Jump to content

Welcome to NCLR - Northern California Land Rover Club
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. This message will be removed once you have signed in.
Login to Account Create an Account
Photo

RRC; SWB vs LWB

- - - - -

  • Please log in to reply
43 replies to this topic

#1
Lauroness

Lauroness

    NCLR Club Member

  • NCLR Club Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 204 posts
  • Fairfield, CA
  • 1998 Discovery LE
Hello everyone,

So I had posted that I was potentially getting a 88 RRC. Well the deal fell off and looks like I'm not getting that particular one. The being said I'm still in the market for a pre 94. One thing I want to get answer is the the SWB vs LWB

Besides that ones is longer then the other. Which is better and why.

Your opinions are highly appreciated

Lauro

#2
El Solis

El Solis

    NCLR Club Member

  • NCLR Club Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,760 posts
Why did it fall through? (Translation where is this 88 RRC located and how can we get it?)

Chris KK6CQE

CT110 Himalayas Pre-Scout Truck
08 BMW 550i
2013 Discovery 4, Black Pack, NCLR sticker as only modification….for now
1963 Jaguar MK2 3.8 litre


#3
Lauroness

Lauroness

    NCLR Club Member

  • NCLR Club Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 204 posts
  • Fairfield, CA
  • 1998 Discovery LE

Why did it fall through? (Translation where is this 88 RRC located and how can we get it?)


It's in Washington, and it was going to be part of a trade but the kid changed his mind. Its ok tho, I'm still working on getting it because I really want it. My options have increased a little so I'm just asking the benefit of LWB and SWB.

#4
El Solis

El Solis

    NCLR Club Member

  • NCLR Club Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,760 posts
Ah got it. I think most people prefer the SWB for off roading bc of the shorter wheelbase and the LWB for the enormous rear leg room. So I think it will depend on what your goals are. Both are capable of road. That taps my RRC knowledge base.
  • TomOwen and erinw.rrc like this

Chris KK6CQE

CT110 Himalayas Pre-Scout Truck
08 BMW 550i
2013 Discovery 4, Black Pack, NCLR sticker as only modification….for now
1963 Jaguar MK2 3.8 litre


#5
astateofmike

astateofmike

    Traveling at the Speed of Adventure

  • NCLR Club Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,271 posts
  • 1988 Range Rover Classic
  • NCLR 004

SWB:  100 inch wheel base, availability of a solid roof panel option.  Best "stock engine" is the 3.9.  Hmmm, that may be all.

 

LWB.  108 inch wheel base.  SAME internal cargo storage as the SWB.  8" more rear seat leg room.  NO factory solid roof option.  4.2L stock engine.

 

So, having owned both (and seen my LWB go hog wild with its current owner) I will impart the only wisdom I can.

 

93-94 LWB is the way to go.  All parts (minus rear doors meaning glass, shell, and interior panel and the roof) are shared among all other RRC.  And if you DON"T get an 87/88, you don't have exterior hinges.

 

ALSO, you get 24 spline axles, and the 4.2L engine.  This means, if you are so inclined, that all you are "missing" is the Center Diff Lock feature.  Don't know about you, but diff seems easier than the engine and all.  

 

I would NOT get a single year 95 anything again....I can't handle looking for the bits and bobs to make it right, and now I am starting with the same issue with the 88.

 

The 8" longer makes the back seat more bearable (not for me, too tall) and the extra length gives a nice ride on the road.  Unless you are building the Dusy/Rubi rig, the 8" will not be a problem. And even then, it's all about height.   

 

If I were to start again, I'd be looking for a white or bronze green 93-94LWB with 3" lift, CDL change, Lockers, and 33" tires.  I think that truck would do it all.  And would almost be exactly what Nathan has.  Good to run kids to school, parts to find, trails to explore.

 

out.


Edited by astateofmike, 14 October 2016 - 07:54 PM.

  • PaulD and Jethro like this

Just enjoying my time traveling at the Speed of Adventure.


#6
ColinB

ColinB

    NCLR Club Member

  • NCLR Web Administrator
  • 878 posts

Long Wheel Base FOR SURE.  

 

Way nicer to wheel.  


  • PaulD likes this

 HAM KJ7RRC
95 LWB RRC 3 inch rte lt-230, 35x12.5/15 bfg km2, GBR 4.14 with trutracs front and rear, Rovertracks front Hd axles and cv's, Ashcroft Hd rear axles,
Rte rear trailing arms,Warn 8k, RTE bumpers front and rear with P-Fab Mods, Flowmaster exhaust ,custom sliders GRB F+R driveshaft, RTE steering links. 12 in Bilstien 7100's


#7
Lauroness

Lauroness

    NCLR Club Member

  • NCLR Club Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 204 posts
  • Fairfield, CA
  • 1998 Discovery LE
So an 88/87 shouldn't be the first choice but the 93/94.

#8
AdvRovr

AdvRovr

    NCLR Treasurer

  • NCLR BOD Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,333 posts
  • Lathrop
  • K6ADV
  • 97 Range Rover 4.0
Colin, curious why you say the LWB is better to wheel. I agree nicer to drive on-road, but unless you need those 8" of rear legroom, why wouldn't you want the shorter wheelbase for wheeling?

I had a 94 SWB Classic and absolutely loved it. Still regret selling it. Always thought it would be such a great expo vehicle. Don't have any experience with LWB to compare against (except the P38 which is obviously not a fair comparison).

Edit, I should add, I wheeled it with the full family and loaded to the gills with gear, and while it wasn't fast I never really thought "Gee, this 3.9 is unbearable."

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Edited by AdvRovr, 15 October 2016 - 09:21 AM.

Chad // Instagram: @AdvRovr
2009 Range Rover Sport // 2007 Mercedes GL320 Diesel // 2001 BMW 330Ci // 1996 Triumph Tiger 900

"Can you make it work?" - "Made by the English...let's not get our hopes up."


#9
lutz

lutz

    NCLR053/SCLR

  • NCLR Club Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 689 posts
  • Grover Beach CA
  • KK6QGU
  • 2004 Discovery 2
  • 1999 Discovery 2
  • 2008 LR3

Id say go with the LWB as Colin said they  tend to wheel better.Only area they have a hard time is vary tight trails.The extra wheel base seems to help with climbing and descending.Most rock buggy's are in the 104 to 110 wheel base these days.


  • PaulD likes this

KK6QGU
04 Discovery 2-Trail truck- RTE 3in with fox 2.0 shocks, $g rear cones ,$G front bumper with Warn XD9000i custom rear,ARB's air lockers F&R with Ashcroft 4.12 w/reverse cut front , Ashcroft HD axles/CV's, RTE diff guards F&R , Max Yedor HD tie rod and track rod,custom watts, 255/85-16 MAXXIS MT-762 BIGHORN

99 Discovery 2 -Parts truck

2008 lr3

http://www.pacificadventuretours.com/


#10
Lauroness

Lauroness

    NCLR Club Member

  • NCLR Club Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 204 posts
  • Fairfield, CA
  • 1998 Discovery LE
I remember watching a video on YouTube of some dudes going on a trail, 3 jeeps and one Discovery. The only reason the discovery guy was there was because of his knowledge. They were testing out one of their jeeps with a 6.1 I think a Chevy LS block of some kind. Anyways one of their keeps having the longest wheel base went up a giant rock and was used to winch up the rest of the group. I remember the discovery guy mentioning something about his wheel base being to small to make it up that rock but at that time I didn't think or know anything of what he was talking about. It's making more and more sense now

#11
astateofmike

astateofmike

    Traveling at the Speed of Adventure

  • NCLR Club Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,271 posts
  • 1988 Range Rover Classic
  • NCLR 004

Yeah, in case I was not clear.  LWB.  extra 8" means sleeping in the back of the car if needed is an option.  It means plenty of floor room for cargo/water/gear if needed.  It means a lot.  Where is Nathan?  And it is passenger room.  Kids NOT kicking the back of the seat....

 

Ok, so here is a LWB.... I think it gets the job done (video from Desert Crawler, DV, NCLR)...

 

https://youtu.be/JqczzhsWOh8


  • PaulD likes this

Just enjoying my time traveling at the Speed of Adventure.


#12
Lauroness

Lauroness

    NCLR Club Member

  • NCLR Club Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 204 posts
  • Fairfield, CA
  • 1998 Discovery LE
Awesome vid. The search has ended..the 88 RRC for sure will come home with me the end of the month.
  • astateofmike, PaulD, erinw.rrc and 1 other like this

#13
astateofmike

astateofmike

    Traveling at the Speed of Adventure

  • NCLR Club Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,271 posts
  • 1988 Range Rover Classic
  • NCLR 004
Well. We shall have to get the 88s together some day for a pic.
  • PaulD and erinw.rrc like this

Just enjoying my time traveling at the Speed of Adventure.


#14
DHappel

DHappel

    NCLR Trip Ambassador

  • NCLR BOD Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,295 posts
  • Walnut Grove, CA
  • KK6TBH
  • '07 LR3 with stuff
  • '96 D1 Roadster
  • '94 RRC
  • '96 D1

I'll stand as the odd man out.  I specifically sought out a swb for my build.  Granted, at this point I only have some mild trail time on it as it's pretty stock.  Here's my thinking:

 

100" wheelbase used to be hot set-up in the Jeep world.  Guys seemed to think that was the best compromise between nimble and comfy.  Lutz is telling us the buggy guys are now going longer, so maybe thing thinking has changed, then again I'm not going as extreme as the buggy guys.

 

Nimble.  The RRC (well, any Rover) axle doesn't have that much steering lock to start with.  A longer wheelbase just means more work getting through tight spots.  It's not just making a corner where the longer truck might have to do a three-point turn but being able to position yourself differently on a trail or obstacle.

 

Break-over.  With the same amount of lift/tire, the shorter wheelbase has greater break-over angles.

 

Weight.  OK, not a huge difference but the swb will save a few pounds over the lwb and in soft surfaces like snow or mud that can help.  Then again I'm a little weigh-conscious due to my LR3 being a fatso.

 

Space.  I have no kids and rarely carry a 3rd person, even then typically only for short trail rides.  I don't think the limited space will be a problem for my use.  I'll probably get rid of one rear seat anyway.

 

Powertrain/driveline.  I wasn't too worried about this as I knew I'd be swapping pretty much everything anyway during the build.

 

In my mind the only thing the lwb has in it's favor is climbing/descending major hills and of course cargo capacity.  To my mind the swb *should* be the better choice.

 

Take all of this with a grain of salt however as the other guys here have far more experience with this platform than I do.  Lots of guys have proved the lwb is plenty capable off road and it is of course more desirable on road.  

 

I have an '88 that has already been 4.2 swapped, and a '95 with a good running 3.9, 3" generic lift, 33s, and bumpers.  I plan to build the '88 as it's more interesting as an older truck.

 

My build plan is geared toward the Dusy/Rubi/Fordyce more than mild trails and highway miles.  The idea is about 4" of lift, 35s (with triming), locked front/rear, 4.2, LT230, HD drivelines, etc.  I may use the bumpers I already have or build my own, and I'll build my own sliders.  I had hoped to get this started this summer but as per usual things are going slowly and it looks like it will be next year before I can really get going on it.   Luckily I've got the LR3 to keep me entertained in the meantime.


  • PaulD, erinw.rrc and Jethro like this

Don
'07 LR3 HSE/HD - slightly non-stock

'96 D1 - even more non-stock


#15
Lauroness

Lauroness

    NCLR Club Member

  • NCLR Club Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 204 posts
  • Fairfield, CA
  • 1998 Discovery LE
I should mention the 88 is a SWB

#16
astateofmike

astateofmike

    Traveling at the Speed of Adventure

  • NCLR Club Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,271 posts
  • 1988 Range Rover Classic
  • NCLR 004

I should mention the 88 is a SWB

 

Didn't need to...they didn't have a LWB that year...or  an other "new" model in the US really  :D


Just enjoying my time traveling at the Speed of Adventure.


#17
SLOHybrid

SLOHybrid

    Driver

  • NCLR Club Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 956 posts
  • SLO
  • 95 RRC 25th 4.6
  • 04 L322
  • 87 RRC
  • 94 4.6 RRC LWB CRAWLER

Awesome vid. The search has ended..the 88 RRC for sure will come home with me the end of the month.

So after all that you are getting a SWB?? confused??

 

I as Mike has promoted a big LWB fan and have attempted in the past to drive other rigs all SWB including a Rubicon (aaahhhh the ridicule I got from that!)

 

I own an 87 SWB RRC and love it's simplicity and turning radius but in my books a LWB is the way to go off road...  I am 6.1" and can with a little a adaptation sleep in it comfortably.   they are not as "tippy" on rocks or steep inclines either.

 

Problem with a 87-88 is they have the anemic 3.5 in it ad will need to be removed immediately if you ever plan to do a road trip in it.  However it does come with the best transfer case an early LT230 in my opinion is the best and it has non ABS brakes all fantastic for offroading.

 

all RRC's 89 on had the BW transfer box which works well until it fails!  

 

Whichever way you go we will help you out!  I have a hoard of Range Rovers and parts for them and so does Tiger Dan.

 

BTW that Vid is a 93 LWB that has over 300K on the original 4.2 and is still going ! in Grover Beach


Edited by SLOHybrid, 17 October 2016 - 08:09 AM.

  • astateofmike, PaulD and erinw.rrc like this

NCLR 093

Traversing Defense Mine Waterfall
http://www.youtube.c...h?v=JqczzhsWOh8


#18
El Solis

El Solis

    NCLR Club Member

  • NCLR Club Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,760 posts
I'll just throw is out there again, I have a 4.2 with 100,000 miles on it sitting in a box in my yard. Top end was rebuilt by Will Tillery (apparently almost as amazing as Dan Harris when it comes to Rover knowledge and ability) 10,000 miles ago. There's also a BW t case and ZF transmission in the box next to it
  • PaulD likes this

Chris KK6CQE

CT110 Himalayas Pre-Scout Truck
08 BMW 550i
2013 Discovery 4, Black Pack, NCLR sticker as only modification….for now
1963 Jaguar MK2 3.8 litre


#19
astateofmike

astateofmike

    Traveling at the Speed of Adventure

  • NCLR Club Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,271 posts
  • 1988 Range Rover Classic
  • NCLR 004

See, IF you are going to get the SWB, and don't want to suffer the "originality" of the 3.5, which I do without end it seems, a 4.2 is a GREAT answer to that issue.

 

I loved the 4.2 in the LWB, and if you have the opportunity to go 4.2 and LT230....such happiness.  I had a 4.2 lower end for the day I was needing to swap engines..it went on to another home to keep a Disco on the road..


  • PaulD likes this

Just enjoying my time traveling at the Speed of Adventure.


#20
SLOHybrid

SLOHybrid

    Driver

  • NCLR Club Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 956 posts
  • SLO
  • 95 RRC 25th 4.6
  • 04 L322
  • 87 RRC
  • 94 4.6 RRC LWB CRAWLER

See, IF you are going to get the SWB, and don't want to suffer the "originality" of the 3.5, which I do without end it seems, a 4.2 is a GREAT answer to that issue.

 

I loved the 4.2 in the LWB, and if you have the opportunity to go 4.2 and LT230....such happiness.  I had a 4.2 lower end for the day I was needing to swap engines..it went on to another home to keep a Disco on the road

Modified 4.6 & Lt230 is even better!  :P


  • PaulD likes this

NCLR 093

Traversing Defense Mine Waterfall
http://www.youtube.c...h?v=JqczzhsWOh8





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users