2012 Engine Failure - warranty claim rejected

[Talktheroo]

I have to agree with Talktheroo and Weekend Warrior most car manufacturers get the most out of the cars to the point where they remain reliable, as someone posted earlier about mine vehicles that are left standard and don't seem to have issues.
I too work in the mining industry and the have relied on toyota for a long time now and I have not seen one toyota broken down on a mine yet - now before anyone jumps up and down i'm in no way saying it doesn't happen all i'm saying is it must be rare as the mine I work on we have approx 40 hilux's all ranging in age from a year to 3 years old and all amounts of K's on them the one I drive has 105,000km on it and is still going strong, it is a manuel and it may have already had the clutch changed but none of our vehicles have broken down, they are all serviced by toyota locally (so filter change half the oil dumped out and then topped up scenario) when they are due and they all get a hard time I would say harder than anybody who owns their trucks drives them.
As said if you want a performance car buy a V8 or do as I did get the best of both worlds, a Blown Lux (TRD) as also mentioned earlier if you want power it costs money if you don't have the money to spend be happy with what you got.

The 1KD-FTVs can be a problem in the standard form as well is what I have been trying to point out here.
Two areas of failure are the blow by problem caused by the injector seats (old design non coated) which leads to the sump screen being blocked and starving the engine of lubrication, and the injector failure problem as well.
There have been some mining vehicles that have failed with these two conditions. I have seen them with my own eyes. Being Xstrata fleet vehicles. Xstrata has replaced at least a percentage of it's ute fleet with the Ford Ranger now, because of the problems and the safety ratings.
The Roo.

[NeKeleC]

I in no way was trying to say "the hilux doesn't have issues because I haven't seen it" I have no doubt there are some issues with the hilux but with the number of them on the road I think the percentages are pretty low. And they all have issues to be dealt with take the Navara you buy it for 4wd right well it is common knowledge the front transfer case has a week point and cracks under load requiring a new transfer case (big$$) but people still buy them knowing they have this issue. Car manufacturers are aware of these issues yes but will they admit it NOOOO of cause not if they do they will have to fix all of them not just the ones that actually break, its a percentages game and they ALL do it they have been for years, its nothing new.
As for mines changing over to Ford Rangers, the only reason this is happening is there lawyers have told them too it has nothing to do with a better vehicle because I can tell you now if they could choose the better vehicle they would stay with the toyotas. I have been told first hand that Rio Tinto approached toyota about increasing "safety" items in there vehicles to up the ANCAP safety rating because they didn't want to change to the rangers but toyota could not achieve the requirements in the timeframe required. The lawyers have told the mines that they need the safest cars on the road to ensure when something goes wrong they have covered the most bases from being sued hence the Ranger with the highest ANCAP safety rating.
Sorry off track a bit yes I know these are issues that pertain to the hilux I have never said they weren't but I bet they only have a higher frequency rate of failure amoung the vehicles that have been modified.

[Talktheroo]

As a person who has owned Toyota vehicles for 35 years now, there's not much wrong with the Ford Ranger T5 3.2L manual models. There is however a few problems still with the auto box. At least Ford Australia do try to fix these problems. Even to the point of giving customers whole new vehicles. The problem seems to be in the harness or the auto ECM.
You can rebuild the injectors in the Rangers as well. You can't do that with the Denso injectors, you have to buy new ones which are expensive.
Toyota Australia are not the company they once were in my opinion. My experience with people that I have known and made warranty claims with TA, in the areas of engine failure, not modified either, have been extremely poor with all of them being rejected.
It's not a cheap fix either, with most repairs being around the $18,000.00 mark. It's only when they are taken to small claims that this company now settles. That's been my experience with this company since 2008 on these matters.
I happen to think that it's a good thing that another manufacturer has come into the mining market that has been dominated by TA for years now. This may make them think about their arrogance towards the Australian consumer when these problems come up.
I happen to know about the Rio Tinto decision, and the person who made that decision is not a solictor or a legal person at all. Yes, the ANCAP rating did play a part in the decision process in both of these companies. That being Rio Tinto and Xstrata.
I would just like to say this again, all the Prados and Hiluxes I have seen with these problems have not had aftermarket chips installed on them.
The Roo.

[outbackjoe]

I know in mining some companies or subcontractors that have dabbled with alternative brands and end up resorting back to Toyota.

With the right seals and inspection the oil pick up issue is basically eliminated. With no water in fuel, the current model injectors are fine. So let's take the scenario where these issues do not manifest, as is typical for most. In that case, I suspect the failure rate among modified vehicles is much higher than stock, and the stock vehicles are very reliable, no worse than alternatives, and usually better.

[Talktheroo]

The only people that will know the real stats on these problems is Toyota Australia. The problem with the injectors are the injectors themselves, and in most cases has nothing to do with water in the fuel.
The other major problem is the old designed seats.
You can stick your head in the sand if you want to, but being educated about these issues may save you a big load of money, like nearly $20,000.00. So you can drive along if you want to and hope for the best, or really get to know the weakness that dwells within your vehicles. Up to you really.
These problems now have been well documented world wide with both the 1KD-FTV and the 1VD-FTV.
At the end of the day, it's up to you if you want to take the advise or not.
For those that want to listen, get your range checked on your injectors regularly and inspect the sump screen with an inspection camera each time you change your engine oil.
Also, the oil change intervals should be the same as the 1KZ-TEs as the 1KD-FTVs have the same recycling system as in putting the soot down into the sump oil. The 10,000 km interval thing that Toyota came up with was to try and compete against vehicles in Europe, that have the particulate system installed in them.
It's just marketing, and the oil changes should be every 5,000 km intervals. That's with a new filter as well.
The Roo.

[Alby]

Roo so there is a difference between the euro diesels with how they filter their oil ?
I do my oil and filter every 5 k regardless but have always wondered why the euro built diesels recommend 20k, some more between oil changes

[Talktheroo]

Alby, it's just all marketing. What I mean by that is the recycling system for the soot is the same as the 1KZ-TEs, and that goes way back. Especially in Europe, as the 1KD-FTVs were introduced in the 95 model Prados In July 2000 because of the Euro 4 emission laws. Toyota mainly achieved the strict pollution laws by using the common rail fuel delivery system as it uses far less fuel for more power.
They didn't go to a particulate filter system to filter out the soot, TMC prefered putting it down in the sump through the EGR system. As I said before, the same way as the 1KZ-TE recycle the soot.
So nothing really changed except the EGR cooler, and that only cools the gas going in.
Yes, a lot of the European designed diesel engines now have the particulate filtering systems in them.
So this system naturally keeps the engine oil a lot cleaner as there is very little soot going down into the sump.
Just for your information, trucks have had the DPF system in them for years now.
That's how manufacturers achieve this and also the change in technology in engine oils as well.
Engine oils actually have got better over the years.
Hope this helps you mate, the Roo.

[outbackjoe]

Why does the dpf lead to less recirculation if the egr is designed to control NOx and not soot? The egr does add soot, but given a certain level of NOx to control, isn't the egr design independent of whether a dpf is present or not?

[Luxi46]

Alby, it's just all marketing

Engine oils actually have got better over the years.

On the one hand you say it's all marketing, and then you go on to explain that engine technology and oils have actually gotten better. If engine oils and technology have really gotten better (which I agree with), would that not be the reason why Toyota can recommend longer service intervals instead of having to resort to marketing? My lux is a 2007 UK diesel, and I've followed the recommended oil service intervals of 10.000 k's, without trouble so far. The marketing arguement sounds a bit weak to me. Solely because from a marketing point of view, it doesn't make sense to market your engine to be serviced at 10.000 k's, only to have it fail in customers' hands way earlier. That opens a company up to law-suits.

And also, why are you mentioning the EGR as being there to filter out the soot in the oil?
- Firstly, the EGR system isn't down in the sump.
- Secondly, the EGR's purpose is to bring NOx levels down. Toyota's implementation by nature actually re-introduces soot into the system.
- Thirdly, the DPF is in the exhaust system, after the catalytic converter**. It's purpose is to filter diesel particulates to prevent them being blown out into the air we breathe. How is it helping to keep engine oil clean?

** edited the location of the DPF for better clarity -

[Tony65]

Hey CHS002. Many of us have given you the time to read your post and dramas with the warranty claim and are interested in the details and the outcome. Why have you not replied to Hilux Max's last post requesting the whole story. Its a bit unfair to draw us all into your issue with Toyota and then leave us with only 1/2 the details. Lets have all the details please...................... Thanks.

[wnewton]

Thanks guys there is a lot of good advice here and a few like NeKeleC that don't know what they are on about and it would be more beneficial to us all if they kept their "uninformed opinions" to themselves and let those with facts have input. FYI the engine is now out & it has a hole through No 3 piston & No 1 & 2 have small cracks. They say there has been excessive combustion temperatures which caused the failure and of course blame the petrol injection system. Firstly with the Chipit system it has a EGT fitted which ties back into the chip. The EGT is programmable & I have it set with an upper limit of 550 degrees so if the the exhaust gas reaches this upper limit (which is fairly conservative) it shuts the chip & petrol system off. It will not turn back on until the exhaust gas is under 500. If the combustion temperature was so excessive as to melt pistons surely this would reflect in the temperature of the EG. The EG probe is right at the turbo exit. They are quoting me $12k for a replacement engine !!! Another option is to get a short engine and put my head and bolt ons onto this and re insert including new injectors "just in case they were faulty???? At $700 plus each why replace just in case they have an issue??? Also it was discovered that the actuator shaft at the rear of the inlet manifold was leaking where the butterfly valves which shut the engine down comes out. If this was the case then the inlet manifold could loose pressure/boost causing the engine to run very rich hence causing excessive heat. Meanwhile I am stuck in the middle. My point is also that Toyota have serviced this car 7 times since new, the chip & petrol system have been on it since almost new and they have been aware it has been fitted. If they had concerns with the system why didnt they convey this information to me? They seem to pick up EVERY other little thing that needs fixing/servicing on the car! If they had said hey mate I see you have a chip & petrol system fitted do you realize it could damage your engine & if it does your warranty will be void???? I get the full report Monday then I can find out who to persue, Toyota or Chipit who promised the system is safe..............

[outbackjoe]

There is no safe limit in temperature. Any increase in temperature yields a higher probability of failure. The egt protection avoids temperatures of very high failure probability but does not eliminate the higher failure rate associated with the elevated temperatures that a chip produces. It's common sense that if you overload something then the warranty is void. I've said it before, if you were in the business of selling buckets and you sold one rated at 20kg and someone put 30kg in it would you provide warranty?

I'd pursue the chip manufacturer. Either it's their fault or they will provide evidence to put the onus back on Toyota. Also NeKeleC has a valid point. Talk nice.

[Qwerty]

An egt that hot would have been a whole lot hotter a few split seconds earlier inside.

[wnewton]

All I want is either Chipit to admit their product which was sold to me as "safe & will not harm the engine" to accept responsibility or Toyota to admit the injectors or what ever failed.....I am stuck in the middle. Does anyone out there really think if people knew the chip system was going to blow their engine up that they would actually fit one??? Companies selling these products & the car manufacturers sitting back and seeing them fitted & saying nothing is wrong. Chipit sell 1000 chips a year then add on DP, Steinbauer etc etc and there are hundreds of thousands of cars running around with chips & no warranty. Toyota need to prove the chip caused the issue not just use it as an out clause so they don't have to honor their warranty. The common rail pressures were within spec as were all other parameters on the engine, no fault codes on ECU ??? And Querty 550 degrees is still cool for a turbo.

[ultimate]

We had a customer go through this last year. He ended up replacing the whole engine at his cost when he got nowhere with Toyota or the supplier. The chip manufacturer said Toyota had to prove the chip was at fault. The Toyota rep said "no I don't" and that was that. By law any performance increase of more than 20% has to be engineered. A lot of the performance chips claim 30-50% more power so they are well outside the legal allowance (Without certification). Unfortunately it's buyer beware and there is a huge risk running performance chips. If your engine fails and Toyota believes it was running more than 20%, you need to prove otherwise.

http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/roads/vehicle_regulation/bulletin/pdf/NCOP3_Section_LA_Engine_01jan2011_v3.pdf
1.2 MODIFICATIONS REQUIRING CERTIFICATION UNDER LA CODES
The following is a summary of modifications that may be performed under Section LA:
 Fitting engines greater than 120% of original power and/or engine mass;
 Fitting performance engines;
 Fitting engines from non original equipment sources;
 Installing a supercharger or turbocharger; and
 Modifying the engine and engine components that results in an increase in engine power
of more than 20% and/or affects exhaust emissions.

[outbackjoe]

I think vehicle owners who modify their vehicles need to take more responsibility for their actions.

Pressure is the same as temperature. There is no safe limit. Chips produce higher pressure regardless of whether a fault code is generated or not. Higher pressure means higher risk of failure.

One parameter that wasn't in spec is engine power and torque. You have overloaded the engine according the the manufacturer's spec and according to the law as Brendan stated.

[kickinback]

We had a customer go through this last year. He ended up replacing the whole engine at his cost when he got nowhere with Toyota or the supplier. The chip manufacturer said Toyota had to prove the chip was at fault. The Toyota rep said "no I don't" and that was that. By law any performance increase of more than 20% has to be engineered. A lot of the performance chips claim 30-50% more power so they are well outside the legal allowance (Without certification). Unfortunately it's buyer beware and there is a huge risk running performance chips. If your engine fails and Toyota believes it was running more than 20%, you need to prove otherwise.

http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/roads/vehicle_regulation/bulletin/pdf/NCOP3_Section_LA_Engine_01jan2011_v3.pdf
1.2 MODIFICATIONS REQUIRING CERTIFICATION UNDER LA CODES
The following is a summary of modifications that may be performed under Section LA:
 Fitting engines greater than 120% of original power and/or engine mass;
 Fitting performance engines;
 Fitting engines from non original equipment sources;
 Installing a supercharger or turbocharger; and
 Modifying the engine and engine components that results in an increase in engine power
of more than 20% and/or affects exhaust emissions.

Putting a chip in is one thing. Putting petrol injection on a diesel is one of the stupidest ideas ever. You want to use petrol injection? Buy a petrol engine. Your warranty is toast and I can't see how Toyota can be held responsible in any way.

[kickinback]

After consultation with my son about the petrol injection ( he is a diesel mech) the most interesting thing he said was about how it would affect the combustion process. Regardless of the timing of injection in relation to TDC you are really only delaying the inevitable catastrophic failure of the engine.

[aandy]

I would agree anything that changes the pressure, timing, duration, volume or penetration of fuel injection would avoid warranty, this is exactly what a chip does, some of them in a very roundabout way.

You went one step further and added a completely different fuel, petrol, this is most probably chemically altering the combustion timing.

Apart from putting more load on the rest of the engine and generally wearing it out faster than a standard engine, I would say the most common negative effect of modifying the fuel injection process would be injection impingement on the piston or cylinder walls.

Engine manufactures go to extreme measures to ensure there is no injection impingement on the pistons and cylinder walls, this would not show up as high egt's but would show up as melted or cracked piston crowns, or damaged bores due to washing away of boundary lubrication.

Im not saying you shouldn't do it, I have a modified 2 stroke v6 outboard motor that does 7400RPM, you think I can take that back to Mercury when it blows up?

[FODFA]

Thanks guys there is a lot of good advice here and a few like NeKeleC that don't know what they are on about and it would be more beneficial to us all if they kept their "uninformed opinions" to themselves and let those with facts have input.

Seems a bit rich someone with only 5 posts starts "having a go" at other members for stating an opinion, NeKeleC seemed to be talking sense to me, a lot of us like to modify our vehicles, with that comes risk and if things go pear shaped you need to suck it up, you made the descision to modify your vehicle so you suffer the consequences.

Personally I think chip manufacturers have a lot to answer for, but thats just my opinion and why I don't have or ever intend to fit one to my vehicles.