u cud av my v8 disco for a lot less

toadie said:

Hi David

I read somewhere that they slip on wet grass!! Aren't they just another 'Chelsea tractor' as odenne put it?

Regards

Theresa

Click to expand...

No.

Unless you are referring to the Disco3, which is used as such by pretty much everyone who owns one.

nathan5346 said:

u cud av my v8 disco for a lot less

Click to expand...

nobody would

Oi

hehehe

nathan5346 said:

u cud av my v8 disco for a lot less

Click to expand...

Thanks Nathan but...............might be a bit thirsty for me judging by the puddle its trying to drink!!

Regards

Theresa

Ok, now you aren't to tell any-one I told you this, OK....... 'cos I risk every-one laughing at me for confessing I actually 'quite like' the little Hippo / Gaylander / Frisby, take your pick.

They are a bit of a 'joke' in Land-Rover circles, becouse:-

1/ they dont have the dedicated mud-plugging ability of the traditional models, mainly due to a lack of ground clerence and gears that wont let them go slow enough...

2/ raced into production to cash in on the Land-rover reseurgence; they weren't as well developed or built as they could have been...... and think on it this way; The Defender had forty years of evolution behind it before it was 'laubched' and is still not renowned as the most reliable motor in the world; the Free-lander project took less than five years from some-one even having an idea to build a 'baby' Landy.......

3/ they were bought variousely by accountants, estate agents and Hair-dressers............

BUT, they are still a Land-Rover...........

And for the sort of terrain you are suggesting, it shouldn't pose much of a challenge to one...... If you can get an 'ordinary' car down a trail, then a Frisby should do the same track, with a lot less fuss.

Though you may hear a lot of worrying scraping noises....... that's NOT something to be alarmed about though, becouse knowing that they didn't have much ground clerance to play with, the factory put lots of 'skid-plates' under the car to protect the most vulnerable bits, and to 'slide' over anything that might catch them.

As for 'falling to bits'.....

Well, thier 'reputation' suggests that they can do that without any 'encouragement' from bad roads........

As for lots of 'expensive repairs'.....

Its a 'L-A-N-D-R-O-V-E-R'...... which does not have 'class leading reliability' or 'best value' main dealer service charges!

Which doesn't sound too helpful, and isn't to put you off, merely to prepare you......

Practically, a 'soft roader', should be a darn site better for your drive way than an ordinary car, by dint of having bigger wheels, softer long travel suspension and more ground clerance.

In the class, the Free-Lander has time and time again, proved to be the most capable vehicle in its class for off-'roading' BUT against its peers in class, it has NOT proved itself the most reliable, nor to have the lowests service costs.....

It should do what you want it to, it SHOULD be a lot less likely to suffer damage or premature wear or fatigue than a regular car, BUT it isn't going to be 'invincible', and you shouldn't expect it to NOT suffer fatigue or damege from that driveway.... it will, just not as much.

And I have cousin who lives in Wales, who was in a similar situation; and got himself a new Frisby about ten years ago, and is now on his second, and has never had a bad word to say about either of them, unlike the VW Golf he had before, that lasted about two years before he got fed up with having shock-absorbers replaced evrry couple of months.

So, as an alternative to a 'regular car'; yes, provided your expectations are't hugely optimistic, and you aren't expecting to just buy a Free-Lander and see it solve all your problems and hassles, and are prepared for the fact that it CAN still be broken, and CAN be expensive to service / fix, it should be a reasonably good choice, even of the alternative 'soft-roaders'.

Now, just to chuck a googlie at you, Land Rover 90.

You say ecconomy is an issue; but, do some sums, BECOUSE, if you can live with the more utiliterian..... well, everything, really! 'comfort', 'noise' 'ride' etc etc etc, and for some it does have a perverse 'attraction' to it; a 90, though MIGHT be a slightly better bet in the long run.

Off-road capability of a 90 is legendary, and that track shouldn't worry it in the slightest, and again, they aren't invulnerable, but they are a damn site more robust, and will tolerate an awful lot more abuse and take a lot more wear and tear before they break.

On that score, they are a lot less likely to demand as many or as expensive 'repairs' over a longer preiod.

BUT the 'ecconomic' I'd like you to think on, is that a unlike a Frisby that's presumed to have a normal car life expectancy of around ten or twelve years, and pretty 'normal' price depreciation, 90's are saught after and hold thier value much better for far longer, and are expected to last twenty to twenty five years.

In the 'long run', the ecconomics of buying a 90, MIGHT make more sense to you; Free-Lander, would be a lot better than a 'regular' car, but a 90, could be a lot better than a Frisby.

A 90, could ALMOST be a buy and forget solution to your problem, will still need maintenence and repairs, as all cars, but given its durability and lack of depreciation, far more likely to warrant them, and give more years of reletively 'hassle free' service.

Though, I think you'd be 'pleased' enough with a Hippo, if a 90 doesn't appeal or there is a niggle in the ecconomics.

Posts moved on a bit since I started my missive!:
DEFINITELY think you ought to look 90-wise, now. For budget what you'll get 90 wise will be older, but still have more life in it, and I'm SURE will cost you less long term.
Disco.... NO!
Not as a 'cheap' alternative to a 90; they dont have the same life, the steel body rots where Deffies ali one dont, and the reason they are 'cheap' is that they have horendouse depreciation; which is the 'saving' grace to make a 90 'ecconomical' for you.

Teflon - many thanks for your balanced advice. I've just had a quick look on Autotrader and there are a few 90's on there and, while they would do us ok if there was just the two of us, we have the baggage to consider too!

Regards

Theresa

Teflon said:

Ok, now you aren't to tell any-one I told you this, OK....... 'cos I risk every-one laughing at me for confessing I actually 'quite like' the little Hippo / Gaylander / Frisby, take your pick.

They are a bit of a 'joke' in Land-Rover circles, becouse:-

1/ they dont have the dedicated mud-plugging ability of the traditional models, mainly due to a lack of ground clerence and gears that wont let them go slow enough...

2/ raced into production to cash in on the Land-rover reseurgence; they weren't as well developed or built as they could have been...... and think on it this way; The Defender had forty years of evolution behind it before it was 'laubched' and is still not renowned as the most reliable motor in the world; the Free-lander project took less than five years from some-one even having an idea to build a 'baby' Landy.......

3/ they were bought variousely by accountants, estate agents and Hair-dressers............

BUT, they are still a Land-Rover...........

And for the sort of terrain you are suggesting, it shouldn't pose much of a challenge to one...... If you can get an 'ordinary' car down a trail, then a Frisby should do the same track, with a lot less fuss.

Though you may hear a lot of worrying scraping noises....... that's NOT something to be alarmed about though, becouse knowing that they didn't have much ground clerance to play with, the factory put lots of 'skid-plates' under the car to protect the most vulnerable bits, and to 'slide' over anything that might catch them.

As for 'falling to bits'.....

Well, thier 'reputation' suggests that they can do that without any 'encouragement' from bad roads........

As for lots of 'expensive repairs'.....

Its a 'L-A-N-D-R-O-V-E-R'...... which does not have 'class leading reliability' or 'best value' main dealer service charges!

Which doesn't sound too helpful, and isn't to put you off, merely to prepare you......

Practically, a 'soft roader', should be a darn site better for your drive way than an ordinary car, by dint of having bigger wheels, softer long travel suspension and more ground clerance.

In the class, the Free-Lander has time and time again, proved to be the most capable vehicle in its class for off-'roading' BUT against its peers in class, it has NOT proved itself the most reliable, nor to have the lowests service costs.....

It should do what you want it to, it SHOULD be a lot less likely to suffer damage or premature wear or fatigue than a regular car, BUT it isn't going to be 'invincible', and you shouldn't expect it to NOT suffer fatigue or damege from that driveway.... it will, just not as much.

And I have cousin who lives in Wales, who was in a similar situation; and got himself a new Frisby about ten years ago, and is now on his second, and has never had a bad word to say about either of them, unlike the VW Golf he had before, that lasted about two years before he got fed up with having shock-absorbers replaced evrry couple of months.

So, as an alternative to a 'regular car'; yes, provided your expectations are't hugely optimistic, and you aren't expecting to just buy a Free-Lander and see it solve all your problems and hassles, and are prepared for the fact that it CAN still be broken, and CAN be expensive to service / fix, it should be a reasonably good choice, even of the alternative 'soft-roaders'.

Now, just to chuck a googlie at you, Land Rover 90.

You say ecconomy is an issue; but, do some sums, BECOUSE, if you can live with the more utiliterian..... well, everything, really! 'comfort', 'noise' 'ride' etc etc etc, and for some it does have a perverse 'attraction' to it; a 90, though MIGHT be a slightly better bet in the long run.

Off-road capability of a 90 is legendary, and that track shouldn't worry it in the slightest, and again, they aren't invulnerable, but they are a damn site more robust, and will tolerate an awful lot more abuse and take a lot more wear and tear before they break.

On that score, they are a lot less likely to demand as many or as expensive 'repairs' over a longer preiod.

BUT the 'ecconomic' I'd like you to think on, is that a unlike a Frisby that's presumed to have a normal car life expectancy of around ten or twelve years, and pretty 'normal' price depreciation, 90's are saught after and hold thier value much better for far longer, and are expected to last twenty to twenty five years.

In the 'long run', the ecconomics of buying a 90, MIGHT make more sense to you; Free-Lander, would be a lot better than a 'regular' car, but a 90, could be a lot better than a Frisby.

A 90, could ALMOST be a buy and forget solution to your problem, will still need maintenence and repairs, as all cars, but given its durability and lack of depreciation, far more likely to warrant them, and give more years of reletively 'hassle free' service.

Though, I think you'd be 'pleased' enough with a Hippo, if a 90 doesn't appeal or there is a niggle in the ecconomics.

Click to expand...

what about a disco?
snigger

Thanks for all the help guys, but it's time for me to put the kids to bed and cook my old man his tea. It's curry night!

I'll look in again tomorrow and see if there are any other comments from you kind people. I also hope that a few glasses of wine and a good nights sleep will help with the thought process.

Night night all.

Regards

Theresa

A lot depends on how (mainly how fast) you drive up and down the track. If you hammer up and down with no mechanical sympathy, nothing will last forever, not even a 90, although it may survive long than a Freelander, but driven sensibly I would expect a Freelander to fit the bill perfectly. Once you come off the track and onto the road, it's far better.
This forum has a lot of people who dislike Freelanders, some with good reason, perhaps they have had bad experiences, others are just biased for no good reason, usually having no experience of them.
Unfortunately there seems to have been the anti Freelander team on line when you posted your question.

toadie said:

Teflon - many thanks for your balanced advice. I've just had a quick look on Autotrader and there are a few 90's on there and, while they would do us ok if there was just the two of us, we have the baggage to consider too!
Theresa

Click to expand...

A 90 CSW has seven seats...... plenty of room for the 'baggage'.... and thats NO way to be describing the little bundles of joy and optimistic hopes of the future.
Yes, space in a 90 is a bit, well, its a shed on wheels! There's no convenient 'boot' or storage compartments or anything; you just have to kind of chuck it all in together and hope for the best!
But dont dismiss it so quick; I had six kids and ran a Series III Long wheel-Base 3-door, kitted out like a 90CSW, same layout, just stretched a foot or so to give me 10 seats, and I was a 'house Husband' using it for ALL the domestic chores.
Its a question of making the space you have as 'useable' as you can, and one of the beuties of a Landy 'Ute' is that they just give you the space and let you use it how you best want, rather than giving you lots of oddement compartments that you struggle to squeeze your 'real world' stuff into, rather than the ad-mens 'props'!
Kids and shopping? How many do you have in your 'pension package'?
School run; kids in the back; in the side seats, thier school bags under thier legs "And STOP kicking your sister!"....... sorry, reflex at the thought!
Shopping; Kids at school; and a freezer filler 'load' to worry about.
If not already in the car; a pair of large staka boxes between the seats, to take the 'heavy' stuff. Loose bags (re-useable ones these days), retrieved from a 'net' on the bulkhead behind the front seats.
Road Trip: VALIUM! Bollox to the 'practicality' of the car; kids, road works, and an impatient 'navigator' give you worse things to worry about!
But...errrr, actually, day trip; those staka boxes; turned sideways, between the kids feet, to stop them kicking each other "Stop KICKING THE DINNER!"..... sorry, reflex again! with all the days 'necessaries' in.
Their school bags under thier legs, if they need any 'stuff' like spare cloths, anoracks or whatever.
Another staka-box, strapped in a spare seat, or a large hold-all, for any additional luggage.
Holidays:, well, if camping, it can be a bit awkward, but basically, you'd not have much easier time with a Frisby, and be looking at roof-racks or a camping trailer if you have a 'lot' of stuff to cart about.
Sounds compromised....... but end of the day, it works, with a little imagination and organisation, and kids are GREAT at 'improvising' and finding the best way to make themselves 'comfortable'.
You CAN make it work, end of the day ALL cars are compromised some-where, and a 90, 'station waggon' could be made to work at least as well as a Free-lander, which isn't particularly spaciouse to begin with.

I'll mention the Long wheel-Base 110; and having muted the fact I had a converted 3-door commercial; and a similar vehicle would be cheaper than a 90 and give you more space, but the REAL reason for looking 90 is the ecconomics, which aren't as good on a 3-door LWB, while they are more 'awkward' as an every-day car, becouse they are so big and difficult to manouver; especially in super-market car-parks.

A 110 County station Waggon; the five door version, with two rows of seats, MAY be worth a look though. They have even BETTER value retension than a 90, so dont expect your budget to go as far to begin with, but its another 'life time' vehicle, and with five doors work like a regular family saloon, though a slightly spartan one, and THEN have more room in the 'back' behind the second row seats even than a 90.... and another six seats if you want to use them.

But we are pushing the envelope here, moving from a frisby with 30+ish mpg to a 90 with 30-ish mpg, towards disco's and 110's with, 30 if your lucky, real world 25ish mpg, seriousely blunting the ecconomy, for the sake of 'practicality'.

And as said, Rangies and Disco's represent a great 'bargain' as far as purchase price, while having the same 'mechanicals' as the utility Landies.

But, that is the main advantage of the Ute's, the lack of depreciation, and the enduring life expectancy.

Your £4K will get you, I guess, a 2002/2203 model TD4 in reasonable shape; that will have dropped in value to around £1000 within three years. That is roughly £1000 a year in derpreciation.

Now, same money, SHOULD get you a decent '94ish 90 CSW. Which doesn't sound great, and its ten years older; but, in three years, that car will still be worth around £2000-£2,500. A depreciation of just £500 a year.

Which doesn't sound like a huge saving, EXCEPT, in three years time, your 13year old Frisby will be pretty much ready for the scrap heap, especially if hard used. Your by then, 20year old 90, though, will still have a good five years or more life left in.

So, whatever you have spent on the Frisby keeping in it roadworthy, is going to be pretty much 'lost' by the end of three years, as it probably ISN'T going to be worth trying to keep it running.

90 on the other hand, has a good five years service left, if not more. It will almost certainly have cost you less in maintenence and repairs in the three years you have had it; is worth more if you try and sell it, BUT you could keep it another three years, and get the full use out of it, before its value has dropped to a grand or so, and STILL not be spending as much a year on maintenence as if you went and got another frisby and started all over again.

Do the same excersize for a Discovery, and you'd only be looking at a slightly newer model, around a 98 or so, and in three years, that will be down to the same £1000 value as a firsby would, and probably as dead, becouse at that point its steel body will probably be rotten. Might have cost you a bit less in running repairs and maintenence than a Frisby, but, offset against higher fuel cost.

Bottom line is, that a Frisby should do what you want it to, as far as your drive-way problem, as would a 90 or a Disco.

What we are looking at now, is the ecconomics of the 'overall cost of ownership', which in the longer term will prove most ecconomical, rather than offer best MPG, and where best to accept compromises, in the ecconomics or in the practicalities;

Disco will cost you the most, but it will handle everything you ask of it with least 'hassle'

90 will cost you the least in the long run, handle 'most' stuff you ask of it, though with a little less 'comfort' or convenience.

Frisby, should handle most of what you ask of it, but WILL be more cramped than the other two, if a bit more comfortable, and sometimes a tad more convenient than a 90, and as such may be a reasonable compromise, costing somewhere between the two, long term.

Really, I think what you need to do is go crawl over some cars on dealer forcoarts; get a 'feel' for them; see what they are actualy like from the drivers and passenger seats, and how 'keen' to shift the respective models, the dealers are, and keep an open mind......

buy a disco and be done with it

For an even more balanced opinion it would be wise to ask the question on other landrover forums, some of which are not anti-freelander. I' ve had experience with series, defenders, discos and freelanders. You will lose alot of your investment with the disco and they really do RUST away.
I have a freelander diesel and I think its brilliant, it will have no problem on your track if you treat it with respect. Freelanders tend not to suffer from rust.
I have to agree with teflon with regards to the defender holding it's value though, it would be a sound investment provided it didn't need alot of work doing. Their chassis and bulkheads rust.

Of course, if you did get a Defender or a Disco you could always waxoyl it. Then you would have a Land Rover immeasurably superior to any Freelander.

"Get a Freelander because all Discos and Defenders rust" is a ridiculous statement. Neither true, nor helpful.

Disco01 said:

Of course, if you did get a Defender or a Disco you could always waxoyl it. Then you would have a Land Rover immeasurably superior to any Freelander.

"Get a Freelander because all Discos and Defenders rust" is a ridiculous statement. Neither true, nor helpful.

Click to expand...

Nobody made that statement.

As for waxoyling a disco 1 or 2, can you find me a mint one without rust already present to waxoyl?

howardo said:

Nobody made that statement.

Click to expand...

Then what, exactly are you trying to say here?

howardo said:

You will lose alot of your investment with the disco and they really do RUST away.

Click to expand...

howardo said:

As for waxoyling a disco 1 or 2, can you find me a mint one without rust already present to waxoyl?

Click to expand...

There are plenty. As with anything it is about research and looking for the right one.

howardo said:

I have a freelander diesel and I think its brilliant, it will have no problem on your track if you treat it with respect. Freelanders tend not to suffer from rust.

Click to expand...

Good, glad to hear it. It does have Land Rover on the front at the end of the day. They may not suffer from rust, but they do have their own issues and for a balanced view you should be open and upfront about these.

howardo said:

I have to agree with teflon with regards to the defender holding it's value though, it would be a sound investment provided it didn't need alot of work doing. Their chassis and bulkheads rust.

Click to expand...

Very true about holding their value. Personally I am not sure a Defender is right for these circumstances though. Unless, of course, the track is shared with Farmer Giles.

gerra navara.










or you thought about a disco?

not sure if anyone has said this but, couldnt you ask the farmer who owns the land if you could tidy the track up abit. ok maybe not tarmac but just fill in the pot holes. just a thought.