Land rover Discovery 2001 TD5 v Volvo XC90 2011 2.4 D5

[GeordieRanger]

I need your help to make a decision on whether to buy a robust old Disco with 68k miles & FSH for £4k or invest (borrow more ;-p) to buy a Volvo XC90 D5 with 17k miles at £ 18k. I'm conscious that new should mean better and more reliable but this hasn't always been the result when I've spent good money in the past. Also trading in a 4 year old car with a towbar can mean taking a big hit as dealers buyers seem concerned at the level if strain tow Inge puts on the engine. Buying an older tug seems a better bet.

The old Disco still looks good if you can source a clean example but what do you guys think? New or old?

If you tow with either 4x4 of similar ages what have your experiences been?
what should Inlook out for when checking over the older Disco?

Thanks for taking the time to help me on this one!

 

[otherclive]

I'd go for the Disco as you'll lose more in depreciation on the Volvo the minute you leave the showroom. Also if you read the LR mags spares are cheap with lots of specialist off road and overland kit with independent dealers around. No DPF minimal electronics etc need I go on? Also by now if its been well looked after any problems will have been sorted. Just check for underbody corrosion and if its been waxoyled or dinitroled if not it will cost about £200-300. Also if you don't like the Disco it will sell easily and there are bags of XC 90s around. I'm even thinking I might sell the XC70 as she's out of warranty this month and just use the Pajero. The XC70 is a great Towcar but having 5 computers two turbos and DPF linking 4 wheels might be costly as the miles mount up!!!!!

 

[seth1]

From what i can gather of the modern day vehicle.Either buy brand new and use the warranty or buy old thats mostly mechanical and not electronic.Its the bit inbetween that seems to be the problem.Both are sound vehicles,i still like the look of the TD5 and it will do the job brillantly,it wont have the poke of the Volvo but it will cope.The only prob i know of the TD5 is the injector harness fault with oil creepage but the applies to nearly everything these days.

 

[twindaddy]

Having worked inthe trade to over 10 years, working with both Volvo and LR, my view is this. They both cost the same to maintain and repair when something needs fixing. The postive with the LR being that most parts and 'unipart' items are usually freely available off the shelf and usually resonably priced. Even with the Volvo being fairly new, we used to regularly spend £1500-£2000 in preparation to get vehicles suitable for re-sale the forecourt - this is not for old vehicles, but maybe just 3-4 years old. Going back a few years, the TD5 discovery would not have been much different when they were being sold on the forecourts, but the different in your current situation is the initial outlay for the vehicle will be vastly different, and of course the TD5 will have Diff lock, low range and air suspension.

HTH

 

[otherclive]

From what i can gather of the modern day vehicle.Either buy brand new and use the warranty or buy old thats mostly mechanical and not electronic.Its the bit inbetween that seems to be the problem.Both are sound vehicles,i still like the look of the TD5 and it will do the job brillantly,it wont have the poke of the Volvo but it will cope.The only prob i know of the TD5 is the injector harness fault with oil creepage but the applies to nearly everything these days.

i would be very surprised if the Disco hadn't had a modified harness fitted given its a 2001 car, but if not its less than 1 hour to fit with replacement updated harness readily available and not expensive. A DIY job well described in the Haynes manual.

 

[GeordieRanger]

Thanks for the advice. Anything I should look out for on LR Disco?
I'll have to find a good dealer in North East.

Another option could be Range Rover 2003-05 plate as majority seem to come with LR FSH and may well have had an easier life. Residuals look solid with little difference in price from 2002-05 mainly mileage that makes difference. I hear they are chain driven rather than belt based. Any idea on what common faults are or what to watch for?

 

[GeordieRanger]

Thanks for the advice. Anything I should look out for on LR Disco?
I'll have to find a good dealer in North East.

Another option could be Range Rover 2003-05 plate as majority seem to come with LR FSH and may well have had an easier life. Residuals look solid with little difference in price from 2002-05 mainly mileage that makes difference. I hear they are chain driven rather than belt based. Any idea on what common faults are or what to watch for?

 

[otherclive]

See the replies on the post in this section on RR.

 

[GeordieRanger]

I'm off to look at a Disco TD5 ES from 2002 and know to look out for the much improved model which came out on sale from 01-06-2002 with 700 improvements. Tell tale sign is the headlamps have the newer circular format within the oblong surrounding covers. I've taken a lot of advice and identified a good source through a UK based LR specialist service company.

I'll keep you posted if I buy this one. Great feeling to be buying a bit of British history (conveniently forgetting BMW's drive to improve the quality if the Disco back in the noughties).

 

[otherclive]

The disco 2 wasn't too well protected from corrosion so if you find a nice one check its rear underbody area and I'd budget for a waxoyl or Dinitrol treatment. Had my Pajero done last winter cost £200 for Dinitrol in Gt Malvern. Waxoyl centre wanted nearly £500.