Darover, I don't necessarily agree with you. My family has 2 Jaguars, a BMW, and now a Land Rover. An 88 and a 95 XJ6,a 98 M3, and a 2000Disco II. My brother drives the M3 with almost 100k miles. It has had no major work done, just plugs, oil, filter, etc. I regard it as a pretty reliable car. By the way, it has the 3.2 litre I-6.It isthesignature BMW engine that packs a huge punch in a smallpackage.The 88 XJ6 has some interior problems, but it runs great and still has some kick. Its brakes lack power assist, but thats OK.The 95 XJ6 has even more kick and the interior it is excelent shape. It has had new hoses, plugs, oil, filters, etc. It just got new shocks and some bushings, but those wear out, but the only othermajor thing has been new fans, which I found a good deal on. In addition to routine maitainance, the Disco II has had the intake manifold gaskets replaced, along with the water pump. Thefront leftdoor window and locking mechanism quit working, but I can fix that. The MAFS died because of a K&N air filter and I need to get a new front bumper (my dad hit something). I replaced the brakes and the rear air springs but the brakes are routine maintainance. It has needed a little more than the others, but I love driving it. It still wants more attention, but it still starts ang gets me where I need to go.

 

Hi Lad's,
Interesting topic. I've drivin Cherokee's for most of my adult life and found them to be reliable,cheap to fix and tough as nails.Sure they had their problem areas,but again,cheap to fix.I decided three years ago to graduate to a Discovery II because I loved the look of the vehicle and the way the cabin is set up.I asked lots of questions,talked to tech's and service managers and soon realized that I was not just buying a typical SUV,but rather a piece of equipment that would require lots of extra service,so I knew up front what to expect. I chose a 5 seater without SLS,ACE,or dual sunroof,and got the 16 inch wheels instead of the 18 inch.(all on the advice of Land Rover Tech's who knew the problem areas)I have no problem taking it for frequent oil changes and inspections and spending the extra couple of bucks for premium oil and K&N oil and air filters.I love this truck and look forward to driving it,I feel good driving it and will own it for years to come. It's likely the smoothest running Discovery in the Country and has never givin me repair grief.No other vehicle could replace this truck..it's mine and part of who I am.Yes,I know I'm getting a little carried away here,but I'm just trying to make a point.If you take extra care of these vehicles,they will pay you back tenfold with long service and pride of ownership.You just can't compare it to another SUV,because it's not just another SUV,it's much more than that.

 

I agree that this is an interesting topic, and here are my two cents to add to the discussion:

I have a couple engineering degrees and have worked as an automotive engineer for an oemfor afew years now. I have always worked on my own cars (never has any of my cars been in a repair shop of any kind - a fact that I am very proud of), and have owned over 20 vehicles so far ranging from 1960's Fiat to newer Acura. Most of my vehicles have been German however: VW, Audi, BMW from the 1980's to late 1990's. Currently I own a '02 Disco (96k miles), '95 Audi S6 (180k miles), '69 850 Spider and a custom built racecar.The Discovery is right near the top ofthe list in terms of effort required to keep it tip-top. There is a good reason for that - from the engineering standpointLR Discovery (and the Ranger Rover P38) can be summed up with: ancient mechanicals with over ambitious electronics attached. After all it has a Buick derived V8 from the 1960's, that Buick itself has long since forgotten. So, I would say that it makes sense to compare reliability in 1960s terms, and then the Discovery looks really good. After all, back in the 60s valve jobs at 50k were the norm, and even brand new cars had all kinds of problems... We have gone a long way since. In terms of how the engineering is done, things look a lot different. Computer simulations can do incredible things very quickly, manufacturing methods have greatlyimproved, materials have changed, etc.

Can aDisco, being from arelatively smallmanufacturer (that may only have ~50 engineers working on it), andrunning 1960's mechanicals be as reliable as a new Kia? No way. Is the Disco a higher quality vehicle? Of course, because there is more to "quality" than just reliability. Is the discovery a great truck? For sure. The off-road capabilities, the interior layout, the looks, etc more than make up for the outdated technology underneath.

And the high running cost of a Discovery aren't all bad. If Discos were as reliable and cheap to maintainas a Honda, they would also keep their value like a Honda, and I wouldn't be able to purchase an '02 Disco in the first place.

Piotr

 

Well said Piotr. I couldn't agree more with the statement "ancient mechanicals with over ambitious electronics attached". As many times as I've been under my Rover,there are still occasionswhen I laugh at how absolutely primitive it is. Any time that a passengercomments on the, somewhat refinedinterior, I explain that the underside looks like that of a WW2 military vehicle.The upside to that, from a DIY owner's perspective,is the fact that the primitive mechanicals make repairs far morerudimentary than they'd be on more modern technology.

I think the die hard/devoted ownership of Rovers make it no surprise that people will jump to their defense when someone rips their reliability, quality, etc. But the fact is, everyone here is an owner and, most likely, a lover of their Rovers. I'll be the first to rip a lot of those things. However, I also subscribe to the theory that Rovers need to be looked at as a "hoby" (a hoby being defined as something that you devote time and money to because you enjoy it and find value in it above and beyond the Kelley Blue Book or MPG it gets). Any Rover owner who waslooking for a "put gas in it and drive it" kind of vehiclehas probably made a badand/or uneducatedpurchase decision.

My additional .02

 

Since I started this thread, I thought it time to let you know what I have seen out in the third-world countries and developing nations where I have been to. What you see is a lack of modern parts houses and a lot of the cars are old American or Eurpean makes because the "parts houses" are junk yards. The internal camshaft of the Rover engine (prior to 2005) removes the need to find a timing belt in these underpriviledged nations of the world. With many of these people, a Landrover is the first vehicle they probably saw. If I were told I had an assignment in one of these places like you see on the Discovery channel or the Nationa Geograpic channel, I would ask for a Land Rover. The first time I ever rode in Landrover was in a Central American country. It was several years old and I had to help the guy get the passenger window up by grabing it with a hand on the inside and one on the outside of the glass and lifting while he pressed the button. Did that scare me off? Nope, bought a new 2003 SE and would do it again. I keep it in the garrage, had to modify my garrage door because the Rover is so high. I have enjoyed reading about others thoughts on this subject matter.

PS: When toyota was trying to get into stock care racing they needed an internal camshaft engine similar to the kind the Rover has. For some reason Land Rover stopped using this engine the very next year. Could it be that Toyota bought the rights to it, in hopes they could use it for a race car engine? Food for thought. Some of you are probebly more up to speed on this subject than I. Weigh in, please!