Land Rover Discovery as tow vehicle

[Moufoo]

I am looking at getting a land rover discovery. I was wondering if it could suffice to pull our malibu v-ride. We have a hoss of a truck that we pull it with now, but i need to know if i get a discovery that it could pull the boat if the need arose. The trip to the lake is about 40-50 miles of interstate, with no real steep grade.

[SacRiverRat]

shoot - just about anything will pull it if the need arose..

shouldn't be a problem... though I'm not a Discovery fan... its yo money

Edited October 6, 2006 by SacRiverRat

[Calimali]

shoot - just about anything will pull it if the need arose..

Sac's right, just about anything will pull them, it's stopping them that's important. The trailer brakes are good, but I think you should always have enough braking power on your tow rig to stop the boat as well. Still, the Disco should cut the mustard with no problem. There are several people on this site that use them.

[RogerQ]

Depends on the year. My brother had one with the 180HP 4.0l V8 and it did not pull well at all. The lack of power and the short wheel base meant the trailer walked around a lot. Stopped OK though. His DIscovery had electrical gremlins. He replaced it with an X5 4.4L. Much better.

[M3Fan]

I'd stay away from the pre-2003 Discovery. Years ago I debated getting one because I liked the looks, brand, and "cult" status of the vehicle. After hours of research, and a test drive, I had to pass. From my research, the general consensus was that the model is a nightmare to own from a reliability/maintenance perspective - this is the pre-2003 models, before they changed the engine out to the old Range Rover engine. The gas mileage (~14-15mpg) on that wheesy 180HP 4L engine is pretty awful. An old Land Rover saying is "if it's not leaking, it's empty". The resale is pretty lousy as well.

[WakeAndSno]

We have an '05 LR3 and it tows very well. BUT, it is a whole different animal from the Disco.

Unless it's a vehicle you already own or have access to, I'd frankly look for an old pickup, tahoe, or yukon over the Disco. You won't save on gas mileage on any of those, so no loss.

JZ

[obski]

One of my partners had a Discovery, but whenever he needed to tow a trailer he would borrow another partner's Suburban.

The repair record on them is not the best either.

[wakecrashin]

I have an 03' Disco and it tows my VLX very well. Just remember the VLX is a heavy boat. Stopping has never been a problem with me. Go for an 03-04 model because of the engine and over 300 upgrades from the previous years. Very happy with it.... not to mention it is incredible off road.

My buddy pulls his 2003 VLX with a jeep Liberty (gas) so....

Once you get a rover you prob wont go back... Just My Opinion

[Badger]

As someone who relies on people like you to help me keep my job and fund my pension, buy a new one!! Buy two while you're at it. PM me if you would like me to check on a "friends and family" discount.

[RoverOn]

I am looking at getting a land rover discovery. I was wondering if it could suffice to pull our malibu v-ride. We have a hoss of a truck that we pull it with now, but i need to know if i get a discovery that it could pull the boat if the need arose. The trip to the lake is about 40-50 miles of interstate, with no real steep grade.

At 40-50 miles on interstate a disco will be plenty good.

pre 1999 is the "old" disco

1999 - 2003 in the Series II disco

2003/2004+ is the LR3

Regarding the comments on Rover reliability...take them with a grain of salt from someone who has not owned Land Rovers. Especially if they are stating that their knowlege is of someone who traded their Land Rover for an X5...since the X5 was designed by the LAND ROVER design team and shares the same motor, tranny and other electronics with the LR3 and Range Rover!!!!

Here is my $.02 (and I have owned all 3 styes of Range Rover, both discos, a defender and have driven LR3s and Freelanders.)

Pre 1997 = Pre BMW...lots of issues

1997 to 1999 BMW fixing LR issues

1999-2003 BMW engineerin and reliability

2003 + Ford owned but still BMW engineering

2006+ Ford/Jag Influence

So I would look to a 199-2003 Disco II and expect that it will be as reliable as any 3 yr old vehicle.

They plus is if you purchase a "certified" vehicle...you will be in good shape.

Dave

[M3Fan]

I am looking at getting a land rover discovery. I was wondering if it could suffice to pull our malibu v-ride. We have a hoss of a truck that we pull it with now, but i need to know if i get a discovery that it could pull the boat if the need arose. The trip to the lake is about 40-50 miles of interstate, with no real steep grade.

At 40-50 miles on interstate a disco will be plenty good.

pre 1999 is the "old" disco

1999 - 2003 in the Series II disco

2003/2004+ is the LR3

Regarding the comments on Rover reliability...take them with a grain of salt from someone who has not owned Land Rovers. Especially if they are stating that their knowlege is of someone who traded their Land Rover for an X5...since the X5 was designed by the LAND ROVER design team and shares the same motor, tranny and other electronics with the LR3 and Range Rover!!!!

Here is my $.02 (and I have owned all 3 styes of Range Rover, both discos, a defender and have driven LR3s and Freelanders.)

Pre 1997 = Pre BMW...lots of issues

1997 to 1999 BMW fixing LR issues

1999-2003 BMW engineerin and reliability

2003 + Ford owned but still BMW engineering

2006+ Ford/Jag Influence

So I would look to a 199-2003 Disco II and expect that it will be as reliable as any 3 yr old vehicle.

They plus is if you purchase a "certified" vehicle...you will be in good shape.

Dave

Ok, some false information here. The 03-04 is still a Discovery Series II. They just made a number of improvements, including taking the old Range Rover engine and replacing the ultra-crappy 4.0L V8 with it. Slightly better motor, not that great still. Still a LR motor. In the 2005 model year they introduced the LR3 which is a JAGUAR V8. Totally new car. The BMW X5 has an optional 4.4 L BMW V8 that was used in the 03+ RANGE ROVER. The 4.4L BMW V8 has been around a long time and is not in any way designed by LR, thank god. BMW designed the 03+ Range Rover, which is why it is outstanding and not a POS. I highly dobut the LR engineers had any say on the X5 design, which uses the E39 5 series platform. The new Range Rover Sport editions are also Jag motors and are based on the LR3. The disco is a cult car that objectively is not a good car in many ways.

Edited October 6, 2006 by M3Fan

[RoverOn]

I am looking at getting a land rover discovery. I was wondering if it could suffice to pull our malibu v-ride. We have a hoss of a truck that we pull it with now, but i need to know if i get a discovery that it could pull the boat if the need arose. The trip to the lake is about 40-50 miles of interstate, with no real steep grade.

At 40-50 miles on interstate a disco will be plenty good.

pre 1999 is the "old" disco

1999 - 2003 in the Series II disco

2003/2004+ is the LR3

Regarding the comments on Rover reliability...take them with a grain of salt from someone who has not owned Land Rovers. Especially if they are stating that their knowlege is of someone who traded their Land Rover for an X5...since the X5 was designed by the LAND ROVER design team and shares the same motor, tranny and other electronics with the LR3 and Range Rover!!!!

Here is my $.02 (and I have owned all 3 styes of Range Rover, both discos, a defender and have driven LR3s and Freelanders.)

Pre 1997 = Pre BMW...lots of issues

1997 to 1999 BMW fixing LR issues

1999-2003 BMW engineerin and reliability

2003 + Ford owned but still BMW engineering

2006+ Ford/Jag Influence

So I would look to a 199-2003 Disco II and expect that it will be as reliable as any 3 yr old vehicle.

They plus is if you purchase a "certified" vehicle...you will be in good shape.

Dave

Ok, some false information here. The 03-04 is still a Discovery Series II. They just made a number of improvements, including taking the old Range Rover engine and replacing the ultra-crappy 4.0L V8 with it. Slightly better motor, not that great still. Still a LR motor. In the 2005 model year they introduced the LR3 which is a JAGUAR V8. Totally new car. The BMW X5 has an optional 4.4 L BMW V8 that was used in the 03+ RANGE ROVER. The 4.4L BMW V8 has been around a long time and is not in any way designed by LR, thank god. BMW designed the 03+ Range Rover, which is why it is outstanding and not a POS. I highly dobut the LR engineers had any say on the X5 design, which uses the E39 5 series platform. The new Range Rover Sport editions are also Jag motors and are based on the LR3. The disco is a cult car that objectively is not a good car in many ways.

Not intentionally false...just bad memory... I state 2003/2004+ LR3 as I could not remember when it was released...I now looked it up and it was October 2004 as a 2005 model...

The X5 is an obvious evolution of a Land Rover product albeit with BMW styling. Hill Descent Conrol, Full-time 4wd, air suspension, etc. Land Rover did have input...do not have the time to dig into it...but think about it...you own a top end SUV company...are you going to ignore them when you design one for your othe brands?

My point was...one is not very justified saying...."My Land Rover is crap, so I bought a BMW X5 instead..." Kind of like saying "My old Taurus is crap so I bought a new Sable." Same company...different year of vehicle...what made the biggest difference...that is was a newer model or a different brand?

I do get that you are a BMW fan (M3Fan) but BMWs $hit doesn't smell like roses either...anyone want to buy a used 90's 750?

Don't get me wrong I never stated it was a bad thing that BMW took over LR...it was the best thing that ever happened...I also own a MINI Cooper....so I am very happy when BMW takes over British companies and builds quality vehicles with British heritage.

Bottom line is he will be very happy with a 1999+ Disco or LR3.

Dave

[SacRiverRat]

I wouldn't buy and X5 either.. and I like BMW's

Maybe someone who bought one can chime in and help me understand the purpose. At the cost of poor gas mileage, and cumbersome (more truck like - which is ok if it works like a truck) handling.. you get what? Haulin (inside or outside) passenger space etc?

Guess each vehicle has it's following

[M3Fan]

I have a bit of a personal issue with this topic because I really, really wanted a (used) Disco about 2 cars ago. I love how they look, and the eliteness of the brand is right up my alley. I shopped, researched, drove, and completely dug into the car because I was so interested in buying one. I was on the Disco boards all the time, etc. There were just too many horror stories about the reliability of the 4.0 V8. Major head problems, rebuilds at 25k miles, etc. Just nasty stuff. Just hoping all the research I did could be used to save somebody else. I ended up going with a 99 4Runner at the time and was very happy with it. It had a V6 with the same HP as the Disco and way better reviews and reliability, cheaper maintenance. Also had the locking rear and center diffs whcih even the Disco didn't have.

Just got an 2006 4Runner V8 this spring and couldn't be happier. Amazing vehicle. For my money, there is no other mid-size SUV under 40 grand.

[Moufoo]

Wow, it sounds like land rovers are lemons. After looking around for a little bit on the internet it seems that they are a money pit. I'm looking for a new to car to replace my 94' 2-door chevy tahoe with 330,000 miles on it. I have never had to take it into the shop, but i want something with newer technology. One thing though is that I'm leary of other internet sites, because there is always some fanboy that is crazy, and land rovers can be as bad as some make it out to be. The other car i have in mind is a nissan frontier, because the truck bed is a plus (imo is best place to put your bike: better gas mileage than with a roof rack, pretty safe back there, cheap mounting equipment for bed-bike-rack).

Towing capabilities are just a plus, because we already have a tow vehicle, i just need a new car.

[RoverOn]

Wow, it sounds like land rovers are lemons. After looking around for a little bit on the internet it seems that they are a money pit. I'm looking for a new to car to replace my 94' 2-door chevy tahoe with 330,000 miles on it. I have never had to take it into the shop, but i want something with newer technology. One thing though is that I'm leary of other internet sites, because there is always some fanboy that is crazy, and land rovers can be as bad as some make it out to be. The other car i have in mind is a nissan frontier, because the truck bed is a plus (imo is best place to put your bike: better gas mileage than with a roof rack, pretty safe back there, cheap mounting equipment for bed-bike-rack).

Towing capabilities are just a plus, because we already have a tow vehicle, i just need a new car.

If you "just need a new car" and are concerned about gas milage....the disco is not for you.

However, I also wouldn't go straight to money pit...but that is a matter of perception.

Compared to a Malibu, any vehicle is cheap.

[wakecrashin]

if you buy a used Dicso that is certified from Land Rover you get...

6/ 75,000 warranty (bumper to bumper NOT limited powertrain)

pretty dam good for a used car

[ilovetrains]

There are lot's of choices in that price range. Sounds like you would rather with stay with an SUV, just in case you need to haul/tow something. My wife is pretty happy with her Commander, but the MPG sucks. The diesel Liberty is tough as nails and can tow well, 35 MPG would be very nice, I must admit. The M class Benz has actually a worse track record for repairs than the Disco, which until the last 5 years was dismal. The X5 seems like a waste to me. I will permantly afront the BMW faithful, but seriosuly, that is not an SUV and I just don't see the point.

[Alibuma]

I had an '04 Disco and it pulled my boat great. I had to leave it in third gear but it did alright. On a trip home from GA we were traveling with 5 vehicles, an 04 RLXi, an enclosed trailer, and 20 people from the UW Stout Waterski Team... my engine blew in the hills of TN while pulling the boat. Turns out there was a problem that year with the oil pumps and some dowling rods. It was under warranty.

[RogerQ]

'My point was...one is not very justified saying...."My Land Rover is crap, so I bought a BMW X5 instead..." Kind of like saying "My old Taurus is crap so I bought a new Sable." Same company...different year of vehicle...what made the biggest difference...that is was a newer model or a different brand?"

While you are certainly entitled to your opinion, the comparison is inaccurate. The Taurus and Sable are platform siblings that share almost all major systems. The X5 and the original Discovery are not. The Discovery was crap. For the 3 years we had it, it probably had 20+ electrical gremlins. In the 2 years we've had the X5 nary a one. I have friends with similar electrical problems--to your point, they are older LR vehicles. However, the vehicles handle & tow completely differently, to the original point of this thread. I'd not tow a boat behind a Discovery I again.

Edited October 10, 2006 by RogerQ

[ilovetrains]

While the LR3 and the X5 and not platform siblings, they were in fact designed by exactly the same people.

I think the similarity ends there, though.