No its not broken its just an ongoing resoration project )

[bandiflip]

What do you mean Nick ???????????

[pamw]

I somehow gathered that you wanted something special, different from everyone else. How about the forward control 101". Tho sourcing parts are also a pain too. Or do up a Series 1 hybrid on coils. Many people did, but have mostly disappeared now.

We toyed with a 101 as a camper once, but never got further than that! 101 useless for trials, so although cool and fun, not going to match Richard's orginal spec!

Any Series 1 that has survived intact and not already messed about with should be left that way. IMHO. They are worth a lot of money in good original condition. Also, SVA (or whatever it is called now) would be a PITA if you were to hybridize these days (when we were all doing hybrids, these things were not such an issue).

However, if you can find one already done 'in antiquity' it isn't a bad idea! Like the lightweight though, panels, etc, cost and hard to find, internal spec poor, etc. Lots of character, but!

[nicks90]

if you want something a little different and dont mind rubbish interiors - and can spring a bit more cash from the money tree....



supercharged v8 anyone?
certainly individual looking too.

[Zedman]

Re previous post

Not sure if its ugly, a beast or both, but if I won the lottery this weekend I would nip over for a test drive ), its definatly had a lot of effort put into it.
I think it would look better all one colour though.

[tecnick]

What is it? a QT with some fibreglass? sorry being ignorant, just interested.

Cheers Nick

[Matthews]

Richard , as a pure trials motor it was hard to beat (one of the main reasons Dave and I formed this club was because my Lightweight was outlawed as a RTV trials motor), do I regret getting rid yes and no but it was so impractical in reality no, do I keep tabs on it , well I know it's still being raced with NORC and I sold it 10 years ago so I must have built a resonable motor, it was better than the 90 in the fact that the body was smaller and it turned better than the 90 but that's down to wheelbase as it was an 88 but overall the 90 is a better motor as I can use it for other stuff , If you want to see it Dave will have some old piccies somewhere in electronic format but I will say I couldn't have carried camping stuff for greenlaning in it, couldn't fit any winches and wouldn't have been able to fit 35" tyres on it as that's not what it was built for (Comp safari's and hillrallies). IMO you can't go far wrong with a good standard 90 with some MT's on it . BTW my 90 has slightly stiffer and longer springs, standard shocks but 4 up front with lowered mounts and thats about it for mods other than the winches and lockers which I don't use on club trials and a very tired standard 300tdi engine n box from a Disco(auto) so it's not heavily modified as they don't need to be, the only reason for the stiffer springs is to carry the extra weight of winches and cage otherwise I would be using slightly softer than standard but a little longer .
If your going to part with hard earned cash listen to everybody and buy a 90.
Matthew

[Zedman]

Mathew thanks for the honest reply, the task of trying to find a vehicle or project that suits a persons character and resources is pretty damed hard to get right on the first attempt and as I have read can change over time.

One thing I have got from this post is the Disco seems to be the King all rounder, but why did they make it with that fat arse ( yes so you can get lots of stuff in the back )

Ultimate trial king ? NO SUCH thing on a budget that has become clear

Best compromise, roflmao so much choice, so much personal preferance, so much dependant on what you want to put into the project.....

4L coil sprung Jeep with a 3" lift, big tyres would be competitive, getting the lift kit and anything that breaks is silly money so Jeep is sadley not a long term prospect but got me into the sport and has been great fun and will continue to be so until next ride is ready, hoping it can still win an event b4 its sold )))))))

I'm pretty sure Kingy beat me in his Disco at the last event but for some reason I am SOOO reluctant to get a Disco, can anyone tell me why ??

And if I can secure a workshop I am still very tempted to go down the Lightweight , diesel, coil conversion route, I drive a Jeep in a Landy club, nuff said ) = I jumped into the fun with very little knowledge and it seems there is an infinate number of fun things you can do with your life and 4x4 vehicles also, more confused than every but tons of fun options to mull over )

[kingsonlim]

Richard, I was never a big fan to the disco I now have. Main reasons i have it now was that my rangie was pronounced dead with excessive rust, and this Jap reimport disco became available. And that happened before I learned to weld. I will keep the rangie if I still have it now.

There are ways to 'reduce' the big fat arse on a disco:

- bobtail
- remove rear bumper
- cut away protuding chassis leg after removing rear bumper and re-weld new cross member
- fit rangie roof and tail gates

A disco is a good balance between the 90 and 110 as it is 100 inch wheelbase. And the best about them is that they are very cheap now. You will be able to get a disco that needs some work done for about 500 quid, leaving you a hefty sum from your budget to do whatever you want on it. Same can't be said for the 90 or 110 as they still cost considerably more.

[Zedman]

Next event:

I would like to thank the vey kind people who offered me 'test rides' in there rides, and one very brave/kind person even offered their vehicle for the entire event (nope I am too scared of breaking it to borrow for the event but would love a sensible test ride with it).

Intending to to get there early on Sunday to do a bit of car swapping, any chance you marshals can set out a Dummy spare section for ALL the club members to mess around on b4 the events starts??

[kingsonlim]

Richard....you can test run mine if you wish on a saturday when we set out the trial....as long as you dont drive the gates, and drive around at different part of the site...you will still be able to compete the next day.....this way, you will not be interfering during the trial day....I will be there 10am onwards...

[Bo]

Just to put the record straight, 200 and 300 Disco's are exactly same length as Range Rover classic to the rear bumper as it uses the same chassis however, the rear body of the Disco is shorter, it's the TD5 Disco that has the long overhang. Unless you are planning on driving down or up a brick wall, its not really an issue. We have had people in our off road club (note, not Landy club) compete quite successfully in Disco's and Rangies with the tow bars still fitted! The top and bottom of it is that you can have the shortest, quickest turning vehicle in the world but if you can't drive you will always get beat by the guy in the 110 who is a good driver.

[Zedman]

Just fixed another leak on the Jeep, this time i learnt my lesson.

Another one of the cores was cracked but this time I wasnt happy / couldn't be arsed removing the radiator. it was just about reachable though the imovable radiator grill, light sanding with stretched finger tips, and a bit of soldering later it was as good as new ).

Hoping to make it down saturday for some chatting etc while ther is no rush to compete, not sure if I dare turn up in the Skoda )

[Zedman]

What's the basic differences between the older Range Rovers and the same period Discoveries ?

[Bo]

The mechanicals to all intent are identical. The body frame up to the back of the rear doors is virtually the same but is dressed in different external body panels. The doors would fit each other apart from the swage line being wrong. The interiors are obviously different early disco seats are crap which is why most swap for Range Rover items.

[davew]

With the exception of the LSE model (which had a longer wheel base and air suspension) the Classic Range Rovers and the Discovery are pretty much the same vehicle with a different body (and even a lot of that is very similar).

When the two overlapped in production the Disco always lagged behind on features and would always have the cheaper options. The Disco, for example, still used carbs on the V8s rather than EFi. This was done to keep the "premium" that the RRC attracted over the Disco on the forecourts. The Disco was launched in 1989 and ran alongside the RRC until 1994 (ish) during which time it was intentionally kept as the "poor relation" of the Range Rover.

When the MkII (P38) Range Rover came along (in 1994) and the RRC phased out (in 1996) the Disco was given a facelift with better engine options and so on to basically take over the old RRC slot now that the P38 had lots of new toys. This face lifted version is known as the 300 series Disco as it had the 300TDi engine instead of the 200TDi. The V8 option was updated at the same time using the same 3.9 V8 engine that the later Range Rover Classic had used. (The P38 had been given a better 4.0 V8 and a better 4.6 V8 so the Disco was allowed to upgrade too).

In 2000 ( I think !) the Disco was given another tweak to catch up a bit on the P38 and the Disco II was released with a longer body to meet the new forward facing seat requirements and air suspension at the back. It was also given the smaller of the two P38 V8s or a TD5. This was all done to reposition it a bit prior to the new generation Range Rover to be launched in 2002 and coincided more or less with a re-modelling of the P38.

So, with that in mind, a RRC and Disco of the same year will mean the RRC is probably a better vehicle with a better engine and more advanced features/interior BUT where the Disco really scores is post 1994 where the RRC sales had all but dried up. Hence the much higher availability of Discos that are affordable, manufactured between 1994 and 2000.

Bet you wish you hadn't asked now