The fact I even need to discuss this is ridiculous.. I must be mad.

Poxy green oval sucks you in.. I should be buying a Porsche or X5.

Surprisingly, Porsche were second from bottom in the recent Carwow reliability survey/video.

I think with anything you buy, especially when it's a few years old, you can as easily be unlucky as lucky and it's how well the dealer sorts the problem that's the most important thing. We bought a Boxster at 2 years old and ran it for 5 years/50,000 miles, the only thing that went wrong was a leaky brake cylinder but as it's located above the footwell it made a right mess. We had the Porsche warranty, so no hassle getting it sorted and they even took the carpet out to clean it front/back and replaced the mats FOC. I had a 2009 520d from new and it didn't have so much as a rattle until the Turbo let go at 4 years old, but it had done 115,000 miles. That was followed by a 535d Touring (also bought new) which was perfect for every one of the 95,000 miles I did over 3.5 years.

Not so lucky with the 750i which was an ex demo with 1,000 miles on when I bought it and kept it until it was 3 years old and had done 50,000 miles. It had an oil leak on a pipe to the turbo, a coolant leak which took 3 visits to sort out and a squeaky drivers seat which I didn't bother taking it in for a second time. Someone hit it in the carpark while it was in for work the second time, which to their credit they sorted without an argument, but due to the special paint it took 2 goes, 10 days and the support of BMW to get it right. It was a bit of a surprise given the previous BMWs, but not too painful as BMW dealers look after 7 series owners very differently to other models in the range. No waiting for a car to be available, they immediately put me in a demo X5 the first couple of times it was off the road and a brand new 740ld when they did the paintwork.

I did think long and hard about buying a JLR product, but figured that I could be lucky and buying one that was just under 18 months old was probably the lowest risk, but we'll see how it goes.

There's no way I'd be brave enough to run one outside of the manufacturers warranty or something much older! MY23 Panamera E-Hybrid
MY19 SDV8 Autobiography - Sold

Goodfella wrote:

The fact I even need to discuss this is ridiculous.. I must be mad.

Poxy green oval sucks you in.. I should be buying a Porsche or X5.

True, but in all honesty, I don't think the whole V6 Diesel crankshaft issue is as bad as the internet would lead you to believe.

The thing is, you could buy an X5 or a Cayenne but everytime an L405 passes you or you park next to one, you'll always think hmmmm, maybe.

Neither Porsche nor BMW have particularly good reputation for customer service. The got the T Shirt comment I made was over an issue with my other half's X5 and their Used car warranty. Its supposed to be there for peace of mind not so they can pick and choose what they want to cover.

"The thing is, you could buy an X5 or a Cayenne but everytime an L405 passes you or you park next to one, you'll always think hmmmm, maybe"

That was what made me take the plunge, I knew that would happen every time I saw one.

If you do go for a Cayenne, make sure it's got full leather as it makes a huge difference to the quality feel. MY23 Panamera E-Hybrid
MY19 SDV8 Autobiography - Sold

Stuff it.

I’m selling all the cars & getting a pedal bike.

Lady of the house will be happy as well.

No, terrible decision, you only live once!  MY23 Panamera E-Hybrid
MY19 SDV8 Autobiography - Sold

stan wrote:

although crank failure does happen it seems to be a rarity ..i also get the indication that its on the disco version of the engine ..
maybe the disco engine has different ancillarys???

I think the reality is they sold far more Disco's than 3.0 405 RR's Stan...

And there is credible arguments about oil coagulation issues after owners topping up with any old oil from the local garage! Or the local village garage servicing Disco's using any type of 10w/30 rather than the correct grade JLR insist is necessary! This then creates lumps of coagulation which could easily block an oil way! Or get sucked into and stuck in the Turbo at point of switch off leaving you with a ticking time bomb.......

This could be more leant towards Disco owners as Range Rover owners take theirs to Main Agents more later in life? All algorithms i guess...

Anyhow, this is just one theory, but i do hear it a lot from JLR tech mates.....

Help me Obi-Cam-Kenobi you’re our only hope..

I’m going to find an approved used example.
If the Camshaft goes in the first year I’ll beg Land Rover, then threaten legal action, then drive it through the nearest dealers windows and put it all on YouTube in some vague borderline insane attempt at retribution.

AnotherMutley wrote:

... My personal experience of dealer undertakings is they're not worth the media they're written on and don't stand up in court, been there got the T-Shirt and essentially a Salesman will tell you anything to get you to sign.

Caveat Emptor.

4.4TDV8 (L322) to 3.0TDv6 (L405) - we had a cracking L322 4.4 TDV8. Decided to get an L405. It had to be a 4.4 TDV8 AB. Travelled the land for months, looking at AU 4.4 ABs (and VSEs); and only looking on main dealer forecourts. Despite premium prices, not one of them met expectations. In the end, drove almost 3 hours to look at a 2 year old 4.4 AB. It was in a poor state, as was every other one viewed. The complacency of the LR sales people I met on the way was staggering. Parked next to it and putting it to shame was a very similar looking but much nicer condition 3.0 TDv6 Vogue. Not the two badges I wanted but had a good look anyway. Lots of worthwhile (and expensive) optional extras had been selected for the 1 owner Vogue. Took it for a test drive. Having driven there in the L322 4.4 TDV8 and having recently had a petrol 4.2SC before that, the 3.0 TDv6 was excellent to drive. Couldn't fault it. But, as mentioned... didn't want a 3.0 or "just a Vogue" so went away to have a think and do some 'due diligence'.

Caveat emptor - reviews for the 3.0 and the 4.4 seemed to say both were excellent engines in their own right. This particular TDv6 didn't have a full main dealer service history but was being sold by the original selling dealer because the owner always buys their brand new cars there. It had been serviced by a trusted specialist local to the countrified owner. However, the service and maintenance receipts, even for such a low mileage car, were plentiful. They showed an owner and independent garage that knew what these cars need (I checked with the independent too, ensuring all was as it seemed on paper). The selling main dealer and LR UK confirmed in writing that regardless of the independent history, no loopholes would be sought to avoid any future warranty claims made via the 2 year AU LR warranty.

August 2017 - bought the 3.0 TDv6 Vogue based on overall spec, condition; and the comprehensive/ true nature and type of service history (did not buy based on the corporate LR brand servicing/ maintenance 'stamp'). Also bought based on the fact that the car was sold as an AU LR with a 2 year warranty.

Then, after getting it home, despite my earlier due diligence, I started to notice some posts on this forum indicating the crankshaft on the 3.0 TDv6 was/ is a weak spot to be avoided. The selling main dealer service department and technicians tried to reassure me that they'd not experienced such failure on an L405. So did LR UK. The warranty provider sat on the fence. None wanted to confirm in writing that there was nothing to be concerned about. Not good enough though when spending a high five figure sum on any car. So I took them on; based on the branding and marketing used by LR to get people like us to buy their expensive products (marketing that includes the AU warranty and "peace of mind").

February 2018 (6 months after buying the car) - in response to my written offer to only use LR main dealers to service the car; and to extend the LR warranty after the 2 year AU period (if we still had the car), written confirmation received from someone suitably senior at LR UK stated:
"... should your vehicle suffer from crankshaft failure due to a defect in manufacture, or materials and the extended warranty policy does not cover the repair, we, as the manufacturer, will do so on a goodwill basis..."

Good enough for me. The audit trail behind it would stand up, if it all had to be put to proof (all I sought was the peace of mind that the LR branding boasts about in order to entice us to buy these cars). My concern is not where that peace of mind is coming from.

CTC's knowledgeable words are also worthy of note - just make sure that the appropriate service/ maintenance schedules are followed and the correct oils/ products are used, so as to maximise the chances of the car staying a good 'un.

3 years on and the only concern I do have about crankshaft failure is batting off probably well intended but often erroneous assumptions/ perceptions made on this fourm about the L405 and the TDv6 engine/ crankshaft. The car has been superb. A few warranty claims (non crankshaft) have been made via the LR AU/ Extended warranty, meaning that over time, the warranty cost has justified itself (and the previous independent service/ maintenance history has never been an issue, regardless of warranty claim type).

Would I buy another L405 3.0 TDv6, another Vogue and even one that is Euro 5 (and not 6)? yes, yes and yes, in a heartbeat (we don't all live in London or cities/ surrounds. We don't all need to use the RR for that type of cost incurring travel).

That’s a great post Mr PLD.

Would you be so kind as to let me know (via PM?)who you contacted in Land Rover for the assurance the Crankshaft would be covered?

Thanks again.