Yesterday I braved the weather and travelled a total of 280 odd miles with my family in the K reg Discovery 200TDi
I was prepared to suffer a huge difference in handling, performance and comfort from the Xantia (2.0 16v), but was surprised to find out that the difference was not as great as I had expected.
With the right conditions, dry roads etc, cruising at up to 90MPH was not ambitious, the wind noise was present but not intrusive. Although the seats are harder than the Xantia, I didn't suffer neck or back pains at all.
Even at high speeds the acceleration was definately significant in 5th gear.
I worked out that the trip cost me roughly £30, which roughly equates to 10 gallons of diesel.
So that seems to calculate at 28 MPG, with 90% Dual carriage way and Motorway driving, and 10% country lane driving.
So, if you're going to get a disco - get the 2.5 TDI!
Hugo
|
|
28mpg seems pretty dire to me for a diesel, even at 90mph.
|
|
Our ex (Y plate TD5 with ACE et al) cruised happily at 75 - not 70 not 80 but 75 (indicated of course) for some reason, and returned 35 mpgish (which isn't at all dire) any faster and I would be unhappy with it's ability to stop in a hurry. In fairness it was a pretty good motorway vehicle.
|
"With the right conditions, dry roads etc, cruising at up to 90MPH was not ambitious, the wind noise was present but not intrusive."
Blimey, 90mph in an old Disco - you must have nerves of steel!. I've been up to about 75mph in one and it frightened me half to death (although, in fairness, not quite as frightening as a Frontera without ABS though!).
|
|
Can't help agreeing with Aprilia. Even the latest Discos are hardly over-endowed in the braking department.
|
Sorry, but to me the whole Disco experience sounds dire. 28mpg and iffy brakes. Plus lousy dynamics. If you don't need to pull trailers across fields or drive through bogs, what's the point of dragging all that ugly metal and heavy four-wheel drive mechanicals around?
A half-way decent diesel car would give superior handling and braking (equals safety), probably better comfort as well, AND would give 50 mpg.
QED.
|
You are all missing the point. If Hugo enjoyed the journey in his "new" vehicle...well then it's a success. There is a certain pleasure when using a Disco on a run that defies cold logic. But isn't that true of most sports cars, exotics and classics...and motorbikes really.
I took one of our girls out in the old LR Series II diesel on Boxing day, so we could get onto some deserted roads/droves for practice on her her new bike.
The wind was so strong we couldn't exceed 45mph on the way out, and on the way back it was blown up to 60mph with an assult of noise from...well everything.
Thing is it was great fun....it doesn't need justifying.
So Hugo you go and enjoy!
Oh by the way HJ if you apply my experience to your trip remember there was a very strong wind from the South during your journey, could that have been much of your fuel consumpion issue?
M.M
|
|
|
|
|
So, if you're going to get a disco - get the 2.5 TDI! Hugo
>>But, Hugo
and I hope you will forgive me. Why get a disco anyway?
Don drbe
|
Nice to hear from all of you:- MM HJ and the Disco Bashers :)
You're right MM, I do enjoy the Disco.
The brakes don't seem much worse than those on a bog standard car. I've got vented front discs and normal rear discs, plus I take the added precaution of leaving plenty of room in front of me at all times.
Th only real problem I did notice was a tendency to roll and be buffeted by winds.
PU, thanks for calibrating the experience with the MPG. As opposed to your average TD Mondeo etc, this vehicle is twice as heavy and will take a lot more diesel to shift it. If I just wanted 50+ MPG I would have gone for a Mondeo TD or similar, No I just wanted to drive a decent 4 X 4 that did more than 14 MPG! So I avoided the V8 or the japanese petrol equivilents.
Why get a Disco? I'll tel you why:-
A I like them
B I wanted a vehicle with plenty of room in it, as opposed to the Xantia, which my children have literally grown our of. At 6 foot 4 inches let me tell you, you do upset the rest of the family by having the drivers seat as far back as it can go!
C I had a choice between an MPV and a Disco app same year and money, I was prepared to suffer a bit of fuel economy and go for the 4 wheel drive.
D I got a good deal!
Hugo
|
Hugo,
The Disco is a fine motor when properly sorted. Never over estimate the brakes, they can seriously catch you out. They are simply not designed to be driven at high speed. My Disco caught me out once on a roundabout and I very nearly lost it when I was driving it in saloon car mode and I stamped on the brakes (for a reason !). You quite rightly pointed out that it is twice as heavy as a Mondeo and regardless of the power of the brakes, slowing down that mass is a major, major problem, stopping is only part of the problem, the other bit is about the vehicle's stability, it is simply not designed to stop a Disco from 90 - 95 mph without drama. Our Disco had a self imposed 75 mph limit, this was in good traffic conditions. This is not a design fault by the way, as the brakes are superb in off-road stuff and around town work. The car is incorrectly marketed - as an off road tool it is near perfect; as a school run, motorway mile muncher it has limitations. Buy a Defender - that always reminds you how fast it is going !
|
I noticed a surprising difference in diesel consumption of the Avensis D-4D on two 300 mile journeys on 26th and 27th. Going North, on Shell bought in Surrey, not using cruise control the car managed 47.73 brim to brim
It is unlikely the mpg will be the same from a to b, as it is from b to a.
This is because of the difference in net altitude of a and b.
A lot more energy is required to lift the vehicle, than to simply sustain momentum against the forces of drag. Of course when the destination is at a lower altitude, the opposite applies.
|
Resisted this yesterday but after that Sooty.....
Your point on the globe when you set off i.e. north, must mean you travel downhill for the globe is a ball. To return to your point on the globe must also mean that you have to travel uphill. Downhill takes less fuel than uphill.
Hardly rocket science is it?
DVD
|
My finger would be pointed at the cruise control making a difference in the MPG figures. When on, the cruise control will use full throttle, pinning the pedal to the floor if necessary to maintain its set speed. This means that if there is a slight incline, the sort that would knock a few MPH off your speed, the cruise control will open the throttle (increasing fuel consumption)to overcome the loss of speed.
If you were controlling the throttle manually, chances are you wouldn't bother about the slight drop in speed and maintain the throttle position you currently have. Its this constant throttle opening/steady fuel flow that is more fuel efficient than the varying cruise control.
|
Other possibilities are that the first tank was not brimmed full, or that the calibration on the fuel pump on the second fill was inaccurate, although I believe that Trading Standards keeps a regular check on this sort of thing.
Reggie
|
|
|
|
