Agreed. Whatever the cause, it’s not good nor necessary for that to happen. It’s a good visual signal that something is not quite right. And as aforementioned driving style can cause these issues as well.

I also find it can have an affect on the gearbox learned programmes as well. First thing I tend to do is reset the lot when I get a second hand car.

Bl4ckD0g wrote:

Hmmm using the engine doesn’t cause soot, don’t mistake the symptom of another problem for the cause. If it does that you have a problem.

DPFs need to get hot enough to be able to do a Regen. A 20 mile motorway trip once a week is sufficient to keep them clear.

Not sure you're understanding there's a specific reason the 4.4 needs a regular Italian tune up / rag / whatever you want to call it. A motorway trip won't just engage the 2nd turbo, neither will getting the engine hot. The 4.4 needs a rag in order that there is boost pressure running through the hoses, to keep the oil behind it's seals and burn off deposits. The turbo actuators dont open until around 2,400rpm. You can't do it just by changing a gear either because the ECU won't command any boost from the turbo - it requires high throttle command also.

Not all engines enjoy a rag but I'll say again, there's a specific design flaw in the 4.4 which means this is necessary. 2015 Range Rover Autobiography 4.4 SDV8

I disagree there is any engineering need to regularly clear oil buildup in the 2nd turbo. You may not like the smoke if you regularly like to drive hard but it’s not detrimental to engine or component life. 2012 TDV8 Vogue (L322)

Oil in quantity reaching the combustion chamber will damage the cats and DPF. You don't want to be suddenly burning off a quantity of oil which has accumulated in the turbo, as this will be sure to shorten component life and certainly going to shorten turbo life.

Burning a few small deposits at a time is healthier for the engine than a larger quantity each time. Once burned off, the turbo engine runs clean when the 2nd turbo is boosting.

You can disagree but, I'm just trying to explain there was a known design flaw with the engine and your options are a modified drain pipe to the turbo or, to keep it clear of oil. It's certainly something you don't want to happen on an MOT, as any visible particulates on vehicles with DPFs are a fail. 2015 Range Rover Autobiography 4.4 SDV8

By what process is a short burn of oil worse than a long burn of the same amount? As long as you are using low ash oil ( as you should be) there is no issue to the CAT or especially the DPF. All turbos leak some oil as they operate anyway and excessive oil leaks due to worn seals or blocked drains is a separate issue. No MOT test involves a full load test so it won’t fail on this. I know it’s a design flaw but IMO it’s a ‘cosmetic’ issue. For some who regularly ‘need’ >2400rpm then sure you are saving yourself the embarrassment at the cost of increased ( however small) component wear and stress of a regular Italian tune. With these cars now getting to be a minimum of 10yrs old I’d suggest for prolonged life it’s wise not to stress any component any more than absolutely necessary and 700nm is a lot of stress on tap…….. 2012 TDV8 Vogue (L322)

I'm going to end it there because I'm not getting into an argument just over what I recognise as a difference of opinion. 2015 Range Rover Autobiography 4.4 SDV8

Yes simply a difference of opinion and everyone uses their vehicle their own way and what’s right for some is not for others
I assume they added the drain on the L405 SDV8 ?
Apart from the oil cooler seals and aux belt tensioner the 4.4 is a very good engine and together with the ZF8spd was good enough to put in the L405 with some extra emissions controls. AFAIK it’s basically a ‘truck’ originally engine designed for the Ford F-150 so likely would in that application ( heavier) have regularly been worked harder. I doubt then envisaged drivers like me wafting along at 1400rpm all day long….. 2012 TDV8 Vogue (L322)

Yes, that's right. It was designed for the F-150 but Ford decided to continue with petrol in the American market and the 4.4 V8 diesel went into the Range Rover instead. I think it was designed to tow 6 tonnes but because we're Europeans and weak, the maximum cars are allowed to tow is 3.5T.

The SDV8 in the L405 has a few modifications, including turbo drain and a bit more power. I think actually that the engine was sourced for the L405 and Land Rover began testing the new tech on late L322s, which is why the 4.4 V8, ZF8 and active body control, DRLs etc all feature in the L405, albeit with improvements made.

As much as people hate the 3.0 SDV6, I actually rate it highly. It's so smooth and quiet, makes a lovely noise and for a small(ish) block, puts out loads of power. My dad has it in his XF and my brother in his F Pace.

It's a shame Land Rover have just ended the production and moved to their new Ingenium engines but, a straight 6 does make servicing and repairs considerably easier than a V8.

I don't know of this is actually true but it feels like there's more space around the 4.4 than the 3.6. When I looked into it, cylinder bore is only slightly wider and it's the length which provides the greater capacity. And the engine runs at 10% lower compression so, the walls can be slightly thinner. Anyone know if the block is actually more compact than the 3.6? The intake manifold is considerably less complex than the one on the 3.6 and considerably smaller so, it could just be this fooling my eyes. 2015 Range Rover Autobiography 4.4 SDV8

Also the kerb weight of the 4.4 is less than the 3.6. I'd love a V6 as I (obviously) don't need the full power of the 4.4 but I just don't trust the cranks. The main reason I didn't get a D4 was the crank issue and it's not the 2nd, 3rd hand experiences I've read it's people I have met personally who have had this happen. New cars with 200miles on them and older ones with 100k+ miles. Best explanation I've seen is that it's a 4cyl size block with 6 cyl in it and thus has wafer thin crank webs.... 2012 TDV8 Vogue (L322)

LR did fix the crank issue - at the workshop, they were saying they don't really see them coming in for fix anymore.

I think it's the noise from people though. Just under 9/10 L494s and L405s sold have the 3.0L SDV6 so, if it makes up 90% of engines sold, of course you're going to hear the most about it. I have often thought about doing a FOI request to Land Rover to get the true stats on crank failure in that engine, I imagine it's actually very low numbers. 2015 Range Rover Autobiography 4.4 SDV8

Last edited by garyRR on 11th Dec 2021 10:00am. Edited 1 time in total

How did they fix it? The person with 200miles on it was offered a new engine but said they wanted a new car as obviously a car with a replacement engine is worth less when you come to sell it so if the majority of customers are doing this then the workshops won't see these failures..... 2012 TDV8 Vogue (L322)