↓ Advertise on Defender2 ↓

Home > Puma (Tdci) > MY2011/2012 Recall Action P047/048 Front Axle Case
Post Reply  Down to end
Page 4 of 39 <123 45 ... 373839>
Print this entire topic · 
Regard



Member Since: 08 Dec 2011
Location: RSA
Posts: 251

South Africa 2011 Defender 110 Puma 2.4 X-Tech LE Orkney Grey
So mine is busy being done as we speak...

Wrote a long email to both LRSA and JLRUK.

My VIN number falls in both P047 as well as P048 range but they will just do P048. The reason given by both LRSA and JLRUK was that although my VIN falls in P047 range my specific vehicle has not been affected? Both wrote back and told me they can "see that on their system"???? I ask how so because the notice clearly state my VIN number for P047 but they said that they have different info on their system to tell them which cars in THAT SPECIFIC VIN range needs the P047 and which does not?

My friend's 110's VIN falls only in the P047 range and LRSA confirmed that he will get a whole new axle casing.

So it seems that if your VIN falls in both P047 adn P048 you will probably only get P048. If your VIN only falls in P047 you will get a new casing.

Any case.....lets hope for the best.
Post #377822 10th Dec 2014 1:22pm
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
blackwolf



Member Since: 03 Nov 2009
Location: South West England
Posts: 17336

United Kingdom 2007 Defender 110 Puma 2.4 DCPU Stornoway Grey
The brackets are (IMHO) an appropriate engineering response to the problem, bearing in mind that this is seemingly a very rare event (I think the Q&A stated 13 vehicles in the last 3 years). Were it not for the severity of the consequences probably nothing would be done.

Bear in mind:-

1) It is very unlikely that a vehicle will suffer from a failure of the flange at all

2) If the flange weld does fail, this modification will (a) almost certainly prevent a crack from become a complete failure of the flange, and (b) even in the case of a complete failure prevent the total separation of the hub and consequent inevitable loss of control scenario from happening.

However unsatisfactory an owner may find this "solution", it is an appropriate and responsible response under the circumstances.

If an axle is found to be cracked then it must, of course, be replaced.

What is I think more interesting is what will Landrover's response be when an axle whcih has been fitted with these catch brackets fails - will the axle then still be replaced free of charge (as clearly it should) or will LR consider that its liability was discharged by the fitment of the catch brackets?
Post #377830 10th Dec 2014 1:39pm
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
Cupboard



Member Since: 21 Mar 2014
Location: Suffolk
Posts: 2971

United Kingdom 2011 Defender 110 Puma 2.4 HT Corris Grey
Quote:
The brackets are (IMHO) an appropriate engineering response to the problem, bearing in mind that this is seemingly a very rare event (I think the Q&A stated 13 vehicles in the last 3 years).


That's around about 1 in 1000 of the VIN numbers supplied I think?
I don't know if those numbers include 90s, but that's not that small a proportion.
Post #377840 10th Dec 2014 3:32pm
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
Mac22



Member Since: 22 Nov 2013
Location: Merseyside
Posts: 675

United Kingdom 2013 Defender 110 Puma 2.2 DCPU Santorini Black
I find this quite disturbing if Im honest. Fitting a catchment jobbie to minimise the chance of a wheel parting company due to defective welding.
Couldn't quite see any other major car manufacturer carrying out such a recall. It will all end in tears.. Whistle
Post #377897 10th Dec 2014 7:59pm
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
T1G UP



Member Since: 08 Dec 2009
Location: Bath
Posts: 3101

England 2011 Defender 110 Puma 2.4 XS CSW Orkney Grey
mines in on monday for a whole list of warrenty work. its had a noise like the front o/s wheel bearings going for ages.....maybe this is the problem.
Post #377936 10th Dec 2014 9:08pm
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
CatherineF



Member Since: 22 Nov 2014
Location: Wiltshire
Posts: 762

United Kingdom 
Ours is a 2011 Model year car and I've just registered, the good news is there appears to be no outstanding recall work.
Post #377944 10th Dec 2014 9:36pm
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
charlesteton



Member Since: 24 Feb 2013
Location: London
Posts: 40

United Kingdom 
My 2011 booked into local dealer tomorrow to have fix fitted, estimated time 30 mins ie while I wait.
Post #379771 17th Dec 2014 8:58pm
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
Cupboard



Member Since: 21 Mar 2014
Location: Suffolk
Posts: 2971

United Kingdom 2011 Defender 110 Puma 2.4 HT Corris Grey
CatherineF wrote:
Ours is a 2011 Model year car and I've just registered, the good news is there appears to be no outstanding recall work.


You have a 90, this is only for 110s and 130s Thumbs Up
Post #379863 18th Dec 2014 8:45am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
charlesteton



Member Since: 24 Feb 2013
Location: London
Posts: 40

United Kingdom 
Had recall fix applied, didn't realise it is to both sides:



Click image to enlarge



Click image to enlarge



Click image to enlarge



Click image to enlarge
Post #380001 18th Dec 2014 4:00pm
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
dgardel



Member Since: 30 Nov 2008
Location: Veneto (Heart & Head)
Posts: 3586

Italy 
Charlesteton !!!

CHECK THE POINTED NUT, it seems not tightened properly !!!



Click image to enlarge


you see the bolt shank between the inside space of the U bracket and the bushing of the silent block.

In that way all forces are transmit to the bolt like 100% shears.......

Check also the other one on the Rolling with laughter driver "wrong" side (2 nuts by side)

If properly tightened the forces are transmit from the arm/pull-rod to the bracket 100% by friction from the bushing of the silent block and the internal side of the bracket.

Admin note: this post has had its images recovered from a money grabbing photo hosting site and reinstated Mr. Green  Discovery 5 td6 HSE Stornoway Gray Outback Engineering Limited Edition

IID Pro MV License
Post #380084 18th Dec 2014 8:34pm
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Send e-mail Reply with quote
charlesteton



Member Since: 24 Feb 2013
Location: London
Posts: 40

United Kingdom 
I saw it and thought it looked odd, they certainly knacked the head. Will get a better photo tomorrow morning and post. Thanks for your heads up. Smile
Post #380134 18th Dec 2014 10:14pm
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
sparkylee



Member Since: 06 Nov 2010
Location: surrey
Posts: 1455

2012 Defender 110 Puma 2.2 DCPU Santorini Black
I'm guessing that due to bracket the bolt needs to be changed to a longer one, if this is the case why is it so rusty already ?
Hope it's ok Thumbs Up It's good to be back from the dark side


DC110 -2012 Black with black hood and black x-tech
FFRR 4.2 vogue
Renault traffic auto
PT crusier convertible
Laika x700 Motorhome
Post #380188 19th Dec 2014 8:08am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Send e-mail Reply with quote
blackwolf



Member Since: 03 Nov 2009
Location: South West England
Posts: 17336

United Kingdom 2007 Defender 110 Puma 2.4 DCPU Stornoway Grey
The "reinforcement kit" only consists of the brackets and uses the existing bolts and self-locking nuts (which is in itself interesting since nylon insert stiff nuts, which my memory tells me these are, strictly shouldn't be reused).
Post #380208 19th Dec 2014 9:18am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
Supacat



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

United Kingdom 2013 Defender 110 Puma 2.2 XS DCPU Keswick Green
Dgardel - I understand your point but here's a reference photo of mine taken when it was first delivered - it appears to show the same gap:
[URL=]
Click image to enlarge
[/URL]

The workshop manual gives the nut tightness at both 210Nm and 197Nm depending on which section you read.

Tightening the nut should not draw the bracket together so a gap where you have indicated would not be indicative of a loose nut but, if anything, a missing spacer or bent bracket.

Admin note: this post has had its images recovered from a money grabbing photo hosting site and reinstated Mr. Green


Last edited by Supacat on 19th Dec 2014 10:41am. Edited 2 times in total
Post #380225 19th Dec 2014 10:11am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
Retroanaconda



Member Since: 04 Jan 2012
Location: Scotland
Posts: 2637

Scotland 
The gap between the radius arm casting and the axle bracket is normal. It's the gap between the inner bush sleeve and the bracket which was concerning dgardel.
Post #380227 19th Dec 2014 10:16am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
Post Reply  Back to top
Page 4 of 39 <123 45 ... 373839>
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



Site Copyright © 2006-2024 Futuranet Ltd & Martin Lewis
DEFENDER2.NET RSS Feed - All Forums