OV9

Posted: **Fri May 17, 2024 11:32 am**

Funny you should mention surprisingly short service intervals. Mine was last done in Oct and has done about 6k miles since then, the stated interval is 12 months / 16k miles, but it is asking for a service already. Googling it, there’s a LOT of people experiencing the same. A few appear to have been going back to the dealer and having it serviced every couple of months after 2k miles

Forum advice seems to be TADTS and stick to the published schedule or if you’re really worried, get the dealer to take an oil viscosity reading. Oil dilution is a real thing here if you do a lot of short journeys.

I’m going to do my own oil change for peace of mind then get it serviced at a specialist in Oct to keep the history up.

Posted: **Fri May 17, 2024 11:54 am**

Yeah, I think the dealer told us to service the XJ every 6000 miles which is frankly ridiculous but at least it’s designed to be done with a vacuum pump and the oil filter sits on top of the engine bay so it’s no more than 10 minutes.
I don’t know if Range Rover are the same but the ad blue tank on Jags is also designed to be purposefully difficult to refill so that you end up taking it to a dealer (located under the spare wheel, doesn’t tell you how much it requires, and if you overfill it damages something). Still easy enough to DIY but a cunty decision.

Posted: **Fri May 17, 2024 12:08 pm**

I do mine every 9000 as I set it to fixed servicing. If I had a modern diesel I’d half the fuel filter interval and the same with the oil if I was doing shorter trips mainly.

You can get the oil sampled but that’s not cheap and oil and filters aren’t bad, especially cartridge style ones.

Dave!

Posted: **Fri May 17, 2024 12:34 pm**

I do the Jag every January, which is about every 5k miles

It has been doing quite a lot more short journeys and I keep an eye on the oil level, when it's full it's 3/4 on the dash display, so if it goes up above that it's due to fuel dilution but I've not had to do any interim changes.

Posted: **Fri May 17, 2024 1:23 pm**

Mito Man wrote: Fri May 17, 2024 11:54 am I don’t know if Range Rover are the same but the ad blue tank on Jags is also designed to be purposefully difficult to refill so that you end up taking it to a dealer (located under the spare wheel, doesn’t tell you how much it requires, and if you overfill it damages something).

For the RR it's under the bonnet, directly above the ns wheel. Easy to get to. I've just done it actually. I bought a couple of the proper top up bottles because they have some special non-spill coupling and I wanted to do it right (new car nervousness of fcuking it up) but in reality a ten or twenty litre tub & a funnel will be fine. Capacity is 18l FWIW.

Posted: **Fri May 17, 2024 4:07 pm**

This is interesting regarding the too-frequent service intervals:

Update. After taking my car to a local RR specialist (and not JLR who are less than useless) it turns out that my oil viscosity is fine at 10.9%. The soot levels in my DPF are c.7g. The problem was a blocked MAP sensor which, when blocked, can give false readings and activates the "service required" light on the dash. A simple clean of the MAP sensor cured the problem. I was told that the garage I took it to - Dakar Cars in Wilmington, Kent - clean the MAP sensor routinely when servicing diesel RR's. Main dealers do NOT apparently. Dakar Cars told me that if a "service required" light comes on the dash or on the In Control app when it is not due, either by time or mileage, there is a high probability that it is caused by a blocked MAP sensor. A very common problem with diesels. Shame the JLR main dealer I took it to TWICE didn't even bother checking this sensor and just changed the oil. Thank you to everyone on here to tried to assist me

https://www.landyzone.co.uk/land-rover/ ... ed.388148/

Posted: **Fri May 17, 2024 4:49 pm**

Bing, fcking, potentially, go.

Looked like this:

: IMG_1028.jpeg (52.89 KiB) Viewed 1709 times

Now looks like this:

: IMG_1033.jpeg (52.76 KiB) Viewed 1709 times

It probably means the whole intake looks like that

but I can investigate that another time.

Posted: **Fri May 17, 2024 5:31 pm**

holy fuckballs, that's atrocious

Posted: **Fri May 17, 2024 7:47 pm**

GG. wrote: Fri May 17, 2024 10:29 am
Jobbo wrote: Fri May 17, 2024 10:26 am
Jobbo wrote: Fri Feb 09, 2024 1:49 pm My wife's Macan had its first oil change today.
I posted that on 9 Feb. Just booked its second oil change in June. Crikey! Moving house may have cut the mileage I'm doing down a bit but it's increased the Macan's. And that won't do 50mpg; I am not sure it's ever done 30mpg in her hands.
And this is the 4cyl right?? Engine downsizing is the biggest con of modern times.

4 cyl 2.0 petrol turbot, not derv.

Posted: **Fri May 17, 2024 7:50 pm**

Beany wrote: Fri May 17, 2024 5:31 pm holy fuckballs, that's atrocious

Diesel, EGR, emissions, blah.

This is what they do. Short runs are terrible for diesels, long runs better, but it happens eventually.

I went for a short drive, I think it pulled slightly more smoothly. Maybe placebo. It must have been reading pressure OK-ish before to not chuck an error code but maybe that gunk was acting as a damper and making the readings sluggish ? We’ll see how it goes.

I also reset the service reminder. I’ll monitor whether the countdown tracks with the actual mileage now.

Posted: **Fri May 17, 2024 7:58 pm**

Sundayjumper wrote: Fri May 17, 2024 4:49 pm Bing, fcking, potentially, go.

Posted: **Fri May 17, 2024 8:02 pm**

Mito Man wrote: Fri May 17, 2024 10:44 am Is she doing 10,000 miles every 3 months

Erm, I think so. Moving house to be a bit closer to work seems to have been counterproductive across the fleet as a whole

I found the FakeTaxi stickers Jimmy bought me - I could probably justify putting just the Taxi part in the window because my stepdaughter effectively has a personal chauffeur…

Posted: **Fri May 17, 2024 9:20 pm**

GG. wrote: Fri May 17, 2024 10:29 am Engine downsizing is the biggest con of modern times.

I still can’t get my head around how lower emissions at the expense of lower real world mpg is better for the environment.

I’d like to see a study of emissions of a supposedly bad engine emissions wise that does mega mpg, compared to a downsized friendly emissions one that ultimately is terrible for mpg and see which is then deemed the most harmful

Posted: **Fri May 17, 2024 9:55 pm**

Was it on the old Top Gear where they had a M3 going round a track and an “economic” car with a small engine which then consumed more fuel. I really can’t remember, was donkeys years ago.

Posted: **Fri May 17, 2024 9:56 pm**

Plus longevity. I'm sure that getting (relatively) huge power & low emissions from a small engine must mean it's quite highly stressed and unlikely to live much past its warranty period.

Posted: **Fri May 17, 2024 9:59 pm**

Mito Man wrote: Fri May 17, 2024 9:55 pm Was it on the old Top Gear where they had a M3 going round a track and an “economic” car with a small engine which then consumed more fuel. I really can’t remember, was donkeys years ago.

Yes, I think it was a Prius, but it was stupid, because unless you're richb, you don't drive your M car flat out all the time everywhere like you're on a track day.

Posted: **Fri May 17, 2024 10:00 pm**

Modern oils are very good. Unless you have a specific engine issue (eg fuel dilution, sticky rings), follow the factory intervals.

I've looked at loads of Used Oil Analysis over the years and I think I would have to go back well over a decade to find a known brand oil that under performed. The only lubrication failures nowadays are due to engine design/quality/fault issues, not from engine oils being insufficient over a standard oil change interval for 99% of road driving conditions.

Most memorable used oil change interval I remember is German guy with a 200.000km Saab Turbo (late 80s early 90s), who gradually stretched the standard 7500km interval to the limits of Shell Ultra to 20000km. It was dyno remapped +30bhp and did 1000km a week of Autobahn use cruising at 200kmh. There was no disproportionate increase in metals (wear) in the oil for the extended intervals.

Posted: **Fri May 17, 2024 10:00 pm**

Mito Man wrote: Fri May 17, 2024 9:55 pm Was it on the old Top Gear where they had a M3 going round a track and an “economic” car with a small engine which then consumed more fuel. I really can’t remember, was donkeys years ago.

It was a Prius I think. The point was right tool for the job. The M3 (or whatever the performance car was) was not being pushed hard at all, while the Prius was flat out. Hardly surprising that it would result in poor figures when it was being pushed beyond the expected use cases.

Posted: **Fri May 17, 2024 10:02 pm**

Sundayjumper wrote: Fri May 17, 2024 9:59 pm
Mito Man wrote: Fri May 17, 2024 9:55 pm Was it on the old Top Gear where they had a M3 going round a track and an “economic” car with a small engine which then consumed more fuel. I really can’t remember, was donkeys years ago.
Yes, I think it was a Prius, but it was stupid, because unless you're richb, you don't drive your M car flat out all the time everywhere like you're on a track day.

im a boring old man doing boring everyday journeys now - I'll happily average high 20s mpg on my M2... lame.

Posted: **Fri May 17, 2024 10:04 pm**

DeskJockey wrote: Fri May 17, 2024 10:00 pm
Mito Man wrote: Fri May 17, 2024 9:55 pm Was it on the old Top Gear where they had a M3 going round a track and an “economic” car with a small engine which then consumed more fuel. I really can’t remember, was donkeys years ago.
It was a Prius I think. The point was right tool for the job. The M3 (or whatever the performance car was) was not being pushed hard at all, while the Prius was flat out. Hardly surprising that it would result in poor figures when it was being pushed beyond the expected use cases.

Yes but I think somewhere in all this many cars got a bit too strangled to look good on emissions tests which had unrealistic slow acceleration and cruising speeds that they ended up consuming far more fuel in reality.

OV9

Your fleet running reports

Re: Your fleet running reports

Re: Your fleet running reports

Re: Your fleet running reports

Re: Your fleet running reports

Re: Your fleet running reports

Re: Your fleet running reports

Re: Your fleet running reports

Re: Your fleet running reports

Re: Your fleet running reports

Re: Your fleet running reports

Re: Your fleet running reports

Re: Your fleet running reports

Re: Your fleet running reports

Re: Your fleet running reports

Re: Your fleet running reports

Re: Your fleet running reports

Re: Your fleet running reports

Re: Your fleet running reports

Re: Your fleet running reports

Re: Your fleet running reports