If you've adjusted it up properly, even if the drum is full of ATF, it'll still hold the car. As long as they test it properly and do both wheels at the same time.....

Pierre3 wrote:

Thanks for the description of the electrical plug shown in the picture. I noticed that mine is only just holding on as the plastic clip, that holds it, is broken on one side. I may have to consider replacing it, but with what I am not sure.

Tie wraps are the usual solution to most broken clips.....

No, OBD scanner only does OBD diagnostics which is engine and, possibly, gearbox. Your cheapest option is the RSWUnlock V4 software which does everything except SRS faults. On a GEMS, any SRS fault needs the ECU to be reset after a fault is cleared so is a pretty important omission.

Have you never heard of crows foot sockets, like this https://www.amazon.co.uk/Siegen-S0845-Drive-Flare-Spanner/dp/B003OX85ES/ref=asc_df_B003OX85ES/? A pair of those would get in there no problem, although you would need two ratchets......

The connector is the supply and feedback for the transfer box range change motor, which is on the back of the transfer box alongside the transmission brake drum..

Was the rubber split or cut? One way of breaking into a P38 is to pull the rubber down between the tailgate and bumper and then use a sharp knife blade to put a ground on one wire at a time until you find the one that comes from the door latch (which is why they are all one colour to make it harder to find the correct one). It's also another way of opening the tailgate if the door latch is faulty. That would put a break in the insulation so weaken the wires and allow the conductors to corrode.

Yes, tailgate is linked from the RH front door latch, irrespective of what side the driver sits on. Power comes from F15 which powers lots of other things so you'd know if that had blown. Power travels on a Purple wire into a connector behind the trim on the RH side of the boot. From there all wires are white (a security thing) so it is easy to find the right one, wires on one side are different colours and all are white on the other side. In the same connector you have a Green/Red wire which goes back to the RH door latch and should have a ground on it when the RH front door is unlocked. Power goes to the tailgate latch, through that to the pushbutton and the other side of the pushbutton goes to the ground wire. So when you push the button in, power goes through the latch (to release it) via the button to ground from the door latch.

If you can get the lower tailgate carpet trim off, you can test at both the latch and the switch.

There will be backlash in the transfer case chain and in the rear diff, so you will be able to rotate the drum enough to see if it is binding or not. You don't back it off just enough to let it turn (unless you like the smell of burning brake linings and a red hot glow from under the car), you follow RAVE. Tighten it to the specified torque and then back it off 1.5 turns. If you have free play in the lever, then adjust the cable to take the slack out of that.

A proper P38 has 4 bolts on the propshaft but I believe the diesel only has 3 and a rubber donut thing. You're the one that is under it, I don't think I've ever been under a diesel! The separate picture in the left corner of this pic https://new.lrcat.com/#!/1234/87921/88144/6934/88159.bolts are M12 x 65 according to that.

Stainless would only be marginally stronger than tie-wraps, you need to use high tensile bolts so they don't just shear off the first time you put your foot down. I went for Allen headed, but in the same size, 3/8UNF, with a washer under the bolt head, so I can use a long hex key without the UJ yokes getting in the way.

The bolts for the flanges are 3/8UNF thread and 30mm (1 1/8") long, the bolts for the guard are M8x25 as the picture Harv linked to shows. I replaced my propshaft flange bolts with Allen headed ones to make undoing them a lot easier. Just took one out, measured it and went to my local nut and bolt supplier. Got new Nyloc nuts for the other end too.

As long as both rear wheels are off the ground when you turn one wheel the other will turn in the opposite direction through the diff. Any movement will only go through to the front wheels if the propshaft it turned, which it won't unless you have only one wheel off the ground. The centre diff can't freewheel, it has a viscous coupling inside it joining front a rear drive. If you put it in transfer case neutral then you will be able to turn the rear propshaft without it turning the fronts but then there will be nothing to stop the front from rolling.

Why do you need to lift the rear wheels off the ground anyway?

From your question on the other thread, I've been under mine today. The adjuster on the handbrake cable couldn't be easier to access. It is about level with the rear of the transfer case, there's nothing in the way to stop you getting at it.

Agreed but this was probably the simplest bit of troubleshooting possible. Low voltage at the ECU, low voltage at the only connection between the ECU and the fusebox, low voltage at the output of the fusebox but full voltage at the fuse. Had I had the ETM with me on the first visit, it would have saved the trip to collect the, not required, replacement ECU. It must have taken far longer getting access to the ECU that to actually identify the fault. Its a case of following things through in a logical order, something many seem to have forgotten how to do (if they ever knew in the first place) these days.

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.