I must admit, on the way home I thought I should have asked the owner if I could take the fusebox so I could pull it apart and repair it, or at least investigate where the fault had occurred. I've done one before and got a GEMS one in the garage waiting for the day when I've nothing better to do. It does seem to be an odd failure though as it isn't as if that circuit is going to be pulling a huge amount of current to burn something out.

As the Channel Tunnel won't allow LPG powered cars due to the perceived fire risk, I wonder how long it will be before they ban EV's too?.......

Last week I was asked if I would look at a 1999 Vogue that had a permanent SRS light and Airbag Failure showing on the dash. The owner had recently swapped the driver's seat and assumed he had done something wrong but his Nanocom wouldn't connect to the SRS system so he was unable to identify the problem. As the MoT is due shortly and it wouldn't pass with an SRS light on, if it can't be fixed, a local breaker had offered him £500 for the car to break for spares.

I went to have a look at it and first thing was to try my Nano on it and found exactly the same as he had, a Nanocom would connect to every system except the SRS. As that uses a dedicated wire from the ECU to the OBD port, that was the first thing to check. Sockets on the port were spotless. So the next thing to check was continuity between the OBD port and the ECU. As that lives under the rear of the centre console, easier said than done but we got the centre console out and got to the ECU. Identified the wire and found continuity to the OBD port, so not that then. As diagnostics wouldn't connect to the ECU and the SRS light was on permanently, decided it could be a dead ECU. Took it out and took the cover off. Looked perfect inside with no signs of water ingress (difficult considering where it lives) or burning and the ball bearing in a housing that detects impact could be heard rattling around. A quick call to the local breaker (about 12 miles away) who told me there was a car in his yard, a 2000 so it would be the same, with the interior out so he was happy for me to go and help myself to it. Got there to find that although the seats were out, the centre console wasn't so set about removing another one. Got the ECU, went back to the car, fitted it and no different. Nanocom wouldn't connect and SRS light on all the time. Checked the plug for the ECU and didn't find power on any pin, only a 3.8V signal on one wire which I assumed was a data line. As I didn't have my laptop with RAVE with me and the owner of the car had printed workshop and overhaul manuals, but not the ETM, gave up on it.

Went back today with the SRS diagrams printed out as well as the laptop in case I needed to look at any other parts of the ETM. Identified the pin that should have an ignition switched supply to the ECU only to find it was the one with 3.8V on it. It goes via the RH footwell connector so that was the next place to look. Contacts all clean and not corroded and 3.8V on both sides of it on the wire to the SRS ECU. The feed comes directly from fuse 23 in the fusebox, checked that and found 12V on both sides. Lifted the fusebox to check what was coming out of it and while there may be 12V at the fuse, there was only 3.8V on the connection on the bottom. There's actually two separate wires coming out of the fusebox from fuse 23, one to the SRS ECU and one to the SRS circuitry in the instrument cluster. There was continuity between both and both showed 3.8V. Connected a piece of wire to one of them, turned the ignition on and connected that wire to the battery. SRS light went out immediately, Nanocom would connect and all it showed was a historic fault for the drivers seat from when it had been swapped. That said the problem was definitely inside the fusebox. Another call to the local breaker, another 24 mile round trip and came back with two fuseboxes, both from 2000 models and both had been working fine, I was assured.....

Off with the original fusebox, on with the better looking of the replacements, fired it up and everything worked. SRS light went out, no Airbag Fault on the dash and went through all the electrics to confirm we hadn't fixed one problem and put another one on in its place. So fusebox failure isn't always obvious, it doesn't always cause a burning smell but can cause all sorts of odd problems. A new one on me but somewhere to check in case of an SRS warning coupled with no communication with diagnostics.

If you look at the video of the car that started the Luton airport fire, initially it could be a Discovery Sport, an L494 Range Rover Sport or an L551 Evoque but looking at the rear lights (before they went out) it is the latter, an L551 Evoque. As a regular user of Luton airport, ANPR records your registration number as you drive in to work out how long you stay in there and how many arms and legs they wish to remove from you for the privilege of parking, so they will know the precise car. Within a couple of hours they had said that it was a diesel car that started it but on a diesel (or petrol) car, with an electrical or fuel fire, flames would be from under the bonnet or from the interior (like the pictures of the one that started the Echo Arena fire)? The videos shot by eye witnesses clearly show flames shooting out the side, much the same as similar pictures of an EV on fire. The L551 is available as a diesel hybrid so has a Li Ion battery mounted underneath, So my theory is that it was a diesel hybrid but so as to not allow yet another EV bashing to start, they simply omitted the hybrid part.

Dave, I know you have been banging on ad nauseam for years on this subject but as someone that was employed to investigate breaches of the EMC regulations, I have delved into the filing cabinet that contains the relevant documents and think a bit of background might help explain why you are flogging a dead horse.

The original EMC Directives (73/23/EEC and 89/336/EEC) along with the 1999 update (1999/5/EC), only related to the potential for an item of Radio and Telecommunications Terminal Equipment (R&TTE) to CAUSE interference to other R&TTE apparatus. Hence the only requirement for a receiver was that any part (such as the local oscillator) must not CAUSE interference. Compliance with the relevant directives then allows a manufacturer to affix the CE mark and place the item on the market in the EU. So had you ever managed to get sight of the certification it would have simply told you that the emissions from it complied, there would be no mention of immunity as it wasn't a requirement to be tested.

It wasn't until the 2004 update (2004/108/EC) of the EMC Directive that a receiver had to be checked in order that: the apparatus has an adequate level of intrinsic immunity to electromagnetic disturbance to enable it to operate as intended. Prior to that, this wasn't a requirement and the argument would be that it will operate as intended, just not, as owners of numerous different makes of car have discovered, when in close proximity to another radio transmitter. The fact that a spurious signal on the correct frequency causes the BeCM to wake and drain the battery is not the fault of the receiver but how its use has been implemented.

The fact that there were no immunity requirements for a receiver until 2004, may be why the 3rd generation receiver was introduced as without compliance with this Directive, it could not be CE marked and therefore could not placed on the market in the EU., That is probably also the reason why even if you wanted to buy one, LR will not sell you a Gen 1 or Gen 2 receiver as they are no longer compliant.

Because the receiver isn't faulty as such, it just has very poor performance. The car manufacturers order something to do a particular job but they aren't RF engineers so they go to a company that produce receivers and tell them what job they want it to do and want it as cheap as possible. So that is what they get, a cheap, poor quality unit that will do the job asked of it. Just not in an increasingly hostile RF environment.

Key Code Lockout is something totally different. That comes up when you reconnect, or charge, the battery after something has caused the immobiliser to be on. So if the battery goes flat after the car has been locked with the fob, it will come up as soon as you reconnect or connect a charger to the battery. That will stay on the dash for 10 minutes on an early car or 30 minutes on a late one, during which time you cannot do anything. You can't enter the EKA, you can't connect diagnostics to the BeCM and you can't sync the fob. All you have to do is wait until it goes out and after it goes out, then you can enter the EKA. The battery on my spare car (a 96 so early in this context) used to go flat after 4-5 weeks of not using it (doesn't now as I put a solar charger on it to keep it topped up) so if the fob wouldn't unlock it, I would have to unlock with the key, open the bonnet, connect the charger and Keycode Lockout would come up immediately.(as it had been locked with the fob and unlocked with the key). Leave it until it went out and I can enter the EKA and sync the fobs. Prior to entering the EKA, it displays, Engine Immobilised, Press Remote or Enter Code. Admittedly it does it in 3 hits as the display isn't wide enough to show it all, but you do get the information and both options.

Back in the mid 1990's, following a request from a BMW main agent to investigate problems with the remote locking on a brand new 7 series, I was tasked with carrying out the tests to ascertain the cause of the problem. Having done the tests, I sent a report condemning the appalling performance of the receiver, to the main agent, who passed it to BMW UK, who passed it to BMW in Germany who then passed it to the manufacturers of the receiver. The response basically said when you pay 0.09 Euros each for the receivers, you can't expect quality. It wouldn't surprise me if the same, or at least a very similar, receiver was the one used in the P38.

Problem with using the key regularly is wear on the cam and plunger that operates the switch and the pip on the microswitch itself. When the key is turned one way or the other, the plunger pushes on the pip to operate the microswitch. So when you turn the key, the CDL switch is operated mechanically by the same mechanism that moves the sill locking button and the keyswitch is operated by the action of turning the key. However, over time the cam that operates the plunger, the plunger and the microswitch wear so it will operate when turning the key to lock but not when turning to unlock. It can also be temperature related as the latch on my spare car works perfectly in warm weather but not when it gets cold. I suspect a tiny amount of thermal expansion in the components is enough to press the pip in the microswitch far enough for it to operate the switch when warm, but not when cold.

Consequently you lock the car with the key and both the CDL and keyswitch operate so the car is locked and the alarm and immobiliser are set. When you unlock the car the CDL switch operates but the keyswitch doesn't so the system thinks someone has smashed the window and unlocked the car by pulling up the sill locking button. That opens the car but leaves the alarm and immobiliser set. With the keyswitch not operating reliably, you can't enter the EKA either as it uses a combination of the signals from the CDL and keyswitch to detect the number of key turns and which direction it is being turned in. Note that the mechanism that operates the keyswitch does just that and only that, so if it is used as intended with the key only used very infrequently, no wear occurs so it will work (although, as I found yesterday when checking mine to confirm, the lock barrel itself can get a bit 'gritty' from lack of use)..

I suppose you could snip the Blue/Red wire to the latch. That way the keyswitch would never operate so when you lock it will only be the CDL switch that operates so the car will think you are sitting in the car and have locked it by pushing the sill locking button down. It won't set the alarm or immobiliser so the car will be physically locked but unprotected.

As I said earlier, once the EKA has been entered once, you can lock and unlock with the key without needing it again as long as both switches are operating. A problem only occurs when one or other switch becomes intermittent.

Early cars have passive immobilisation (unless turned off) but don't have the coil, hence the "Engine Immobilised, Press Remote or Enter Code" if you have passive turned on and don't start within the pre-determined time limit. As the message says, it is immobilised but pressing Unlock on the fob turns it off and, if that doesn't work, it needs the EKA.

Anything that can be installed can be uninstalled, hence the requirement for embedded security..
Lockouts usually caused by the owner doing something wrong, wear in a part designed to be used occasionally rather than all the time or not being aware of how the EKA system works.
The receiver problems aren't unique to the P38, identical problems occurred with many other cars of similar vintage from multiple manufacturers, about the only ones that didn't suffer were Peugeot who used an Infra Red remote rather than RF. They aren't as well known though as most of those cars have been scrapped years ago unlike the P38 which has continued up way beyond its original design life. Problems weren't that common back then either. Having worked in RF for over 40 years, back then the usable spectrum stopped at 1GHz and not up to 60GHz as it is these days and there was considerably less of it about too.
You shouldn't need to install switches in parallel as the original switches, or more correctly the keyswitch (the one that wears), should only ever have been used a few tens of times. Rather than lacking vision, they had the vision to provide an emergency alternative for the time when the primary method of locking and unlocking the car, the remote, wouldn't work for whatever reason. Using the key all the time is abusing something that was put there as an occasional use, emergency feature.

As for what is it like to own, etc, all I would say is you need to set aside a couple of days every few months for routine servicing and a bit of preventative maintenance and if anything doesn't feel, sound or operate as it should, deal with it immediately.

You can't disable the immobiliser (except by having your engine ECU modified), only passive immobilisation. A non-removable immobiliser has been mandatory on all cars sold since the mid-1990's. If you disable the EKA how are you going to start it when the fob goes flat or you are in an area where the fob won't work? Ordinarily you would simply enter the EKA, start the car and drive home but if you have turned off the EKA then what do you do?

Locking with the fob and unlocking with the key doesn't confuse anything, it does exactly what it was designed to do, stop the car from being stolen. It doesn't know if you are using the key, have jammed a screwdriver in the lock barrel and forced it or given the valet key to someone so they can open the car (and give it a valet) but not go joyriding in it. That is when the EKA is needed to turn the immobiliser off.

There are a lot of people that think it is a stupid design and have tried ways to get around it but it is actually a well designed and well thought out system to stop the car being stolen. It has two weak links, the poor performance of the receiver (but that isn't insurmountable) and the fact that the plastic internals of the latch that operate the keyswitch wear when it is overused. The poor performance of the receiver is down to the supplier doing it on the cheap and the weakness in the keyswitch mechanism is because it was never intended to be used all the time, only in emergencies.

The relay attacks are the reason why insurance companies have got very twitchy about insuring later models and are down to keyless entry and start, probably the most stupid idea that answers a question nobody ever asked. Did anyone ever say, "wouldn't it be nice if I didn't have to press this button on the fob to unlock my car and then put a key in a slot to start it?" I doubt it but once one manufacturer does it, they all do. I found myself carrying two keys for a car a couple of weeks ago. It was one where if you have the key in your pocket, the doors unlock as soon as you put your hand on the door handle. Only problem was, the spare key was in the centre console so even if you didn't have the key in your pocket, it could detect the spare as being close enough and would unlock the doors, making locking it a complete waste of time until I took the spare out and put that one in my pocket too.

As I said, if passive immobilisation is enabled and you don't start the car within the time limit, the immobiliser is enabled again. In that case, the valet key won't start the car unless you use it to enter the EKA first.

If you locked with the fob, then use the valet key to unlock (it will only unlock the drivers door, the central locking won't work on the other doors) and try to start immediately, it still won't start the car until you enter the EKA. Once the EKA is successfully accepted, the other doors will unlock and the car will start.

However, if you lock with the valet key and unlock with the valet key and start within the time limit, it will start as locking with a valet key sets the immobiliser but unlocking with the same key turns it off again.

If passive immobilisation is turned off, once unlocked and the immobiliser is turned off (either by using the fob or entering the EKA), it stays off and doesn't re-enable after the set time so it doesn't matter how long you wait before starting the car. It doesn't need to be started within the time limit and the coil does not send a pulse so the LED on the fob doesn't flash (an easy way to see if it is enabled or not).

So, if you lock with the fob and unlock with the key, it will need the EKA.
Once that has been entered and accepted, you can subsequently lock with the key and unlock with the key and it will not need the EKA again, it only needs it the first time it is unlocked but not afterwards. I've just been outside to check on mine to confirm (which has passive immobilisation turned off) and I can lock with the fob, unlock with the key and once the EKA has been entered once, I can then lock and unlock with the key without it asking for the EKA.

If you have a faulty door latch microswitch (either the CDL or keyswitch) so can't enter the EKA with the key, on a car with a BeCM of V36 or later (mid-97 onwards) you can use a Nanocom to key in the EKA instead. If you have an early car with a BeCM earlier than V36, then when the car is immobilised a Nanocom cannot connect to the BeCM so you can't enter the EKA with it. You can only enter the EKA by turning the key in the door. That is what causes more problems than anything when someone with an early car also has a dead or dying microswitch in the door latch so it doesn't recognise the key being turned so you can't enter the EKA in the normal way.

Try it, wind yourself a coil of thin wire and put it around your keyfob. Give it a short pulse of 12V, preferably via a resistor to limit the current so you don't burn it out, and the LED on the fob will flash.

davew wrote:

Presumably a code (via said inductor plus coil) is sent to the BECM & etc.

NOOOO. The coil sends a pulse (a simple on-off pulse) when the microswitch in the ignition switch detects you have put the key in the ignition (the same one that gives the Ignition Key In warning when you open the car door with the engine off but the key still in the ignition). That pulse causes the remote to transmit the unlock code by electrically pressing the Unlock button. That causes it to transmit the code which is received by the receiver and passed to the BeCM, no different to you pressing the button. The coil does nothing more than cause it to do it.

If you have never changed the heater core O rings since you have had the car, they will likely need doing. Despite what you may have heard, it is a relatively simple job, just a bit fiddly. The last time we had a P38 summer camp, I did 3 sets in as many hours.

Easy to tell if the heater blowers are working, just take the pollen filters out and have a look down the hole. If you see a stationary fan, it isn't working.

Genuine Febi cap can be got from Amazon of all places, see https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B0068M7JNA/

No, all there is in the fob is a surface mount inductor that sees a pulse from the coil and that triggers it to send an unlock code. Unlike many cars there is no RFID device in there. As an aside, I got a panicked call from my son-in-law one day to say his car wouldn't start when he came out of work. The key blade in his fob was loose so he had pulled it out so he didn't lose it and was trying to start the car holding it in a pair of pliers. I asked him for the rest of the key, held it next to the ignition lock and it fired straight up. So a Toyota has an RFID transponder in the key but a P38 doesn't which is why it can be started with a cut key blank. The delay between unlocking the car and starting the engine is 30 or 60 seconds, I don't remember exactly which. Easy way to test, assuming you have passive immobilisation enabled, will be to unlock with the remote fob, open the door and wait before trying to start the car with the valet key. If it will start after 40 seconds, the delay isn't 30.....

I've only ever had one remote fob with my car so I got 2 cut by my local Timsons. One is kept in the house while the other is concealed under the car. That way if I lose the key while hundreds of miles away from home, I can get the one from under the car and use that to enter the EKA and start the car.

If you want a flip key, your local LR dealer is the only option. If you don't mind a rigid key, CNRW is the only option. If you just want a non-remote key, you SHOULD be able to persuade Timsons to order in a blank and cut one for you, mine did but, as you seem to have found, not all are as helpful as others.

davew wrote:

Thanks for the additional data Richard, with my comment about the (passive) immobiliser coil I was just drawing attention (for those without a nano etc) that a basic VALET key (no fob etc) will not -necessarily !- on its own start our cars !

Yes it will. If Passive immobilisation is on, it will start it as long as you do it within the time limit after unlocking the car. If the car had been locked with the fob and is unlocked with a valet key, it will need the EKA entering first but if it was locked with a valet key it can be unlocked and started with it without having to enter the EKA. When most people talk about an immobiliser coil they are referring to one that picks up a signal from a transponder in the key so you must have the correct key in the ignition. If anything, a correct term for it would be a mobilisation coil as it only sends a signal to the fob and the fob transmits to the receiver just the same as when you press the button.

That said does anyone know of a supplier that can cut/copy the fob-type keys (and at a reasonable price) ?

Yes, CRNW can. They can't do a flip style fob but can do a rigid Discovery style remote fob either from the Lockset Barcode or by copying what you have (at around half the price of a genuine flip key from Land Rover). They can also program and cut a key for NAS spec cars using the 315MHz fob which are NLA from Land Rover.

davew wrote:
(and start older ones without the immobiliser coil on the ign. switch etc)

It isn't an immobiliser coil, it is a trigger to cause the fob to transmit an unlock code. If Passive Immobilisation is enabled and you unlock the car but don't start it within a predetermined time, the immobiliser kicks in again. On an early car when you go to start you get the message "Engine Disabled, Press Remote or Enter Code". In this case, you need to either press the Unlock button on the fob or enter the EKA. On a car with the coil, when you put the key in the ignition, the coil causes the fob to transmit the unlock code without you having to do it manually. On my car the coil hasn't worked since I've owned it so I got into the habit of pressing Unlock before trying to start it whether it needed it or not. As soon as I got the Nanocom I disabled Passive Immobilisation so the immobiliser doesn't kick in no matter how long you leave it between unlocking the car and starting the engine. Simple way to tell if it is enabled is to look at the key when you put it in to the ignition. If the LED on it flashes, Passive Immobilisation is enabled, if it doesn't it isn't (or the coil has died).

The overflow from the coolant reservoir drips down behind the RH front wheel. If you have filled to the upper mark and the pressure cap has reached its sell by date, it will be pushing some out of the overflow. Have a look below the reservoir and you may see damp down there.

Aragorn wrote:

I dont really get the stop start hate. I suspect its just the usual humans-dont-like-change thing that applies to so many things... As the chap above points out, if it was always there you wouldnt think twice about it.

I don't have a problem with it and the reasoning behind it, what I have a problem with is the way it actually slows traffic flow. When sitting at a roundabout or a junction with no traffic lights, you look for a gap in the traffic to pull out into. In a manual you floor the throttle and dump the clutch, in an auto you just floor the throttle and in both cases the acceleration is instant. When I first drove a car with stop start, I expected the same instant getaway and it didn't happen so by the time it started to move, the gap was too small to slot into. So the queue of traffic building up behind me had to wait even longer and the queue just gets bigger. Hence discovering that I could cause the engine to restart by twitching the steering wheel in advance so it would go when I told it to and not when it decided it was going to.

The only manual I have driven with stop start was easy, just don't take it out of gear and the engine doesn't stop so it is ready to go when you want it to.

Pierre3 wrote:

It is still a pain that a replacement accumulator is around £120, but if you buy the original one, Landrover made, from Rimmers it is around £400, I think. Mad money.

and of course Land Rover didn't make it, Wabco did. So the Wabco one at £120 is identical to the Wabco one in a Land Rover box at £400. Bloody expensive cardboard box.....