rangerovers.pub
The only place for a coil spring is up Zebedee's arse
Member
offline
924 posts

Do you mean the orange bit you can see in one of the photos? I can't see any sign of a fan there, the orange bit you can see I think is the handle of a bucket being used to catch the old oil?

Certainly looks like its leaking oil from the edge there to me, looks very much like what I can see from underneath mine actually, though the other bank on yours looks drier than mine does. You will find out once the heads are off as it should be a lot more obvious then.

You should be able to see the gearbox outputs in Nano if you have one (you mention diagnostics?), there is a table in Rave to tell you what each selection should be. When mine failed (D2 uses a slightly different but very similar switch) you could see one switch didn't switch as fast as it should do, and would drop into limp mode randomly. More annoyingly it also wouldn't start like that, once I found what the problem was moving the stick between gears was usually enough to get it to move again. One of the springs in mine seemed to have weakened - you could feel it would press with almost no resistance at all to pressure. Repalcement switch was the only option at that point.

The only thing I could see that might be making the difference is if it meant the oil control rings were doing their job better, thereby not sending excess oil down the exhaust where it can contaminate the lambda sensor, honeycomb of the cat (possibly also causing it to become sticky and attaching further debris) and thereby causing eventual failure of the cat. Oil isn't generally wanted to go down the exhaust system in cat equipped vehicles for both of the reasons above. Trouble is by the time its failed in the manner described, it might be hard to see what started the process by the amount of damage done.

Lpgc wrote:

Bri, just to clarify, which city(s) reckon they will or may allow monofuel LPG vehicles to avoid emissions zone charges?

On range, there are not a lot of vehicles on which removal of the petrol tank would make space for much extra LPG capacity but there are some..

You have their response word for word as from the email in the post above, the only bit I removed was the case ref. Sadly doesn't give any info on that. I'm not even sure its 100% correct as it seems a bit vague.

It was raised as a query for the CAZ checker - which currently covers Bath and Birmingham, I believe Bristol and Leeds will be added as their schemes get to the point where the required standards are clear. As far as I knew, Leeds wasn't yet active? (your closer to the place than me, so maybe you know better on this point?) Bristol still seems to be deciding which scheme they are going to use.

Good point on range about removing the petrol tank, but it still leaves you stuck if you turn up at a filling station with little left in the tank and find its out of order. Round here the closest station to me doesn't have another one working within 15 miles. And its not like you could turn up with a jerry can if its on gas only!

Simon has posted here > https://www.lpgforum.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=14263&p=112046&hilit=elgrand#p112046 and Here > https://forum.elgrandoc.uk/threads/the-e51-catalytic-converter-problem.5443/page-9 about it. The guess would probabbly be it failing on one side (of the v6) so half the engine runs ok, whilst the other half struggles to push anything out of its blocked exhaust. In that case, I'd expect its compressing the sump as the exhaust can't escape where it should do and oil is then getting where it shouldn't?

The main problem is that the front cats break up, and then can't get out of the way as the rear cats catch the broken bits and block up, at least that seems to be the explanation in that case.

The bit in the quotes above was from my query to them (which was basically why is London ok but not Birmingham for the same vehicle). I'd submitted the question using the link at the bottom of this page > https://www.gov.uk/clean-air-zones - online contact form.

The general theme of it is they are still working on it. The impression I get is the car in question was an early adopter of Euro 4 status and that seems why TFL say its ok, but the logbook for it doesn't state the Euro status. The other serivce above that Davew linked to seems to show its actually classed as Euro 3 on there.

On the lpg monofuel setup side, You'd want a decent size tank setup to be sure you weren't going to run out, with the way stations are at present round here its very unpredictable where you can get it some of the time.

Gilbertd wrote:

Maybe they are fitting single points?

Like the homemade one? - Cylinder plumbed in using a tap to control the flow and very little else. Saw it on Youtube linked from the LPG forum some time back. Think that was someone with an old Mondeo.

Gilbertd wrote:

Be interested to know which one is OK. The P38 meets Euro 3 so shouldn't be ULEZ compliant but there is obviously an error in the TfL database as it shows a 2000 or later, 4.0 litre P38 as complaint but a 4.6 isn't, even though they both meet the same standard. One other loophole was filled when they changed from the T-Charge to ULEZ. Under T-Charge an import, which doesn't have emissions data on the V5, was considered exempt, whereas under ULEZ, it isn't.

Found the reply I was looking for in amongst the 16k emails in my inbox, I've put the bit about gas in bold from their response below. Not in response to a P38 (not even a Land Rover in this case) but the gas bit might be of interest. Though the only gas-only vehicle I know of is Robert's Medusa from the other forum.

"Thank you for your enquiry received on 4/3/2021. Your case reference number is *.
We appreciate that you have taken the time to contact us in relation to this matter.?
It may help if I explain that the Clean Air Zone scheme is not linked to Transport for London's Ultra-Low Emission Zone and can only be found in locations outside London. However, we are working with Transport for London to ensure as much consistency as possible between our Clean Air Zone vehicle checker and the ULEZ system. We would advise all drivers to use the relevant vehicle checker for the zone they intend to travel into if they are unsure if their vehicle meets the standards.

A vehicle would need to run solely on gas to be exempt from charges. As you have advised that the vehicle runs on both petrol and LPG gas, the vehicle does not fall under the exempt fuel type and so would still be subject to Clean Air Zone charges where that vehicle type is chargeable.
The vehicle would need to meet the minimum emission standards for the zone the vehicle will travel into or within.
If the vehicle does meet the required emission standards, it would not be subject to charges.
After checking the vehicle record, I can see the Euro Status is missing.
Work is ongoing to provide an accurate result for vehicles which may have adopted a Euro standard before it was legally required to do so. You are not required to take any action at present as we are working closely with manufacturers and partners to update the results for these vehicles before the launch of the first Clean Air Zones.

If your vehicle has adopted the Euro 4 status, I would expect that it would be compliant with the emission standards of Clean Air Zones, and so would not be subject to Clean Air Zone charges.

When this information is updated, the Clean Air Zone checker will be able to provide the information to show if your vehicle is compliant or whether you would be subject to a charge when entering the Clean Air Zone.
Please check back closer to the time of the Clean Air Zone launch for this information.
I trust this is of assistance to you."

I did post something along the lines of what Davew has said earlier in the thread, but looks like in the process of "posting" it, i didn't actually press the reply button.

The rattling mentioned further back suggests the honeycomb had started to break up. Thats usually down to either misfire damage or too high temperatures from lean running, or striking the cat (possible with off road use I'd guess?). The cats are that far back in the exhaust I'd doubt it would be lean running, more likely misfires due to a failed coil pack or other ignition issue. Given you've rebuilt the engine I'd imagine you've addressed the original issue if it was anything more than just age related.

If its like the one I've seen, you'd struggle to even get the probe in the exhaust pipe as its tiny.

The response I got when enquiring about one of mine, was that if it was a full gas only vehice (not Bi-fuel) that it would. Can't find the email now but it was asking why one of mine was ok for the Ulez but not Birmingham when the same standard is applied to both places.

I think Bristol ditched that plan a few months back, and are now going with the same scheme Birmingham are bringing in in June
https://www.bristol.gov.uk/streets-travel/bristol-caz/charges-and-checker

Scotland on the other hand, have the plan to ban non-compliant vehicles entirely when they bring theirs in.

And an area that can be hard to avoid, I've seen a fair few posts and comments from people and in the effected area getting rid of their relatively newer diesels as they don't meet the required standard to drive without incurring the charge

Lpgc wrote:

hugh wrote:

A similar thing happened to me last week, poor tickover and a struggling throttle response and variations between normal and abysmal
Tested the battery voltage with the engine running - oh oh this doesn't look good.
Gave the alternator a whack with my trusty hammer -and she's been OK ever since.
As a precaution I've ordered up a spare alternator from a good P38 breaker on eBay and will get new brushes + voltage regulator (if available) to overhaul the existing

I've told the story about when I had to drive back to Yorkshire from mid Scotland using a generator to power vehicle electrics due to a failed alternator on a bank hol weekend a few years ago (different model vehicle but same problem) lol.. At first that alternator started working again if given a whack but the period of working between whacks became shorter and shorter until it wouldn't work even straight after a whack. When home I fixed the alternator myself the next day for pennies, just fitted new brushes but not available in Scotland on a bank hol weekend.

I've had an alternator fail just like that. It really chose its time to do it - in the middle of Belfast the day before I had to drive to Dublin to catch the ferry back on the Saturday morning after. Finding an alternator over there off the shelf for the car seemed impossible, ended up finding a place that could either fix the alternator or get a rebuilt one (Also hampered by having no tools with me to take the alternator off to do anything about it). The replacement ended up coming over to them from Huddersfield!.

dhallworth wrote:

For some reason, D2’s rot horrendously compared to P38’s too.

David.

I gather they treated the chassis on the P38 (possibly galvanised it?) and didn't on the D2 to stick with Land rover traditions (like the series vehicles). So the body stays reasonably ok (except for the boot floor in my case, though that was minor compared to the issues the RR Classic or D1 have there) whilst the chassis rots from both inside and out. Supposedly something that BMW ownership made happen in the case of the P38?

You also lose the chassis to rot on the D2, suffer with poorly designed sunroof that will leak when the rear end of the car is lower than the front, and the ACE system on a lot of them can be a bag of problems due to pipes rotting away I gather (not got ACE on mine but that seems to be what some end up scrapped for).

Personally I find the handling on the D2 hideous at times, though mine has coils on the back which probabbly doesn't help any. I've not been in one with aigbags. The other D2 I've been in was a sickly TD5 (Failed head gasket) and it seemed slightly more pokey than the p38 diesel I've been out in, though both seemed to be noisy and slow compared even to the D2 with the V8. I'm not sure the P38 diesel in that case is in the best condition it could be though, as it starts with cloud of smoke when warm so maybe that isn't the best one to judge it by. Owner doesn't seem to want to do anything about it, hes been driving it with a suspected blend motor fault for over a year, so heater is stuck on the hot position (for some reason my Nano won't connect to his hevac, it just sits there flashing as soon as you try, though it will connect to other modules just fine).

The Chassis on mine is a mixture of welded repairs, rust and oily bits up the front end. The p38 we have had on the lift and the difference between the state of the chassis on that (which is a 98 model so is older) and the chassis on my D2 is very noticable - slightly scabby in a couple of places, but nothing that you'd really worry about and could easily be sorted with a wire brush and some paint.

Of course some will have brought the D2 ES to get the extra seats in the back as well, an option that wasn't there for the p38.

Lpgc wrote:

You could use a schraeder valve tool to remove the valve temporarily while you have the pressure gauge connected. Some such tools look a bit like a radiator key but with a forked end.

Example of them on this Amazon listing
https://www.amazon.co.uk/pengxiaomei-Valve-Repair-Single-Remover/dp/B07T6SF2N5/

I think you'd find the screwdriver type a bit easier to get onto the port though that kit includes both types.

Main difference between the two is the corrosion inhibitor, the Oat stuff is supposed to be good for 5 years, the blue one only 2 years. Downside to the oat one is that it's not compatible with some materials, I think copper is one of them. And obviously mixing them isn't recommended either.

If you haven't already tried it, some high revs can be enough to clear loose bits out of the y pipe to stop rattling. I had the same after having a coil pack go, stuck it in 2 and took it onto the local dual carriageway for a few miles. No more rattling after that!

davew wrote:

Typically dave3d these types of policies have a fixed minimum/'set up' fee of about £200, and then 4p/Mile

Not for real ££££ classics either - lots of better normal/classic insurance deals for our p38 available anyway.

As far as I can tell these policies are mainly aimed at young/very low mileage drivers (?)

Definitely aimed at those sort of drivers to bring the cost down. Plenty of blackbox policies around (one of my neighbours had a policy like this with LV - self installed sensor that plugged into the lighter socket and requirement for mobile data availability).

I don't think it was particually cheap either, considering he was driving a Corsa at the time and was over 50, I think it still cost him more than my business use insurance for 10k miles on the Disco at the time.