LR Discovery 300Tdi OffRoad Prep

[afonseca]

Hi all,

I’m currently doing some OffRoad preparation on my old Disco 300 TDI '94, which was from my father and is "part of the family" since then, so I decided to come here since I need some help from you experienced guys.
 
The idea is to prepare it for some touristic OffRoad courses as well as some trips/expedition, etc. Nothing extreme such as trial, etc.
 
I’ve already installed:

    - OME Nitrocharger Sport +2” springs and shocks
    - Front HD winch bumper
    - Rear HD bumper Britpart DA5647 (similar to yours if not the same)
    - Goodrige braking hoses
    - Working lamp

and am thinking on putting:

    - Air intake (Mantec?)
    - Steering shock (Tough Dog RTC? is it a good idea?)
    - Winch (Superwinch or Warn?)
    - A/T or M/T tyres (currently it has Michelin Latitude)
    - Offroad lights
 
But right now it’s really regarding tyres that I need more help. I want something more adequate for the OffRoad purpose but nothing with "bigfoot" looking (that ones getting too much out to the wheel arches).

I've been reading several opinions about this subject and was thinking on installing some AT ou MT on size 245/75R16, 235/85R16 or 265/75R16 but I'm still trying to know what's the more adequate, which ones need more changes and which (“camel cut”, reinforcing steering, etc).
 
So I kindly ask you opinion about brand (BFG, other), type (A/T or M/T), size and recommended wheel hubs (iron/aluminium?, brand, model, etc).
 
On option I was seriously considering was BFG’s MT 265/75R16 with boost rims, an alternative would be Cooper STT or Michelin XZL but I’m still very un-decise…

On the other hand aren’t MT tyres too un-confortable on road? And about fuel consumption?

Best regards and thanks in advance for any help you may provide.

[LandRoger]

 Having run a few Disco,s over the years these are my thoughts , a lot of people fit big muds for looks with no regard to on/off road performance
and then find they are rumble machines that do nothing for mpg on road, i have always used BFG ATs in 235s  great rubber for most situations giving unbeatable wear life and mpg and act like a normal road tyre  on road i have found that the narrower tyre section of 235 cuts through the mud to the harder under surface thus giving you grip where as the wider sections seem to push the mud in front of the tyre  235/85s will need only a small arch trim with a 2in lift .just mho hope it provides you with some food for thought.

[Range Rover Blues]

I'd agree with that, on the RRC you can fit 235/85 with a 2" lift and no body mods. the Disco needs a gentle trim to make the rear arches look like the RRC.  BFG are worth the money if you don't wreck them, our ATs are so old I'll have to retire them soon with 5mm tread left on, the MT do wear quicker but no worse than anything else.  Otherwise Cooper or another branded brand.

Fit remoulds at your own risk!

With a 2" lift you can get negative castor, which opens up a whole big can of worms.  I've looked at RTC dampers but the tough dog is the only one that fits a Disco.

if you converted to a Defender damper ahead of the axle you could fit a Terrafirmer which is far cheaper and reduce a bit of axle weight.

But that is covering up the issue of Negative Camber.  To do it right you need castor correction arms or bushes, then a Cardan prop from a TD5 (along with the flange).

Anti Roll bar spacers (tow ball spacers do just fine) to match the lift.

Extra long brake hoses, say plus 3"

Cranked rear radius arms and a high-articulation balljoint


You can go on and on spending money, so decide what you want to do with it and prioritise.

Mostly, have fun


Oh, and welcome to the club.

[LandRoger]

(You can go on spending money) now there,s an under statement i have been down that road looking for the ultimate when a friend let me try his Disco that had only £1200 spent on it i could of wept  it was every bit as capable as mine having spent 5k +  that was 10 years ago i am a little wiser now 

[Range Rover Blues]

(You can go on spending money) now there,s an under statement

Sorry, I had to laugh at that.