DEFENDER2.NET - View topic - Output shaft failure, Forum Survey

↓ Advertise on Defender2 ↓

Home · FAQ · New Posts · My Posts · PMs · Search · Members · Map · Calendar · Profile · Donate · Register · Log In

Home > Puma (Tdci) > Output shaft failure, Forum Survey

Page 26 of 33

3 ...

27 ...

Print this entire topic ·

MK

Member Since: 28 Aug 2008
Location: Santiago
Posts: 2408

2007 Defender 110 Puma 2.4 SW Chawton White

My bet is that those total losses of drive are not due to the Ashcroft kit failing. I would pay to look at those kits. Puma 110" SW

.............................................................
Earth first. Other planets later

19th Jan 2022 1:41pm

Dinnu

Member Since: 24 Dec 2019
Location: Lija
Posts: 3403

2012 Defender 90 Puma 2.2 CSW Santorini Black

JLR already knew that the Defender days were countable when they were ending the TD5. So why bother spending a fortune in development and testing... it only need to last as long as the warranty. 1988 90 Hard Top, 19J Diesel Turbo, Shire Blue - Restoration ongoing
2012 90 CSW, 2.2TDCI, Santorini Black

19th Jan 2022 1:57pm

Caterham

Member Since: 06 Nov 2008
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 6295

2011 Defender 110 Puma 2.4 XS CSW Stornoway Grey

if the extension casting was on a budget (which I'm sure it would have been) is if fair to assume some have warped during the casting process?

19th Jan 2022 2:35pm

DSC-off

Member Since: 16 Oct 2014
Location: North East
Posts: 1394

2015 Defender 110 Puma 2.2 XS CSW Aintree Green

All of the important features of the adapter casting are machined after casting to eliminate the inaccuracies of the casting process (supposedly). That is, the faces and the locating dowel holes at both ends.

Whether the machining is accurate enough to ensure alignment, or not, is the question here.
Also relevant is the machining of the corresponding features on the back of the gearbox and front of the transfer box.
It all has to go together to achieve an acceptable condition when assembled.

I would suggest that nobody, JLR included, knows what the acceptable limit is for misalignment in this application.
Indeed it is an arbitrary point as to where that limit is, should the life be 100K, 200K miles or more?

The only things we do know is 20K miles or 50K miles is not acceptable, neither is sudden, complete and unpredictable failure.

19th Jan 2022 4:25pm

blackwolf

Member Since: 03 Nov 2009
Location: South West England
Posts: 17322

2007 Defender 110 Puma 2.4 DCPU Stornoway Grey

Caterham wrote:
you'd think LR would be 'man enough' to explain what the problem is and a remedy even if it were at a cost?

You are joking, right? The company with possibly the worst record of any for acknowledging the possibility of faults with its products.

19th Jan 2022 4:29pm

blackwolf

Member Since: 03 Nov 2009
Location: South West England
Posts: 17322

Grenadier wrote:
Good post. It makes one wonder, therefore, if it’s a QC problem? Is there a problem with the angles of the two faces that meet between the MT82 and trans case? Clearly the MT82 was brought in off the shelf to be married to (I think I’m right in saying) the already used trans case. If so, perhaps some light fettling was done (or wasn’t done, but was required) to the trans case in order for it to marry to the MT82 and that the problems stem from what could have been a back-of-fag-packet solution, as was the theme for all later development of the Defender by LR. The angle of the respective faces would only need to be an ‘nth’ of a degree out between top and bottom to stress the OS. Easily done if the work was carried out by hand. Another hypothesis, clearly.

Some/most/all of us have been wondering about a QC issue for over a decade now!

As far as the fitting is concerned the transfer case is identical to any other LT230, it is not modified in any way specific to the Puma. The MT82 is different to (I think) all others since it has a mating face for the adaptor housing and has no propshaft fitted. It is however relatively unlikely that there is any widespread manufacturing issue with the MT82 since generally gearboxes are manufactured to tight tolerances and the MT82 is not a bad gearbox (except for those specially made to annoy Mustang owners by having optional defects built in).

It is most plausible that if there is a manufacturing tolerance issue it concerns the adaptor housing, which is a specific-to-the-Puma part, we don't know who makes it, we don't know the dimensional specification or tolerances, we don't know the QC processes, and it is exceptionally difficult to measure it for accuracy. Any errors in the manufacture of the housing could introduce a number of alignment issues - the gearbox and transfer box shafts axes may be parallel but offset, or they may not be parallel whether or not offset, and any of these or any combination of these will destroy the coupling.

Nige's measuring technique on his video only measure offset, not angular misalignment. It would be difficult to measure the accuracy of this part without manufacturing special (precision) tooling.

Finally we should remember that this is actually all speculation, albeit informed speculation based on sound engineering. Indeed, is there actually a problem at all? Landrover says not.

19th Jan 2022 4:44pm

Supacat

Member Since: 16 Oct 2012
Location: West Yorkshire
Posts: 11018

2013 Defender 110 Puma 2.2 XS DCPU Keswick Green

Is it correct that there's no know failure of the Ashcroft kit?

If that's the case, and their kit does nothing to address any type of alignment issue but rather changes the mating splines from dry to wet, then is it possible to hypothesise that this is the issue?

The fact that the LR instructions make reference to and include grease in the repair kit might also support this notion. Albeit, it does not have a way to hold the grease insitu or replenish (as per the Ashcroft kit) and thus there have been repeat failures?

Last edited by Supacat on 20th Jan 2022 6:04am. Edited 1 time in total

19th Jan 2022 4:58pm

blackwolf

Member Since: 03 Nov 2009
Location: South West England
Posts: 17322

I don't really think that there is anything to add to the preceding 26 pages of this thread as far as hypothesising on the cause.

19th Jan 2022 5:43pm

MK

Member Since: 28 Aug 2008
Location: Santiago
Posts: 2408

There is evidence some shafts disengages and moves backwards from the female adaptor. Puma 110" SW

.............................................................
Earth first. Other planets later

19th Jan 2022 5:51pm

Caterham

Member Since: 06 Nov 2008
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 6295

blackwolf wrote:
Caterham wrote:
you'd think LR would be 'man enough' to explain what the problem is and a remedy even if it were at a cost?

You are joking, right? The company with possibly the worst record of any for acknowledging the possibility of faults with its products.

I wasn't but I probably should have been.

19th Jan 2022 6:43pm

Caterham

Member Since: 06 Nov 2008
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 6295

FIXED IT.

when replacing your next adapter shaft first get it on a lathe. Cut a groove into the mid-part of the shaft. the groove needs to be deep enough such to introduce some flex. This will allow for any mis-alignment.

19th Jan 2022 6:48pm

ashtrans
Site Sponsor

Member Since: 08 Nov 2008
Location: Harpenden
Posts: 257

Supacat wrote:
Is it correct that there's no know failure of the Ashcroft kit?

If that's the case, and their kit does nothing to address any type of alignment issue but rather changes the mating splines from dry to wet, then is it possible to hypothesise that this is the issue?

The fact that the LR instructions make reference to and include grease in the repair kit might also support this notion. Albeit, it does not have a way to hold the grease insitu or relish (as per the Ashcroft kit) and thus there have been repeat failures?

I would agree with this, we don’t fix the misalignment, we just wet the spline so it doesn’t wear out as the spline faces rub with each revolution. Dave

19th Jan 2022 7:16pm

nitram17

Member Since: 08 Jun 2014
Location: newcastle
Posts: 2261

Caterham wrote:
FIXED IT.

when replacing your next adapter shaft first get it on a lathe. Cut a groove into the mid-part of the shaft. the groove needs to be deep enough such to introduce some flex. This will allow for any mis-alignment.

Is it April 1st?

19th Jan 2022 7:25pm

nitram17

Member Since: 08 Jun 2014
Location: newcastle
Posts: 2261

Re: Bloody Output Shaft

natyeo wrote:
My 2014 2.2 90 HT at 127689 has just lost all drive , after fitting the Ashcroft kit in my 2012 90 , do I go the same route A) Ashcroft or B) do I go std land rover and drill and tap fit grease nipples 180 degrees apart and my acccess hole in casing or C) std landrover and fill with good grease?

Thoughts Folks

The guy who tapped his shaft (steady matron)and fitted grease nipples i don't think is on the forum anymore ......so no update ..i wonder if anybody else has done it?I wondered also if it was worth drilling and tapping two high tensile bolts at 90degrees to the grease nipples to minimize movement and extend life of shaft.

19th Jan 2022 7:46pm

blackwolf

Member Since: 03 Nov 2009
Location: South West England
Posts: 17322

nitram17 wrote:
Caterham wrote:
FIXED IT.

when replacing your next adapter shaft first get it on a lathe. Cut a groove into the mid-part of the shaft. the groove needs to be deep enough such to introduce some flex. This will allow for any mis-alignment.

Is it April 1st?

No, but I fear Caterham's come off his meds too soon!

19th Jan 2022 8:24pm

Page 26 of 33

3 ...

27 ...

All times are GMT

Jump to

< Previous Topic | Next Topic >

Posting Rules

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum