 | Home > Puma (Tdci) > MY2011/2012 Recall Action P047/048 Front Axle Case |
 
|
|
|
| blackwolf Member Since: 03 Nov 2009 Location: South West England Posts: 17372   
|
Plenty of good engineering info and explanation online, Google is your friend.
Eg http://www.boltscience.com/pages/vibloose.htm |
||
24th Dec 2014 1:09pm |
|
| landybehr Member Since: 17 Apr 2013 Location: -D- Posts: 173 |
Many thanks for that !! I love to look into these details, really!
Now as just changed my mind, there: http://www.boltscience.com/pages/Why_nuts_...loosen.pdf was this :  |
||
|
26th Dec 2014 12:29am |
|
| Marius Member Since: 21 Dec 2010 Location: South Africa Posts: 231  
|
Had mine done today. I was in the vin range to get a new axle case but in the end when I collected they only did the bracket and explained that's what the system told them to do....
|
||
|
12th Jan 2015 2:32pm |
|
| icelandic Member Since: 17 Dec 2013 Location: Passau Posts: 4 
|
Hello together,
I have a problem with my Defender MY 2011 and so, my car is in the workshop at the moment. I got the information with the recall actions P047 and P048. Then my dealer was in contact with LR Germany. They gave him the information that the German cars are not affected.... with P047. I checked the serial number again - and LR informed me that noz all vehicles are affected. So I have to send them the next E Mail - please give me a detailed answer regarding MY car and MY serial number. My serial number is SALLDHMS8BA403680. Another E Mail from JLR England came back with the information: Not all cars with the serial numbers are affected. Your car is in germany and the P047 is not necessary on your car. The P048 have to be done. I am a quality engineer - and I can not accept such an answer from a vehicle manufacturer. I told JLR that this is an safety issue with the P047. My vehicle looks to be in the P047 and in the P048. The P048 looks for me (as already written here in this thread before) - that it is a cheap modification from LR. I wold them they should send me an official statement - regarding my serial number that my car is not affected and no welding seals can break. For me it is really unbelievable, that there can brake the flange of the axle and they built a bracket under the axle and say - all is ok now. I want to get an official statement from LR, that no more safety risk will be on my vehicle - only with the P048. I really can not understand what will happen when the flange brakes away from the axle... I hope this will never happen - but - when it happens - then I want to have the statement from JLR - that this is no more a critical safety issue after the action P048 with this brackets. because I can not believe that this bracket will beware for bigger damages when the welding seal and teh flange will brake... Click image to enlarge Click image to enlarge Does anybody of you already have a better statement from Land Rover in this case? For me this situation is really unbelievable. A critical service risk and they built a bracket under the axle.... Thats really crazy and for me it is really not acceptable, because such a safety issue - this makes me nervous. It is not a recall from leaking door seals..... There can something brake in the axle... I do really hope, that there will not happen any accidence where person will be affected and hurt. Thanks for your help! A L E X and Nanook |
||
|
19th Jan 2015 12:49pm |
|
| Supacat Member Since: 16 Oct 2012 Location: West Yorkshire Posts: 11018 
|
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/l...s-28803026
Interesting comparison story on a recall up to 74,648 Range Rovers because one or both front brake hoses could rupture, causing the loss of braking fluid. "According to a history posted by the safety regulators, Jaguar Land Rover first investigated the brake hoses in November 2010 after dealers noticed bulges in the hoses. The case was closed in June 2012 because of the sporadic nature of ruptured hoses and the lack of reports of accidents or injuries." So JLR knew about the issue but decided to take a passive approach - what could be more safety critical than the front brakes 
Ask yourself the question what would you think of a person who told you they had bulging brake hoses but had decided to do nothing about it? |
||
|
9th Feb 2015 10:01am |
|
| Supacat Member Since: 16 Oct 2012 Location: West Yorkshire Posts: 11018
|
http://www.slashgear.com/2015-land-rovers-...-04372144/
"the lug nuts on select recently manufactured 2015 Land Rovers could crack and come apart from the bolt, the result of which could cause the wheel to detach and the car to crash." OK small numbers involved but article actually makes the point "The fix is a simple and obvious one -- once owners are notified, they'll be able to take their vehicle to the dealership where the lug nuts will be replaced with new ones. The recall isn't expected to start until April 17, however, which is an uncomfortable duration for driving around on potentially faulty lug nuts." |
||
|
5th Mar 2015 9:19am |
|
| Caterham Member Since: 06 Nov 2008 Location: Birmingham Posts: 6298  
|
not taken mine in yet for the recall.....
nervous they'll brake something else while there .....plus can't help but think this is a shockingly poor reaction to such a critical item? hay ho....perhaps they can advise on my knocking noise??  |
||
|
12th May 2015 7:29am |
|
| clutch Member Since: 19 Mar 2011 Location: Cape Town Posts: 8 
|
Hello Regard and ALL - first post so be gentle!! 1. LRSA contacted me today 18 Sept 2015 - to inform me of P048 recall 2. Ok onto defender2.net - to see the real story! 3. Surprise, shock, dismay! a) recall dated 19/09/2014 - your posting Dec 2014 - and only getting to my vehicle now?? b) my VIN is 824xxx c) so by your comments and the range for the P047 (820578-826022) and P048v2 (825080-826097) - I foolishly thought that I should rather be on a P047 recall ..... surely better and I can continue to enjoy the landy - without little voices warning of possibly losing both front wheels at any moment! d) LRSA inform me that only selected VINs in the P047 range are actually eligible - and sorry not yours!! But don't worry you get the P048 bracket Regard - please advise on your friends 110 progress - what was his ViN? Any advise and assistance would be much appreciated! Surely the logic should be : 1. If there is prior knowledge by LR and the possibility of axle failure >> recall and replace the axle casing 2. if there is no possibility of axle failure >> do not recall 3. By offering the P048 damage mitigation devise - LR are admitting there is a possibility of axle failure >> goto 1 Why must I subject myself (and family) to a potentially life threatening event when one or both front wheels detach from the axle - before LR will replace what is known to be a defective part?? 2x1: KTM 990R, 4x4: Landy 110 |
||
|
18th Sep 2015 1:39pm |
|
| clutch Member Since: 19 Mar 2011 Location: Cape Town Posts: 8
|
Hello ALL
Found this - which may explain things a bit more clearly - with regard to VIN number ranges in this rather disappointing matter reference url: http://m.recalls.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/1061983 extract... P047 = Axle Case renewal 55 vehicles affected in Australia. Selected vehicles within VIN range - SALLDKVT8BA820578 to SALLDKVT7BA408683 P048 = Bracket Fitment 224 vehicles affected in Australia. Selected vehicles within VIN ranges - SALLDHMT7BA820580 to SALLDHSS8BA408691 end So the short hand VIN LDxxxxxx is misleading - so for example my landy is SALLD HMT 7BA 824xxx .... and seems like why LRSA are giving me the finger - err sorry the P048 damage mitigation device 
Still I agree with members (especially icelandic's posting) - LR have knowledge of the defect - but have chosen to be passive and only provide a damage mitigation device - when the axle fails. It is even more concerning when considers the long term fatigue life of a known defective weld - it will certainly fail at some time in the future! 2x1: KTM 990R, 4x4: Landy 110 |
||
|
18th Sep 2015 2:16pm |
|
| Supacat Member Since: 16 Oct 2012 Location: West Yorkshire Posts: 11018
|
So what are the criteria that gets you a new axle rather than a bracket. Is the answer just in the VIN in terms of body style or another denominator?
I think the recall scheme in UK is far too lapse - look at this as an example of how it could be done: http://www.gulf-times.com/qatar/178/detail...s-recalled "The recall comes within the framework of the ongoing co-ordination and follow-up by the ministry to ascertain the dealers’ commitment to follow up defects and repair them to protect consumers’ rights." and "Consumers have been urged to report any abuses or irregularities by communicating with the Department of Consumer Protection and Commercial Fraud Combat". |
||
|
18th Sep 2015 4:40pm |
|
| clutch Member Since: 19 Mar 2011 Location: Cape Town Posts: 8
|
Hi Supacat
Have a read thru the quote below - from a document supplied in Fifth Horseman opening post - of this thread https://www.defender2.net/gallery/albums/u...47a3~0.pdf Question 12 What will Authorised Repairers do to the vehicles? Answer Owners will be notified and instructed to take their vehicles to a Land Rover dealer who, in the case of certain 110 and 130 vehicles with Heavy Duty Suspension, will have a correct to specification replacement front axle case installed (recall action P047). All other affected vehicles (P048) will have an additional bracket mounted to the end of the axle case tube around the flange so that in the event of the weld cracking sufficiently to allow the flange to detach, the wheel hub assembly and suspension does not detach. In this condition the vehicle will exhibit an oil leak from the failed weld area. It is also possible that steering feel will be degraded and may be less precise, the steering wheel may be mis-aligned and in this condition vehicle stability and control is fully maintained. Why are some vehicles having a replacement front axle case whilst other vehicles are having an additional bracket mounted to the end of the axle case? Through extensive engineering and data analysis it was identified that Land Rover Defender 110 and 130 vehicles specified with heavy duty suspension and operated in markets designated as significant arduous use are more likely exposed to operating conditions where weld failure is more likely to occur – significant and repetitive shock loading at speed for example on rutted roads. In an abundance of caution, Jaguar Land Rover has decided to replace the front axle case on particular vehicles in these markets. To ensure clear instructions for the repair requirements is provided; two recall action codes have been allocated to align those vehicles requiring axle replacement separately. end (bold text added here) So looks like unless you have a Heavy Duty Suspension option AND operate in markets designated as significant arduous - you get the bracket and must live with the potential future axle failure. So basically trust us..... despite your flawed axle - we believe it will not fail! But in the event we are wrong - we offer a damage mitigation bracket to 'hopefully' ensure you have a safe non lethal accident when it does fail. Sounds fair!!! Ironically, I purchased a landy so I could perform arduous tasks - like traveling at speed on rutted roads - which we do routinely here in ZA! 2x1: KTM 990R, 4x4: Landy 110 |
||
|
18th Sep 2015 9:45pm |
|
| Supacat Member Since: 16 Oct 2012 Location: West Yorkshire Posts: 11018
|
Thanks, makes that a lot clearer.
|
||
|
19th Sep 2015 9:15am |
|
| spudfan Member Since: 10 Sep 2007 Location: Co Donegal Posts: 4655 
|
I wonder if this could be more of a problem to those who use the vehicle frequently in off road situations i.e. as it was intended to be used. I would presume that frequent or heavy off road use would stress the suspect components more than on road use.
I wonder if I did have an accident on the road due to this issue whether my insurance company would use it as an excuse to get out of any payment due to other parties as it is an acknowledged defect. I know that Land Rover have done a "fix" on it but without replacing faulty components. Just wondered whether the insurance industry is satisfied with Land Rover's solution to this issue 1982 88" 2.25 diesel 1992 110 200tdi csw -Zikali 2008 110 2.4 tdci csw-Zulu 2011 110 2.4 tdci csw-Masai |
||
|
7th Nov 2015 11:14pm |
|
| Jonno Member Since: 06 Mar 2012 Location: Yorkshire Posts: 234 
|
To me the addition of a bracket is a ridiculous idea, it's basically stating the axle is rubbish and we have no confidence in it, however we don't want to spend upwards of £2000.00 per car to correct a fault that probably wont manifest itself.
It's a bodge at best and seems rather unprofessional to me, the car should be rectified to 100% perfect condition if a design or manufacturing issue is found. What also concerns me is the amount of items that just seem to be at risk of breaking. I would suggest nuts and bolts and general hardware are bought from the lowest bidder ie india or china. In the past it was almost unheard of to have issues with basic hardware breaking such as nuts and bolts. My Defender was recalled for potentially brittle seat belt mounting bolts, some have been recalled for wheel nuts that might split. It makes me wonder if the axle tubes are not metallurgically suspect leading to this issue. There must be quite fine margins at play if a harder suspension or larger bodystyle makes the difference between a new axle a bodge or leave it alone.... Jonno |
||
|
8th Nov 2015 9:07pm |
|
|
|
| All times are GMT |
< Previous Topic | Next Topic > |
Posting Rules
|
Site Copyright © 2006-2024 Futuranet Ltd & Martin Lewis
