Discovery advice please

This site contains affiliate links for which LandyZone may be compensated if you make a purchase.
D

Dadio

Guest
I will try and stay coherent.... a bit long, sorry, but no-one else to talk
to (how sad is that!).

I have a 1995 3.9 V8 ES Auto which I bought with 12000 on the clock in 1996.
Since then I have worked it pretty hard (tow 2 tons all over the place) and
it now has done 145,000 miles.

Do I throw money at it and give it a real good sort out, or do I get rid of
it and buy another one. I do want a V8 ES Auto, it does what I need it to
do..

For around £6000 I could possibly buy a similar aged Disco with fewer miles
(70,000?)
It would cost me nearer £20,000 for a significantly later model and that is
serious money.

To spend, say, £2000 "doing stuff" to my existing Disco is very affordable
(it deserves it) but do I risk throwing that money into a bottomless pit.

For the first few years it was serviced by Land Rover main dealer (very
expensive!) but for the past few years by my local garage and probably not
particularly thoroughly.

It has not been that well looked after but despite my lack of attention is
in pretty good condition.

Now decision time...

It needs a "thorough" service, a real good going over. The engine sounds
sweet but has a habit of stalling. I reckon it is an engine management
thing, dodgy sensor somewhere, intermittent, ok some days, big problem
others.

The suspension needs replacing, I had rear shocks renewed at 75000 but new
springs and shocks all round sounds sensible now (145000 miles remember).

Exhaust needs replacing, not sure about the cats, they are still original.

I have toyed with the idea of lpg conversion but at £2000 plus, I am not
convinced. There are Discos that come up for sale that have already had
that done, maybe that would be a better route to take. 75 pounds to fill up
my tank and do 270 miles is getting scary.

The transfer box whines, a bit like a jet engine, it all works ok, sounds a
bit as though filling it up with thick oil would shut it up (I wonder if
there is much oil in it? hmmmm.) I don't really use the car off road in the
mad mudlark sense but I do use the high and low and diff lock regularly as I
tow my trailer in some odd places so it all works. A bit of clunking from
under the engine as lumps of metal bonk into place when I reverse sounds a
bit worrying sometimes but I am used to it!

Frankly I don't mind throwing a bit of money at the car to have it properly
sorted as long as I end up with something that is going to be reliable and
give me a few more years (5+) solid use, typically 7000 miles per year now.

I have been going through the necessary mental adjustment and might be
turning into a bit of a Landy Man. With most cars you run them into the
ground, throw them away and buy another one. With my Disco a different
thought process would be to mend or replace the broken bits and keep it
going (forever?), Landy thought process not Ford thought process, is that
right? or am I deluding myself, is 200,000+ miles normal for the V8? would a
rebuild be sensible, how much, when? etc etc.

I am in South Cambridgeshire, can anyone suggest a decent independent Land
Rover garage with the necessary electronic analysis kit to do a bit of
diagnosis and tweaking without charging the excessive LR dealer rates. I
don't mind travelling a few miles for someone honest and fair dealing. The
stalling issue needs sorting. Gut reaction is that it is something simple
and silly, but boy could I be wrong.

The only rust of concern is the front off-side wheel arch. Wing is ok but
the arch as badly rotted under the plastic stone guard. A bit awkward to get
at, I am tempted to slap on a blanket of fibre glass but that would be
cheating. Is this something to give a body shop to sort out? Silly money?

I have just replaced the fan belt (one great big long one) and the brake
pads all round. I am no mechanic but it was dead easy. The bad thing was
that one front pad was down to metal (feeling guilty about that one). The
really bad thing was that the rear pads (fitted by a "proper" garage in
2002... bastards) were the wrong ones. I could not work out why the new
pads were slightly different and a bit hard to slide in and it turned out
that the new ones were ok but the old ones were for a Range Rover and had a
tiny bit notched out. They had slid too far in and gouged the drum (over a
couple of years!). If I can find the original receipt I shall take the
matter up with them even though it was a few years ago. Its amazing how
something built like a truck tolerates that, and I hadn't noticed any
braking issues, you just get used to it, shows how much better it can be to
do the work yourself (just need the ability).

Sorry, I am wandering.....

Back to the need for advice..... Do I throw money at the car that I have
had for the last 10 years or look for another one.
If I keep my existing car where is a decent mechanic in North Herts / South
Cambs who can be relied upon to do a good job for a fair price.

and so on and so on, you know what I am getting at.

Thank for listening

Les


 
"Dadio" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>I will try and stay coherent.... a bit long, sorry, but no-one else to talk
> to (how sad is that!).
>
> I have a 1995 3.9 V8 ES Auto which I bought with 12000 on the clock in
> 1996.
> Since then I have worked it pretty hard (tow 2 tons all over the place)
> and
> it now has done 145,000 miles.
>
> Do I throw money at it and give it a real good sort out, or do I get rid
> of
> it and buy another one. I do want a V8 ES Auto, it does what I need it to
> do..


Les,

My personal opinion having spent lots of an Insurance Companies money on
rebuilding my Range rover... get rid, get a ES with LPG and lower milage.
I'm doing (when it was working last week!) 120 miles on £21 of LPG in our
Disco ES. I considered fitting a LPG system to my old car but then this
Disco came up. Only word of caution, make sure what ever you get has a
certificate and has preferably been installed by a local established
installer and they tend to disappear in the night. Unfortunately mine was
installed miles away as a one off kit but by a reputable installer who
normally only installs other such (such is his deal with his supplier).

Lee D


 
On Sat, 13 Aug 2005 19:17:18 GMT, "Dadio" <[email protected]> wrote:

>I will try and stay coherent.... a bit long, sorry, but no-one else to talk
>to (how sad is that!).
>
>I have a 1995 3.9 V8 ES Auto which I bought with 12000 on the clock in 1996.
>Since then I have worked it pretty hard (tow 2 tons all over the place) and
>it now has done 145,000 miles.
>
>Do I throw money at it and give it a real good sort out, or do I get rid of
>it and buy another one. I do want a V8 ES Auto, it does what I need it to
>do..
>

<big snip>

There's no right answer to this, but I asked myself this question
about a year ago. I still don't know if I came up with the right
answer.

My 95 V8 was in good shape - just had the engine recammed, LPG fitted,
upgraded the brakes (should be on anyone's Disco list), recon gearbox
at 95000 miles. At 132000 miles it was set for a good few more.

But there were niggles - rotting rear arches, duff door handles /
locks and general 'wear'. It had also broken down a couple of times
(fixed, but still fresh in the mind). Always when I was driving, but
it worried me what would happen if my wife was stranded with our very
young daughter. And my mileage had just increased (40,000 miles this
year) so I wanted a high-speed mile-muncher.

So, I was lured by comfort, reliability and general 'better image'
into a nearly-new Volvo V70. That car has done exactly what I expected
it to, so I can't fault it. Lease this year has cost about £5000 and
another 2 on servicing (expensive), tyres (expensive) and other bits.
But it has been utterly reliable and is the most comfortable car I've
ever owned. I frequently do 500 mile day trips so it's a big factor.

Now, would I have been better putting 3K in my pocket and 2K into the
Disco? I would have done...

i) all new locks (they were ****ing me off) - say £200 (I'm guessing)
ii) fix rear arches, little rot spots under alpine lights, battery
tray etc (£300 - again guessing)
iii) good quality respray (£1500)?

Another 40K would have seen some other things needing to be fixed -
probably another £500 or so assuming nothing too major.

So it would have been cheaper than running the Volvo, AND I would have
been getting 45mpg by price on LPG, rather than 29 from the Volvo. It
would probably have been worth about the same as I sold it for (older,
but prettier). But it would still be a 10 year old Discovery.

If you aren't doing mega miles and the car is doing what you need it
to do, keep it. You are always better off with the car you know -
unless of course you know it's about to throw its crank! A 6K disco
is still going to need all the work doing - suspension, engine timing,
rot etc etc.

You also need to find a good specialist. Can't help you in Cambridge,
but Sheffield is a nice play to live...



--

Tim Hobbs

'58 Series 2 88" aka "Stig"
'77 101FC Ambulance aka "Burrt"
'03 Volvo V70
 

"Dadio" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>I will try and stay coherent.... a bit long, sorry, but no-one else to talk
> to (how sad is that!).
>
> I have a 1995 3.9 V8 ES Auto which I bought with 12000 on the clock in
> 1996.
> Since then I have worked it pretty hard (tow 2 tons all over the place)
> and
> it now has done 145,000 miles.
>
> Do I throw money at it and give it a real good sort out, or do I get rid
> of
> it and buy another one. I do want a V8 ES Auto, it does what I need it to
> do..
>
>
> Back to the need for advice..... Do I throw money at the car that I have
> had for the last 10 years or look for another one.


Since you have kept it thus far you might as well keep it until it is scrap.
You may need to throw the odd dollop of cash at it but in all probability it
will last a good deal longer yet. Depreciation is the highest cost along
with fuel. If you run this vehicle and are self employed or run a business
you will know that repair costs are 100% allowable against tax [assuming you
make a profit].
As long as you are happy with it, be assured that it is worth more to you
than anyone else. Its true value to sell is very little indeed now.

Huw


 
On or around Sun, 14 Aug 2005 23:18:07 +0100, "Huw"
<hedydd[nospam]@tiscali.co.uk> enlightened us thusly:

>you will know that repair costs are 100% allowable against tax [assuming you
>make a profit].


that last bit is the trick. mind, it's handy to know that you can take 'em
off the total before assessing tax... last few years, I've not made enough
profit to be taxed on it anyway. This is not as clever as it might at first
sight seem, since it means being skint most of the time.
--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
0123456789112345678921234567893123456789412345678951234567896123456789712345
1 weebl: What's this? | in recognition of the fun that is weebl and bob
2 bob: it a SigRuler! | check out the weebl and bob archive:
3 weebl: How Handy! | http://www.weebl.jolt.co.uk/archives.php
 
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 09:53:10 +0100, Austin Shackles wrote:

>> you will know that repair costs are 100% allowable against tax
>> [assuming you make a profit].

>
> that last bit is the trick. mind, it's handy to know that you can
> take 'em off the total before assessing tax...


Surely only 100% if the vehicle is 100% business use? ISTR that my
accountant allows 75% of all nett vehicle costs against tax, the 25%
being acceptable to HMR&C as private use.

> I've not made enough profit to be taxed on it anyway. This is not
> as clever as it might at first sight seem, since it means being
> skint most of the time.


Aye, cash flow problems. Too much flow, not enough cash. B-(

--
Cheers [email protected]
Dave. pam is missing e-mail



 
On or around Mon, 15 Aug 2005 10:18:30 +0100 (BST), "Dave Liquorice"
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 09:53:10 +0100, Austin Shackles wrote:
>
>>> you will know that repair costs are 100% allowable against tax
>>> [assuming you make a profit].

>>
>> that last bit is the trick. mind, it's handy to know that you can
>> take 'em off the total before assessing tax...

>
>Surely only 100% if the vehicle is 100% business use? ISTR that my
>accountant allows 75% of all nett vehicle costs against tax, the 25%
>being acceptable to HMR&C as private use.


well, yeah. a percentage, for a vehicle used on mixed use. If you can show
reasonable evidence that it's not used for private use, or only 10%, say,
then you can claim 90%, say.
>
>> I've not made enough profit to be taxed on it anyway. This is not
>> as clever as it might at first sight seem, since it means being
>> skint most of the time.

>
>Aye, cash flow problems. Too much flow, not enough cash. B-(


too right. bloody stuff all flows and doesn't stay. What I need is a more
effective filter.
--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
"'Tis a mad world, my masters" John Taylor (1580-1633) Western Voyage, 1
 
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 12:53:35 +0100, Austin Shackles wrote:

>> Surely only 100% if the vehicle is 100% business use? ISTR that my
>> accountant allows 75% of all nett vehicle costs against tax, the
>> 25% being acceptable to HMR&C as private use.

>
> well, yeah. a percentage, for a vehicle used on mixed use. If you
> can show reasonable evidence that it's not used for private use, or
> only 10%, say, then you can claim 90%, say.


True enough but I get the impression that HMR&C won't bat an eyelid at
75%.

>>Aye, cash flow problems. Too much flow, not enough cash. B-(

>
> too right. bloody stuff all flows and doesn't stay. What I need is
> a more effective filter.


I'd rather more input flow. McCawber:

Annual income 20 pounds - annual expenditure 19 pounds, 19 shillings
and sixpence, result happiness; Annual income 20 pounds - annual
expenditure 20 pounds and sixpence, result misery.

--
Cheers [email protected]
Dave. pam is missing e-mail



 
On or around Mon, 15 Aug 2005 19:54:42 +0100 (BST), "Dave Liquorice"
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 12:53:35 +0100, Austin Shackles wrote:
>
>>> Surely only 100% if the vehicle is 100% business use? ISTR that my
>>> accountant allows 75% of all nett vehicle costs against tax, the
>>> 25% being acceptable to HMR&C as private use.

>>
>> well, yeah. a percentage, for a vehicle used on mixed use. If you
>> can show reasonable evidence that it's not used for private use, or
>> only 10%, say, then you can claim 90%, say.

>
>True enough but I get the impression that HMR&C won't bat an eyelid at
>75%.
>
>>>Aye, cash flow problems. Too much flow, not enough cash. B-(

>>
>> too right. bloody stuff all flows and doesn't stay. What I need is
>> a more effective filter.

>
>I'd rather more input flow. McCawber:
>
>Annual income 20 pounds - annual expenditure 19 pounds, 19 shillings
>and sixpence, result happiness; Annual income 20 pounds - annual
>expenditure 20 pounds and sixpence, result misery.


's troo. Mind, some way of retaining more of what does come in would be
handy.
--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
"My centre is giving way, my right is in retreat; situation excellent.
I shall attack. - Marshal Foch (1851 - 1929)
 
Thanks to all.

I think I will keep it. Bodywork is pretty good. Value is peanuts and
better the devil you know as long as the engine can give me another 50,000.
I have it down as 100pc business (grin) and as you say, that means all
repairs off set against tax. The tax threshold of 12000 pounds makes
spending more than that on anything newer unatractive, apart from not having
the money.
It would be nice to be making enough profit to be paying lots of tax as I
would have a bit more dosh in my pocket, never mind. At least with my poor
mans NHS card I get free prescriptions to keep my blood pressure down.

Can anyone suggest someone in the Cambs / Herts area of the country who has
a diagnostic thingy that can plug into my Discovery and give a lead as to
why it stalls from time to time?



 
so Dadio was, like...
> Can anyone suggest someone in the Cambs / Herts area of the country
> who has a diagnostic thingy that can plug into my Discovery and give
> a lead as to why it stalls from time to time?


Stepper motor. Another 999 suggestions will be along in a minute.

--
Rich
==============================
Disco 300 Tdi auto
S2a 88" SW
Tiggrr (V8 trialler)


 
On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 07:51:13 +0100, "Richard Brookman"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>so Dadio was, like...
>> Can anyone suggest someone in the Cambs / Herts area of the country
>> who has a diagnostic thingy that can plug into my Discovery and give
>> a lead as to why it stalls from time to time?

>
>Stepper motor. Another 999 suggestions will be along in a minute.


Air mass meter
dodgy connection to fuel pump
ECU
Coil

995 to go...


--

Tim Hobbs

'58 Series 2 88" aka "Stig"
'77 101FC Ambulance aka "Burrt"
'03 Volvo V70
 

"Tim Hobbs" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 07:51:13 +0100, "Richard Brookman"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>so Dadio was, like...
>>> Can anyone suggest someone in the Cambs / Herts area of the country
>>> who has a diagnostic thingy that can plug into my Discovery and give
>>> a lead as to why it stalls from time to time?

>>
>>Stepper motor. Another 999 suggestions will be along in a minute.

>
> Air mass meter
> dodgy connection to fuel pump
> ECU
> Coil
>
> 995 to go...


Split vacuum pipe (weak mixture)
Split vacuum pipe to pressure regulator (rich)
Split diaphragm in dizzy vacuum capsule
Dodgy injector or 3
Air leaks around plenum flange
Bad/dirty connection of rpm pickup lead at coil -v terminal
Rotor arm

988 to go... ;-)

Badger.


 
so Badger was, like...
> Split vacuum pipe (weak mixture)
> Split vacuum pipe to pressure regulator (rich)
> Split diaphragm in dizzy vacuum capsule
> Dodgy injector or 3
> Air leaks around plenum flange
> Bad/dirty connection of rpm pickup lead at coil -v terminal
> Rotor arm
>
> 988 to go... ;-)
>
> Badger.


Wrong phase of the moon.

987.


--
Rich
==============================
Disco 300 Tdi auto
S2a 88" SW
Tiggrr (V8 trialler)


 
Back
Top