Hey y'all,

Lease just ended on Mini Cooper and I'm weighing the pros and cons of replacing it with either a 2002 Range Rover 4.6 or the 2004 Discovery. I owned a 1994 Disco which we drove until the engine caught fire--fourteen years and 148K miles later. Yes it leaked oil like a sieve, was expensive to maintain and my wife managed to blow the head gaskets--twice. But I loved that car, brought both my daughters home from the hospital in it and miss it to this day. On the other hand the RR would be something new to experience. My RR mechanic advised against both--he said buy new, better built, fewer headaches. True, also much more of a buy in for a rapidly depreciating asset. Would rather get one of the above and then pay to keep it on the road as needed.

It won't be a daily driver--just something to call my own for weekend errands, mountain bike transport, the occasional meeting in town, etc. Figure a tank of gas a month max.

I know there've been a couple of threads in the past addressing this issue, but the most recent was four years ago. Any new perspective you guys can bring to the issue now that the RR will be ten years old and the Disco eight?

Many thanks.

 

i'd personally go with the 2004 discovery. most of that is based on i don't like the P38 Range Rover body style. a 2005 Range Rover on the other hand would catch my eye. i'd drive both and see what suits your needs better. i think reliability for the two would be pretty similar.
jon

 

I appreciate the suggestion and plan to investigate the 2005 Range Rovers. I completely agree that it really comes down to a matter of personal taste, and driving them back to back will be a valuable exercise. Price, condition and mileage will weigh heavily in my decision.