Discovery Sport Forum banner

SSM73697

49K views 82 replies 16 participants last post by  DiskoSport17 
#1 ·
#52 ·
They have a quality issue ( in that specific DPFs with FB in the number) are not operating correctly with the control software.

It's a defective componant.

Some people will notice it through the lights , others will be blissfully unaware.

JLR won't change the defective components on those that don't notice it.

There ..,, that sums it up too :)
 
#83 ·
They have a quality issue ( in that specific DPFs with FB in the number) are not operating correctly with the control software.

It's a defective componant.

Some people will notice it through the lights , others will be blissfully unaware.

JLR won't change the defective components on those that don't notice it.

There ..,, that sums it up too :)
I know it is an old thread but still relevant to me as I've just found out about SSM73697 and my car (MY17 bought about 18 months ago) falls into the vehicles affected and the last 2 digits of the part code of my SCRF are "FB". I've experienced loads of amber DPF warning message and a few Red DPF warning message too since I got the car. I've only managed to avoid those warning lights recently by getting a diagnostic tool (Autel MAXICOM MK808) for monitoring the soot mass (g/m3) so I can be pro-active about active DPF regens. I mentioned about my faulty SCRF to both the dealership where I got my car from and my local JLR who have changed my oil recently. Both say that SSM73697 is now inactive so local JLR can't do anything about it, and the dealership say the only way this would be covered is potentially through good will if Land Rover wish to support, which would mean having the car booked for a diagnostic in their workshop, which would be chargeable if JLR does not wish to support. Not sure it is worth going that route if JLR does not wish to support, I'd be wasting money. The dealership is trying to help but looks like JLR will have the final say. So JLR identified a fault with some SCRF and because the SSM is now inactive I'm not entitled to get it repaired whilst it's a Quality issue which is 100% JLR fault! You seem very knowledgeable on the subject, any advice you could give? Thanks.
 
#53 ·
Interesting point in their bulletin examples .....

Examples that may lead to it
" manual transmission" ???

Anyone any thoughts why a manual transmission is more suceptable than an auto ?
 
G
#54 ·
Yeah I wondered that as well Barnsh - if I was driving a manual I suspect I'd be revving it higher than the auto (which seems intent on hanging onto the highest possible gear at all cost). Unless they're saying the higher revs generate more guff which coke the "DPF" (sic!) quicker? An odd one
 
#55 ·
Barnsh said:
Interesting point in their bulletin examples .....

Examples that may lead to it
" manual transmission" ???

Anyone any thoughts why a manual transmission is more suceptable than an auto ?
I'd assumed it was because you can change up earlier in the manual at lower revs, whereas the auto hangs on a little later generally. Agree that the auto will stay in the higher gear longer, but I imagine with the torque of the engine plus manual you can whip up through the gears while keeping the revs low (and the exhaust cool).
 
#57 ·
Barnsh said:
JLR won't change the defective components on those that don't notice it.

There ..,, that sums it up too :)
It doesn't make it right but that is completely standard practice in the automotive business.
And for that matter in other areas of business as well.
 
#58 ·
Dashnine said:
Barnsh said:
Interesting point in their bulletin examples .....

Examples that may lead to it
" manual transmission" ???

Anyone any thoughts why a manual transmission is more suceptable than an auto ?
I'd assumed it was because you can change up earlier in the manual at lower revs, whereas the auto hangs on a little later generally. Agree that the auto will stay in the higher gear longer, but I imagine with the torque of the engine plus manual you can whip up through the gears while keeping the revs low (and the exhaust cool).
I pondered that , I guess JLR will put that down to driving style , :lol: :x :lol:
It just seemed such a bizarre inclusion in their list .....what about paddle shifters :shock:
One crazy half hearted doc with no substance.
 
#59 ·
Chippy said:
Barnsh said:
JLR won't change the defective components on those that don't notice it.

There ..,, that sums it up too :)
It doesn't make it right but that is completely standard practice in the automotive business.
And for that matter in other areas of business as well.
Yep,
But the point some may miss , is the software control of the SCRF is limited to reading pressure across it to detect full soot loading ( also % of soot amount is gained) from these two sensors either side of the box. We know that 36% full of soot is the trigger for active regeneration, we know over 80% full of soot is a dealer regeneration .

So everyone with this substandard, poor quality , faulty ( which ever one you want to call it ) box IS affected to some degree when doing short runs as part if their "mixed driving " style. Just because we don't see the light does not mean we are unaffected to some degree.

This FB marked box is being replaced with another box which will fix the issue for some not all , and that has to be cost .

Whilst I'm still helping some one reject over faulty DPF, they never saw the light as per this document Although the code was registered.( happened last July ....yes long drawn out fight)
Further engineering input from JLR about this vehicle , when pushed into a corner , they then diagnosed the light was only available to be seen for 2.1 seconds , JLR immediately changed tack and agreed to pay for the DPF replacement as good will. They stated "they could not expect a driver to be able to see this light due to its short duration of illumination'. This precedes this document by 6 months . But this document is now submitted as part of their case.

People that are unaware of this SMM are very much at the hands if the dealer network . Will they be charged £1500 and told it's their driving style or will the dealer find this document?
 
G
#60 ·
Bottom line I think is that we're all speculating here because none of us actually know - and that's simply down to JLR's continued reluctance to be completely open and to obfuscate. If ever there was a lesson in how to hack off a swathe of people who effectively contribute to paying their wages..... Quite simply so many of us are now so hacked off with this charade I wonder whether (m)any of us will believe anything JLR now say and consider investing with them again?
 
#61 ·
weemark said:
Bottom line I think is that we're all speculating here because none of us actually know - and that's simply down to JLR's continued reluctance to be completely open and to obfuscate. If ever there was a lesson in how to hack off a swathe of people who effectively contribute to paying their wages..... Quite simply so many of us are now so hacked off with this charade I wonder whether (m)any of us will believe anything JLR now say and consider investing with them again?
Here, here!

I for one am certainly on my last LR
 
#62 ·
Chippy said:
weemark said:
Bottom line I think is that we're all speculating here because none of us actually know - and that's simply down to JLR's continued reluctance to be completely open and to obfuscate. If ever there was a lesson in how to hack off a swathe of people who effectively contribute to paying their wages..... Quite simply so many of us are now so hacked off with this charade I wonder whether (m)any of us will believe anything JLR now say and consider investing with them again?
Here, here!

I for one am certainly on my last LR
Yep not much else we can do though.
It's pretty obvious by the quantity of possibly affected vehicles that this isn't a bad batch!

Unless they have a massive DPF store
 
#65 ·
Chippy said:
There is always something else one can do - sell ones DS for instance. Sound familiar? ;)
True but it also goes along with the old mouse or man proverb .

We can all walk away quietly , or we can kick up a stink on the way :lol:

Remember sending the photographs of the b pillars chisel destruction to mr Speth and Hicks by a few members did result in the chiselling of seams being stoped and changed to a "wiggle" with pliers.
 
#70 ·
Hi, Jist wanted to thank you guys for this thread. It's definitely a very important piece of information. My nightmare stories are posted at the "Restricted Performance" thread. And a very big thank you to Barnsh who made sense of the numbers in this SSM (would anyone know what SSM mean???- I'm guessing "M"is memorandum?).

No wonder I am in deep mess, my VIN is right smack in the middle 688###. The faults are not mine/ the drivers... it's "a quality flaw"and its expected to fail.

The diagnosis was done sometime 12December though the report that they forwarded to us was dated 9 January. I wonder if this valuable info (especially no. 5, on retailer's action "if any repairs are carried out, please book to warranty" was even considered at all? Hmmm, I guess Barnsh had a good foresight when she said it will all boil down to them saying it's "driver's fault." That's their convenient excuse to make us shoulder the repair on an already rejected car (first breakdown 28 days after purchase- then 3 more after that).

Again, thanks.
 
#71 ·
MMAA101 said:
Hi, Jist wanted to thank you guys for this thread. It's definitely a very important piece of information. My nightmare stories are posted at the "Restricted Performance" thread. And a very big thank you to Barnsh who made sense of the numbers in this SSM (would anyone know what SSM mean???- I'm guessing "M"is memorandum?).

No wonder I am in deep mess, my VIN is right smack in the middle 688###. The faults are not mine/ the drivers... it's "a quality flaw"and its expected to fail.

The diagnosis was done sometime 12December though the report that they forwarded to us was dated 9 January. I wonder if this valuable info (especially no. 5, on retailer's action "if any repairs are carried out, please book to warranty" was even considered at all? Hmmm, I guess Barnsh had a good foresight when she said it will all boil down to them saying it's "driver's fault." That's their convenient excuse to make us shoulder the repair on an already rejected car (first breakdown 28 days after purchase- then 3 more after that).

Again, thanks.
Hi it's a great crowd on here and we all do try to get to the bottom of things, sometimes successfully and sometimes not.

The SSM is Special Service Message, it went clean out of my head the other night :roll:
I do hope they find you are affected by this and they do the right thing and foot the bill.

PS
I've never heard of someone paying a repair bill on a car they have already successfully rejected , and especially on the very componant it was successfully rejected for.

Fingers crossed for you
 
#72 ·
Sorry me again, just checking.

As the codes for engine warning lights were included in here. Would anyone know if there's a code that should register if the DPF has regenerated or cleared? I am wondering cause I did drive the car as prescribed (40miles for 20mins-I did 35mins, as registered on the remote app). I definitely saw it light up green saying it was regenerating and then cleared. But service is saying that from amber light we drove it for 208miles whilst it's on. Then The next fault code was red/limp mode, Really? Given our history I don't think a car with amber warning can even be driven as far as 208miles.

The weird bit is, it turned yellow then turned red several minutes after. So being undriveable, we had JLR Road Assist/AA loaded it up and delivered to service.

Is it right that it might have not registered because they are just looking for fault codes? And regeneration and clearing isn't a fault.

=====
I don't know if it's connected, but we often see outside temp registering below freezing even if it was summer (-30s), and a couple of times referring to obstruction to front cameras - and we definitely don't have a front camera (hahaha, not unless they set up extra features I didn't pay for). I mentioned this to the service advisor who handled our first 3 DPF issues. We even booked a service date to have it checked, but it seemed to clear o it's own, so we cancelled it. Unfortunately, that brilliant Service Adviser has resigned a week before the 4th DPF nightmare.
 
#73 ·
MMAA101 said:
=====
I don't know if it's connected, but we often see outside temp registering below freezing even if it was summer (-30s), and a couple of times referring to obstruction to front cameras - and we definitely don't have a front camera (hahaha, not unless they set up extra features I didn't pay for). I mentioned this to the service advisor who handled our first 3 DPF issues. We even booked a service date to have it checked, but it seemed to clear o it's own, so we cancelled it. Unfortunately, that brilliant Service Adviser has resigned a week before the 4th DPF nightmare.
The negative temperatures in summer was caused by the ambient temp sensor, there is now a fix for this.
The camera issue you are seeing is because of the forward facing cameras for Autonomous Emergency Braking system . Everyone has those cameras they are mounted at the top of the screen behind the rear view mirtor. They have to be clear of first Frost or condensation to work properly.

I don't think and wouldn't expect there's a fault code for the green light on clearing the DPF as it's not a fault , perhaps someone else can confirm this ?
 
#74 ·
Thanks Barnsh, but they should somehow be able to track a regeneration, right? What am I saying, they can't even track an amber light before turning red 🙄.

I've rung an independent JLR Specialist technician to inquire about some issues. He said it is odd to hear a conclusion of "Diver's fault" on a car that's been declared with faulty DPF. Not even encountered a 250mile threshold to come up with such a conclusion. Moreover, he is aware that there is a design and technical issue with DS Sport 17MY.

How come it's a fact to others but JLR seems not to know? 😡

====
DS HSE MY17 - Kaikoura Brown, Black Alloy, Climate Control Pack, rejected since AUG but still paying for it and using a car hire
 
#75 ·
MMAA101 said:
Thanks Barnsh, but they should somehow be able to track a regeneration, right? What am I saying, they can't even track an amber light before turning red 🙄.

I've rung an independent JLR Specialist technician to inquire about some issues. He said it is odd to hear a conclusion of "Diver's fault" on a car that's been declared with faulty DPF. Not even encountered a 250mile threshold to come up with such a conclusion. Moreover, he is aware that there is a design and technical issue with DS Sport 17MY.

How come it's a fact to others but JLR seems not to know? 😡

====
DS HSE MY17 - Kaikoura Brown, Black Alloy, Climate Control Pack, rejected since AUG but still paying for it and using a car hire
They can track the last regeneration, it shows when they connect to the vehicle .
They can see how many of the previous generations were successful too.

The 250 mile regeneration is set by the vehicle. If it has not successfully regenerated during recent runs it initiates one approximately every 250 miles. This is in the document on how the regeneration of the DS works which is on the forum somewhere already.

We know there is a "design and technical issue " by referring to JLRP00100 where it advises of increased regenerations due to "hardware and rechnical differences" from other JLR vehicles. This I suspect is perhaps what your Independant specialist is referring to.

Anyvway you should here back from your dealer about the SMM shortly, also from the FSA Ombudsman who seems to be on your side.,
 
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