistles, what's available at what cost.
Graham Russell
Auckland,
NZ
Snagger
Explorer
I have a '95 300Tdi RRC soft dash Vogue (non-SE), so it has the R380, coils, no leaky sun roof and manual cloth seats. I love it to bits and it'll be fully restored when I can afford to do it with the body shell stripped for blasting and repair prior to galvanising, along with the chassis. The axles and suspension will be hot zinc sprayed. It'll be rebuilt to look the way it left the factory, but to higher quality and longevity. The soft dash is relatively rare amongst the RRC anyway and is the best of the Classics - if yours is viable, it'll be worth restoring eventually as their value is slowly increasing; so many RRCs have been broken up, turned into hybrids or wrecked as cheap off-road toys that as a whole they are becoming rarer and more valuable if in good order.
DividingCreek
Explorer
Classic seats are far more comfortable than disco seats. I'm 6'6 and never had any issues with a classic, and the disco was comfortable once I swapped in seats from a classic.
JeremyT101
Adventurer
Really eh? Maybe the seats I had in the front of my focus really sucked, but the first time I sat in the front seats of my Disco it was like sitting on a cloud. I can only imagine how good the Classic seats are.
mowerman
Adventurer
I am not as tall but I also fitted RRC seats in my 96 D1, as I found the disco seats uncomfortable
Mechanically very little to choose between the 2 I just preferred the 7 seats of the Disco - which are also cheaper in the UK than a good RRC
colvere
Observer
I have owned a 97 and 99 disco1 and loved them both. I have spent a week behind the wheel of a 93 classic and realy liked it. Discos are easier on parts location but if you found a nice classic i would take it. I am currently looking for a nice 95 clasic to go along with my 99 disco 1. On another note I test drove and gave a good once over a 99 disco 1 that had 315000 miles on it (no rebuild) and it drove the same as my 99 w 138K on it. if taken care of they do well for a long time.
bloodycape
Observer
Which would be easier/lower costing to build up?
Rovertrader
Supporting Sponsor
Build up is near identical, but less systems to eliminate on the Disco. For example, near all the newer Classics had air suspension. The parts to lift the two are the same, but you will have nonfunctioning switches in the cabin of the RRC. Also, it can be harder to locate body items like bumpers for the Classics. A lot of those items depend on the owner, as Disco pieces will fit, but not exact.
