Thread: 90 vs 110 comparison?

I have owned both - although Td5's not Tdi's.

The 90 is more "choppy" in that, on the highway it will be a little more front to rear bouncing over bumps in the road. Also more prone to bump steer - where, after hitting a bump, the rear wheels want to tell the front where to go. It's not bad (like my old FJ40 Land Cruiser) but certainly more noticeable that the 110 which is more stable.

The 90:

is nippier as it has a better turning circle and better power to weight ratio.

Aircon is more effective due to the smaller volume.

Noise is a bit less - same reason.

Feels a little more "tippy" in offroad situations when the front wheels enter a hole - this could be improved a lot with better suspension travel - I only have standard suspension.

Slightly better fuel economy (5 to 10 %).

If I had my time over I would have bought a 110. The 90 is better off road and more manoeuvrable around town (easier to park) but IMHO, these benefits do not outweigh the disadvantages or less space.

All my opinion - I am sure others feel differently.

In a perfect world I would own both

90`s are better off road if you dont want to carry more than two people.feel a bit quicker on road. in the uk second hand 90`s cost more than similar secondhand 110`s !

I second sleppy's above.

That choppiness is even noticeable between a disco (100") to the 110 defender.

Originally Posted by peewee

90`s are better off road if you dont want to carry more than two people.feel a bit quicker on road. in the uk second hand 90`s cost more than similar secondhand 110`s !

Actually there are situations where both of the different wheelbase vehicles will dominate offroad.The 90 will feel quicker due to its better power/weight ratio.The rear springs on the 110 are heavier and also larger in diameter.The rear springs on the 90 are the same diameter as the Discovery and are the same diameter as the front springs.Which allows you to put rear springs in the front,which is a fairly common and cheap upgrade to the suspension if required.Which ever way you decide,it is a trade off that you will have to decide what you prefer to have and what you can do without.

One other point. The 90 has a better departure angle, which can be a benefit off road. Approach angle, I suspect is the same.

What are you planning on doing with it on the dark continent?
isn;t it mostly plains (or shoudl I say Veldt) work out there ?
A 110 would probably be my choicefor there, I suspect.


Out of interest are there (many) 130's in South Africa?

I spend several weeks a year in Africa - partly chasing wildlife in fairly rough areas as well as visiting family and friends in the cities. I don't carry a great deal of kit (although heavy at times with fuel and water) but also am tempted by the SWB maneuverability in the city and slightly better performance on thr freeways?

Briann,

I owned '96 300Tdi 90 South African spec back from '97 the through to 2001. They are all county spec with the little sideway folding down seats in the back. I never needed to carry more people than myself plus one, so I removed them and boxed out the rear. Good fuel consumption depending on your foot that regularly dipped under 10.0l/100km. I had a long range tank and a roofrack fitted with a tent. I toured with the LROCSA for 5 weeks through Botswana and I found that I was able to carry all I needed. As mentioned before, if you want to load up to the max payload you might just have to uprate the rear coils.

The "bouncyness" of 90's are well documented, but it just adds to their quirkiness and fun to drive. As a occational runaround and a vehicle you can use anywhere in SA you can't possibly go wrong. I would recomend it 100%