Looking at a grenade I mean an SDV6. They want strong money for it but think they will come down as it need a few scuffs sorting and it’s been on for a while.

It’s a 2017 on 80k miles and with the track record of this engine, would putting a new crank and bearings in get me a lot more life out of it? There is nothing wrong mechanically this would purely be preemptive

Cheers Current stable:
2006 BMW M6
2007 4.2 V8 S/C FF
Gone:
2002 4.4 V8 FF

I honestly don't think that'd be required. It might even introduce a problem that wasn't there to start with!

There are known issues with TDV6 & SDV6 cranks, as you will have read / experienced / seen on the 'LR Time' channel on YouTube.

Some engines fail at just 80K with full main dealer history, whilst others happily plug away to over 200K with minimum servicing! Don't forget though, there are literally tens of thousands of this engine unit out there in Disco's, Rangie's, Jags, Citroëns, etc. All reliably plugging away for many-many years.

I'm not at all sure that every report of a 'snapped crank' actually is a crank failure. Ebay and Facebook has, at any one time, a number of vehicles for sale with a 'snapped crank'. I can't help but think that every single locked engine is being diagnosed as a snapped crank, when it could just as likely (probably more likely) be a failed timing belt that's caused catastrophic engine failure!

I'd focus on ensuring that the vehicle has a perfect service history, demonstrating regular oil changes (at least every year) and had the timing belt changed by now (due every 7 years I believe).

If it really worries you, and you're thinking of going to all that bother of re-cranking & re-shelling an engine, wouldn't you be better off going for the SDV8?

Jon 1992 RR Classic 3.9 efi Vogue
2014 Disco 4 HSE
===================
Both my fatties now gone...
Previous: 2011 L322 4.4 TDV8 Vogue SE /// 2002 L322 4.4 V8 HSE /// 2009 Discovery 3 2.7 TDV6 XS /// 2004 Defender 90 TD5 /// 1993 110 V8 Snatch Landrover /// 2005 Discovery 3 2.7 TDV6 SE (Aus) /// 1990 110 Isuzu 3.9 County (Aus) /// 1976 Series III Trayback (Aus)

Oil dilution... forgot to mention that. Make sure this vehicle hasn't been doing lot and lots of short runs! You don't want a Chelsea Nannies car that's been sat in traffic for hundreds of hours, clogging the DPF and having multiple failed DPF regens, leading to more diesel than oil in the sump.

Not good for the bottom end!

J 1992 RR Classic 3.9 efi Vogue
2014 Disco 4 HSE
===================
Both my fatties now gone...
Previous: 2011 L322 4.4 TDV8 Vogue SE /// 2002 L322 4.4 V8 HSE /// 2009 Discovery 3 2.7 TDV6 XS /// 2004 Defender 90 TD5 /// 1993 110 V8 Snatch Landrover /// 2005 Discovery 3 2.7 TDV6 SE (Aus) /// 1990 110 Isuzu 3.9 County (Aus) /// 1976 Series III Trayback (Aus)

Good advise - tbh there seem to be more and more sdv8 failures as they get older and as you say the sdv6 and tdv6 sold many more units - the failure rate seems abut the same if you talk percentages Current stable:
2006 BMW M6
2007 4.2 V8 S/C FF
Gone:
2002 4.4 V8 FF

Just to add a bit of balance, oil dilution can be a bit of a red herring, and often mentioned by unqualified “armchair experts”, almost like we are all potentially driving round with 50/50 oil/diesel mix in our engines, -nothing could be further from the truth, and therefore I suspect has nothing to do with snapped cranks whatsoever, given the vehicle is serviced sympathetically:

A bit OTT I know but I have been sampling my own TDV6 oil, & testing every 6 months/2500 miles (each time the oil & filter are changed), and with mostly urban use, the dilution never gets above 1%, -consistently. (How many of those internet loud mouths pay £50 every 6 months to have their oil analysed independently?) No, only us nerds who love our cars do that, of course.

So, do the vehicle algorithms tend to wildly overestimate the actual dilution, as on that basis to get to the 10% limit would apparently take 25000 miles. (Not saying that 10% is anything less than stupid, but even at say 12,500 miles/5% dilution, you would have been crazy not to have had the oil changed, unless you were completely unaware), however thanks to the “miles to service” warning which depletes the actual mileage by a ratio above 3:1, our 16000m oil change interval becomes 4K-5K miles, which is about right, suggesting something JLR knew all along, hence explaining the raft of free “arduous” oil change services initially offered by JLR, before everything got out of hand and they started blaming “driving style” for reasons of fiscal economy.  “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” -where’s the fun in that?

I have some personal experience after my sons 3.0 D4 had a main bearing failure that lead to the seizing of a big-end bearing, then replacing the bearings of a running engine that had travelled 120K kms with trimetal bearings to get rid of the original sputter bearings prior to fitting. Sputter bearings are OK where conditions are perfect but they don't provide the leeway that good trimetal bearings do in less than perfect conditions. The D4 was mine from new for a number of years, it doesn't have a DPF and oil changes have always been very frequent.

On 1 of the 2 centre main bearings of the replacement engine the shells were worn across half of the surface only, indicating that the journal was tapered. The sputter coating of the shells had worn yet it is not expected to wear which meant that before long only the soft aluminium and tin layer would be exposed which would then very quickly be squashed out of the metal backing. Kings trimetal main and big-end bearings for the 2.7/3.0/3.6/4.4 Lion engines, including the slightly modified 3.0 TDV6 in the F150, have 2 wear layers and are all the same bearing shells (part numbers) except for the thrust bearing inserts attached to the rear main shells.

Having become aware of the risky sputter bearings in these engines, I'm now advocating replacing the bearings (not the crankshaft) with trimetal versions as something that can be done to significantly reduce the risk of bearing failure, along with replacing the camshaft sprockets with the current versions at the same time if the engine has the earlier versions. The sprockets were replaced on the replacement engine, as were the belts as they were nearly due.

Get a Petrol  2018 SE SDV8 4.4 Byron Blue

Gremlin500 wrote:

Just to add a bit of balance, oil dilution can be a bit of a red herring, and often mentioned by unqualified “armchair experts”, almost like we are all potentially driving round with 50/50 oil/diesel mix in our engines, -nothing could be further from the truth, and therefore I suspect has nothing to do with snapped cranks whatsoever, given the vehicle is serviced sympathetically::

Hi Jon, sorry but my intentions were purely general, nothing personal at all, just to say oil dilution is an oft-exaggerated cause at times. Oil pressure hardly ever gets mentioned, for example. Given frequent oil/filter changes, it’s a very good idea to fit a new oil pump each time the belt service is done every 5/6 years or 50K miles with these engines. It’s more likely a result of several combining factors which ends in any one catastrophic failure, rather than a single cause, IMHO. “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” -where’s the fun in that?

OK, thanks Gremlin.

I agree with your comments on oil pressure not being mentioned a great deal, and oil pump changes being a good preventative task.

My personal opinion is that oil pressure runs comparatively low in both the SDV6 and the SDV8, especially when coupled with the 8 speed ZF box, which sees cruising speeds being undertaken at very low RPM's and therefore lower oil pressure being generated. Whether this leads to bearing wear / spun bearings is open for debate - even the engine builders can't seem to agree on the cause!

Personally, I think a contributing factor is likely the oil filter housing draining down if the bung / spring has been dislodged and subsequent damage caused by cold starts with zero oil pressure at the mains (until the filter housing fills). Probably only a couple of seconds, but each and every time the vehicle starts after being stopped for 5 minutes or more, and this adds up.

I've mentioned low oil pressure in another thread and I think GraemeS has done some testing with his own vehicles in Oz before and after fitting upgraded oil pumps. Don't want to open a can of worms here about oil pressure vs flow vs pressure at the main bearings though...

I know there have been several iterations of the oil pump since the first TDV6 engined vehicles 20 years ago now. So any 2017 vehicle (like the OP's) should have the thicker uprated pump, but even so, it's good advice to change it.

I still think the OP will be fine, and not need to carry out such drastic preventative work with replacement crank & main bearings, providing that the vehicle has a good documented service history.

Jon 1992 RR Classic 3.9 efi Vogue
2014 Disco 4 HSE
===================
Both my fatties now gone...
Previous: 2011 L322 4.4 TDV8 Vogue SE /// 2002 L322 4.4 V8 HSE /// 2009 Discovery 3 2.7 TDV6 XS /// 2004 Defender 90 TD5 /// 1993 110 V8 Snatch Landrover /// 2005 Discovery 3 2.7 TDV6 SE (Aus) /// 1990 110 Isuzu 3.9 County (Aus) /// 1976 Series III Trayback (Aus)

GraemeS wrote:

I have some personal experience after my sons 3.0 D4 had a main bearing failure that lead to the seizing of a big-end bearing, then replacing the bearings of a running engine that had travelled 120K kms with trimetal bearings to get rid of the original sputter bearings prior to fitting. Sputter bearings are OK where conditions are perfect but they don't provide the leeway that good trimetal bearings do in less than perfect conditions. The D4 was mine from new for a number of years, it doesn't have a DPF and oil changes have always been very frequent.

On 1 of the 2 centre main bearings of the replacement engine the shells were worn across half of the surface only, indicating that the journal was tapered. The sputter coating of the shells had worn yet it is not expected to wear which meant that before long only the soft aluminium and tin layer would be exposed which would then very quickly be squashed out of the metal backing. Kings trimetal main and big-end bearings for the 2.7/3.0/3.6/4.4 Lion engines, including the slightly modified 3.0 TDV6 in the F150, have 2 wear layers and are all the same bearing shells (part numbers) except for the thrust bearing inserts attached to the rear main shells.

Having become aware of the risky sputter bearings in these engines, I'm now advocating replacing the bearings (not the crankshaft) with trimetal versions as something that can be done to significantly reduce the risk of bearing failure, along with replacing the camshaft sprockets with the current versions at the same time if the engine has the earlier versions. The sprockets were replaced on the replacement engine, as were the belts as they were nearly due.

The big-end bearings in the replacement engine didn't show any abnormal wear but were replaced anyway with trimetal bearings.

Some nice lively discussion here, folks!
(And as usual Gremlin likes to stir the pot a bit, or play Devils’ Advocate, lest things get too boring )

This being specifically an L405 thread, we need to be careful not to generalise or indeed go OT into the other earlier models too much, but getting back to the OPs’ question, swapping out bearings as a preventive measure is a bit drastic as a first step. An oil analysis and oil filter teardown will confirm worst fears or allay them, in the absence of any strange sounds. Chunks of metal/glitter in the filter, or bad oil report will then mean an engine out inspection and remedial work before the inevitable very expensive total failure. Far better to repair than replace. My own 2017 TDV6 Gen2 had the timing belt service at 52K last year, so even with the uprated later pump, I junked it and replaced it with a new JLR pump. I mean at £250 why on earth not, whilst they are in there doing the belts, surely it makes perfect sense?

One issue facing potential used FFRR purchasers is the ”TVR factor” as I call it:
As these previously very expensive vehicles age, their value declines, to the point where they suddenly become affordable to those of lesser means, some who may have just enough dosh to purchase, but not to pre-emptively, or even fastidiously, maintain. Servicing may get skipped, aftermarket or even used mechanical parts and backstreet or bodged DIY maintenance begins, some vehicles are not even maintained other than whatever just gets them through an MOT, yet may outwardly look smart and shiny with still smart interior due to original quality. All the more reason for new affictionados to tread carefully, and gain the knowledge before the car. Thankfully, there are forums like this, where enthusiasts care about the cars and share the knowledge, and is usually the best place to begin to learn and perhaps even buy your next FFRR.

Sorry folks! Went a bit OT at the end…..  “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” -where’s the fun in that?

Sputter bearings don't have a wear layer as such and therefore never show in oil analysis until the sputter coating has failed leaving the soft aluminium/tin layer as the bearing material which is very quickly destroyed as it isn't a wear layer. Hence there won't be any indication of a pending bearing failure until the bearing is severely compromised. The idea of replacing the sputter bearings with trimetal bearings is to prevent the sudden demise of a bearing.

Frequent oil anaylsis would give confidence that no bearings are currently disintegrating if aluminium and tin levels haven't suddenly increased. Testing for copper is useless as copper isn't used in sputter bearings.

Ford may have swapped to trimetal bearings for the F150 engine as one bearing manufacturer advertises their trimetal bearings, noting that they are an OEM supplier of the F150's bearings. However that doesn't guarantee that they supplied trimetal beaings for that engine. Ford assessed that the 3.0 bearings fitted to the engine for JLR were of inadequate durability for the work expected of a F150 engine but I haven't found any reference to the changed bearing material specifications or compounds. If Ford changed to trimetal bearings then perhaps they were also fitted to the Gen2 JLR engines which were assembled together on the same production line. However even Gen2 engines have failed with crankshaft issues.

My son's replacement engine had its bearings changed because the engine was already out of the vehicle and the body already removed. Hopefully the body won't ever be removed again due to the expense of doing so.

Has anyone had the Ranger/Amarok version apart yet?