Discovery Sport Forum banner

Service interval

1M views 3K replies 215 participants last post by  Past master 
#1 ·
My DS, first registered in November 2015 has covered 8910 miles.
A few days ago, on the InControl App, a Service Due Alert message appeared advising that my car is due for a service.
This coincided with an occasional message (on first start up of the day) saying that the oil level is low. This message did not stay, but disappeared once the tyre setting message had been displayed. I checked the oil level on the dipstick and it is showing full.
I spoke to my dealer who says that maybe due to the type of driving I have been doing (!!) the car needs an oil and filter change.
Anybody else had a similar experience?
 

Attachments

#2,977 ·
Badgerface said:
Wash.FTM said:
Cheers once again. I have told them I will go down the legal route if they so wish and they have responded by saying I will have a definitive answer by the 9th jan.
How have you got on with this? Has the dealer responded definitively within the timescale that they set themselves as they said they would, or not? What solution have they offered you? (Or not as the case may be!)
They have offered to buy back the car at todays price which is not acceptable or exchange it for a petrol version although I would have to contribute an amount towards it as they didn't appear till 2017 and mine is a 2016
 
#2,978 ·
Wash.FTM said:
Badgerface said:
Wash.FTM said:
Cheers once again. I have told them I will go down the legal route if they so wish and they have responded by saying I will have a definitive answer by the 9th jan.
How have you got on with this? Has the dealer responded definitively within the timescale that they set themselves as they said they would, or not? What solution have they offered you? (Or not as the case may be!)
They have offered to buy back the car at todays price which is not acceptable or exchange it for a petrol version although I would have to contribute an amount towards it as they didn't appear till 2017 and mine is a 2016
Just one thing to be aware of as your is a 2016.....the 2016 brochure which is linked on this forum clearly states the vehicle would do 21000 miles without service , saving you inconvenience and money. If you show your dealer you have a copy he may realise he hasn't thought this through. You have an Official JLR brochure that states this for your model year. This then would be misrepresentation by JLR.
 
#2,979 ·
I'd like a bit of advice on my DS oil issue please.

Car is a 2016 16 plate 2.0L now with 29k mikes.

First full service was at 16k
Then intermediadiate oil change at 24k
Second oil change at 28k

All above done foc.

Dealer has admitted oil dilution is the problem

Car is now nearing end of warranty period but my pcp lease has another year to run until March 2020.

I was told today that future oil changes would not be free despite this being an ongoing issue. I have a service plan for 50k miles.

Anybody have any advice on my options? Considered an extended warranty but that doesn't cover design faults or pre existing faults.
 
#2,980 ·
snoopyhaynes said:
I'd like a bit of advice on my DS oil issue please.

Car is a 2016 16 plate 2.0L now with 29k mikes.

First full service was at 16k
Then intermediadiate oil change at 24k
Second oil change at 28k

All above done foc.

Dealer has admitted oil dilution is the problem

Car is now nearing end of warranty period but my pcp lease has another year to run until March 2020.

I was told today that future oil changes would not be free despite this being an ongoing issue. I have a service plan for 50k miles.

Anybody have any advice on my options? Considered an extended warranty but that doesn't cover design faults or pre existing faults.
The "extended service plan" that you took out was basically a fluffed-up pre-purchase agreement for 2 regular services, nominally one at 21K/2 years ("A" service) and one at 42K/4 years ("B" service) plus free DEF top-ups for 5 years. JLRP00100 provides that a vehicle with a service plan which presents with high oil dilution having completed 15,750 or more miles should receive the "A" service, which is then ticked off against the plan. It sounds, therefore, as though this happened and that you've still got the "B" service in the bank, the other services presumably having been carried out under "goodwill" as part of the faulty exhaust campaign documented in the SCN.

JLRP00100 implied that customers with a service plan would continue to receive the goodwill oil changes out to 50,000 miles, although it has to be said that the wording was ambiguous. Forum member castiel109 was told by CRC on June 5th 2018 : "As a Service Plan has been taken out on your vehicle, any oil and filter changes that are required on your vehicle prior to a service will be covered free of charge as a goodwill gesture, providing your vehicle is within its 3 year manufacturer's warranty. Outside of the manufacturers warranty this would need to be assessed on a case by case basis. "

Dealers appear to have different policies with regards to the free oil changes and, because we are entering new ground as the first Ingenium diesels start to reach the end of the 3-year warranty period, to say any more at this stage would be speculation. Good luck.
 
#2,981 ·
Thanks for the message. I'm not that concerned over the extra oil changes, its counter intuitive for me to only change the oil in a car every 20k anyway and I've never had a car that made it full term on services, always 75%ish due to me doing a lot of short journeys.

Mostly concerned over associated engine wear from dilution when out of warranty and whether the finance company will raise the issue when the car goes back in a years time.

Does this issue effect newer DS models, if not then that would indicate that JLR have a fix?
 
#2,982 ·
snoopyhaynes said:
Thanks for the message. I'm not that concerned over the extra oil changes, its counter intuitive for me to only change the oil in a car every 20k anyway and I've never had a car that made it full term on services, always 75%ish due to me doing a lot of short journeys.

Mostly concerned over associated engine wear from dilution when out of warranty and whether the finance company will raise the issue when the car goes back in a years time.

Does this issue effect newer DS models, if not then that would indicate that JLR have a fix?
Oil analysis has raised concerns about progressive damage to engine components such as bearings, ring packs and cylinder liners but it's too early to draw firm conclusions. Dealers (and therefore the finance companies) remain oblivious to any potential threat coming from this direction. However, no-one who has commented on this forum believes that the diesel DS is a long-term keeper, there are just too many risks to the wallet. It is the automotive lady of the night - just enjoy the experience that you have paid for, don't fall in love, don't think about marriage, don't get hurt and take precautions.

After 3 years of stalling by JLR it's now clear that nothing can be done to fix the issue due to the amount of re-engineering required. Thus we continue to have regular reports of 8 month-old 2018 cars hitting the service message at 6,000 to 8,000 miles (scan the Service interval thread) and this will continue at least until the new model appears next year. Watch these pages and around the middle of next year there will be an influx of new Landmark owners popping up who had no idea about this problem when they bought their (otherwise lovely) tax-efficient diesels. They will all be asking the same question: Why is my new car asking for a service before 10,000 miles?

The solution, as mentioned elsewhere, is to buy a petrol and swallow the higher fuel bills. Or vote with your feet, as many others have done.
 
#2,983 ·
I might look at rejecting the vehicle under misrepresentation or poor quality if JLR refuse to cover oil change costs after March - I still have the original 2016 brochure which states the service intervals.

Next step is JLR customer services then legal advice if no joy.
 
#2,984 ·
Iamthemanny said:
hseblack said:
I have recently ordered a DS Landmark for March 2019, I did ask the question should I need an oil change what is the position and the salesmans reply was that as from January 2019 customers will be asked to sign a disclaimer before taking the car off the forecourt. I note the JLR100 amendment and good will gesture and a dealer claims against the warranty, what is the current viewpoint on this topic thanks in anticipation.
I think the good will oil changes must be costing a fortune. Sadly with JLR financial position from last few months it is another cost cutter.

If I could buy again now, I would go petrol due to all tye time I have wasted getting the car serviced every 6 months.

It is sad that they are now forcing customers, to pay for, what appears to be bad engineering which they cannot fix. If they still exist get the service plan. I did not and that has made it harder.

It will be interesting to see what they do when a new model comes out. I would have thought the Disco dport is a high volume seller. But I have no data to back that up.
They can fix the problem or more to the point mitigate the issue so that the engine will go 21K miles till it needs an oil change. They are waiting for a patent to be applied.
 
#2,985 ·
#2,986 ·
Chippy said:
Zedman said:
They can fix the problem or more to the point mitigate the issue so that the engine will go 21K miles till it needs an oil change. They are waiting for a patent to be applied.
This makes interesting reading and I wonder if this is the patent Zedman is referring to.

http://images2.freshpatents.com/imageviewer/20180010501-p20180010501
Appears at first glance from reading the limited text that this is a continuation of existing patent and not new, which would be listed in its own right?
 
#2,987 ·
Chippy said:
This makes interesting reading and I wonder if this is the patent Zedman is referring to.
http://images2.freshpatents.com/imageviewer/20180010501-p20180010501
This appears to be the original patent Pub. No.: US 2016/0230629 A1 which was granted to Jaguar Land Rover (inventor Michael Davies) on Aug. 11, 2016, The grant was based on application PCT/EP2014/069774 submitted 17 September 2014.

View attachment US20160230629A1.pdf

I looks like a smoking gun, equally revealing as JLRP00100. Why? Because this invention represents a conscious attempt to fix every one of the exhaust faults that we've heard that JLR engineers knew would occur with the Ingenium diesel before even a single DS was sold. These are faults that JLR still officially denies while it continues to blame our "driving style". In 2014, someone sat down and designed a radically different exhaust system with a view to avoiding the diesel dilution problem but it never made it into production. According to VDS, engineers who came to inspect his car were prepared to talk freely about this in October 2017, such was the level of their frustration at their management's mishandling of the exhaust design issue.

NoDiscoSport said:
You are right. It's a slow burner but there's something very wrong here and eventually the truth might have to come out. The engineer who came out to my car was very clear in what he told the local service supervisor - this didn't just "happen" in the field and take everyone by surprise. The powertrain engineers knew in advance what would happen due to the consequences of positioning a 3-way catalyst-on-filter device so far back from the engine. He said they told management they needed to shorten the service intervals to 16K, or better still 12K. He said they were told that it would stay at 21K as per the marketing positioning and that they needed to keep working on finding a way to make it work.
https://www.discosportforums.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=7166&start=20
https://www.discosportforums.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=7166&p=78545#p78545
https://www.discosportforums.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=5379&p=79951#p79951

The patent awarded to JLR in 2016 is for a diesel oxidation catalyst (DOC or diesel oxidation and NOx absorption catalyst, DONAC) so tightly coupled to the engine that it is physically incorporated into the exhaust manifold itself! It features a Urea injection port just before the oxidised exhaust gases flow into the turbo-charger, then a very close-coupled DPF/SCR device followed by a tapping for LP EGR before the rest of the system. I've picked out a few paragraphs containing the key words and hi-lighted them for anyone who doesn't want to scan the whole document. When the management told engineers that they "needed to keep working on finding a way to make it work", perhaps this patent represented the solution that they had in mind.

I sincerely hope that this thing eventually works and is compact enough to be retrofitted to every single L550 ever made. But, even if it doesn't, it provides another strong strand of evidence that what has been said all along about the design faults - and JLR's deliberate attempts to hide them - is correct and provable. There's no doubt about the target vehicles for this invention: it had to be the AJ200 diesel Discovery Sport and Range Rover Evoque because these were the only models using, or scheduled to use, SCRF technology at the time.

Circuit component Font Auto part Parallel Circle


[0009] According to an aspect of the present invention there is provided an exhaust treatment apparatus for an internal combustion engine, the apparatus comprising:

[0010] a catalyst chamber containing a catalyst;
[0011] at least one exhaust gas inlet for supplying exhaust gases from the internal combustion engine to the catalyst chamber,
[0012] an exhaust gas outlet for supplying exhaust gases from the catalyst chamber to a turbocharger; and
[0013] an injection nozzle for introducing a reductant into the exhaust gases between the catalyst and the turbocharger.

[0014] At least in certain embodiments, the light-off time of the catalyst can be reduced since it is disposed upstream of the turbocharger. The reductant and exhaust gases flow through the turbocharger together and this can promote evaporation and mixing through the turbocharger. The reductant can be introduced at an earlier point in time from cold start or at lower vehicle speeds. The reductant can, for example, be urea which can operatively be introduced into the flow of exhaust gases in an aqueous liquid form.

[0015] The mixture of reductant and exhaust gases can subsequently be passed through a selective catalytic reduction (SCR) system or a selective catalytic reduction filter (SCRF) system. The apparatus can be configured to make use of existing packaging space within the vehicle to enable closer coupling of downstream after-treatment devices (e.g. cDPF, SCR, SCRF) with light-off and packaging benefits.

[0016] The catalyst can be carried on, or supported by, a substrate (or support structure). The substrate can define the three-dimensional open structure of the catalyst. The substrate can have a three-dimensional porous nature. By way of example, the Substrate can comprise a ceramic foam, a metallic foam or a fibrous structure. The substrate can be fully or partially coated with a catalytic coating (DOC or diesel oxidation and NOx absorption catalyst, DONAC).

[0069] The outlet port 21 is connected to a turbocharger 25 which is driven by the exhaust gases to provide forced induction for the engine 5 in conventional manner. The reductant 23 and exhaust gas are mixed further as they pass through the turbocharger 25. A combined selective catalytic reduction (SCR) and diesel particular filter (DPF) is provided down stream of the turbocharger 25 in the form of a selective catalytic reduction filter (SCRF)29. It will be appreciated that the SCR and the DPF could be provided as separate modules. A low pressure return line 31 is connected downstream of the SCRF 29 to provide low pressure exhaust gas recirculation (LPEGR). A conventional silencer or muffler (not shown) is typically provided downstream of the low pressure return line 31, for example disposed at the rear of the vehicle V. It will be appreciated that not all engines utilise LPEGR and the low pressure return line 31 can be omitted in certain embodimentS.

[0076] The operation of the DOC 3 will now be described with reference to the accompanying Figures. When the engine 5 is initially started, the DOC 3 achieves a light-off (operating) temperature more quickly than conventional catalysts as it is disposed closer to the engine 5. The DOC 3 can thereby begin to perform oxidation more quickly than conventional catalysts. The exhaust gases from the engine 5 are introduced into the exhaust manifold 13 from each cylinder 9A-D through the respective exhaust gas inlets 11A-D. The exhaust gases are introduced into the exhaust manifold 13 in a series of pulses dependent on the operating cycle of each cylinder within the engine 5. These pulses help to circulate the exhaust gases through the substrate 33. The substrate 33 can help to suppress noise radiation from the exhaust manifold 13 caused by the exhaust gas pulses.

[0077] The exhaust gases enter the apertures 41A-D formed in the substrate 33 and then travel through its open pore structure. By positioning the catalyst 35 within the exhaust manifold 13, the required light-off (operating) temperature can be achieved more quickly than conventional catalysts. The catalytic treatment of the exhaust gases can thereby occur over a wider range of operating conditions. The catalyst 35 uses oxygen to convert carbon monoxide (CO) and carbonaceous particulate matter in the exhaust gases to carbon dioxide (CO); and hydrocarbons (HC) in the exhaust gases to water (HO) and CO. The substrate 33 and/or the catalyst 35 can also function to clean exhaust gases prior to recirculation through the high-pressure return line 17. At least Some of the hydrocarbons and particulates in the exhaust gases can be removed within the exhaust manifold 13, thereby helping to reduce the build-up of contaminants in the engine 5, for example on valves, when the exhaust gas is recirculated to the engine 5 through the high-pressure return line 17.

[0078] As outlined above, the reductant 23 is introduced into the mixing chamber second region 39 as a liquid from the injection nozzle 19. For example, the reductant 23 can be an aqueous solution of urea. The reductant 23 is vaporised in the mixing chamber 43 and mixes with the exhaust gases. This arrangement ensures that the reductant 23 is not exposed to catalyst 35 which would potentially promote the formation of nitrogen oxides (NOx). In prior art systems, the reductant 23 is introduced downstream of the turbocharger 25. However, in the present embodiment, the reductant 23 is introduced upstream of the turbocharger 25 resulting in increased mixing with the exhaust gases as they travel through the turbocharger 25. The efficacy of the reductant 23 in removing nitrogen oxides (NOx) on the downstream SCR(F) catalyst from the exhaust gases can potentially be increased. At least in certain embodiments, it is not necessary to provide a separate urea mixer which might otherwise result in an unwanted backpressure increase. Furthermore, the SCRF 29 can be moved closer to the turbocharger 25 as it is not necessary to introduce the reductant 23 into the exhaust gases between these components and allow it to evaporate and mix with the exhaust gas prior to the SCR(F) catalyst.

[0079] The catalyst 35 within the catalyst chamber C may accumulate carbonaceous particulates over a period of time but can be regenerated periodically by employing a conventional regeneration strategy. The exhaust manifold 13 can be an assembly, for example consisting of first and second components, to enable the catalyst 35 to be replaced. Alternatively, the exhaust manifold 13 can have a sealed construction. The catalyst 35 could be formed inside the exhaust manifold 13.

[0080] The SCRF 29 disposed downstream of the turbo-charger 25 functions in conventional manner to convert nitrogen oxides (NOx) in the exhaust gases into nitrogen (N) and water (H2O). During this process, the reductant added upstream of the turbocharger 25 is absorbed onto a catalyst in the SCRF 29. Some of the exhaust gases downstream of the SCRF 29 are recirculated to the internal combustion engine 5 through the low pressure return line 31 in known manner.

[0081] FIGS. 1, 2 and 3 are intended merely to provide schematic representations of the apparatus 1. Notably, the positioning of the apparatus 1 within the vehicle V, as shown in FIG. 2, is not necessarily representative of a production arrangement. A possible arrangement would be to position the SCRF 29 within the engine bay, for example in front of the vehicle dashboard/pedals (not shown).
 

Attachments

#2,988 ·
I can't see them retrofitting the exhaust system of 400K DS (100K cars a year, mainly diesel over the last 4 years?), the cost would be extortionate and much more than the cost of filters and oil for those 'entitled' to it.

I can see it being the exhaust system of the new Evoque and the DS2 however.
 
#2,989 ·
Doesn't the SD4 (240) Powertrain utilise this already?
 
#2,990 ·
My 2018 HSE Sport Black is up for renewal so I have ordered a HSE Sport Landmark Edition unfortunately this is only available in a 180ps diesel auto otherwise a good package. I mentioned about the oil quality/oil dilution scenario and asked if the pre 21,000mls free oil/filter change is still applicable, the reply was that at handover customers are asked to sign a disclaimer and in not doing so would affect the warranty. Over a barrel methinks and an extortionate amount for an oil change £288, as I understand it only JLR can perform this task and delete the warning light which sucks.
 
#2,992 ·
hseblack said:
My 2018 HSE Sport Black is up for renewal so I have ordered a HSE Sport Landmark Edition unfortunately this is only available in a 180ps diesel auto otherwise a good package. I mentioned about the oil quality/oil dilution scenario and asked if the pre 21,000mls free oil/filter change is still applicable, the reply was that at handover customers are asked to sign a disclaimer and in not doing so would affect the warranty. Over a barrel methinks and an extortionate amount for an oil change £288, as I understand it only JLR can perform this task and delete the warning light which sucks.
Do you know what the disclaimer says?
 
#2,994 ·
Iamthemanny said:
Do you know what the disclaimer says?
More seriously, I find out astounding that we've reached the point where a manufacturer has got things so badly wrong that customers have to provide indemnity before they're allowed to buy the product.

I see they're trying to draw a line under their exposure, but perhaps they could do that better by fixing the problem?
 
#2,995 ·
townandcountry said:
Iamthemanny said:
Do you know what the disclaimer says?
More seriously, I find out astounding that we've reached the point where a manufacturer has got things so badly wrong that customers have to provide indemnity before they're allowed to buy the product.

I see they're trying to draw a line under their exposure, but perhaps they could do that better by fixing the problem?
They have a fix, or at least a mitigation to the oil dilution. They are waiting for the patent to be approved.
 
#2,996 ·
Zedman said:
townandcountry said:
Iamthemanny said:
Do you know what the disclaimer says?
More seriously, I find out astounding that we've reached the point where a manufacturer has got things so badly wrong that customers have to provide indemnity before they're allowed to buy the product.

I see they're trying to draw a line under their exposure, but perhaps they could do that better by fixing the problem?
They have a fix, or at least a mitigation to the oil dilution. They are waiting for the patent to be approved.
But if that is just a system to ignore or overide the dilution that will potentially ruin engines.
 
#2,997 ·
Iamthemanny said:
Zedman said:
townandcountry said:
More seriously, I find out astounding that we've reached the point where a manufacturer has got things so badly wrong that customers have to provide indemnity before they're allowed to buy the product.

I see they're trying to draw a line under their exposure, but perhaps they could do that better by fixing the problem?
They have a fix, or at least a mitigation to the oil dilution. They are waiting for the patent to be approved.
But if that is just a system to ignore or overide the dilution that will potentially ruin engines.
It isn't from what I have been told.
 
#2,998 ·
Zedman said:
Iamthemanny said:
Zedman said:
They have a fix, or at least a mitigation to the oil dilution. They are waiting for the patent to be approved.
But if that is just a system to ignore or overide the dilution that will potentially ruin engines.
It isn't from what I have been told.
It seems to be quite a change, moving the CO Catalyst and Urea injection to the engine side of the turbo, allowing the SCRF to be closer (the infamous 'close coupled') to the turbo, which has the added benefit of the turbo mixing the urea with the exhaust gases before hitting the SCRF. The SCRF should be up in the engine bay and hotter meaning no, or less diesel injection required and accordingly less oil dilution. Not sure if it would affect turbo lag however.
 
#2,999 ·
Iamthemanny said:
hseblack said:
My 2018 HSE Sport Black is up for renewal so I have ordered a HSE Sport Landmark Edition unfortunately this is only available in a 180ps diesel auto otherwise a good package. I mentioned about the oil quality/oil dilution scenario and asked if the pre 21,000mls free oil/filter change is still applicable, the reply was that at handover customers are asked to sign a disclaimer and in not doing so would affect the warranty. Over a barrel methinks and an extortionate amount for an oil change £288, as I understand it only JLR can perform this task and delete the warning light which sucks.
Do you know what the disclaimer says?
At time of writing I have no details unfortunately.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top