Land rover discovery V8 (2000)

Submitted: Saturday, Apr 22, 2006 at 18:32

ThreadID: 33151 Views:6052 Replies:5 FollowUps:9

This Thread has been Archived

stormbay

Hi folks,
Trying to find out what kind of k's the petrol V8 on the Discovery does. Thinking of buying one, a 2000 model. all feedback appreciated.
John

Back Expand Un-Read 0 Share

Reply By: David from David and Justine Olsen's 4WD Tag-Along - Saturday, Apr 22, 2006 at 18:41

Saturday, Apr 22, 2006 at 18:41

what kind of k's??....fast ones I reckon :-)

I guess you mean fuel consumption. About 18L/100k (highway).

AnswerID: 168481

Follow Up By: David from David and Justine Olsen's 4WD Tag-Along - Saturday, Apr 22, 2006 at 18:48

Saturday, Apr 22, 2006 at 18:48

and well into the twenties off road. Between 22 and 26 L/100k depending how hard you work it.

If I've misunderstood your post and you are asking how many k's you would typically get out of the engine then thats really hard to say-depends on how well it has been looked after. Around the 140 to 160 mark they will need head gaskets and welch plugs and water pump and such usually. The radiator is the biggest bugbear. If it hasn't been flushed annually you'd be best to get a new core, or at least get it rodded. They will run forever but get pretty tired once the cam and followers wear, so will be down on power.

Hope that helps.

FollowupID: 423823

Follow Up By: Exploder - Saturday, Apr 22, 2006 at 19:11

Saturday, Apr 22, 2006 at 19:11

That’s consumption’s not too impressive out of only a 4.0 V8, would of thought it would have been a chit load better than that.

FollowupID: 423824

Follow Up By: David from David and Justine Olsen's 4WD Tag-Along - Saturday, Apr 22, 2006 at 22:18

Saturday, Apr 22, 2006 at 22:18

Drive it conservatively on the highway and you may get 16L/100k. But it isn't exactly a light vehicle, and a 4L V8 maybe a pretty small engine but it is a big car, so it works pretty hard.

Pretty similar consumption to any comparable petrol 4wd of the same era really.

FollowupID: 423854

Follow Up By: Exploder - Sunday, Apr 23, 2006 at 02:52

Sunday, Apr 23, 2006 at 02:52

I get around 12 or so Ltrs per 100 out on the Hwy sitting on 110-120kp/h and 14-15 around the city. That’s out of a 4.0Ltr V6.

I Thought the V8 Disco's would do a little better than 18Ltrs/100, but guess not.

FollowupID: 423885

Follow Up By: David from David and Justine Olsen's 4WD Tag-Along - Sunday, Apr 23, 2006 at 08:05

Sunday, Apr 23, 2006 at 08:05

I had on very rare occasions got 14L/100k. But on my various long travels, all around 10,000 k, I averaged 19L/100k with the roof rack on.

FollowupID: 423895

Follow Up By: Bytemrk - Sunday, Apr 23, 2006 at 10:32

Sunday, Apr 23, 2006 at 10:32

G'day Exploder,

Is yours full time 4x4? The disco is driving all wheels all the time - no option for 2 wd - no hubs to lock/unlock That may be the biggest contributing factor in the difference.

Also as David has pointed out they are a pretty heavy vehicle. And slightly less areodynamic that the average house brick!..;-)

Cheers, Mark

FollowupID: 423917

Follow Up By: Exploder - Sunday, Apr 23, 2006 at 12:53

Sunday, Apr 23, 2006 at 12:53

No it has 3 modes Auto, 4Hi and 4Low, for normal driving it’s in Auto mode witch activates the TOD system, so in normal driving it’s 2WD until slip is detected at the rear then the front axle will be engaged until traction is regained then it will go back into 2WD mode the Hubs are permanently locked in.

I have herd stories about people putting them on a 2 wheel Dyno and as soon as they start the TOD system detects a speed difference between the front and rear wheels thro sensors in the T/Case and ABS sensors in the Wheels and engages the front axle, now that would be interesting LOL.

It a 98 Explorer by the way, thus the screen name, and no explosion yet LOL.

FollowupID: 423932

Reply By: drivesafe - Saturday, Apr 22, 2006 at 19:06

Saturday, Apr 22, 2006 at 19:06

Hi stormbay, for all things Landy, try the AULRO site.

They are a pretty good bunch and are always happy to give you any info, good and bad, on anything Landy.

Cheers

AULRO

AnswerID: 168486

Reply By: Bytemrk - Saturday, Apr 22, 2006 at 21:42

Saturday, Apr 22, 2006 at 21:42

G'day John,

As you have already been told the 4.0 V8 2000 Disco is a pretty thirsty beast... I have one.

It really depends on how you drive.

Around Melbourne I have to do a lot of short trips ( I only work 9 Km for home). They run pretty rich on startup (computer controlled so there is not much you can do to change that). This combined with the fact I tend to be a bit heavy on the right foot sees 19 -20 Ltr/100Km constantly around town.

Highway - again depend how you drive... If I am careful I get 14 - 15 ltr/100km - cruising around 90 - 100. If I push it harder and sit around 110+ that goes up to around 17.

Off road I have never had it get worse than 22 l/100k ...

Pulling my Tambo camper fully loaded through the High Country I was getting 20 ltr/100 k... car and trailer weighed in at 3.5 tonne... so I wasn't too disappointed with that.

My best piece of advice if you are looking at one is SERVICE HISTORY.. get one that has been maintained well and it will be a good car... even if it's a bit thirsty.

Get one that has NOT beeen maintained... and you are likely to be the target of all the Landy bashers that tell you how unreliable all Land Rovers are... ( mine has never failed to get me home)

Finally for those wondering why they go through a fair amount of fuel.... one contributing reason is that they are full time 4x4... so you are ALWAYS driving all 4 wheels.. that has advantaged... but it doesn't help with fuel economy.

Hope that helps,
Mark

AnswerID: 168507

Follow Up By: johnnyD - Sunday, Apr 23, 2006 at 06:52

Sunday, Apr 23, 2006 at 06:52

Thanks Mark and everyone else for their replies...
Having said that and heard the facts I guess it's back to the drawing board! I live in Tasmania where the fuel is getting in the mid $1.30's and used diesal 4x4's are getting more expensive by the day. Same old situation, more money to buy a diesal or less for a petrol rig and then pay more for fuel. "If I ruled the world..." I wouldn't worry, buy a new Disco and relax... not even sure why I want a disco except I've found a really good Rover mechanic!! Does that make any sense!

We are aiming to drive the Tribulation track this year so it is kinda important what we depend on.

Cheers
John

FollowupID: 423890

Follow Up By: Bytemrk - Sunday, Apr 23, 2006 at 10:27

Sunday, Apr 23, 2006 at 10:27

No worries John,

I know this will draw flack.. but of course it makes sense to want a disco..;-)

Anyway... I know Diesel is a more per litre in Tas.... but the diesel Disco's get MUCH better economy.. My mate that has a similar are disco TD5 to my v8 get the sorts of figure below....

Around town... V8 450km a tank........... TD5 700 km per tank

Highway V8 550-600km per tank TD5 1100 + per tank

So maybe a closer look at a diesel may be a better option. That way you get the Disco you want... plus better running costs. I know servicing the diesel is a bit more... but I am not sure how much.

As driveline said... pop in to www.aulro.com great site based in aus... thousands of Landie fans that can give you their knowledge and help if you want it.

Good luck with it.. Mark

PS. I did a quick trip to TAS a few weeks ago... did Devonport, through Cradle Mountain to Straun.. played on the beach there a little then Straun to Hobart - Hobart to Devonport and the Disco V8 sat on a contant 600 km per tank... FYI

FollowupID: 423915

Reply By: Rock Crawler - Sunday, Apr 23, 2006 at 09:23

Sunday, Apr 23, 2006 at 09:23

on our simpson trip , my mates V8 was more economical than my 80 series

AnswerID: 168550

Reply By: arthurking83 - Sunday, Apr 23, 2006 at 11:20

Sunday, Apr 23, 2006 at 11:20

My '79 Rangie (3.5 with Zeniths) used to get me 7.5-8.0Km/l on the highway...back when it was being used!

I had to get the front drive shaft checked/balanced/repaired and had to drive the beast as a RWD for nearly a week, and it seemed to make no difference to the economy!
Mind you I was a bit more gentle with in in that time.....but I definitely saw no difference in economy...(OK maybe .01km/l saving!!)

While this is not a definitive test...I never believed the rumors of higher fuel consumption with a constant 4WD!

Engine condition/tune, tyres, loaded weight, fitted accessories, right foot, and driver attitude will affect fuel consumption more than the old "4WD/2WD" argument.

just my view on that subject!

AnswerID: 168563