A thing, strangely

"Cé hé sin" (michael-m-mouse) 05/16/2018 at 18:07 • Filed to: Land Rover, Discovery

1

8

Oooh, a 1980 LR Discovery (the first two digits in the number are a clue)!

(picture stolen shamelessly from social media)

Who can tell me what’s unusual about this and why?

benjrblant > Cé hé sin 05/16/2018 at 18:17

1

Discovery production started in 1989, so maybe a chassis swap?

TheTurbochargedSquirrel > Cé hé sin 05/16/2018 at 18:17

0

1.9L diesel?

Rust and Dust - Oppositelock Forever > Cé hé sin 05/16/2018 at 18:18

1

The Discovery I wasn’t released until 9 years later than the number plate would indicate (I think).

Rear axle track width looks narrow in comparison to the body as well, but that may just be perspective.

Nibby > Cé hé sin 05/16/2018 at 18:24

0

arl > Rust and Dust - Oppositelock Forever 05/16/2018 at 20:33

0

That was the first thing that caught my eye - the narrow axle.

facw > Nibby 05/17/2018 at 00:28

1

Do you want to give people seizures? 

AuthiCooper1300 > benjrblant 05/17/2018 at 02:38

0

If they kept it in the family, the Discovery and Range Rover shared what was basically the same 100" chassis. Another possibility, rather more complicated, would be to fit the Discovery body on a cut-and-shut One Ten-110/127 frame (i.e. coil-sprung, 110" or 127" wheelbase, related to the RR/Disco one) but those did not appear until 1983 and surely it would be much, much more involved.

Of course a 1980 Range Rover wouldn’t have a diesel engine so they’d have to fix new engine mounts and such – not terribly difficult though.

All those options wouldn’t explain why the rear axle looks so narrow (it doesn’t to me, but I don’t know them so well). Maybe they put the body on a LWB Series 3, but those have a leaf-sprung chassis and the whole thing would be a nightmare.

Perhaps it’s on a completely different chassis, non-LR related?

adamftw > Rust and Dust - Oppositelock Forever 05/17/2018 at 07:21

0

Thats just how they look