Discovery or LC90
 

Hello all!
Im going to change my old Hilux to something newer that will be good enough for some trips to marocco(or mayby egain to mauritania?who knows?)
And Im pretty not decided what to chose.
I see two possibilities good for me. LR Discovery 300Tdi (till 1998) or Land Cruiser 3.0 D4D(mayby KZTE, but I better like D4D due to lower fuel consumption)
As all we know Discoverys from 1998 are almost half the price of Land Cruiser from 2000-2001.
So If I chose Discovery, I want to install Maxi Drive locking diffs(four pinion diferentials,strenghtend drive shafts ect..) in front and rear. (I heard that LR orginal diferentials are not great) and all new Equipe4x4 suspension in it, plus some other changes.
All that Disco with extras will cost me probably same as 2000-2001 Land Cruiser J9
One more thing, when I buy Discovery 1998 i get something around 130.000-160.000km on the clock and in 2000 LC i have around 70.000-120.000km.
And here is a question. what is better? what should I chose?
for me the most important thing is reliability and fuel consumption.
space inside is not so important.
Please help.

Peter

stock
 

In my opinion:
Both will be good cars, and performant enough in standard fit to cope with morocco, Mauritania and further.
Personally, if it is the 'altered' disco or the stock toyota, I'd go for the stock toyota. If it's the disco at half the price or the toyota, I'd propably go for the disco and spend the money on traveling rather then flashy kit that doesn't really matters.
Rob

Peter,

I would not recommend spending serious money on improving a Disco unless you want to keep it forever. Which may prove difficult in the light of reliability issues leading to frequent frustrations.

IMHO reliability is the issue - you don't burn any fuel at all by going nowhere :-). So, the answer is straightforward. Don't be put off by older LC models. They can be sorted out quite easily and still give you long years of service. Modern engine management systems are a bit risky after all.

thanks guys for your replies.
so I see that you suggest to forget about Discovery? and Toya D4D? :)
I understand that D4D probably dont like dirty african fuel?
thats why you suggest the better for overlanding is LC 3.0 KZTE (those with 125KM)
and what about front diferential in LC90? is it four or two pinion?
Hove does It cope with 32'' tyres?

Some other tips about my problem?

Peter

Peter,

Dirty fuel problem can be solved by using a dual filter in line. It's the electronic engine management that is a headake to diagnose and difficult / impossible to bypass in case of faiure (I am not sure which is true as I've never had one).

Get an engine with the most power available. Fuel consumption is less of an issue at African prices and with a secondary tank.

Not sure about LC90 diffs but I don't think you'll ever have to worry about them - it's not a landrover.

32 inch tyres are slightly bigger than standard and a popular choice.

anybody knows what are the differences in fuel consumption with 32'' tyres in 3.0 KZ-TE(125KM) and 3.0D4D(163KM)?

Hi,

I have a LC90 with 1KZ-TE and the fuel consumption is 10L/100 km and a according to a friend of mine who has D4D engine the consumption is quite similar.

Regarding the sensitivity to the fuel quality - according to info I have the D4D engines are more sensitive.

I was in the same dilemma regarding the purchase Disco vs. Toyota but when I collected all the info the decision was quite straight forward to go for toyota.


Tom

thanks Tom!

that looks strange, on the other forum some users told me that their KZTE uses about 11-12l/100km and D4D something like 2liters less than KZTE.
probably it depends how heavy your right leg is :)

Can you tell me Tom, do you have manual or automatic? and long or short body?

Peter

LR vs LC for Maroc, Mali etc
 

There is little difference in reliability or functionality between the two marques. Contrary to urban myth, Disco Mk 1 is not less reliable than LC. Long-term, both are excellent trucks. Both marques suffer from electronics in later models, and later models of Disco (series II) had some bad build quality in certain production batches.

Either will be excellent for your needs. Both have mountains of spares available in N Africa. Moroccans love Land Rovers.

Disco has better axle articulation, therefore better in really bad terrain.

LC has better gearing and more horses / torque - therefore better in large dunes.

Both have limits in terms of interior space, but LC has the edge.

As a rule, both have similar fuel consumption (within margins)

Both very comfortable.

So you pays your money, you takes your choice. Ive been let down by LC in the past in the Sahara and always had excellent results with LR (Defenders mainly but also Disco V8) so Id go for Land Rover every time.

But ask 5 overlanders and youll get 10 opinions. Test drive a few, see what you think?

I have a long body with manual transmission - and yes I don't have a heavy leg :euro:.

Regarding the tires - currently with OME suspension (standard lift ...) I'm using slightly bigger tire 265/75 R16 but I wouldn't say that there is much space left for bigger tires ... but I haven't tried so far

Tom

,
,
,
Hi Tom,
Fuel consumption for the 2 Toyota engines couldn't be further apart.

My son, has the 3.0L KZ-TE
I have the 3.0L D4-d

He gets perhaps 20 mpg on a good day, Ofton as low as 17 mpg
I get 35 mpg on a good day, don't drop below 27 mpg

There is a HUGE gap between the 2 engines.
They really are "chalk and cheese"
Graham