| D4SSWME |
Hi,
Just wanted to see if anyone had tried out an '03 Disco before getting into an MDX.
The MDX seems to be more of a street SUV whereas the Disco is more of an off-road SUV.
I'm already in the waiting list for an '03 MDX but have the '03 Disco in my mind too.
Hoping you guys can help me decide whether to stay on the list or jump ship.
Thanks! |
|
|
| stumpie |
| Having tried the 02 Disco, I'd stay away....ergonomics are extremely non-driver friendly, in my opinion. |
|
|
| mgmdx |
How often are you actually going to drive off-road? I would say if at least 80% of your driving will consist of off-roading then Discovery is worth considering (although that wouldn't be my first choice, I would likely look at Landcruiser first). Otherwise, MDX is the best option.
In addition to poor ergonomics, inferior build quality and questionable reliability, Discovery's on-road drivability and handling are not the best either. This is confirmed by a comparison test drive of 7 luxury SUVs (including MDX) that was done by Car and Driver magazine, where Disco scored the last place (although I am not sure if significant changes were made to 2001 Discovery) and MDX won the first.
Details of this "Designer-Ute Smackdown" article can be found here. |
|
|
| D4SSWME |
Thanks, Guys!
Looks like I will be staying in the waiting list.
Just getting impatient.
Argh! |
|
|
| mgmdx |
quote:
Originally posted by D4SSWME
Thanks, Guys!
Looks like I will be staying in the waiting list.
Just getting impatient.
Argh!
It is definitely worth the wait. You won't be disappointed. I should know, I waited for mine for nine months. |
|
|
| D4SSWME |
Wow,
I have not seen that many articles on the '03 Disco until your reply.
Thanks a lot! |
|
|
| pelucidor |
| Weren't the Disco's rated amongst the most unreliable cars in the USA recently by JD Powers (perhaps last year)? |
|
|
| tigmd99 |
Hey all,
The '03 Disco is a very good buy for those who actually do any off-roading. The axles are heavy duty...full-floating. Interior materials are first-rate, rivals those in BMW, Mercedes, and Lexus. How well it is put together is another question....
Off-roading, it is pretty much king in it's class. In my opinion, it is better than Hummer H2. Well-articuation on the Disco is class-leading, by far! Nothing else comes close to it.
Again, it is a great vehicle...except, the quality/reliability is horrible. However, there are many happy owners out there with zero problems...my brother has a '01 Disco with no mechanical problems except for a frozen driver door lock (fixed under warranty).
Thanks. |
|
|
| vicpai |
quote:
Originally posted by D4SSWME
Hi,
Just wanted to see if anyone had tried out an '03 Disco before getting into an MDX.
The MDX seems to be more of a street SUV whereas the Disco is more of an off-road SUV...............
I would strongly suggest you stay away from the Land Rover like it's the plague. Here are a few reasons why: This is a very unreliable, OVERPRICED, OVERHYPED, vehicle with obsolete technology. There are many other vehicles that are equally off-road competent (if not more) that have state-of-the-art technology, safety and performance: examples include the new 2003 Toyota 4 Runner Limited, Mitsubishi Montero etc.
If off-road credentials and ruggedness are important to you and if you (as myself) have absolutely no use for that 3rd row seat, then there is no better vehicle than the 2003 Toyota 4 Runner Limited. It's awesome in almost every way (performance as well as amazing levels of handling - check out the new X-REAS sport suspension as in the Audi RS 6 sports car, refinement, comfort and luxury).
I know it sounds a bit silly, but I gave up off-road capability (I live in Southern California and decided if, occasionally, I do want to go off-road, I can rent a vehicle and "play" with someone else's vehicle rather than my own) and went the MDX route, because of the fabulous Acura Navigation System. Other than off-road ability, the MDX does equal the 4Runner in most respects, except in one or two areas such as the availability of SIDE-CURTAIN SHIELD AIRBAGS
A comprehensive review of the '03 4Runner is available in the latest Car and Driver (Nov. 2002) edition. (detailed performance, interior sound levels etc. etc. etc.)
Besides this, the '03 4Runner is also reviewed here:
http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/road...56/article.html
http://www.canadiandriver.com/articles/ly/034runner.htm
http://www.thecarconnection.com/ind...9&sid=181&n=157 |
|
|
| D4SSWME |
Thank you vicpai for reviews and comments.
Based on above, I will be taking the '03 Disco off my potentials.
Now I'm down to the '03 MDX and if the wait takes quite some time, might even go the Lexus GX-470 route. |
|
|
| tigmd99 |
Hey all,
I have to seriously disagree with Vicpai! I don't think he has enough experience with what a Land Rover is. Remember, i have a Toyota 4Runner...i am not biased. It maybe unreliable. All true.
However, it is MUCH more capable than the freaking all-independent Montero!! That is for sure! The departure angle on the Montero is pathetic! Worst than MDX...i think around 19 degrees for Montero. The all-independent suspenion only has slightly more articulation than MDX...not even close to Disco. Power?? What power in the Montero...it is as slow as the '02 Disco! The '03 Disco has a better engine...TONS of torque down low. The Disco's traction control system is far superior to any in the industry. In off-roading, it is hard to beat a SUV with solid axle front and rear (excluding the Grand Cherokee). The axles on the Disco is also heavy duty...i think equivalent to DANA 60, which is seen in heavy duty American trucks. All of Disco's hardware is waterproof.
As for the '03 4Runner, it is capable. However, it's approach/departure/breakover angle has decreased from previous generation. Breakover angle in the Disco is class-leading.
HOWEVER, yes, if you do a lot of highway driving, then go for the 4Runner, MDX, etc. But, the only thing that i think is better than Disco in off-roading are Hummer H1 and Jeep WRangler Rubicon. That is it. In the end, i picked the 4Runner because it is nearly as capable, but more reliable and bullet-proof.
Here is a link to the '03 4Runner: (scroll through the pages)
http://www.gocrvclub.org/showthread.php?threadid=317
Here is a link to the '03 Montero:
http://www.gocrvclub.org/showthread.php?threadid=742
Here is a link to the '03 Rubicon: (scroll through the pages)
http://www.gocrvclub.org/showthread.php?threadid=13 |
|
|
| renov8r |
For every technically challenging off-road mile logged in a Disco, there are probably 10 million on pavement Starbuck sipping miles!
For reliabable driving the Toyotas probably cannot be beat, but again the Disco is hardly ever really bought for other than image. Heck, even the very capable Toyo Land Cruiser & maybe even LX470 spend as much "mud time" as Discos...
The fact is that Land Rover sales are hurting, and Toyota & Honda/Acura is responsible for ALOT of that hurt.
For folks to whom "off road credibility" is important, if only for image, the Toyotas offer a hard to beat line up. For those who rank true all-weather capabilities higher than "boulder hopping prowess" the Pilot & MDX are winners. If the Rovers could have been built more in the price range of the Toyotas & Honda/Acura they still would not have the real reliability, further the preception of unreliabiluty has hurt both their resale & new sales.
Sometimes being unique is not a good thing... Uniquely hard to exit, uniquely hard to repair, uniquely poor appeal. |
|
|
| MDXLNT |
I went to a Halloween party last night and rode in my friend's brand new 2003 Silver Discovery. It was the SE7 (which is the 7 passenger version).
Nice ride. Nice new car smell. Liked the rear passenger controls for the audio. The Rear entertainment center (DVD) option integrated well with the interior and functioned flawlessly.
I know that Land Rover has had some problems, but from what I saw first-hand last night, it looks like they've made some improvements. With all the accessories added (running boards, rear entertainment, mats) she paid $43K. IMHO I wouldn't take it off your list of potentials yet. |
|
|
| TheyCallMeBruce |
| I've been hearing a lot of quality issues from various forums about a perceived downturn in a number of overseas based luxury and prestige vehicles such as Jaguar, Volvo, and Land Rover. Not suprisingly, I keep learning over and over again (I keep forgetting because I don't like the thought of it), that over the last couple of decades Ford has become the parent company of all of these automotive subsidiaries. Had fun pointing out to a sleazy used car sales manager that one of their turbo-charged Mazda MX-6's had a Ford Escort engine in it (name plates everywhere) and he pretends to be shocked. Weird stuff. I would meticulously track the reliability and customer satisfaction ratings on the entire line of any of these brands, not just a particular model. I don't like what I've read from other owners in the last few years. Good luck choosing. |
|
|
| tigmd99 |
Bruce,
Surprisingly, most of the brandnames you mentioned (except Volvo) have a lot of quality issues BEFORE Ford took over. In fact, in many people's view, Ford takeover will IMPROVE quality, rather than destroy it. Jaguar has always had a bad reputation regarding quality, but it does have excellent MATERIALS. With Ford taking over, the newer models have a slightly better quality, but less quality-materials (X-type, etc.). Hopefully, Land Rover won't suffer the same fate. |
|
|
| DaleB |
quote:
Originally posted by tigmd99
Bruce,
Surprisingly, most of the brandnames you mentioned (except Volvo) have a lot of quality issues BEFORE Ford took over. In fact, in many people's view, Ford takeover will IMPROVE quality, rather than destroy it. Jaguar has always had a bad reputation regarding quality, but it does have excellent MATERIALS. With Ford taking over, the newer models have a slightly better quality, but less quality-materials (X-type, etc.). Hopefully, Land Rover won't suffer the same fate.
Not sure about Volvo..I had a '72 model 142 many years ago. Great car, but the camshaft went soft in 30,000 miles. Factory admitted it was a production defect and paid for half the repairs (out of warranty). That was $170 out of my pocket. Lots of money in those days.
Especially for an airman 1st Class.
I digress, overall nice cars. I have no doubt Jag going to Ford has to be a improvment as far a reliability. But hardly takes it to a High Standard. |
|
|
| MDXLuvr |
some ramblings.
1. Don't slam the disco too hard. This new model is a definite improvement. It will never be a Honda or Toyota, but it is clearly one of the reasons for the luxury suv segment.
2. The disco and its big brother were owned by BMW until 6-9 months ago. So, the new products have significant improved quality control, and bmw electricals/drivetrain( on the RR). It might be owned by FORD now, but it was updated by BMW.
3. I would never, repeat, NEVER put the disco and mdx in the same shopping list. If I was looking a 'X, then i would look at the pilot, xc90, and the RX. If i was looking at the disco, i would look at the GC, GX as competitors.
4. i don't care how much they improve it, there is NO way i would buy any $40k vehicle that use a 1960's buick engine!
5. D4SSWME- remember, patience is a virtue, and the MDX is DEFINETLY WORTH THE WAIT. so, start planning your accessory list while you are waiting for you X. I think Tim will be more than happy to help u.:D |
|
|
| Desant |
My other SUV (01 Montero) was in Service for 3-4 days and I rented a brand new Disco. First impressions were - WOW! This car is great - luxury, great ergonomics, nice sitting position in the car (height). SUV looks good and I have heard it is really good off-road.
That was before I hit the first bump. Since it is a frame-based design vs. unit-body on MDX, it really shook and jerked the car. For the same reason, there is a certain oversteer. On the freeway, it accelerated really well - however, you feel every uneven spot you drive over.
On the streets, when you turn a corner, you have to be careful and steer back quickly instead of the wheel coming back to the initial position, like on MDX.
It is a little but tight inside for a big guy and there is very little space for the back sit passengers.
All this is OK and you can get used to it if you never owned an SUV that is unit-body, like MDX, Montero, GMC Envoy or a new 03 Range Rover. After 3 days of rental, I could not wait to return that thing called Disco and get back into my SUV. It is a different paradigm of driving!
I would definitely recommend against the Disco, in favor of MDX. This said, 2003 Range Rover is unit-body based, built by BMW. If you can afford it and if you don't care about the resale value, IMHO it is the best SUV out there.
G. |
|
|
| colemanpc |
I'm not slamming the Disco here, but I am going to state two facts that anyone considering a Disco should, well, consider:
1) Look at the resale value on a Disco with 20K miles on it and then compare it with the resale of an MDX (or Honda Civic for that matter)
2) Disco is the only vehicle I've seen wearing a bumper sticker stating: "The parts falling off of this vehicle are of the finest British quality." |
|
|
| vicpai |
quote:
Originally posted by colemanpc
............Disco is the only vehicle I've seen wearing a bumper sticker stating: "The parts falling off of this vehicle are of the finest British quality."
......Sir colemanpc! :D . Puts the Land Rover's reliability (or lack thereof) into proper perspective! |
|
|
|
