'04 Disco Vs. '04 RR

[98 HOO]

Might be time for a new daily driver and I am considering either an '04 Disco, or a third generation RR. I currently own two Discos (96 D1 and 00 D2), and am aware of their issues. The Range Rovers are about twice the cost of the Discos, but this might not be bad if they have fewer maintenance issues (BMW engine...). So, looking for feedback on those that have third generation Range Rovers that have put a good number of miles on them. Any trends related to maintenance issues? Did the '04 Discos make any improvements v. previous years that lead to fewer issues - especially with head gaskets????

Thanks for the help.

 

[JohnOlson28]

04 Disco without question. For starters you're getting the last model year of a car vs the first.

 

[DiscoNDixie]

The first year BMW powered RR had issues. Wait until you can afford the Jaguar engined RR. Right now there are fantastic deals to be had on 03-04 Discos. I just bought and added to my stable a 03 with 50k miles for $8950 from a dealer. If you are familiar with the Discos issues, then there are great deals to be had. DnD

 

[wooderson]

MKIII hands down

 

[cboy903]

I have both a '05 RR and a '04 D2. For a daily driver, the RR wins hand down. The RR is a completely different truck than the Disco and even the P38a.

Imagine the comfort difference on a long drive between a Defender and a D2. That's how much more comfortable the RR is over the D2.

 

[Ron]

RR is a much nicer car.

Ron

 

[luvs2getmuddy]

Rr.

 

[draaronr]

D2 easier to fix and easier initially on the wallet

 

[Alyssa]

RANGE ROVER!!!! I've had an 04, 05, and now an 06. They are SO much better as a daily driver! Stable and QUIET on the highway, more power, MUCH better turning radius, more comfortable, and more features. They are also awesome offroad!!

 

[Justin Kurosaki]

And how does the RRS compare?

 

[jwest]

04 Disco without question. For starters you're getting the last model year of a car vs the first.

exactly - plus, they're so different as to pros/cons, it's hard to consider - you're considering both....

I love the lines/design of the MKIII RR, however not the first year due to ples of issues, then 05's were not all that much better from all I've read, of course the people with no trouble just go places and don't complain on forums

They have SUCH different attributes though -- you guess which one:
one is SO much more practical for the simple utility
one is highly UNmodifyable
one cruises long trips lovely
one feels more sporty with proper medium duty OME springs and shocks
one has 2 operable sunroofs
one has the spare where you can actually get to it without unloading your entire vehicle.
both have heated windscreen and seats with cold weather pkg.
one has a reverse camera
one is very annoying to tow things with due to it's reterded recessed hitch receivor - including a hitch mounted bike rack!!

one allows a mtn bike to stand up with no wheels off for transport to the trail - the other barely fits it with front wheel off.

one is posh/image mobile (while I love them) whereas the other is just plain cool and unassuming.
one has more room to install a 2nd battery system
one has sweet riding air bags to fail any moment - or behave otherwise as i have seen at the dealer with nearly 18" under the rear diff when the system whacked out and it became almost undriveable. one has a power steering height adjustment also waiting to screw you when it fails (as seen at dealer one day too)
one is the best rendition of a generation while the other is a mess.
one is a very good value while the other is always inflated in price.



either wait for a supercharged RR 06 is a nice year with the coolest seats allowing separate upper back angle adjustment, or just get the very nice and practical 2004 Discovery II with the gof lights and sunroofs, etc. They're really great all arounders.

enough? - i have no more opinions for the night. good luck.

 

[jwest]

And how does the RRS compare?

The silliest rover ever made, maybe only 2nd to the freelander... why buy an "suv" that has less cargo space than a jetta wagon - well, at least less than a passat wagon?! a RRS is like all of the bad things about an lr3, none of the good, and nothing even close to a "real" range rover.

it was one of the most fantastic marketing schemes though.

I've owned both a scrr and still have the lr3, having driven both rrs models - the rrs sc is cool, but stupid all at the same time. the rr is so much cooler, better design, more space (imagine thinking an suv should have some space inside... oohh), and built better.

 

[jymmiejamz]

either wait for a supercharged RR 06 is a nice year with the coolest seats allowing separate upper back angle adjustment, or just get the very nice and practical 2004 Discovery II with the gof lights and sunroofs, etc. They're really great all arounders.

enough? - i have no more opinions for the night. good luck.

The clam-shelling front seats were available 2003-present, and they are not standard on 2006 models. The clam-shelling seats are one of the features included in the "Luxury Package."

 

[jwest]

The clam-shelling front seats were available 2003-present, and they are not standard on 2006 models. The clam-shelling seats are one of the features included in the "Luxury Package."

wrongo buddy. the cool "clamshell" seats ended with 06 due to air bag placement. 07's + don't have them anymore.

you are correct about the lux pkg aspect.

 

[gmookher]

for da street? RR, obviously over a d2...

 

[wooderson]

again, get the MKIII