The bad design I was referring to was more to do with fitting what is essentially an engine designed for a car and putting it in a vehicle that should have a truck spec engine , and yes this is where those away from the "coal face" have too much say in a big corporate .
I'm sure any engineer worth his salt would have had misgivings about it
Of course that more frequent oil changes are better , but plenty other makes do even longer between scheduled changes without ****ting themselves in the same spot .
Ford now have made a truck spec 3.0 litre while at the same time managing to distance themselves from an inferior Land Rover product ( spin doctor genius right there )
2007 Discovery 3 SE7 TDV6 2.7
2012 SZ Territory TX 2.7 TDCi
"Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it." -- a warning from Adolf Hitler
"If you don't have a sense of humour, you probably don't have any sense at all!" -- a wise observation by someone else
'If everyone colludes in believing that war is the norm, nobody will recognize the imperative of peace." -- Anne Deveson
“What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others.” - Pericles
"We can ignore reality, but we cannot ignore the consequences of ignoring reality.” – Ayn Rand
"The happiness of your life depends upon the quality of your thoughts." Marcus Aurelius
While I partly agree with this, it’s not entirely correct. I worked for Audi for over 4 years, and we never had one Q7 fail like this. Yes, they weren’t immune from problems, but the original Q7 was a comparable weight, power, and performance (from a different style vehicle, yes). And with the same 6 or 8 speed ZF behind the engine!
Simply saying the engine is too highly strung for the car is a bit of a cop out. It’s either a design flaw or a manufacturing fault that’s being covered up big time
Oil doesn’t last forever, we all know it ages and breaks down. High temp and loads degrade it further, faster. In a diesel it get saturated with soot (mainly carbon) very quickly too. All significantly affecting the oils ability to do its primary job in reducing friction between moving metal parts.
Changing frequently (10,000km or less) with a high quality and specced oil and doing a pre oil change engine flush every second oil service or so will definitely help in my view...
The top end valve train of these engines are pretty good, excluding the plastic manifolds. Yes if the belt or chains fail its a mess but in the context of this thread (crank failures), there have not been cases I've heard or read about where a top end failure has led to crank failure.
There have been a few on the disco3 UK forum where even a gentle “piston meet valve” event has seen the top end repaired only to be followed later by a bottom end failure. It’s always a risk. If you whack a valve hard enough to damage the valve and/or supporting infrastructure you are bound to introduce a pretty severe shock load to the spinny bits.
My 2.7 failed after 270,000KM of being serviced religiously at the scheduled interval, although I will concede that oil breakdown may have had something to do with it. The vehicle had just completed two 800KM round trips with a sheep trailer on the back when it failed, and it was close to needing a service from memory. No, the oil wasn't low
Regards,
Tote
Go home, your igloo is on fire....
2014 Chile Red L494 RRS Autobiography Supercharged
MY2016 Aintree Green Defender 130 Cab Chassis
1957 Series 1 107 ute - In pieces
1974 F250 Highboy - Very rusty project
Assorted Falcons and Jeeps.....
| Search AULRO.com ONLY! |
Search All the Web! |
|---|
|
|
|
Bookmarks