I always wanted to read the Koran/Quran, but never could make up my mind which translation to choose. All are attacked by somebody for different reasons. So in the end I chose at random: standing in a bookshop waiting for my wife to make up her mind on something else, I noticed this edition in front of my nose and thought, what the heck, why not.
Not sure it was a good idea.
Rodwell first published his translation in 1861, and it appears as if he deliberately wrote in an even older style to make the book sound approximately like a King James Bible, which may not be ideal.
He had the innovative idea to re-arrange the text by chronology of its writing, which has probably lots of merits on terms of Islamology, but confuses the reader who is used to a different arrangement from the official versions. The official version have the convincing principle of arranging the text pieces by length. I am sure your computer could come up with a half dozen equally logical arrangements, but in the end, what should decide is convention. After all, this is supposed to be a translation.
The editor of the newly published Rodwell text put it back into the right order, so this is a 'normalized' Rodwell Koran. Jones kept Rodwell's original endnotes, give or take some, but had to re-arrange them with the Sura sequence too, of course. Jones claims that Rodwell's translation stood the test of time, but that his introduction did not, so Jones provides his own brief one about the times and the text and the prophet. Usefull.
Now to Rodwell's language: I keep hearing praises about the poetic beauty of the Arabic text. Honestly, Rodwell lost that aspect out of sight entirely. There is no poetry here.
Jones asserts that otherwise the translation stood the test of time. Actually that is discouraging if it is true. One of my AFs recommended other translations to me. Ok, I' ll give the benefit of doubt and try one of those.