Here's a thing. Yesterday my wife got a letter from our local Nissan dealer. No great surprise there then, she has a Qashqai and she gets it serviced there.
Anyway, here's where it gets complicated. The letter suggests that she should arrange to bring her car in for some recall work because it says ( something like ) under extreme load and in extreme conditions there is a potential problem with seizing engine bearings on her car.
"Blimey" etc was our first reaction. Until we read it more carefully.
The reg number of the car it refers to isn't hers at all. We do have a historical connection with the car mentioned though, in so far as it was the other Qashqai we had but which was my company car and which she has never booked in to that dealer or any other for that matter in her name.
I've not had that car for nearly three years now but it differs from hers in that it was a 2.0 diesel and hers is a 1.6 petrol.
So I did a bit searching on the web and found that indeed there has been a recall on the 2.0 diesels for bearing failure prevention.
Seems though that the "cure" is a remap to reduce the bhp which would be mildly irritating to anyone who had bought the 2.0 because they wanted a bit more shove.
Then I opened another letter from an insurance company who phone me at this time of year every year to offer me a "great deal" on the insurance for the Mondeo I keep on telling them I sold 4 years ago. The letter actually mentions that they know they phoned me but that they can now do an even better deal having looked again at my account ( which I don't have anymore, and haven't had for 4 years, and which I tell them every year for those past 4 years I don't have, and can they please update their records, "yes sir, terribly sorry sir, of course we will sir") yeah right !
Anyway, just for anyone thinking of a 2.0d Qashqai ( maybe other cars with that engine, I wouldn't know, but just thought I'd mention it )
Never gave me any bother in the 80 odd thou I had it by the by.
Last edited by: Runfer D'Hills on Sat 12 Jul 14 at 18:06
|
>> Seems though that the "cure" is a remap to reduce the bhp which would be
>> mildly irritating to anyone who had bought the 2.0 because they wanted a bit more
>> shove.
That would be more than 'mildly irritating' to me, it would feel flat compared to what you were used to. They aren't going to reduce it by a couple are they?
|
|
It sounds like a very poorly designed engine if that is true. Most engines have maps to cope with a dire lack of servicing, rubbish fuel and just not treated nicely. It's on that basis that most engines are re-mappable to get more power out of them, and if you treat them right, no noticeable effect on the life.
|
|
It all sounds like it could be of interest to the Information commissioner to me.
|
Humph, who I imagine to be a sympathetic, laid-back driver, had no problem with one of those in 80,000 miles. I wouldn't expect to run the bearings either, if I had that car.
I imagine the damage results from heavy throttle uphill at low speeds in too high a gear. A lot of drivers are very insensitive and stupid. I can actually hear and feel the sound of bearings being bashed. You drop a gear when that happens, or damage the engine.
People aren't very bright and their senses aren't tuned. Perhaps they just have free cars and don't care.
|
heres a thing... max miller by any chance?
|
>> heres a thing... max miller by any chance?
What could you mean zookeeper? What's it got to do with battered big-ends?
Is 'Here's a thing' a Max Miller catchphrase? If so you should be ashamed of yourself if only for being 500 years old.
:o}
Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Sun 13 Jul 14 at 00:12
|
Wasn't he the guy who wore tights? Or was that Max Wall?
|
|
Before anyone else does shall I get in quick and blame the purchase by Renault for the decline of Nissan? Though for me, while they might be less reliable, they're a damn sight more interesting now than in the days of the Bluebird, Almera or Primera ;-)
|
In some ways I wish car forums didn't exist. Prior to them I never really realised how stressful cars were. I just sort of drove them on the assumption that modern cars were all pretty good and with one notable and a couple of lesser exceptions mine all have been.
It's all much more worrying now ;-)
|
>> In some ways I wish car forums didn't exist. Prior to them I never really
>> realised how stressful cars were. I just sort of drove them on the assumption that
>> modern cars were all pretty good and with one notable and a couple of lesser
>> exceptions mine all have been.
>>
>> It's all much more worrying now ;-)
>>
Car keeping is far less stressful than beekeeping. With cars, the manuals work. Bees don't read bee manuals..:-)
Last edited by: madf on Sun 13 Jul 14 at 09:43
|
|
Have they developed a sort of buzzing noise you can't quite quite track down?
|
|
Could always use a stinger.
|
>> Have they developed a sort of buzzing noise you can't quite quite track down?
>>
In the bonnet?
|
>>Bees don't read bee manuals..:-)
>>
Just show them the B(ee) movie.
|
>Car keeping is far less stressful than beekeeping.
Last Friday evening we found a very poorly big bumblebee outside on the patio. He was almost dead so we picked him up and put him on a salvia plant and surprisingly he perked up straight away. He has a damaged wing so he can't fly but seems pretty happy letting us move him around to different plants.
We've grown quite fond of him and christened him Bernard.
|
>> Last Friday evening we found a very poorly big bumblebee outside on the patio. He
>> was almost dead so we picked him up and put him on a salvia plant
>> and surprisingly he perked up straight away. He has a damaged wing so he can't
>> fly but seems pretty happy letting us move him around to different plants.
>>
>> We've grown quite fond of him and christened him Bernard.
>>
I can see the reason why:
i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02791/ingham_2791918b.jpg
|
We've grown quite fond of him and christened him Bernard.
She might prefer Bernardette, Kevin. But I'm all for kindness to bees.
The ones you find on the ground are often just tired or cold - or both. Moving them into the sun can help by warming the flight muscles. The frayed wings are just something that happens to most insects, since not many live more than a few weeks as adults, and I don't think (Madf will know better, of course) that the hive offers the apine equivalent of a desk job to workers that can no longer fly.
Last edited by: WillDeBeest on Tue 15 Jul 14 at 11:09
|
|
For all you bee enthusiasts there is a program just for you on BBC 2 tonight . Hive Alive presented by Chris Packham 8.00 p.m. BBC 2
|
> The frayed
>> wings are just something that happens to most insects, since not many live more than
>> a few weeks as adults, and I don't think (Madf will know better, of course)
>> that the hive offers the apine equivalent of a desk job to workers that can
>> no longer fly.
>>
Young bees start out in teh hive as nurse bees looking after the young and cleaning. As they get older they go foraging for nectar and pollen. The average life of a worker bee in summer is six weeks. In winter it is much longer - fewer young to look after and no shopping so months.
Drones - the males- last a few months before being turfed out to die in autumn.,
Queen bees last from 1 to 5 years.. Most are replaced by beekeepers before they are two.
|
>> Never gave me any bother in the 80 odd thou I had it by the
>> by.
>>
Does this mean you are officially a Mimser ?
You've had a vehicle with a faulty engine recalled by the manufacturer and in 80k miles you didn't uncover the defect...
Good grief man ! That 250 must be gasping for a cobweb blow out ! :-)
Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 14 Jul 14 at 01:19
|
>> Does this mean you are officially a Mimser ?
Anything is possible, but that seems very unlikely.
>> a vehicle with a faulty engine recalled by the manufacturer and in 80k miles you didn't uncover the defect...
Not faulty, just with a weakest point (like all engines). The recall was necessary because people's crap stupid insensitive driving hammered at the weak point until it sometimes gave way.
I wouldn't have run the bearings any more than Humph did. Nor would many here. Perhaps not all.
|
>> I wouldn't have run the bearings any more than Humph did. Nor would many here.
In fact mimser driving, essentially deaf, blind and insensitive, is what caused those bearings to fail in some cases causing the remap to slow the jalopy down a bit as the lesser of two evils. I don't doubt that Humph is a driver whose senses are still good and who knows that modern diesels in particular need to be kept spinning freely and don't respond well to heavy throttle at low crankshaft speeds. Much of that will damage the bearings, and drivers with senses avoid it more or less unconsciously and automatically.
|
Maybe the trouble is that they do respond very well to heavy fuelling at low rpm.
The gearchange indicator on the Outlander will have you changing up very early, though of course it doesn't mandate maximum acceleration.
|
I didn't say you couldn't make use of a diesel's torque at low crankshaft speeds. But a sensitive toe is needed for that. Diesels are best on part-throttle anyway. Dig?
Of course you do. Anyone with brains and ears does.
|
|
You don't even need ears to have mechanical sympathy. You can feel if your actions induce power plant unhappiness.
|
How much of this problem is the 'modern way' of economy at all costs?
You all know the tit that won't accelerate properly down a m/way or dual carriageway slip road, in case they use a bit more fuel.
Same principle with too high a gear?
Last edited by: Westpig on Wed 16 Jul 14 at 16:46
|
When I did my IAM course I was surprised to find that I often used a light throttle on slight uphill sections, using the torque of my large petrol engine to do the work. My observer recommended a lower gear and more throttle to keep the car more balanced and the engine spinning over 2000 rather than 1500 which it always seemed happy to do.
Surprisingly I passed my test with flying colours, joining the motorway at an indicated 80 mph having seen a gap in the traffic (HGVs) in lanes 1 & 2 and moving smoothly and swiftly in a straight line to lane 3 rather than sitting behind a wagon at 56 for a few minutes. At the time I thought I had messed up but I was told to drive as I normally would and was actually complimented on it.
|
>> How much of this problem is the 'modern way' of economy at all costs?
>>
>> You all know the tit that won't accelerate properly down a m/way or dual carriageway
>> slip road, in case they use a bit more fuel.
>>
>> Same principle with too high a gear?
>>
It's also how the cars are setup. In my own car if you use a minimum of 2000rpm you only have a 1500rpm rev range as power drops off a cliff at 3500.
Peak power is at a lowley 2900rpm. Peak torque starts at 1400rpm
|
When I had the Morgan 4/4, I remember using the southbound M1 slip at Junction 6.
It's a tight one, but with soft rubber and an engine that frankly was a race one, I shot round the slip, and had to slow down to join the free flowing motorway.
I loved driving that car, but you had to be so alert to other road users as most of them thought 'old car' as I appeared - then red shifted away from them...
|
>> - then red shifted
>> away from them...
>>
Were there any 'brown shifts'?
|
You can use maximum acceleration without pounding the bearings, although a certain brutality is usually involved.
You really just have to get the engine spinning well without coming down hard on the throttle until it is spinning well. If you really want maximum oomph you get it spinning, then come down hard on the throttle and slip the clutch judiciously away from rest. It isn't much slower to start with light throttle in the normal way and press harder and harder when it's turning well.
If you have to think about it you probably can't do it. Just remember that mimsing instincts will do more harm than good. Let your car run free!
|
Were there any 'brown shifts'?
Not really, I competed with that car over 25 years, used it hard and the only time I was stopped by the boys in blue was defused very quickly by my explanation of why I'd done it; car stalled and restarting was tricky so I turned off the lights - after dark and didn't re-switch them on for about 100 yards.
Had to give them a guided tour and they were quite happy for me to keep the engine running, due to the re-start problems already explained.
It was a nice silly car, but no need to break the road rules - I'd done far more on the track - including once hitting the rev limiter in top gear!
Last edited by: Slidingpillar on Wed 16 Jul 14 at 22:09
|
|
It seems to me to be an engineering design problem if an engine's bearings aren't up to a bit of tweaking. We're not talking about a raucous Bentley blower with a 10 second safe engagement period - this is just a bit of electrical fuel timing jiggery?
|
Wouldn't really know, all I've got to find out was by searching the web. A bit about it buried in HJ's Good and Bad section on the Qq.
Strange too that the dealer the notice of recall letter came from thinks the car is my wife's when it wasn't even mine ( company car ) and I've not even seen it for nearly 3 years.
How messed up do their records appear to be?!
I suppose I could tell them.
|
Of course one is more or less impervious to pain, but I must confess to being slightly miffed that RD'H hasn't endorsed my meticculous, far-ranging analysis of his bearing-friendly driving.
As someone has pointed out, it comes naturally to good drivers (but I insist that hearing comes into it as well as sensitive buttocks). Perhaps Humph is too modest to agree, aw gee shucks sort of thing? Surely not.
|
>> You all know the tit that won't accelerate properly down a m/way or dual carriageway slip road,
>> in case they use a bit more fuel.
I know what my car is meant to get officially on the mpg tests. I get at best 10mpg less. Around town/local driving aside even on a motorway run I'm down. I've tried to go for best ever once or twice but there's not so much in it.
So with 170PS/350Nm torque, if I join a motorway or similar I might accelerate hard. Some impact on mpg but not too much. And I did try out the 140PS/320Nm variant of this car and discounted it. Not able to accelerate well in 6th if revs drop on a motorway. Yes you can change gears but it was pretty gutless for a heavy car. Glad the 1.6 is not an option but it is in the regular Passat!
And the change up indicator wants you in a much high gear than you might think it appropriate. Do 30mph and it might suggest 5th when revs will be like 1200rpm. It doesn't struggle as such but I'd be in 3rd/4th.
It will be interesting how my next car with 1.4 turbo petrol does with only 150PS and 250Nm. At least it has DSG so it can at times do it's economy attempt in too high a gear, coasting and then change down when needed.
|
>> So with 170PS/350Nm torque, if I join a motorway or similar I might accelerate hard.
>> Some impact on mpg but not too much. And I did try out the 140PS/320Nm
>> variant of this car and discounted it. Not able to accelerate well in 6th if
>> revs drop on a motorway. Yes you can change gears but it was pretty gutless
>> for a heavy car.
Not having a go at rtj, if somebody else was paying I'd go for the extra zip, but that comment says a lot about how cars have evolved and what it has done to our expectations.
Even so I'd expect any car to be a bit sluggish when the revs drop in overdrive! It's the gear that's the problem in that situation, not the engine.
320Nm of torque from less than half way up the rev range is astonishing. We now expect them to go without actually driving them.
A couple of weeks every year with a Mk1 Polo, 40bhp @5300rpm, and 74Nm (peak) of torque @2700, would teach us all to drive again.
Or even my old MX5 for that matter, 140bhp @6500, 162Nm@4500, weighs only 1000kg, not very exciting flooring that at 70mph in 5th either.
Interesting comparison actually if not strictly fair. Same nominal power rating, but half the maximum torque at double the rpm.
|
|
We've just got the 1.3 Colt. Actually it's not too bad - engine is relatively torquey, so combined with the fact it's doing >3000rpm at (indicated) 70, you can put your foot down in 5th on the motorway and feel it accelerating. The prominent boom at about 75 isn't great though, and it's not exactly refined anyway. Makes going anywhere (eg. uni open days at the moment) more of an expedition :)
|
|
Is that a 3 or 4 cylinder Focusless? I've had both as loan cars - the 3 had a truly horrible drone, the 4, I liked.
|
4 cyl, 95bhp? The 1.1 was the Colt engine you were supposed to go for, with HJ being one of the critics of the 1.3. But I test drove both.
EDIT: it's an '07 CZ2 3dr.
Last edited by: Focusless on Thu 17 Jul 14 at 11:47
|
>>"Even so I'd expect any car to be a bit sluggish when the revs drop in overdrive! It's the gear that's the problem in that situation, not the engine."
Quite so! - I can't quite square Rtj70 finding it utterly necessary to have to have the 170hp variant because the 140hp one is too sluggish when the revs drop in 6th on the motorway, and then mildly-complaining that he doesn't get very good MPG !
|
Quite so AC. One doesn't like to say.
;-)
|
One of the things I used to notice when taking over learners who'd been taught the basics by dad was they'd often be in fourth gear at just over 20mph because they "Didn't want to wear the engine". They took a hell of a lot of persuading that what they were doing was actually murdering the lump and often led to "Can I have word" from said parent before the next lesson.
It was a similar story when taking mature victims who'd been referred to Driver Improvement courses by plod. Reminds me of my ex (And by now probably late) father in law who used to knock it into neutral when stopping from any speed to save wear on the clutch.
|
I used to service and take my late FIL's, petrol, Volvo for it's MOTs. He bought it new and came with me once, chastised me for taking it up to nearly 3K RPM. Never heard piston slap like it.
Got a brother the same. Insists on having 2-litre, petrol Focuses (Focii, can you still get them with that engine?) 'for the power'. Never takes them above 2K and cruises in the middle lane of motorways. He was horrified that I used to take the old Kia to 7K.
|
|
I once had the pleasure of driving my mother's Almera to a distant funeral. Mother was horrified when I planted the loud pedal in third in order to catch up with the (surprising nippy!) hearse. There was a noticeable resistance in the pedal's travel about half way down. Apparently she had never taken it over 3000 rpm.
|
>>I once had the pleasure of driving my mother's Almera to a distant funeral. Mother was horrified when I planted the loud pedal
Later, petrol models had Variable Valve Technology (VTEC) on the inlets. There's a noticeable difference in performance (and fuel consumption) from around 3K up.
|
I've always understood that bearing wear is caused by induced vibrations in the components caused by the engine having insufficient torque at the selected speed. If an engine is tending to judder it will be wearing the bearings. It should be pulling smoothly, and comfortably within its power and torque capability, regardless of speed.
Damage in high a gear occurs in small driving instructor type cars, not in big torquy engines.
But all engines are normally very over-engineered and ought to stand a wide range of driving styles and power tweaks. I still say the margin has been cut too finely on the engine in question, and de-tuning is a desperate makeshift way of overcoming a design fault.
|
Bearing down - Westpig
