The systemic biases of Regional Climate Models (RCMs) impede their application in regional hydrological climate-change effects analysis and lead to errors. As a consequence, bias correction has become a necessary prerequisite for the study of climate change. This paper compares the performance of available bias correction methods that focus on the performance of precipitation and temperature projections. The hydrological effects of these correction methods are evaluated by the modelled discharges of the Kaidu River Basin. The results show that all used methods improve the performance of the original RCM precipitation and temperature simulations across a number of levels. The corrected results obtained by precipitation correction methods demonstrate larger diversities than those produced by the temperature correction methods. The performance of hydrological modelling is highly influenced by the choice of precipitation correction methods. Furthermore, no substantial differences can be identified from the results of the temperature-corrected methods. The biases from input data are often greater from the works of hydrological modelling. The suitability of these approaches depends upon the regional context and the RCM model, while their application procedure and a number of results can be adapted from region to region.