[Dashnine]

Just to emphasise a couple of important points in Mamil's post. It takes 10 to 15 minutes for the first post injection phase, associated with retarded ignition, to increase the DPF temperature to 580 degrees. Then, as the reproduced text clearly says, this temperature must be maintained for at least a further 20 minutes. The total regeneration process takes a minimum of 30 to 35 minutes to complete, not 20. This is from the 15 May 2015 document which forms part of the workshop manual and JLR00100.

All this time, post injection is being applied inside the cylinders. Post injection is the ONLY process that causes the dilution, nothing else. When the journey stops prematurely, as statistically it must do twice as often now, because of this faulty exhaust design, post injection STOPS. Anyone still not getting this? When the journey stops - the oil dilution stops. This might be something to recall the next time you hear or read that short journeys and stopping during regeneration causes oil dilution due to a pool of excess diesel "running down" into the sump. Utter codswallop.

For what it's worth...
I have actual recorded data proof of at least 4 regens that lasts about 20-25 minutes.

I think that's what VDS says, he is saying your total journey needs to be at least 30-35 minutes to allow time for the engine to warm up before the regen can trigger.

 

[Dashnine]

https://www.landrover.co.uk/offers-and-finance/ved.html

TBH I was hoping for a bit more than 'it's going up to £960'. What was the emissions, old vs new, what was the old tax rate, isn't it a band lower as the DS is now RDE2 compliant so isn't penalised, etc.

Apparently the 'up to £960' means tax is going up by a figure of 'up to' an additional £960, not that the tax is 'up to' a flat £960. Lovely phrasing there.

 

[Dashnine]

Yep and everything he said is true, now with the new ved rates from April 2020 buying a JLR just doesn't make any sense at all :lol: as somebody has posted they are to little to late and rushing to catch up they make mistakes.

Anyone care top summarise the 2020 changes in VED for the various DS models / engines as a result of changing to WLTP from NEDC emissions figures?

I've Googled around but have failed miserably! All the LR and dealer sites say 'avoid by buying before April', but not what I'd be saving.

 

[Dashnine]

It's often been said that all EU6 diesels suffer from oil dilution, reduced service intervals and other problems associated with driving style. To see whether this is true I went to Google and entered the following search: diesel fio dilution eu6 service interval.

The top ten responses include nine related to current Jaguar Land Rover products. Google's "Related searches" also suggested that I might want to search on:

discovery oil dilution issue
range rover sport oil dilution
evoque oil dilution
discovery sport oil dilution
2.0 ingenium engine problems
velar oil dilution
land rover discovery forum
ingenium engine oil dilution

Not just a JLR issue then.

I'm not sure that's an entirely valid 'experiment', given your likely previous search history unless you'd cleared all cookies and ran an anonymous browser session?

 

[Dashnine]

I guess they key question is why do you feel 6% 'safe' and 10% isn't?

Actually I would prefer no diesel dilution but this is the cost of driving a diesel in 2019. 6% has been used on the XE since 2015 and that car doesn't need N289 because, unlike the DS, it actually works as designed and advertised. The SCN said more than 6% FIO risked engine failure. Going to 10% is a compromise commercial decision - high enough to avoid a few more early oil changes, but not high enough to cause JLR to run out of replacement engines. Any fool knows that increasing oil dilution erodes the MTBF margins - I just don't want mine eroded any further than they are already.

I hear fuel in oil dilution is practically zero on a petrol.

SIM Message.PNG

The point I was trying to make (badly), is that the same people who said 6% was safe are now saying 10% is safe. Is this a financially led increase, or an Engineering led increase.

And yes, I'm hoping for low levels of oil dilution on my P240.....

 

[Dashnine]

I guess they key question is why do you feel 6% 'safe' and 10% isn't?

 

[Dashnine]

I wonder what differences the PTA platform has I've the D8 platform...

Waiting for someone to get under there with a camera (relying on you CG), or someone new to the forum with a MY20 complains about an early service required notification!

 

[Dashnine]

I think your usage is likely to keep you clear of oil dilution. I am on my second DS,; did 60,000 miles in the first and already 13, 000 in the second and no issues. I do oil change every 10-11,000 anyway as good practice!.

How will he be clear of oil dilution? There will still be active regens meaning oil dilution, albeit with perhaps fewer restarted regens. You'll have had active regens and dilution too, but changing the oil at means no long term damage (which is what I assume you mean by no issues).

 

[Dashnine]

:evil: Written confirmation received from JLR Engineering via CRC that the AJ200D diesels will now be allowed to run with up to 10% fuel-in-oil dilution before the Service Required message appears in the IC:

After speaking with our technical and engineering team, I can confirm that N289 is a software update for early service. It's primary function is to increase the oil dilution range from 6% to 10%.

At this moment in time I have no further information.

Dan - Land Rover UK

Thanks for posting this, Disco in for 2 year service this morning and I politely asked about N289 on the paperwork, service rep went to ask and came back to say it does not change the dilution limit. I smiled politely and left, but followed up with an email to confirm in writing their statement that it does not change the dilution limit.

In 2017 JLR Engineering said (JLRP00100) that there would be severe consequences for any of its engines that were exposed to diesel dilution in excess of 6%:

"1. Continued vehicle operation with high oil dilution will result in engine failure."

"2. Engineering has identified a population of vehicles with oil dilution at 6% or greater. If these vehicles continue to run without an oil change, there is a further risk of engine damage. These customers are to be proactively notified of the action via letter."

Is this text from JLPR00100? I could not see it just now, it would be useful to know the source in case I need to quote it later. :roll:

Given the DPF is constantly trying to cycle (it appears to me), and that JLR want me to take on the cost of their design issue I am not so happy to put it politely

First quote: JLRP00100 Page 1, Issue 2, Early Service due to Oil Dilution.

Second quote: JLRP00100 Page 3, Actions Required, N020.

I wouldn't rely on a dealer knowing what the content of the update is, they will probably only see the description LR gives on the software, e.g. something like 'Powertrain Control Module Update'. It's a bit like asking Sainsburys which country Heinz got their beans from - says made in the UK on the tin.....

 

[Dashnine]

I wouldn't put it beyond LR to come up with a method of stopping us from resetting the oil service..

I thought they already had - the doors / bonnet procedure resets the main service counter, the oil service counter can only be reset via the LR workshop diagnostic system.

 

[Dashnine]

To be honest I don't see any point asking your dealer about this, it's neither their fault, or within their power to answer it.

We will never get JLR to admit in writing something that will legally put them in an awkward position. We know most of it.

The only thing in my mind that doesn't stack up is how JLR engineering could come up with a solution that got as far as making production that didn't work. I'm sure they are not that bad.

The more likely reason it doesn't work is because thanks to VW/Bosch, the system they had designed and tested could not be used in its intended form, and suddenly they had to use the ECU operating without any cheats going on. This is kind of verified by the DS actually coming out as meeting emission targets in independent testing.

The real blame here lies with VW/Bosch. Personally I think JLR should sue them to recover the costs and if they wanted to make us happy, also the cost of properly fixing it. But that's unlikely to happen.

There's still time for JLR to drop service schedules to something more reasonable, and also publish testing results to back that up, in terms of oil dilution % vs. engine wear, which would be the open and honest thing to do. They could also be honest, and if legally can get away with it make it clear where the blame lies, and encourage people to consider that when making their next purchase. I don't see why they should play nice here, VW haven't. Might even boost their sales in the UK and non-German countries.

There may be the odd libellous phrase in the 'speculation' above - be careful, use questions rather than statements.... it's not just you, it's the forum owner and possibly mods as well who'd be held responsible.

I can't imagine JLR would want their moment of glory in court over such a topic, but lawyers are lawyers!

Agree , but I very much doubt JLR would be happy to drag their dirty washing into a court room for all to see. .?

As I said.

 

[Dashnine]

To be honest I don't see any point asking your dealer about this, it's neither their fault, or within their power to answer it.

We will never get JLR to admit in writing something that will legally put them in an awkward position. We know most of it.

The only thing in my mind that doesn't stack up is how JLR engineering could come up with a solution that got as far as making production that didn't work. I'm sure they are not that bad.

The more likely reason it doesn't work is because thanks to VW/Bosch, the system they had designed and tested could not be used in its intended form, and suddenly they had to use the ECU operating without any cheats going on. This is kind of verified by the DS actually coming out as meeting emission targets in independent testing.

The real blame here lies with VW/Bosch. Personally I think JLR should sue them to recover the costs and if they wanted to make us happy, also the cost of properly fixing it. But that's unlikely to happen.

There's still time for JLR to drop service schedules to something more reasonable, and also publish testing results to back that up, in terms of oil dilution % vs. engine wear, which would be the open and honest thing to do. They could also be honest, and if legally can get away with it make it clear where the blame lies, and encourage people to consider that when making their next purchase. I don't see why they should play nice here, VW haven't. Might even boost their sales in the UK and non-German countries.

There may be the odd libellous phrase in the 'speculation' above - be careful, use questions rather than statements.... it's not just you, it's the forum owner and possibly mods as well who'd be held responsible.

I can't imagine JLR would want their moment of glory in court over such a topic, but lawyers are lawyers!

 

[Dashnine]

"Engineering work" doesn't necessarily mean on end user vehicles, could be rig / vehicle work within LR simulating oil dilution over high mileages.

It's a new engine as we know, and we believe oil dilution has probably been known in LR for almost as long as it's been in the cars. If we assume testing has been taking place since then, after several years there's a point when positive test results could allow changes to the dilution thresholds.

Speculation, of course.....

Jaguar Land Rover Plc
Ingenium will also come to market as one of the most tested and proven Jaguar Land Rover engines ever. Before the first Ingenium engine is sold, it will have already undergone the equivalent of more than eight years of the toughest, most punishing testing that Jaguar Land Rover engineers could devise. These tests include a huge range of integrity and durability testing, including more than 72,000 hours of dyno testing and 2 million miles of real-world testing to ensure these engines deliver - and continue to deliver.

No need to waste any more engineering money when they had 500,000 eager owners to do it for them!

I think its more likely that they just looked at the total number of DPF, EGR, crankshaft, turbo charger, balancer shaft and whole engine failures that two years of completely unchecked dilution had produced (18% to 20% I think GLLR said)…. let their bean counters do the sums and then just chose the cheapest option. More speculation of course....

Feel free to trawl the forum for examples, but haven't a lot of balance shaft failures been on newish cars, before oil dilution could strike? A lot of DPF failures were due to the faulty batch and EGR, crankshaft and turbo failures have hardly been rife either. And I think we've heard of one whole engine failure with 11.25 litres of fluid in the sump, the extra 5 litres was hardly likely to have been due to oil dilution alone.

Here I go again speculating, but I wouldn't say there have been a lot of mechanical failures (yet) due to oil dilution, but by all means carry on LR bashing.

 

[Dashnine]

"Engineering work" doesn't necessarily mean on end user vehicles, could be rig / vehicle work within LR simulating oil dilution over high mileages.

It's a new engine as we know, and we believe oil dilution has probably been known in LR for almost as long as it's been in the cars. If we assume testing has been taking place since then, after several years there's a point when positive test results could allow changes to the dilution thresholds.

Speculation, of course.....

 

[Dashnine]

Maybe, just maybe LR have been testing with a durability or rig program and have found that going up to 10% dilution is something the engine can handle up to its intended lifecycle.

The problem is, no-one knows outside LR one way or another and all people outside LR can do is speculate.

(Body armour is on, and I'm in my bunker ready for the anti LR assault....)

 

[Dashnine]

No problems on the FPace ingenium diesel , no driving style issues , they are getting the 21k mikes before service ( not sure that's wise though ) , no early service warnings , no DPF issues .

Different SCRF layout , exact same engine.

Yes, but what's ECU's distance between active regen setting? Or, the average distance between active cycles on those models? It can't be the same as the DS else drivers of these vehicles would be suffering similar numbers of failed active regenerations too. (as we are all agreeing there is no difference in driving style... at this point)

The regen isn't calculated by mileage, it's initiated due to the amount of soot in the filter. The numbers on the forum somewhere, 0.3 (1.0 being blocked) being the trigger (from memory) and is measured by pressure before and after the filter.

That's why it can go at varying intervals depending on what you've been doing previously (i.e. driving style) and it doesn't matter if you've just been blasting down the motorway.

 

[Dashnine]

Self-cleaning in these cases means Active Regeneration, using diesel to burn the soot in the exhaust filter.

But the car should also be self-cleaning passively, burning some of the soot when it gets hot enough 'naturally' - but it never does because the filter's under the car in the cold airstream, not nice and hot in the engine bay.

Hence more Active Regenerations, more fuel used (appalling fuel economy tank to tank) and more oil dilution than planned or in the longitudinal installations of the same engine.

 

[Dashnine]

Apologies if this appears twice as I submitted similar message but it has not appeared.

My oil service was done last Monday and at the same time balancer shafts replaced. The Service warning appeared just before the shafts squealed.
After this work I checked and the screen told me I would need another oil service in 4500.
Has the interval been shortened yet again? Or is this evidence of an admission that dilution is causing engine damage?

What was the Oil Service warning showing before the oil was changed? Maybe they have forgotten to reset the warning?

 

[Dashnine]

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.

 

[Dashnine]

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.