 | Home > Puma (Tdci) > Output shaft failure, Forum Survey |
 
|
|
|
| MK Member Since: 28 Aug 2008 Location: Santiago Posts: 2262   
|
Are you planning to ask Ashcroft about this issue? Puma 110" SW
............................................................. Earth first. Other planets later |
||
17th Jan 2022 11:01pm |
|
| DSC-off Member Since: 16 Oct 2014 Location: North East Posts: 1351  
|
If the original shaft has lasted 127K miles, A) Ashcroft, would probably never need replacing again.* C) Standard & grease, a new one should last a similar mileage as the first one. Treat it as a consumable item and replace it at, say 90K or 100K, or if the gearbox / transfer has to come out. It depends what you're comfortable with for risk and expense. 127K miles on a 2014 year gives us some reassurance that not all of the late ones are bad. * The only reservation with A) is the recent failure of Keith's at the regular failure interval. We've not seen any pictures of what happened there. |
||
|
18th Jan 2022 12:59am |
|
| ashtrans Site Sponsor Member Since: 08 Nov 2008 Location: Harpenden Posts: 254
|
"* The only reservation with A) is the recent failure of Keith's at the regular failure interval.
We've not seen any pictures of what happened there." Correct, we are still awaiting details of the failure Keith has had, please don't speculate on this failure or our product until Keith shows his findings. Dave |
||
|
18th Jan 2022 5:20pm |
|
| spudfan Member Since: 10 Sep 2007 Location: Co Donegal Posts: 4482 
|
I thought I was doing well with 197073 KMS (122455 MILES) on a 2008 2.4 Puma which is still on it's original factory fitted shaft. Also have a 2011 2.4 but less miles which is also on it's original shaft. 1982 88" 2.25 diesel 1992 110 200tdi csw -Zikali 2008 110 2.4 tdci csw-Zulu 2011 110 2.4 tdci csw-Masai |
||
|
18th Jan 2022 5:52pm |
|
| Caterham Member Since: 06 Nov 2008 Location: Birmingham Posts: 6264  
|
just a thought on this.
the idea of installing grease nipples if I'm not mistaken was undertaken by someone on here (I'm sure it was) and is mentioned above as a possible by LR themselves. I wonder how whoever it was that installed them is getting on / how many miles they've covered? |
||
|
18th Jan 2022 6:13pm |
|
| LR90XS2011 Member Since: 05 Apr 2011 Location: bickenhill Posts: 3614 
|
I think it was Ian series1 somewhere earlier in this thread DEFENDER 90 TDCI XS,
I hope everyone is well and your land rovers make you happy |
||
|
18th Jan 2022 6:27pm |
|
| nitram17 Member Since: 09 Jun 2014 Location: newcastle Posts: 2260 |
They will say its a fitting issue! |
||
|
19th Jan 2022 1:33pm |
|
| Caterham Member Since: 06 Nov 2008 Location: Birmingham Posts: 6264
|
you'd think LR would be 'man enough' to explain what the problem is and a remedy even if it were at a cost?
|
||
|
19th Jan 2022 1:37pm |
|
| Grenadier Member Since: 23 Jul 2014 Location: The foot of Mont Blanc... Posts: 5765  
|
I’m still of the opinion it’s gearbox/trans alignment, how they’re fitted at factory and whether there are any other influencing factors. My second died last Nov. On removal it looked almost identical to the first failure. What was noticeable when dismantling everything, was that the trans case support/bush had completely failed, with the rubber having detached from the mounting plate and slid down a cm or two. That could only have put stress on the alignment if everything dropped. (Influencing factor?).
So if, as some have said on here, the angle required to mate the 2.4 to the MT82 to the trans case is ‘unnatural’ (and if I’m right, tilts downwards from front to back), then perhaps the OS is already under stress even when new and any failure could be brought on by further misalignment caused by support failure, whether trans and gearbox mounts or engine mounts? Indeed, if you look at my photo, you’ll see the wear is most severe at the top, getting less and less prevalent along the length of the spline. This would seem to indicate that the OS is being pulled down to its rear, creating extra friction to the head of the shaft (oo-er  ). I certainly can’t think of any other reason the wear would gradually (almost uniformly) lessen along the length of the spline.
So I’ve just popped in a brand new Ashcroft shaft, which is a thing of beauty, and replaced the two gearbox and trans mounts. And I’ve tried my best to tighten all the bolts uniformly. Let’s see what happens. What does anyone else think of this hypothesis?  Click image to enlarge Monsieur Le Grenadier I've not been everywhere, but it's on my list..... 2011 Puma 110DC - Corris Grey |
||
|
19th Jan 2022 2:01pm |
|
| ashtrans Site Sponsor Member Since: 08 Nov 2008 Location: Harpenden Posts: 254
|
Hi MK, I am not sure if you mis read the post from 'natyeo' or if I have mis understood your comment, note his 2014, 90 has lost drive, our shaft kit is in his 2012, 90, thanks, Dave Dave |
||
|
19th Jan 2022 2:17pm |
|
| Caterham Member Since: 06 Nov 2008 Location: Birmingham Posts: 6264
|
once the engine, gearbox, extension and transfer box are all bolted together I'm not sure but suspect the angle of installation becomes irrelevant.
one of my input shafts upon inspection was not fully inserted ie the spring clip had not retained the shaft and hence wear was only obvious at the end of the splines - similar to yours? Last edited by Caterham on 19th Jan 2022 3:33pm. Edited 1 time in total |
||
|
19th Jan 2022 2:17pm |
|
| ashtrans Site Sponsor Member Since: 08 Nov 2008 Location: Harpenden Posts: 254
|
see above post, why would you suggest this Nitram 17 ? Dave Dave |
||
|
19th Jan 2022 2:18pm |
|
| Dinnu Member Since: 24 Dec 2019 Location: Lija Posts: 3210  
|
Having a nose up installation of the engine - gearbox - transfer case is not an influencing factor for the wear of the adaptor shaft.
But the pictures from Grenadier above suggest that there is an angular misalignment rather than a radial offset which has been the most favored hypothesis. Nigel, also a forum member made a fantastic video on how to measure gbox to TC misalignmnet. May watch on his your tube channel ). The problem with Nigels' method is due the assumption that the problem is an axial misalignment. Would have been nice if the rear most bearing race on the TC input gear was also clocked and compared with the forward most reading. That would show if there is also an angular misalignment. 1988 90 Hard Top, 19J Diesel Turbo, Shire Blue - Restoration ongoing 2012 90 CSW, 2.2TDCI, Santorini Black |
||
|
19th Jan 2022 2:26pm |
|
| Grenadier Member Since: 23 Jul 2014 Location: The foot of Mont Blanc... Posts: 5765
|
Good post. It makes one wonder, therefore, if it’s a QC problem? Is there a problem with the angles of the two faces that meet between the MT82 and trans case? Clearly the MT82 was brought in off the shelf to be married to (I think I’m right in saying) the already used trans case. If so, perhaps some light fettling was done (or wasn’t done, but was required) to the trans case in order for it to marry to the MT82 and that the problems stem from what could have been a back-of-fag-packet solution, as was the theme for all later development of the Defender by LR. The angle of the respective faces would only need to be an ‘nth’ of a degree out between top and bottom to stress the OS. Easily done if the work was carried out by hand. Another hypothesis, clearly. Monsieur Le Grenadier
I've not been everywhere, but it's on my list..... 2011 Puma 110DC - Corris Grey |
||
|
19th Jan 2022 2:33pm |
|
|
|
| All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
< Previous Topic | Next Topic > |
Posting Rules
|
Site Copyright © 2006-2024 Futuranet Ltd & Martin Lewis
