 | Home > Off Topic > Recall - Discovery - battery earth stud to the chassis |
 
|
|
|
| Supacat Member Since: 16 Oct 2012 Location: West Yorkshire Posts: 11018   
|
Alert number: A12/01799/20
Category: Motor vehicles Product: Passenger car Brand: LAND ROVER Name: Land Rover Discovery 2019 to 2021 Model Year vehicles Type / number of model: e5*2007/46*1056 Company recall code: N400 Production dates: 21/09/2018 to 31/08/2020. Counterfeit: NO Risk type: Injuries Due to insufficient contact of the battery earth stud to the chassis, the vehicle’s lighting devices may fail, increasing the risk of an accident. Measures taken by economic operators: Recall of the product from end users (By: Manufacturer) Description: Passenger car. Country of origin: Slovakia Alert submitted by: United Kingdom Type of alert: Serious https://ec.europa.eu/consumers/consumers_s...amp;lng=en |
||
19th Dec 2020 9:18am |
|
| Supacat Member Since: 16 Oct 2012 Location: West Yorkshire Posts: 11018
|
Slow news day in Ireland :
"Hundreds of Land Rover Discovery vehicles recalled due to 'various electrical faults' There are currently 341 affected vehicles in the Republic of Ireland. Jaguar Land Rover Ireland Limited have warned: "The vehicle could cut out while in motion and may lose all electrical power." https://www.dublinlive.ie/news/dublin-news...s-19753820 So 341 sold in just short of two years. |
||
|
4th Feb 2021 7:41am |
|
| Notyalc Member Since: 27 Jul 2018 Location: Northumberland Posts: 161 
|
Why on the defender forum?
|
||
|
4th Feb 2021 7:35pm |
|
| blackwolf Member Since: 03 Nov 2009 Location: South West England Posts: 17380 
|
Curious that a Disco cutting out in motion merits a recall, but a Defender losing all drive doesn't.
|
||
|
4th Feb 2021 7:41pm |
|
| L90Andy Member Since: 29 May 2014 Location: Stratford-Upon-Avon Posts: 717 
|
Good post Supacat, thanks. I experienced this in my 20MY Disco before Christmas when it had total electrical failure and had to be recovered to the dealer. At that time the dealer said he'd seen quite a few and was pushing LR to issue a recall, so good to see they finally have. Its the weld on earth stud cracking off the body near the rear mounted battery, due iirc to a defective welding robot in plant. They had it up and running perfectly a day later and even took on the monumental task of thoroughly cleaning it for me. Good service afterall. Instagram: l90andy
2006 Land Rover 90 TD5 CSW Silver Edition My 1984 Ninety: http://www.defender2.net/forum/topic56071.html - SOLD! My 2015 Defender: http://www.defender2.net/forum/topic39625.html - SOLD! |
||
|
5th Feb 2021 8:36am |
|
| Supacat Member Since: 16 Oct 2012 Location: West Yorkshire Posts: 11018
|
OT a bit but I'm just delving through the ODI (the Office of Defects Investigation in the US) database, and can't help thinking if the old Defender had been sold in the US we would have been so much better off for regulators like this actively pressing manufacturers. The pertinent example was this record: "PE07019 LAND ROVER NEW RANGE ROVER 2003 POWER TRAIN:DRIVELINE:DIFFERENTIAL UNIT Land Rover 20070404 20070815 FRONT DIFFERENTIAL/DRIVESHAFT FAILURE IN RESPONSE TO AN INFORMATION REQUEST (IR) LETTER SENT BY THE OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI), FORD STATED THAT THE PRIMARY CAUSE FOR THE MAJORITY OF THE REPORTED FRONT DIFFERENTIAL/DRIVE SHAFT FAILURES IS A MISALIGNMENT OF THE JOINT BETWEEN THE TWO COMPONENTS.CERTAIN LEVELS OF MISALIGNMENT MAY OVER TIME CAUSE AN UNEVEN WEAR OF THE SPLINES.CONTINUED WEAR OF THE SPLINES MAY RESULT IN A SHEARING OF THE SPLINES AND THE INABILITY OF THE DRIVESHAFT TO TRANSFER TORQUE TO THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL. TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE IN THE FIELD, FORD INITIATED A SERVICE CAMPAIGN IN JUNE 2003 TO CORRECT THE MISALIGNMENT ISSUE AND, IF NECESSARY, REPLACE THE FRONT DRIVE SHAFT AND/OR DIFFERENTIAL.THE SERVICE CAMPAIGN COVERED MODEL YEAR (MY) 2003 AND MY 2004 VEHICLES BUILT FROM APRIL 18, 2002 THROUGH JULY 3, 2003.IN PRODUCTION, FORD INTRODUCED A CHANGE TO THE LUBRICATING GREASE OF THE JOINT IN FEBRUARY 2003 AND A CHANGE TO THE ASSEMBLY PLANT ALIGNMENT PROCESS IN JULY 2003 TO ADDRESS THE MISALIGNMENT AND WEAR ISSUE. ODI IDENTIFIED ONE CRASH RELATED TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT.THE CRASH INVOLVED A SUBJECT VEHICLE BEING STRUCK IN THE REAR AFTER BECOMING DISABLED BY A FRONT DIFFERENTIAL/DRIVESHAFT FAILURE AND PULLING TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. THIS PRELIMINARY EVALUATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (EA07-012) TO FURTHER ASSESS THE SCOPE, FREQUENCY AND SAFETY CONSEQUENCES OF FRONT DIFFERENTIAL/DRIVESHAFT FAILURES IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLE POPULATION." and "EA07012 LAND ROVER NEW RANGE ROVER 2003 POWER TRAIN:DRIVELINE Land Rover 20070814 20081210 08V635000 FRONT DIFF. / PROPELLER SHAFT FAILURE SUMMARY:IN A LETTER DATED DECEMBER 2, 2008, FORD MOTOR COMPANY (FORD) NOTIFIED NHTSA THAT LAND ROVER IS CONDUCTING A SAFETY RECALL OF MODEL YEAR (MY) 2003 THROUGH 2005 RANGE ROVER VEHICLES BUILT AT THE SOLIHULL (UK) ASSEMBLY PLANT FROM JANUARY 3, 2002 THROUGH FEBRUARY 22, 2005, TO REPLACE THE FRONT DRIVESHAFT JOINT (NHTSA RECALL NO. 08V-635, LAND ROVER RECALL NO. P041). THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL COUPLING SLEEVE AND THE PROPELLER SHAFT MAY BE MISALIGNED RESULTING IN SPLINE WEAR OVER TIME, WHICH MAY EVENTUALLY RESULT IN THE SPLINES SHEARING.THE DEFECT CONDITION CAN RESULT IN A LOSS OF PROPULSION AND SUBSEQUENT VEHICLE DISABLEMENT IN THE ROADWAY OR ON THE SHOULDER OF THE ROADWAY. FURTHERMORE, THE DEFECT CONDITION CAN ALSO CAUSE LOSS OF THE TRANSMISSION LOCK FUNCTION WHEN THE VEHICLE IS SHIFTED INTO THE PARK POSITION.THE LOSS OF THE TRANSMISSION LOCK FUNCTION CAN CAUSE A VEHICLE ROLLAWAY CONDITION IF THE EMERGENCY BRAKE IS NOT APPLIED AND THE VEHICLE IS UNATTENDED BY THE DRIVER. IN JULY 2008, LAND ROVER INITIATED A SERVICE ACTION (Q041) INSTRUCTING DEALERS TO INSTALL A REDESIGNED FRONT PROPELLER SHAFT, FRONT DIFFERENTIAL COUPLING AND HEAT SHIELD KIT TO ADDRESS THE MISALIGNMENT AND SUBSEQUENT SPLINE WEAR.THIS IS THE SAME REPAIR PROCEDURE THAT WILL BE USED IN SAFETY RECALL 08V-635.APPROXIMATELY 48 PERCENT OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES (18,000) HAVE HAD THE REMEDY PERFORMED UNDER SERVICE ACTION Q041 AS OF DECEMBER 2, 2008. ODI BELIEVES THAT SUDDEN LOSS OF MOTIVE POWER WITHOUT WARNING AND FAILURE OF THE TRANSMISSION LOCK FUNCTION ARE SAFETY CONSEQUENCES THAT, PARTICULARLY IN THE CONTEXT OF THE HIGH FAILURE RATE OF THE SUBJECT COMPONENTS, REPRESENT AN UNREASONABLE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY AS STATED IN A RECALL REQUEST LETTER SENT TO FORD AND LAND ROVER ON NOVEMBER 6, 2008.LAND ROVER DOES NOT AGREE, BUT IS CHANGING ITS CUSTOMER SATISFACTION PROGRAM TO A SAFETY RECALL AS ODI REQUESTED. LAND ROVER NOTED THAT IT WAS AWARE OF ONE ALLEGED ACCIDENT; HOWEVER, IT WAS UNAWARE OF ANY INJURY OR VEHICLE DAMAGE ASSOCIATED WITH THE ALLEGED ACCIDENT.LAND ROVER'S RECALL RESOLVES THE SAFETY DEFECT CONCERNS PURSUED BY THIS INVESTIGATION. THIS ENGINEERING ANALYSIS IS CLOSED." |
||
|
5th Feb 2021 9:14am |
|
| Supacat Member Since: 16 Oct 2012 Location: West Yorkshire Posts: 11018
|
 Click image to enlarge And interesting that they can crack out the sales data in this format: Click image to enlarge Click image to enlarge Click image to enlarge Click image to enlarge Click image to enlarge Click image to enlarge Click image to enlarge Click image to enlarge |
||
|
9th Feb 2021 2:57pm |
|
| Supacat Member Since: 16 Oct 2012 Location: West Yorkshire Posts: 11018
|
Seems the problem is more widespread than first thought - a 2nd recall:
Click image to enlarge Click image to enlarge https://ec.europa.eu/safety-gate-alerts/sc...l/10004397 |
||
|
27th Sep 2021 9:00am |
|
|
|
| All times are GMT |
< Previous Topic | Next Topic > |
Posting Rules
|
Site Copyright © 2006-2024 Futuranet Ltd & Martin Lewis
