Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456
Results 51 to 56 of 56

Thread: D4 Engine types - interoperability

  1. #51
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    MelbourneESE
    Posts
    47
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoJeffster View Post
    It’s fair to say when LR only care about failures within warranty or reasonable service times (post warranty) (which if determined are reasonable are funded by LR anyway) so they know the failure rate within the parameters they care about. If an engine fails at an extended age, they don’t care TBH.

    There is no reason to re-engineer anything at this stage, simply provide a new short or long engine to those who require it. You take your chances at probably sub 1% real failure rate. If you’re not paying, it’s difficult to argue more.

    DiscoJeffster, thanks for your comprehensive commentary, particularly the SB numbers, I will have a read of these

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    18,474
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Well Ford the builders of the engines certainly know there is an issue with the crankshaft. The 3.0 TDV6 that is going into the F trucks have larger journals. The PSA Lion 3.0 engines have main journals approx 65.98mm where the Ford F150 Lion engines have main journals at around 69.98mm so around 4mm larger - plus there are design changes in the block which is thicker. (similar to what LR did with the RV8 crankshaft on the change from the 3.9 to 4.0 engines where crankshaft journals are larger in the 4.0 even though the 3.9 and 4.0 have the same engine capacity.

    So clearly PSA/LR/Ford knew of the issues of the crank in the 3.0 and took steps to remedy it for the engine to go into a US stateside product with their Lemon Laws.
    REMLR 243

    2007 Range Rover Sport TDV6
    1977 FC 101
    1976 Jaguar XJ12C
    1973 Haflinger AP700
    1971 Jaguar V12 E-Type Series 3 Roadster
    1957 Series 1 88"
    1957 Series 1 88" Station Wagon

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Whyalla, SA
    Posts
    7,064
    Total Downloaded
    0

    D4 Engine types - interoperability

    Or it could be as simple as continuing product improvement and development. D4 Engine types - interoperability

    Imagine that, a manufacturing striving to make an improved product. Oh the conspiracy.

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    18,474
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Tombie View Post
    Or it could be as simple as continuing product improvement and development. D4 Engine types - interoperability

    Imagine that, a manufacturing striving to make an improved product. Oh the conspiracy.
    Well maybe and it would be great if it was the case, but the F150 Lion engine has been around now for what - 2 years and as far as I know this development did not flow over to the European products - would love to be shown I am wrong but I dont think so.

    Didn't someone post in the last couple of days that the 3.0 SDV6/TDV6 is getting a reprieve and is going to stay on in some LR products as a replacement for the 2 litre engine - if so, I hope this engine has the product development you mentioned.
    REMLR 243

    2007 Range Rover Sport TDV6
    1977 FC 101
    1976 Jaguar XJ12C
    1973 Haflinger AP700
    1971 Jaguar V12 E-Type Series 3 Roadster
    1957 Series 1 88"
    1957 Series 1 88" Station Wagon

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Location
    Hobart, Tasmania
    Posts
    520
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by 101RRS View Post
    Well Ford the builders of the engines certainly know there is an issue with the crankshaft. The 3.0 TDV6 that is going into the F trucks have larger journals. The PSA Lion 3.0 engines have main journals approx 65.98mm where the Ford F150 Lion engines have main journals at around 69.98mm so around 4mm larger - plus there are design changes in the block which is thicker. (similar to what LR did with the RV8 crankshaft on the change from the 3.9 to 4.0 engines where crankshaft journals are larger in the 4.0 even though the 3.9 and 4.0 have the same engine capacity.

    So clearly PSA/LR/Ford knew of the issues of the crank in the 3.0 and took steps to remedy it for the engine to go into a US stateside product with their Lemon Laws.
    I see you own an E Type V12.
    Noice car!
    Are you aware the early V12 engines had faulty crankshafts and Jaguar had to re-engineer?
    Spun bearings often, I replaced 2 in around 1974/5 and they didn't have big mileage on them.
    Out of warranty and no 'real' Consumer Laws in those days!
    One E Type and one XJ12 Series One.
    Never found the reason as I wasn't working for a Dealership, had my own Jaguar/RR business, but heard it was probably faulty nitriding/tuftriding during manufacture.
    Before: Ser 2a LWB, Ser 3 S/W, 1979 RR 2 door, 1981 LR Stage 1 V8 (new), 1985 LR 110 V8 County (new), 2009 RRS TDV8
    Now: MY13 D4 TDV6. "E" rear diff. Cambo's magic Engine & Auto Tune.

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    18,474
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Not heard of that. My car is the 11th RHD car made so is very early, not sure where the engine sits with that but is also a very early variant. I have not had any issues with the engine - like I have not at this stage not had any issues with my 2.7 TDV6.

    I had heard of the tuff nitriding on the V12 crank breaking down but was not considered a systematic problem.

    Cheers

    Garry
    REMLR 243

    2007 Range Rover Sport TDV6
    1977 FC 101
    1976 Jaguar XJ12C
    1973 Haflinger AP700
    1971 Jaguar V12 E-Type Series 3 Roadster
    1957 Series 1 88"
    1957 Series 1 88" Station Wagon

Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Search AULRO.com ONLY!
Search All the Web!