2.2 puma 130 engine failure

Great news Summitt, well done.

Sounds like Toyota may be making similar lack of customer service/design fault mistakes to those that Land Rover made in the 80's? Great that LRA look to be
resurrecting that reputation now. Interesting how tables turn. The potential for LRA, if the new Defender is good, is huge.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Summiitt

Finally got my 130 back on the road with the new motor, the guys at Lennock land rover have been great..hopefully now with new axles, transfer case, chassis and now a brand new motor, I'm looking forward to driving the bloody thing and it earning it's keep, interestingly the first fill I got 570km till the light came on, has always been at about 510-530km with the old motor, so maybe the injectors were on the way out for a while.

---

After the problems you've just had, id be scared running the tank down to empty anymore unless you have to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Summiitt

Finally got my 130 back on the road with the new motor, the guys at Lennock land rover have been great..hopefully now with new axles, transfer case, chassis and now a brand new motor, I'm looking forward to driving the bloody thing and it earning it's keep, interestingly the first fill I got 570km till the light came on, has always been at about 510-530km with the old motor, so maybe the injectors were on the way out for a while.

---

570km is good for a 130, especially a brand new motor. Hopefully you've got a good'n.

Time to disable the EGR valve while its still clean inside.

Is disabling the EGR the go? I've got mixed feelings on the EGR as a couple of my western stars are EGRs and have been great yet heard of others that have been crap, is this the same for the rovers?? As for running the fuel low in the tank, I've got little option as the capacity is pathetic and that of a corolla, not sure what your reasons for running the tank low is? I've got no issues running down till the light comes on.. If you've got fuel, use it..

People don't like running their tanks low because it picks up the gunk at the bottom,they don't seem to realise the tank feeds from the bottom regardless of how much fuel is in it,I run mine to empty. Pat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Summiitt

Is disabling the EGR the go? I've got mixed feelings on the EGR as a couple of my western stars are EGRs and have been great yet heard of others that have been crap, is this the same for the rovers?? As for running the fuel low in the tank, I've got little option as the capacity is pathetic and that of a corolla, not sure what your reasons for running the tank low is? I've got no issues running down till the light comes on.. If you've got fuel, use it..

---

One of the first things i did was to get a decat, intercooler, egr blanked and switched off and a remap. Went from an average 580kms per tank to around 610kms per tank. The benefit of all this is around 150hp and 450nm of torque. Basically i let the engine breath better and reap the rewards. My Mack truck rep told me a long time ago that egrs are one of the worst things ever introduced for engine reliability and longevity

Ps i have 110 2.2. Constantly carrying around 250-300kg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PAT303

People don't like running their tanks low because it picks up the gunk at the bottom,they don't seem to realise the tank feeds from the bottom regardless of how much fuel is in it,I run mine to empty. Pat

---

Exactly. A lot of people don't seem to understand this. Any crap and water in the fuel gets sucked out first at the bottom of the tank, regardless of fuel level.

Hilarious that anyone thinks fuel is drawn from the top of the tank!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Summiitt

Is disabling the EGR the go? I've got mixed feelings on the EGR as a couple of my western stars are EGRs and have been great yet heard of others that have been crap, is this the same for the rovers??

---

Well its probably not going to be as big a problem on your trucks and rovers, that, as commercial/work vehicles spend a bigger part of their engine hours at proper temperature and being worked with a decent load. They'll naturally be longer lasting, cleaner running engines because of it.
But feeding abrasive, sooty, oxygen depleted gas into an expensive engine just doesn't make sense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beery

Exactly. A lot of people don't seem to understand this. Any crap and water in the fuel gets sucked out first at the bottom of the tank, regardless of fuel level.

---

When the tank is Lower you have more free surface effect which stirs up debris that may be stuck in the bottom of the tank, the other thing is you'll get more condensate build up this is pretty minor if you've got a fuel cooler and not really an issue with a car fuel tank.
Regardless of the suction being at the bottom, it's still bad practice to run a diesel tank down to the low level alarm unless you have to. I had an ex mine site ford courier years ago and I stuffed the fuel pump from doing it due to all the Pilbara red dust that made its way into the tank.