Thread: D4 3.0 SDV6 catastrophic failure

Originally Posted by Discodicky

What was the breakup Parts & labour of the $50k?
I was hearing/reading middle 20's.

Supports my suggestion of re-building the engine and using existing fuel pump, turbos etc.
Why pay for items which are unnecessary (at say, 100-200,000 klms) ?

$25K is a typical used engine swap on a 3.0

My point really was...
An old merc van from 2008 you can still get a new engine. Like so many others ford transit, rangers, toyota hilux new engines are still available.
But a D4 from only 2016 you can't get a new engine.

Which is a disgrace, I bought a new short crate engine in 2014 , 4.6 V8 to put in my Disco 1
It is insane you can’t get a 3l , I am still hopeful the engine from the new Ranger/Everest is an option

Originally Posted by DazzaTD5

$25K is a typical used engine swap on a 3.0

My point really was...
An old merc van from 2008 you can still get a new engine. Like so many others ford transit, rangers, toyota hilux new engines are still available.
But a D4 from only 2016 you can't get a new engine.

And that's the very reason I'm buying a Tojo Prado or maybe something else. Plus just recently I saw a thread where someone was quoted 5K for a new electronic oil sender thing! Surely that can't be right? Please tell me it isn't.
I've never understood apart from LR (Ford?) engineers loving electronic fancy bits, why an ordinary old fashioned dip stick was got rid of and this replaced it. Nothing dirty about checking oil with one and at least you could see if the oil change you'd paid for had been done when the stealer had had their hands on it.
Not that I'd let them touch my vehicle unless it was a warranty job so I didn't worry about that anyway.
AlanH.

Originally Posted by ATH

And that's the very reason I'm buying a Tojo Prado or maybe something else. Plus just recently I saw a thread where someone was quoted 5K for a new electronic oil sender thing! Surely that can't be right? Please tell me it isn't.

It is. The cost is in the fact that half the car needs to be dismantled in order to change it. And I agree, checking the oil is no hazard if you are halfway carefull.* I still curse Ford for removing the dipstick from the autos in the EL Falcon!

Originally Posted by ATH

Not that I'd let them touch my vehicle unless it was a warranty job so I didn't worry about that anyway.
AlanH.

That going to remain the case with Toyota's fixed price servicing?

(* Stupid red line. I don't care how the Yanks spell it. )

Originally Posted by Tins

(* Stupid red line. I don't care how the Yanks spell it. )

Nothing to do with Yanks. It only has one L, unless it is "carefully", so be careful.

Originally Posted by ChookD2

Nothing to do with Yanks. It only has one L, unless it is "carefully", so be careful.

All the 'full words had two Ls when I went to school, and all the old ( pre maybe 1970 ) books I have ( British published ) spell that way. Carefull is another way of saying full of care, just as beautifull is another way of saying full of beauty. It may be old fashioned, but I prefer it.

EDIT. BTW, which country is responsible for the spell checker used by your browser?

Originally Posted by Tins

All the 'full words had two Ls when I went to school, and all the old ( pre maybe 1970 ) books I have ( British published ) spell that way. Carefull is another way of saying full of care, just as beautifull is another way of saying full of beauty. It may be old fashioned, but I prefer it.

My schooling was late 60s and 70s, always one L when ending with full, e.g. playful, hopeful, etc. Doesn't matter really. I still spell programme the correct way.

edit: Mine is set to English (Australia).

Originally Posted by ChookD2

My schooling was late 60s and 70s, always one L when ending with full, e.g. playful, hopeful, etc. Doesn't matter really. I still spell programme the correct way.

edit: Mine is set to English (Australia).

I was 10 years earlier, but I guess it depends on the school. Programme is an interesting one, as both spellings are accepted, perhaps as the longer version has a formal connotation in the US, where program is far more common. Nobody in Silicon(e) Valley programmes a computer...
I think we should be gracefull and agree to differ