Service interval

Engine, Exhaust, Drivetrain, ECU Faults and Fixes
Barnsh
Posts: 6845
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 5:20 pm
Location: South East
Has thanked: 159 times
Been thanked: 147 times

Re: Service interval

Post by Barnsh » Thu Mar 14, 2019 1:33 pm

Ian_S wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 8:23 am
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.
If I was a guessing person Bosch will deny it all as was proven when they even went to court.....but lost and were heavily fined in the USA over VW
My18 FPace, 25t, BRG, R Sport, Auto. 18 way mem Seats, ActiveLED, PrivGlass, ICTP, blis, cooled gloves, spare.
MY17 HSE 180 gone
My16.5 DS 180 b pillar tick ~ rejected :oops:
My16 DS 180 ~ rejected :oops:


Barnsh
Posts: 6845
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 5:20 pm
Location: South East
Has thanked: 159 times
Been thanked: 147 times

Re: Service interval

Post by Barnsh » Thu Mar 14, 2019 1:36 pm

Dashnine wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 12:00 pm
Ian_S wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 8:23 am
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. .?
My18 FPace, 25t, BRG, R Sport, Auto. 18 way mem Seats, ActiveLED, PrivGlass, ICTP, blis, cooled gloves, spare.
MY17 HSE 180 gone
My16.5 DS 180 b pillar tick ~ rejected :oops:
My16 DS 180 ~ rejected :oops:


User avatar
Dashnine
Posts: 2801
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2016 10:18 pm
Location: Warwick, UK
Has thanked: 39 times
Been thanked: 87 times

Re: Service interval

Post by Dashnine » Thu Mar 14, 2019 2:19 pm

Barnsh wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 1:36 pm
Dashnine wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 12:00 pm
Ian_S wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 8:23 am
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.
MY19 P240 HSE, Indus Silver, Black Pack, Privacy Glass, 12 Way Memory Seats, Roof Rails, Spacesaver, Cold Climate Pack, 2 x USB in 1st & 2nd rows.
Gone: MY16 D180 HSE Black, Santorini Black


User avatar
Ian_S
Posts: 364
Joined: Thu May 03, 2018 6:53 am
Location: Southern England
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 52 times

Re: Service interval

Post by Ian_S » Thu Mar 14, 2019 3:36 pm

Is it ridiculous though?

Obviously no-one held a gun to JLR's head, however the alternative is somewhat hard to swallow as well.

Let's assume there was no diesel gate, and that the Bosch ECU in question ran the engine to meet all EU6 emissions targets perfectly. In this scenario what we are effectively saying is that the JLR exhaust engineers had all that time to design, test and get into production an architecture that just doesn't work. It didn't just miss it's targets by say 1000 miles, it's massively off. That would have shown up very early on in the design cycle. Early enough to have known that and had enough time to do something about it. Instead we are supposed to then believe that they just went, ah well, we can just cover it up and pretend it's all down to driving style. That same engineering team then leak details in order to highlight just how bad their own design is.

To me that seems more ridiculous.

It seems more likely that what was effectively a last minute, but major change was forced onto them very late in the day, and that JLR were too far down the line to stop as presumably they had also terminated their supply of diesel engines from Ford. So they had only one option which was to get Ingenium out regardless. Unfortunately there was no magic engineering fix, and a rather annoyed engineering arm of JLR have been keen to make details known so they don't get all the blame.

It's a massive co-incidence that other manufacturers than VW have been caught cheating diesel emissions using the same Bosch ECU that VW appear to have developed with Bosch, and that JLR who use the same ECU, but didn't launch their Ingenium engines using this transverse architecture until just a few months after the whole thing erupts, suddenly have a massively under-performing system, that exhibits strong similarities to 'fixed' VW engines...

Had VW not actively engaged in cheating, would Bosch have had a 'clean' diesel ECU to sell to other car manufacturers? Would JLR and others find themselves where they are now? If you'd have had to use the ECU the way it is now, would you have come up with a different solution in the first place?

Someone said JLR don't want to wash their dirty linen in public, but they are doing so, just not in a court of law. But is all the above supposition is actually true, then why not? Being British about it isn't exactly working out well, and if at the root of all this, it's not their fault....

Of course the new Evoque will be very interesting. If that hasn't properly fixed this issue then maybe it is JLR's engineers at fault, as they have known about this for long enough to ensure a heavily revised platform would perform correctly. Other manufacturers have managed it since...)
MY2016 HSE TD4 180


User avatar
PhilMabbots17
Posts: 304
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2017 10:44 am
Has thanked: 22 times
Been thanked: 63 times

Re: Service interval

Post by PhilMabbots17 » Thu Mar 14, 2019 5:05 pm

Ian_S wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 3:36 pm
Is it ridiculous though?

Obviously no-one held a gun to JLR's head, however the alternative is somewhat hard to swallow as well.

Let's assume there was no diesel gate, and that the Bosch ECU in question ran the engine to meet all EU6 emissions targets perfectly. In this scenario what we are effectively saying is that the JLR exhaust engineers had all that time to design, test and get into production an architecture that just doesn't work. It didn't just miss it's targets by say 1000 miles, it's massively off. That would have shown up very early on in the design cycle. Early enough to have known that and had enough time to do something about it. Instead we are supposed to then believe that they just went, ah well, we can just cover it up and pretend it's all down to driving style. That same engineering team then leak details in order to highlight just how bad their own design is.

But what if it went like this.

Well before production, during the later stages of design sign-off, say around March 2014, a big inter-departmental squabble kicks off between Design and Engineering over space for the Ingenium and its closely-coupled DOC-DEF device. Engineers say that it won't fit in to the available space. Design say the lines of the car are set in stone and refuse requests to move the hard-points. The engineers lose the argument and tell management that the L-550 can't launch with Ingenium, therefore the first ones have to go out with the Ford Duratorq. It's only EU5 but that doesn't matter as EU6 isn't mandated for all new vehicles until September 2015. So the engineers, still licking their wounds after losing the battle for space with McGovern, now have two jobs to work on. The first is to complete the installation of the Ford 2.2 which they know is a waste of time because it's going to be replaced just as soon as they can complete job number 2. This is more complicated because they will need a totally new exhaust system, quite unlike any they have produced until this point. Nevertheless, they dutifully set about trying to find a way to make it work. Job 1 delays the shipments of the L-550 Ford until early 2015 and they only manage to get 83, all demonstrators, out the door before the curtain is pulled over calendar 2014. The clock is now ticking loudly for Job No, 2.

We know that JM's SCRF coatings were brand new and still being actively sold during 2014 with headline-grabbing claims about SCRF being quicker to warm up than conventional SCR systems - provided that it's fitted in a "closely-coupled" configuration. The chemistry looks promising but the architecture still presents a problem as McGovern's Design team aren't prepared to concede an inch of space, so the engineers get their pencils and slide-rules out again and come up with what we have now. It's not perfect but it works, provided that it's used with EDC17 and its infamous "special features". Mmmmm… yep, and you know what guys? Not only is this design elegant and clean enough to pass the emissions tests, but it can actually go all the way to 21,000 miles if it's run the right way with a bit of help from Bosch. No dieselgate at this stage. So the brochures are printed, the extended service interval suddenly becomes a major selling point and everything in the garden looks rosy. The fleet buyers are drooling as they line up with their chequebooks.

Then, Holy Shit! 18th September 2015 happens and the automotive world rocks on its foundations. Some of the SCRF cars have already escaped into the wild, but they can't afford to let any more out. So that day all shipments of Evoques and Discovery Sports is suddenly and inexplicably stopped. And it stays that way for another 2 months. Then Wham!! Half way through the following year, the first cars start yelling out for an oil change service at 8,910 miles.....

....pick up the trail of what happened next on page 1.

It's all speculation, naturally. But when you look back through the evidence there's nothing to contradict this version of history.
2019 (19) TBA 8-)
2017 (66) Mercedes GLC 220d 4Matic Sport
2017 (17) Land Rover DS HSE 2.0L (Rejected)


User avatar
Ian_S
Posts: 364
Joined: Thu May 03, 2018 6:53 am
Location: Southern England
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 52 times

Re: Service interval

Post by Ian_S » Thu Mar 14, 2019 6:28 pm

I think the reason that maybe wasn't the way it happened is that the solution had to also fit the existing Evoque. That was already set in stone and not a new car like the Discovery Sport. If there was no room in the Evoque then the DS would have to follow...

Interestingly on the new Evoque there is presumably even less room in the engine bay as there is now an electric motor attached to the engine crankshaft.
MY2016 HSE TD4 180


Rob1976
Posts: 3
Joined: Sun Apr 21, 2019 5:53 pm
Has thanked: 2 times

Re: Service interval

Post by Rob1976 » Sun Apr 21, 2019 6:08 pm

Hi, just wondering how you can tell (easily) whether or not the DS has these fixes - N289 etc - apples or not?

My DS has always suffered from calling for an early oil service, in my two years since taking delivery it has consistantly been every 6 months each time needing an oil and filter change. The first time it happend they actually said to me it was oil dilution issue from the factory.

It’s going in next week for it’s first (2 year) service hence why I’d like to check what software versions it has.

Thanks


User avatar
Ian_S
Posts: 364
Joined: Thu May 03, 2018 6:53 am
Location: Southern England
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 52 times

Re: Service interval

Post by Ian_S » Mon Apr 22, 2019 7:50 am

There's no easy way of telling, apart from creating yourself a topix account and seeing if there's any outstanding service actions against your car for these updates. I hesitate to call them fixes as they increase the oil dilution threshold from 6.1% to 10% which will make services seem like they're required less often but won't change the rate of dilution build up unless they have found some other tricks to help reduce it.

These updates will get applied when the car is at at the dealer for its service.
MY2016 HSE TD4 180


Past master
Posts: 1128
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2016 5:30 pm
Location: Isle of Ely
Has thanked: 24 times
Been thanked: 39 times

Re: Service interval

Post by Past master » Mon Apr 22, 2019 11:11 am

I'm not sure that increasing the threshold is all it does. My car seems much more "driveable" after the update - I get the impression it has also set the engine to rev a bit higher - ie change gear earlier, which might have been done to affect emissions. Could be I'm imagining it.
MY16 SETech 180 diesel Santorini Black


Rob1976
Posts: 3
Joined: Sun Apr 21, 2019 5:53 pm
Has thanked: 2 times

Re: Service interval

Post by Rob1976 » Wed Apr 24, 2019 5:41 pm

Thanks guys, might call them before it goes in next week and ask them to prove that N289 has been applied to the car. Otherwise I can see the car having to go back in again for another oil change in 6 months time.

Worried that although I have a service plan, and to date any oil change has been covered under warranty, next time they will try and charge me for it 🙁


Post Reply

Return to “Engine and Drivetrain”