I'm just wondering if the reason there are many repair issues with Discoveries is that they are used heavily, with little or no maintenance from the original owners? Being that they are really fine vehicles and do the off-road stuff so well, in comfort, people keep using them longer. What do you think?

 

I think its a mix of poor maintenance mixed with poor quality control and or poor engineering on individual components

Guess it depends on model, d1 seems to be mostly ecu and sensors plus head gaskets nptnto much with actual wiring IMO

Other models seem plauged with engine trans issues like free lander, wiring issues/ connectors bad diffs like lr3 , iirc d2 frame rots out, I would expect better from such a expensive brand and they wonder why they had to sell out to ford

 

There's two different scenarios, on-the-street and offroad.

Land Rovers are easily considered trouble-prone on the road compared to other makes. They really do frustrate the average consumer. Up through the Discovery II and P38 Range Rovers, they were building them with decades old technology that did not match the then current market's expectations for the segment where they were selling them (luxury lifestyle accessories). They also had very poor quality control, and a mix of brilliant engineering with poor execution, and just bad engineering.

Another part of the issue is neglect, often as a result of buyers of severely depreciated vehicles not being willing to spend what they demand. In other words, people acquire a Land Rover at a low price that reflects the deferred maintenance, and then they're shocked and disappointed that it's going to cost them more than they bought it for to fix everything: https://landroverforums.com/forum/ot...d-disco-70679/

Offroad is different. The reason I think so is because all the little problems that plague the average consumer amount to minor nuisances compared to what driving a vehicle offroad will do. You can take any make or model, Jeep, Toyota, Ford, GM, Land Rover, Isuzu... the offroad environment will trash them all. There really is nothing that is going to survive without serious and frequent maintenance and repair, and often a good dose of costly upgrades.

I have hung out with wheeling clubs, local forum groups, and other gatherings of offroaders and the only guys that are not breaking a lot are the ones that also spend nearly as much time building and maintaining their rigs as they do driving them, and a heck of a lot of money.

Consider a Camel Trophy event. These events were perhaps 1000 miles, and the vehicles were typically built-up significantly over stock, and then used for only one event. Compare this to a person that drives offroad just on the weekends. A typical weekend might consist of 25 to 100 miles of trail. If a person drives only half the weekends of the year, they could still accumulate more offroad miles than two Camel Trophy events. If they drove during the week, the wear on the vehicle would be even greater. Most people that drive offroad regularly invest significantly in their rig to make it last. They want it to last more than one event, or one year. But it's not practical to complete ten Camel Trophies without more than a few fixes here and there.

 

As far as the 98 d1 I think one of my biggest complaints is the substandard ecu's and non weather proofed harness connectors when compared tosay a chevy of the same year, but on the flip side it has full float axles and sealed swivels like a military vehicle so...

 

I look at the idiosyncrasies and "requirements" (head gaskets at 120~k miles, etc) and I wonder why people punish them selves this way.

Then I reflect on where this rig of mine has gone on 55 series 18's (WTF Rover?) as opposed to the locked/locked Cherokee on 35's that I was following and keeping up with... and it kind of makes sense.

Oh. And the Connolly Hydes (Rolls, anyone?) the piping, the Walnut, the smell ( a Rover smells like none other on the inside) the fact that the Louvre called the classic a work of art (only rig ever to command that) and I get it.

Plus it feels damned good.

Sure my 215,000 mile Suburban, was smoother, with better ride and handling, superior traction control (Stabilitrak...mmmmmm), and better mpg, comfortable seats.... but it didn't have the soul of the Landy.

Although.... were both in my driveway? 'Bourbon would get the nod for a Road trip, and the Landy would get a loving pat of betrayal, as I saddled up the GM.

 

All good replies and points. Couple things I thought of to add:
1) A great many (if not most) Land Rovers were sold on a lease situation as I read one time. So, the dealer took care of initial problems and the 2nd owners that got stuck with the 'big' issues would get nickled and dimed on a steady stream of problems ...some that might have been deferred from the original leasee.

2) Land Rover is a small company. When you look at what they did with the revenue they generated, I think one could make a case it was really amazing they were able to put together such a good product with a tiny budget. It's amazing they even exist today. I figured it out once that Ford sold more trucks in one year than all the D1's and D2s. The point is, they couldn't afford the engineering departments that other top-tier companies had/have. That results in older technology sticking around longer and less time/money to test for problems.

3) The older technology that the D1's have is also part of (in my opinion) what makes them good vehicles. Easy to work on, rugged axles that would have been engineered out if they had the money too.

4) Once I spent the time/money and got most of the bugs worked out of my D1, it's been a pretty reliable vehicle. I'm sure something will come up soon ...but I've been in a nice trouble-free stretch lately.

5) If you keep just about any vehicle long enough, parts will fail and need to be replaced. For example, people used to talk about how the older Toyota trucks had legendary toughness and ran forever. Well, that reputation results in many of those older Toyota trucks being rebuilt and rebuilt again. You still see a lot of them around. I've had a few and I can tell you I've had to rebuild the transmissions, redo the axles, timing chains, head gaskets, steering wears pretty fast on them, there's a long list at 160k miles. But I've had several Chevrolet trucks that went well past 200k that I barely had to touch. Some legends seem more urban [legends] than real.

 

It was Ford that were responsible for the Discovery 3 and 4 (LR3 and 4) - cost cutting left right and centre shows VERY clearly in Ford-era cars (take a look at the Jaguar S-type and X-type if you want to see what I mean).

On that theme, of course, the company had been owned by BMW for 4 years at the time of the launch of the Discovery 2. Wonderful German engineering, eh? Good old (un)reliable Bosch electronics, too.

 

If I understand the history right, the P38 was the last unfettered Land Rover product. When BMW bought the Rover Group, the P38 was ready to come out the door. But BMW quickly went to work to replace it with a product influenced by the X3, but based on the 7 series and later the E39. It was under Ford's ownership that the 3rd generation Range Rover came out, but most of it had developed under BMW. It was a product that was mostly conceived and designed by BMW.

The DII was a revised Discovery with far more Land Rover influence than BMW. It is in a lot of ways a Discovery 1 with many of the changes from the P38 program.

So besides the 3rd generation RR, the other mark left by BMW on Land Rover history, was the Freelander. Although the concept pre-existed BMW by almost a decade, Rover didn't have the capital to enter the compact SUV market and had been seeking a partner. Honda backed out and it was BMW's capital that made the Freelander possible. The sales in Europe dwarfed everything else Land Rover was doing. This probably was one of the major catalysts for Land Rover abandoning the true offroad, solid-axle, 4x4 market and going the way of the LR2, Evoque etc.

 

... is in the wilds of Australia and Afica. Where people do not play on weekends with their 4x4s but use them to work or on safari.

In both of these countries you may be on a single vehicle safari and not see another vehicle for a week - be 1,000 miles away from any dealer and 500 miles away from any workshop.

Go to Africa, from the south to Central and East and see if anywhere you can lease (we call it "hire") a Landrover to go on your photo-safari. What you will see is the Mitsubishi Pajero (The SA, by Merceds Benz built Montero) and Toyota Landcruiser.

The Landrover always has simply been a known, notoriously unreliable mode of transport. It is such a pity as the design philosophy was very good, but British adherence to quality principles was lacking from the beginning.

Then BMW bought Rover but nothing became German. Yes Bosch ignition coils replaced Lucas and for good reason. NOTHING in the structure and drive train was changed. Why did Rover sell? Because of having been punting an unreliable vehicle and because it was not making financial sense to go bancrupt by forever replacing broken gearboxes, engines and electronics with the same unreliable stuff.

BMW bought a useless brand and pawned it off to Ford and we know what the level of resistance at this giant is to design change. Ford sold it to Kia before class action was imminent and nothing will change. They'll make money from selling, and talk their way out of any class claims.

I owned two Tdi Defenders in my safari business in Southern Africa. After 18 months I gave them back to Landrover South Africa in disgust and got my money back.

In Australia I heard the expression - "If you want to arrive at your destination in style take a Range Rover. If you want to arrive at your destination take a Toyota Landcruiser". This not just bashing Landrover - it is an idiom born out of heartbreak experience. Character has nothing to do with reliability

Visit South Africa and go to a safari self-drive vehicle lessor for you and your family's two week Safari to the Okavango Swamps in Botswana via the Central Kalahari where you will face deep, dragging sand and heat. You will carry ALL your food and water, as well as your cooking and sleeping stuff. Kitted out for exactly this stand two vehicles, a Discovery and a Landcruiser.

Which one will you choose?

Come do it with me - We'll take my Mitsubishi Pajero and my son's Mitsubishi Colt pickup. They've done it many times and will do so for another 200,000 miles.

 

I don't recall Kia buying Land Rover, Tata however did buy it.