New model Ford Ranger has 3litre V6

[PhilipA]

Just reading today that the new Ford Ranger model has the 3litre V6 which I assume to be the later developed version of the V6 in the D4.

If the hard points of the engine are the same the D4s with broken cranks could have a more reasonable replacement available as soon as the Ford drivers start crashing them.
Regards PhilipA

[loanrangie]

Just reading today that the new Ford Ranger model has the 3litre V6 which I assume to be the later developed version of the V6 in the D4.

If the hard points of the engine are the same the D4s with broken cranks could have a more reasonable replacement available as soon as the Ford drivers start crashing them.
Regards PhilipA

that shouldnt take long, Ranger is almost the new dunnydore.

[l00kin4]

Just reading today that the new Ford Ranger model has the 3litre V6 which I assume to be the later developed version of the V6 in the D4.

If the hard points of the engine are the same the D4s with broken cranks could have a more reasonable replacement available as soon as the Ford drivers start crashing them.
Regards PhilipA

Spot on - not completely sure about the second point.

2023 Ford Ranger engine specs (https://www.whichcar.com.au/news/2023-ford-ranger-engine-specs)
Ford has released more details of the engines that will power the next generation of Ranger ute (https://www.whichcar.com.au/ford/ranger) and Everest wagon (https://www.whichcar.com.au/ford/everest) models in Australia. Specifically, it has revealed the outputs on the new 3.0-litre V6 diesel engine that will be available on upper specification models of both the 4x4 Ranger and Everest.
This latest version of the ‘Lion V6’ engine has been tuned to put out 184kW of power at 3250rpm and 600Nm of torque which will make the Ford pair the most powerful 4-wheel drive models in their respective categories.
The Lion V6 is not a new engine having first debuted as a 2.7-litre capacity in the Land Rover Discovery 3 (https://www.whichcar.com.au/land-rover/discovery) and some Peugeot and Citroen passenger cars back in 2004. In this capacity it was even used in Ford Australia’s Territory wagon. The capacity was increased to 2993cc in 2009 and both single- and dual-turbocharger variants have been used, producing up to 700Nm of torque in some Range Rover (https://www.whichcar.com.au/range-rover) models.

[PerthDisco]

This is great news for D4 owners as an abundance of low km latest spec 3.0 engines will soon be hitting the wrecking yards!

[scarry]

Thats a huge amount of power and torque for a ute.[bighmmm]

[discorevy]

The new VW anorak will have the same engine ( and a lot else ) as the Ranger.
Will open up options for all the blown D4's only if all the hardware, castings etc are the same.
as mentioned, shouldn't be too long to wait after they're released before the CUB's start pranging them

[101RRS]

I thought the new Ranger was getting the Ford Powerstroke 3.0 TDV6 - the next iteration on from the LR 3.0 SDV6 so had a range of upgrades over the D4/5 engine. While there has been lots of speculation about whether this engine is backwards compatible with the D4 as a replacement for the 3.0SDV6, I have not seen a definite confirmation that this is the case.

Garry

[DiscoJeffster]

I don’t see what all the fuss is. It’s not hard to repair a broken crankshaft. See!? A stick welder and some grinding and she’s as good as new.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220325/33f4608c3b5c12472bc1b9f54b32961d.png



https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220325/b361ea85398967a2ec6c9339dbd81dd5.png

[BradC]

I don’t see what all the fuss is. It’s not hard to repair a broken crankshaft. See!? A stick welder and some grinding and she’s as good as new.

.....



Curse you. There goes another half an hour :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDfq0S2loVs

[loanrangie]

I thought the new Ranger was getting the Ford Powerstroke 3.0 TDV6 - the next iteration on from the LR 3.0 SDV6 so had a range of upgrades over the D4/5 engine. While there has been lots of speculation about whether this engine is backwards compatible with the D4 as a replacement for the 3.0SDV6, I have not seen a definite confirmation that this is the case.

GarryIt's likely the same engine although hard to find any definitive details.

[101RRS]

It's likely the same engine although hard to find any definitive details.

I did find some data on the crank used in the Powerstroke and the journals are a couple of mm thicker than the LR engine (approx 69mm vs 65mm) but I cannot find it at the moment. It also inferred that because of this the block is slightly different as well, but I suspect all internal stuff.

Assuming that all the sensors etc and basically the same and can be swapped around then maybe there is no issue in swapping a complete long engine across - after all someone has replaced a 3.0 with a 2.7 and did not have major issues.

Garry

[Slunnie]

The new VW anorak will have the same engine ( and a lot else ) as the Ranger.
Will open up options for all the blown D4's only if all the hardware, castings etc are the same.
as mentioned, shouldn't be too long to wait after they're released before the CUB's start pranging them

I cant see any logical reason why VW would use the Ford TDV6. I doubt there is a single thing that is better about the Ford motor when compared to VW's own.

[BradC]

I cant see any logical reason why VW would use the Ford TDV6. I doubt there is a single thing that is better about the Ford motor when compared to VW's own.

Emissions?

[loanrangie]

Emissions?And pricing, VW charge drug dealer prices for their parts.

[Slunnie]

Emissions?
I doubt very much


And pricing, VW charge drug dealer prices for their parts.
Thats the difference between the Ford and VW motors. The Ford one requires parts.

[BradC]

Thats the difference between the Ford and VW motors. The Ford one requires parts.

Having had 3 golfs and 2 toerags in the family we’re pretty familiar with the inside of VW engine compartments. Can’t comment on Fords though but most parts that have broken on the D3 have FoMoCo stamped on them.

[discorevy]

I cant see any logical reason why VW would use the Ford TDV6. I doubt there is a single thing that is better about the Ford motor when compared to VW's own.

Agree, I think it's more to do with VW no longer making the Amorok (they've repurposed the factory to make an electric van) The merger is so they can share driver assist technologies, so they say.
I have found the handful of passats and golfs I maintain to have no shortage of problems but all of them good to drive

[incisor]

I doubt very much


Thats the difference between the Ford and VW motors. The Ford one requires parts.And Ford bits are mostly much dearer than LR bits...

[scarry]

I cant see any logical reason why VW would use the Ford TDV6. I doubt there is a single thing that is better about the Ford motor when compared to VW's own.

Mazda went away from using the rebadged Ranger due to the number of warranty repairs they were doing on them.

Hopefully VW dont have the same issues.

And no i didnt see that on FB,it was out of the mouth of a guy who is a part owner of one of the Mazda dealerships on the Gold Coast,and has been for over 30 years.

The rebadged Isuzu they now have has so far been a lot better,with virtually no warranty issues so far,and the comment was much better fit,finish,reliability and general quality control.

[101RRS]

Agree, I think it's more to do with VW no longer making the Amorok (they've repurposed the factory to make an electric van) The merger is so they can share driver assist technologies, so they say.
I have found the handful of passats and golfs I maintain to have no shortage of problems but all of them good to drive

I agree - why would you re-engineer the Ranger also to be the Amarok to take the VW TDi V6 when it is already engineered for the Powerstroke engine. Easier and cheaper to just go with what it was originally designed for.

Now while fitting of the Powerstroke is still speculation, the fitting of the Ranger 2.0 Turbo Diesel to the new Ranger based Amarok is confirmed so logically the same will happen with the Powerstroke.

Garry

[rdenyer]

I did find some data on the crank used in the Powerstroke and the journals are a couple of mm thicker than the LR engine (approx 69mm vs 65mm) but I cannot find it at the moment. It also inferred that because of this the block is slightly different as well, but I suspect all internal stuff.

Assuming that all the sensors etc and basically the same and can be swapped around then maybe there is no issue in swapping a complete long engine across - after all someone has replaced a 3.0 with a 2.7 and did not have major issues.

Garry
Found this
Despite the fact that the engine is new for the F-150, it already has its history while was used in other vehicles, back in the past when Ford owned JLR. The 3.0l Power Stroke engine for a reason has new revised crankshaft and bearings. Ford's 3.0L diesel engines had serious problems with bursting crankshafts and quick wear on crankshaft bearings. There are several possible causes - a design mistake, insufficient oil pump performance, improper oil, untimely and incomplete oil change. The reason is most likely a complex of the above factors. Ford has done some work with related components and only time will tell how successful it is.
Ford 3.0 Powerstroke Engine Specs, Problems, Reliability, oil, F-150 (https://www.motorreviewer.com/engine.php?engine_id=145)i

[RRT]

Wont the issue be more of electronics than hard points?

No doubt there will be new injectors and hardware etc. with the requirement of ADblue and such as well as a constant upgrade of the firing of the injector cycle and increasing of pressure of the fuel supply. Maybe if the injectors can be replaced with older engines one, this may give a greater chance of success as to being able to control the correct flow.

Maybe what be of a more interesting point is the oil supply to the crank being able to be used in the existing engines, that is the sump and pump as well as the oil supply to the bottom end of the engine. The top end of the engine as far I can ascertain is pretty unburstable. To my mind it is the bearings that are the issue, lack of oil to these and the heating of metal to metal then onto ultimate fatigue...

[Tombie]

Curse you. There goes another half an hour :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDfq0S2loVs

Love the linishing phase! Thats gold!

[Discodicky]

FORD has announced a 3.5 litre Ecoboost V6 for next year's F150.
298Kw, 678Nm, Tows 4.5Tonnes, 10 speed auto.

Showing faith in the "V6" concept.

[Arch]

FORD has announced a 3.5 litre Ecoboost V6 for next year's F150.
298Kw, 678Nm, Tows 4.5Tonnes, 10 speed auto.

Showing faith in the "V6" concept.

F1 car run V6 engines. Its only internet speculation that keeps the weak V6 design myths going.

[shack]

There is absolutely no issue with the V design for motors, it's specifically diesel that it's a problem for, and again, specifically high output.

No doubt some are better designed than others, or at least better selected for applications.

The crank in a V engine of any sort USUALLY has less strength.

Think about the length of a "straight 6" 3 litre engine crank compared to a V6 crank.

The V6 is a lot shorter and yet has the same amount of Conrods connected.

Obviously there are ways around the lack of room, less man bearings, narrower journals, making the crank harder, but all of these workarounds can have issues. For instance what happens with harder metal? Yes it's stronger, yes it resists wear better, but it also makes it brittle, which increases the chance of failure.

There will be cranks that have failed in engines simply because of lack of quality control, and crossing the line between hard and brittle. There are also plenty of cranks that have snapped, not because of an inherent weakness in the crank, but because the block has twisted/flexed under load.


In fairness, diesel engines as a whole suffer more crank failures than petrol or gas as they are under so much more stress, employing the V design just increases the stress per CM³ of crank material.

Cheers
James

[Arch]

Can you explain how diesels are different in this regard? I thought F1 cars had high output engines.

[DiscoDB]

Meaningless comparison when an F1 engine is design to last around 3000km.

[Arch]

Meaningless comparison when an F1 engine is design to last around 3000km.

No not meaningless at all particularly when some of the lion V6 engines have failed with low kms.

If it looks like a V6, it must be a V6 and therefore have the same design weaknesses.

I don't think anyone have ever got to the bottom of why the lion V6 engines fail. There is lots of speculation about weak cranks, dodgy oil pumps, oil supply issues, no tabs on bearings etc etc but no solid evidence.

What I do know however is that keyboard warriors are very good at speculating.

[Eric SDV6SE]

Meaningless comparison when an F1 engine is design to last around 3000km.

And spend most of their short life at 12000 rpm....

[shack]

Can you explain how diesels are different in this regard? I thought F1 cars had high output engines.Again that would be the lack of diesel.

Although to be fair I believe some F1 engines are (speculated to be) running compression ratios up around 18:1.

However the pressure rise in the chamber compared to diesel would be substantially different, therefore creating different torque loadings.

Don't forget the rpm they run as well, so they actually make a lot less bang (torque) per fire than you might imagine.

And it's likely that if you tried to run one for a couple hundred hrs you might find a number of parts leaving the crankcase in a hurry.

You also need to consider the development $$ spent on an F1 car and the cost of the parts compared our road cars. Look up the cost, it's staggering.


And the road car needs to operate under a myriad of circumstances whereas F1 is reasonably tightly controlled.

Cheers
James

[twr7cx]

And Ford bits are mostly much dearer than LR bits...

The 2.7 TDV6 oil pump pricing would beg to differ!



I agree - why would you re-engineer the Ranger also to be the Amarok to take the VW

Big assumption there of 're-engineer'. VW have been involved in the T6.2 platform since 2017 - as such, it's highly likely that it was engineered from the start to suit their engines too.

[scarry]

There were many V6 petrol engines built over the years that were extremely reliable,but I suppose with no where near the high output of these modern engines particularly the torque of the diesels.

The Tojo V6 petrol comes to mind,started at 3.4L then went to 4.0L,sold all over the world and fitted to many different vehicles with virtually no issues or breakages.

[PerthDisco]

There were many V6 petrol engines built over the years that were extremely reliable,but I suppose with no where near the high output of these modern engines particularly the torque of the diesels.

The Tojo V6 petrol comes to mind,started at 3.4L then went to 4.0L,sold all over the world and fitted to many different vehicles with virtually no issues or breakages.

I loved the V6 Ecotec i had in my VS ute. Light on fuel and heaps of power.

(Based on Buick V6 sold in zillions)

[scarry]

I loved the V6 Ecotec i had in my VS ute. Light on fuel and heaps of power.[biggrin]

(Based on Buick V6 sold in zillions)

Yes I forgot about that one,I had a six seater wagon,great vehicle,fantastic on fuel,but the brakes were never up to the task if it was driven enthusiastically.Very reliable as well.
Coming from a 202 HZ,anything that sort of era(90’s)was better[biggrin]

I think the original LR 3.5L V8 also came from that stable?
Although weeping heads,and later on slipped liners were a continual issue.

[shack]

Came across this video today, whilst it doesn't directly comment on what I've written here before, the guy presenting it might do a better job than I have in explaining it!!

This video is not what I was basing my previous comments on, as I mentioned, the first time I ever saw it was 10 minutes ago.

If you have a think about what he says, the gist of what I was saying earlier might make more sense.

Cheers
James


Why do Semi-Trucks Use Inline-Six Engines? - YouTube (https://youtu.be/eOaEcb_9HkY)

[loanrangie]

Came across this video today, whilst it doesn't directly comment on what I've written here before, the guy presenting it might do a better job than I have in explaining it!!

This video is not what I was basing my previous comments on, as I mentioned, the first time I ever saw it was 10 minutes ago.

If you have a think about what he says, the gist of what I was saying earlier might make more sense.

Cheers
James


Why do Semi-Trucks Use Inline-Six Engines? - YouTube (https://youtu.be/eOaEcb_9HkY)

Dont the majority of prime movers use V8's though ?

[Dagilmo]

I though the same. But a quick look on the Kenworth and Mack sites, and both use inline 6. Kenworth a Cummins and Mack a 13ltr Mack unit.

[BradC]

Came across this video today, whilst it doesn't directly comment on what I've written here before, the guy presenting it might do a better job than I have in explaining it!!

This video is not what I was basing my previous comments on, as I mentioned, the first time I ever saw it was 10 minutes ago.

If you have a think about what he says, the gist of what I was saying earlier might make more sense.

Cheers
James

I have a great book on balancing engines from the 60's which points out pretty much the straight 6 and V-12 can be perfectly balanced (and boxers, but they're something else entirely), anything else is a compromise. It's not like you can't build a V6 to last.

[Arch]

Again that would be the lack of diesel.

Although to be fair I believe some F1 engines are (speculated to be) running compression ratios up around 18:1.

However the pressure rise in the chamber compared to diesel would be substantially different, therefore creating different torque loadings.

Don't forget the rpm they run as well, so they actually make a lot less bang (torque) per fire than you might imagine.

And it's likely that if you tried to run one for a couple hundred hrs you might find a number of parts leaving the crankcase in a hurry.

You also need to consider the development $$ spent on an F1 car and the cost of the parts compared our road cars. Look up the cost, it's staggering.


And the road car needs to operate under a myriad of circumstances whereas F1 is reasonably tightly controlled.

Cheers
James

It's actually much simpler, the V6 engines found in land rovers have design problems.

[PerthDisco]

I though the same. But a quick look on the Kenworth and Mack sites, and both use inline 6. Kenworth a Cummins and Mack a 13ltr Mack unit.

Much easier for commercial engines to work on and maintain heads, manifolds etc vs a V engine duplication

V just makes it easier to shrink the size for a given cc. I’m thinking the engine bay of a car or we’d still be enjoying Straight 8s.

[Bulletman]

Much easier for commercial engines to work on and maintain heads, manifolds etc vs a V engine duplication

V just makes it easier to shrink the size for a given cc. I’m thinking the engine bay of a car or we’d still be enjoying Straight 8s.

My dad told me if you open the bonnet and cant see the ground , dont buy it as you wont be able to work on it.. why the hell did I buy a 2.7 tdv6.. I realize now how true those words really are.
Bulletman

[chuck]

Pretty sure Mercedes, Audi, Porsche, VW are all using pretty successful diesel V6's

one of the truck engines used to be a "screaming jimmy" V6 diesel.

Straight sixes might be back in vogue now but they were discontinued for some time & reason.

Ingenium 4's are already experiencing failures & given the Ingenium motors are supposed to be modular are we sure the straight six is going to be better?

[scarry]

The new LC 300 is also V6,it will be quite a few years,i suppose,until we find out if its any good.
The Japs dont usually have too many engine issues.

[Bulletman]

The new LC 300 is also V6,it will be quite a few years,i suppose,until we find out if its any good.
The Japs dont usually have too many engine issues.

Agree , I've seen many over the last 2 weeks and I actually like them, all reports from the LC faithful they are awesome.

Seriously would consider 1 when I need to replace the D3 as the 3.0 d4 scares the hell outta me ,and I'm not a fan of anything else in the LR stable including the ugly new defender.
Cheers Bulletman

[PerthDisco]

Pretty sure Mercedes, Audi, Porsche, VW are all using pretty successful diesel V6's

one of the truck engines used to be a "screaming jimmy" V6 diesel.

Straight sixes might be back in vogue now but they were discontinued for some time & reason.

Ingenium 4's are already experiencing failures & given the Ingenium motors are supposed to be modular are we sure the straight six is going to be better?

Detroit did the Screamer two strokes probably one of the largest production run of any engine of all time and largely bulletproof (excepting small Honda motorbike engines) and Cat did the 3208 V8 awesome 10 litre engine but all gone to straight engines because that’s what commercial customers want. Simples

[BradC]

My dad told me if you open the bonnet and cant see the ground , dont buy it as you wont be able to work on it.. why the hell did I buy a 2.7 tdv6.. I realize now how true those words really are.
Bulletman

That's why I love working on my 4 pot Volvo, or Dads old Triumph. You can get in there with the motor and stand next to it.

[josh.huber]

Detroit did the Screamer two strokes probably one of the largest production run of any engine of all time and largely bulletproof (excepting small Honda motorbike engines) and Cat did the 3208 V8 awesome 10 litre engine but all gone to straight engines because that’s what commercial customers want. Simples

I've seen both of those break cranks in school buses.

[shack]

In farming circles, 3 of the most despised engines over the last 50 years would be:
Cat 3208
JD 8955
Dv 550

Once again I point out that not all V diesels are bad, just that by their very design, they are more prone to crank problems than a straight 6.

I'm not letting LR off the hook, just explaining why V's on average have more failures.

The 300 series engine will probably be fine, but a lot of time and money would have been spent on R and D to make it's as reliable as a straight.

Cheers
James

[scarry]

In farming circles, 3 of the most despised engines over the last 50 years would be:
Cat 3208

The 300 series engine will probably be fine, but a lot of time and money would have been spent on R and D to make it's as reliable as a straight.

Cheers
James

In another life we used to run refrigeration compressors in trawlers coupled to CAT 3208.
Can’t remember any real issues,but they no doubt did have some.

That comment about the 300,is something LR are yet to learn after 70 yrs…..

[PerthDisco]

In another life we used to run refrigeration compressors in trawlers coupled to CAT 3208.
Can’t remember any real issues,but they no doubt did have some.

That comment about the 300,is something LR are yet to learn after 70 yrs…..

If two stroke Detroit’s and 3208 V8s were invented solely to bring joy to human ears then they succeeded admirably.

Like everything, a 3208 NA at 180hp went forever. In 550hp TA mode it was a hand grenade.

Same for the Detroit.

The law of thermodynamics is a cruel mistress.

[Melbourne Park]

In another life we used to run refrigeration compressors in trawlers coupled to CAT 3208.
Can’t remember any real issues,but they no doubt did have some.

That comment about the 300,is something LR are yet to learn after 70 yrs…..

But let's not forget - Toyota changes their fluids much more often than do the Euro makes.

That LR recommend a single oil change a year, is stupid IMO.

Same too with their transmission fluid change schedule. Hang on - they don't really have one for the transmission!!

And its easy for us to be more frequent.

But with a Toyota, they provide a fixed cost for each service. So to retain your warranty, its pretty easy. And today, its becoming normal for service pricing for warranty periods to be bundled with the purchase price.

the LC v6 3.3 litre 300 diesel requires servicing every 10,000km or 6 months, whichever comes sooner. That was according to Drive when I read about the LC 300 when it was introduced.

But the Oil-finder site published this:



3,3L diesel engine (F33A-FTV)
For EURO V/IV - 0W-20 ACEA C5
Except EURO V/IV - 5W-30 API CF-4 or ACEA B3, B4, B5 or JASO DL-0
6,6
Replace when maintenance reminder indicator is ON
or 5000 km (3000 miles) or 6 months (for severe conditions



✅ TOYOTA Land Cruiser J300 2022- recommended oils and capacities (https://oils-finder.com/index.php'model_code=landcruiser22)

the LR or Lion 3 litre has a bit less oil in it too - I think the 6.6 for the Toyota is it's total oil capacity, dealer change is I think about 6 litres. So that says one should replace the motor oil in the new LC 300 motor every 5,000 km in severe conditions. Australia is severe conditions, for many of us at least.

Reading about crank issues in the Lion in 2014 before I bought my D4 and since that time, oil has been mentioned as a possible issue. Along with 5 or so other "maybees". And oil gets diluted by distillate fuel in diesel engines, which is another reason why more oil changes are required in diesel engines.

IF one is concerned, then change the oil more frequently. And with the recommended oil. Same too with the tranny. And let's not forget the differentials.

[Pippin]

But let's not forget - Toyota changes their fluids much more often than do the Euro makes.

That LR recommend a single oil change a year, is stupid IMO.

Same to with their transmission fluid change schedule. Hang on - they don't really have one for the transmission.

And its easy for us to be more frequent.

But with a Toyota, they provide a fixed cost for each service. So to retain your warranty, its pretty easy. And today, its becoming normal for service pricing to be bundled with the purchase price.

the LC v6 3.3 litre 300 diesel requires servicing every 10,000km or 6 months, whichever comes sooner. That was according to Drive when I read about the LC 300 when it was introduced.

But the Oil-finder site published this:



3,3L diesel engine (F33A-FTV)
For EURO V/IV - 0W-20 ACEA C5
Except EURO V/IV - 5W-30 API CF-4 or ACEA B3, B4, B5 or JASO DL-0
6,6
Replace when maintenance reminder indicator is ON
or 5000 km (3000 miles) or 6 months (for severe conditions



✅ TOYOTA Land Cruiser J300 2022- recommended oils and capacities (https://oils-finder.com/index.php'model_code=landcruiser22)

the LR or Lion 3 litre has a bit less oil in it too - I think the 6.6 for the Toyota is it's total oil capacity, dealer change is I think about 6 litres. So that says one should replace the motor oil in the new LC 300 motor every 5,000 km in severe conditions. Australia is severe conditions.

Reading about crank issues in the Lion in 2014 before I bought my D4 and since that time, oil has been mentioned as a possible issue. Along with 5 or so other "maybees".

IF one is concerned, then change the oil more frequently. And with the recommended oil. Same too with the tranny. And let's not forget the differentials.Oil may well be a part of the issue causing crank failure, with my D3 I have a dipstick which I fill to the max at every change which gives longer oil life and less oil temperature stress under hard conditions as opposed to D4's where you don't really know the oil level status with any certainty. After all I rarely see a dealer put any more oil in than they have to. Just my thoughts. Nick

[Melbourne Park]

Oil may well be a part of the issue causing crank failure, with my D3 I have a dipstick which I fill to the max at every change which gives longer oil life and less oil temperature stress under hard conditions as opposed to D4's where you don't really know the oil level status with any certainty. After all I rarely see a dealer put any more oil in than they have to. Just my thoughts. Nick

Soon after I bought my D4 I took it to QLD from Melbourne. I bought it during the annual LR discount period, it had 4k on it and was the service manager's car, which was actually the case. I stopped into refuel the vehicle but couldn't find the dip stick ... I asked the country town service station's attendant there, and he had a friend with a recent Disco like mine ... but the friend didn't answer his phone so I couldn't find it out. I read the manual that night.

And even checking the oil level is not simple - one has to idle the warm vehicle for some time, on horizontal ground. It seemed to me a huge downside of the vehicle. Why change something that works, and replace it with something that is inherently less reliable, more costly to make including the changeover of hardware, and because it takes much longer to perform the function, effectively negates checking one's oil?

[scarry]

And even checking the oil level is not simple - one has to idle the warm vehicle for some time, on horizontal ground. It seemed to me a huge downside of the vehicle. Why change something that works, and replace it with something that is inherently less reliable, more costly to make including the changeover of hardware, and because it takes much longer to perform the function, effectively negates checking one's oil?

Wait until the level sensor has failed,and has to be replaced,a rediculously huge job.A few on here know all about that.[bigsad][biggrin]

The new ingenium engines have dipsticks.[bighmmm]

You could say the same for the rotary dial gear selector.
Another dumb idea that caused a heap more issues than a shifter ever caused,in both LR and Jag vehicles.

I wonder why it has been dropped?[bighmmm]

Seems some manufacturers have to learn the hard way.

[Discodicky]

Wait until the level sensor has failed,and has to be replaced,a rediculously huge job.A few on here know all about that.[bigsad][biggrin]

The new ingenium engines have dipsticks.[bighmmm]

You could say the same for the rotary dial gear selector.
Another dumb idea that caused a heap more issues than a shifter ever caused,in both LR and Jag vehicles.

I wonder why it has been dropped?[bighmmm]

Seems some manufacturers have to learn the hard way.

It's Engineers having "bright ideas".....
I firmly believe the 3.0 engine would not have any crank bearing failures if the brg caps had the small locating tabs which engine manufacturers have used since they went to shell bearings in the 1950's.
Older and experienced auto and heavy machinery mechanics could supply an endless list of stupid designs that have existed over the years.
Not only Pommie engines; all Countries have spawned them.

With my 3.0 engine, I simply check the level via the readout BEFORE I start the engine first thing in the day.
The level difference from standing overnight to having run it for a while is negligible and anyway, it won't give you a reading until approx 10 mins after the engine has shut down in order to ensure the 'froth' has settled.
It doesn't use a drop between 8-10,000 klm changes.

[scarry]

It's Engineers having "bright ideas".....
I firmly believe the 3.0 engine would not have any crank bearing failures if the brg caps had the small locating tabs which engine manufacturers have used since they went to shell bearings in the 1950's.

Which is probably a Ford issue,that unfortunately turned into an LR issue.

But its LR that continued to sell vehicles knowing there was a huge issue with the engines,for decades.

[SimmAus]

Which is probably a Ford issue,that unfortunately turned into an LR issue.

But its LR that continued to sell vehicles knowing there was a huge issue with the engines,for decades.

Which is NO different to every other vehicle manufacturer.
To quote from a movie:
AxBxC = X.
If X is less than the cost..we don’t recall..

[Tombie]

Wait until the level sensor has failed,and has to be replaced,a rediculously huge job.A few on here know all about that.[bigsad][biggrin]

The new ingenium engines have dipsticks.[bighmmm]

You could say the same for the rotary dial gear selector.
Another dumb idea that caused a heap more issues than a shifter ever caused,in both LR and Jag vehicles.

I wonder why it has been dropped?[bighmmm]

Seems some manufacturers have to learn the hard way.

The new Ingenium engines are failing now too.
Lots of interesting issues….. not one of them due to having a dipstick.

[DiscoJeffster]

The new Ingenium engines are failing now too.
Lots of interesting issues….. not one of them due to having a dipstick.

Yeah, the dipstick isn’t telling you your oil is diluted with diesel as is the case with those awful things

[veebs]

How did we end up with two threads bitching about ****ing dip sticks?

They don’t have one. Deal with it, or buy something that does.

[ozscott]

Yeah, the dipstick isn’t telling you your oil is diluted with diesel as is the case with those awful thingsNor that the timing chain is about to let go.

Cheers

[scarry]

The new Ingenium engines are failing now too.
Lots of interesting issues….. not one of them due to having a dipstick.

Dipstick?No we cant go there again[bighmmm][biggrin][smilebigeye]

Yes,the 4 cyl diesel has been a disaster,unfortunately.

I remember when it first came out they were boasting about 50PSI boost.Not long after it was derated.Now it has been dropped from most models.

No reports on the diesel 6,hopefully its sorted.But it hasn't been out for long.

[ozscott]

Dipstick?No we cant go there again[bighmmm][biggrin][smilebigeye]

Yes,the 4 cyl diesel has been a disaster,unfortunately.

I remember when it first came out they were boasting about 50PSI boost.Not long after it was derated.Now it has been dropped from most models.

No reports on the diesel 6,hopefully its sorted.But it hasn't been out for long.Unfortunately i wouldn't trust any LR motor until it is a proven reliable prospect. Ie for me that means around 300,000 kilometres without any engine failure and at most say an alternator and water pump replacement in the meantime. But that seems a hard ask for LR. Jeez even my 4.0 V8 with its old tooling made it to 200,000 before an alternator went and somewhere over that before its first head gasket failure but I wouldn't call that reliable motoring if I remove the rose coloured glasses with the LR logo on the wings. Cheers

[scarry]

Unfortunately i wouldn't trust any LR motor until it is a proven reliable prospect. Ie for me that means around 300,000 kilometres without any engine failure and at most say an alternator and water pump replacement in the meantime. But that seems a hard ask for LR. Jeez even my 4.0 V8 with its old tooling made it to 200,000 before an alternator went and somewhere over that before its first head gasket failure but I wouldn't call that reliable motoring if I remove the rose coloured glasses with the LR logo on the wings. Cheers

In over 45 years,yes that unfortunately shows my age[bigsad],I have never had an engine issue in any vehicle.
That includes a heap of work vehicles that did huge mileage.
They were always serviced correctly which probably helped.

All the LR’s we had were gone at less than 150,000 Km or 10 yrs…..

One of my brothers has a petrol D1 that has done just under 400,000Km,with very little issues,and only the usual head gasket coolant weep problem with the engine.
It does dribble a bit of oil from here and there though[bighmmm]

[ozscott]

In over 45 years,yes that unfortunately shows my age[bigsad],I have never had an engine issue in any vehicle.
That includes a heap of work vehicles that did huge mileage.
They were always serviced correctly which probably helped.

All the LR’s we had were gone at less than 150,000 Km or 10 yrs…..

One of my brothers has a petrol D1 that has done just under 400,000Km,with very little issues,and only the usual head gasket coolant weep problem with the engine.
It does dribble a bit of oil from here and there though[bighmmm]Mate I tend to hold on to vehicles I like. My D1 has over 300,000klm on the 3.9 and runs like a charm. But the D1s tended to be great. The tooling/casting was still good and they ran an inline thermostat, lower temps, no biasing to the heater and richer versus the D2 V8. Yes it didn't get the economy nor grunt of the D2....but the cost of engine failures buys a lot of unleaded. Cheers

[Melbourne Park]

In another life we used to run refrigeration compressors in trawlers coupled to CAT 3208.
Can’t remember any real issues,but they no doubt did have some.

That comment about the 300,is something LR are yet to learn after 70 yrs….. - the comment being plenty of R&D by Toyota for its V6 diesel.

My point: what choice did Land Rover have? They were bought by BMW, who developed their X5 from what they learn't. They kept the mini for front wheel drive R&D but sold off LR to Ford. It's silly to think that Land Rover could have refused to accept a Ford engine, as LR was then part of Ford. Who unlike GM put money into the vehicle companies they have bought. Look at Volvo compared to what GM did to SAAB. The LION was developed jointly with Peugeot, who had a great vehicle reputation with diesels. IMO it was the East West compromise (for very few vehicles bought) that has hurt the longevity. But that is IMO a minor issue.

The real issue is quality control in Ford's Dagenham engine plant. Most LION engines last a very long time without issues. While others fail after being looked after, some at low mileages. This substantiates that the cause has been manufacturing quality control.

[scarry]

- the comment being plenty of R&D by Toyota for its V6 diesel.

The real issue is quality control in Ford's Dagenham engine plant. Most LION engines last a very long time without issues. While others fail after being looked after, some at low mileages. This substantiates that the cause has been manufacturing quality control.

This has been debated many times by all sorts,including those that specialise in rebuilding the Ford Lion engines in the UK.
What we do know is the problems were never sorted by Ford,and LR sold vehicles with the engines fitted for many years,over many models,knowing there were problems.

Anyway,it is all history,owners just have to work with what they have.

[PhilipA]

I was surprised reading the Thread about the D4 that died that no mechanic has got his hands on a Ford V6 and stripped it down to see whether the ancillaries of the D4 will fit.
I have done a long search using google and other sources but no definitive answer. I recently saw a video by a bloke in the USA who strips down blown engines strip a D4 3l. . He thinks they are the same.
Another site I saw listed the differences as a forged crankshaft in the new V6. this seems to be corroborated by LR Time who bought a recent Ford branded crankshaft and it was identical in measurements to the 3L crank. He didn't comment whether it was forged or cast.
The differences listed on one site were 9 litre sump vs 6 in a D4, single turbo, forged crankshaft, and not much else.
I bet that there are numerous D4 owners who would love to know.
BTW, since I have been on the Ford Everest site I have not heard of one V6 self destructing and boy do those Ford owners whine. Totally different to the AULRO where IMHO the posters are incredibly tolerant of really **** quality and support from LR. I have my letter from Ford with 10 year warranty on my EGR cooler. Anyone have a letter from LR giving 10 year warranty on anything? I read about some bloke whose daughter was driving and ignored the oil pressure light due to a leaking drain from the turbo. One would think there would be numerous pools under the car but some people never seem to look under. Ford paid for a new engine, I believe.
Regards PhilipA

[scarry]

Anyone have a letter from LR giving 10 year warranty on anything?

Not from LR,dont be silly.....[biggrin]

There is a couple here for our work Tojos,i think it is 10yr on DPFs and injectors.
Same for the LC.

Probably as a result of the class action that all the Toyota buyers are gradually paying for,as part of the cost of their new cars[bighmmm][smilebigeye]

[scarry]

boy do those Ford owners whine.

Wait until they start falling apart,we have two Rangers at work,the last model,one 4 yrs old,the other three.
Both have been in recently for a new boot around gearshift lever,steering wheel,drivers seat,all falling apart.

Credit though,they did do it all no questions asked.

I do realise work vehicles get a harder life than privately owned vehicles,but they should be better quality.

Hopefully the quality of the newer models has improved,but i doubt it.

[PhilipA]

However I realise that a Ranger or an Everest is about half the price of the equivalent Land Rover.

My 2018 Everest had 84KK on it when I bought it and trim wise was and is immaculate. The driver's door rubber was split slightly and a new rubber cost about $120.
When I bought a dongle and program I found the adblue heater needed replacement which Ford did under extended warranty and a glow plug was dead which I had replaced with the other 4 under dealer statutory warranty. Seeing the engine is the same family as the Defender 2.2 and 2.4 any common problems are common to Defender and Everest( eg glow plugs).

I chickened out on a RRS even though I would have loved one due to the "all or nothing" nature of the dreaded crankshaft failure as I didn't have a lazy $25K sitting around.
As I posted before I have a 10 year warranty on my EGR cooler, which is a known weak spot on the 3.2. I believe that I am aware enough of my coolant level and engine temperature to catch it before engine destruction although it appears many owners are not. Even so Ford has paid for complete engine replacement in most cases even when an owner has had a private mechanic do a rebuild. I have seen a video of coolant dripping out of the muffler and the owner asked what it was and still driving it!
So when talking about quality in my mind you have to separate nuisance stuff like trim, with showstoppers like engine or transmission failure. Many Everest owners tow humungous caravans and don't service the transmission or know it's temperature and wonder why it dies. The six speed in the 3.2 is basically identical to the 6 speed transmission fitted to the early D4.
Regards PhilipA