IllustrationRANGE ROVER FRONT DIFFERENTIAL FAILURE - LEADING TO LOCK UP OF TRANSMISSION. IF I HAD BEEN TRAVELING AT SPEED A SERIOUS ACCIDENT WOULD HAVE OCCURRED. THE VEHICLES SHOULD ALL BE RECALLED BY THE MANUFACTURER AS IT IS A SAFETY ISSUE. DO WE NEED TO WAIT UNTIL SOMEBODY IS KILLED? NM
2003 Land Rover New Range Rover
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Limited comparison data
There is not enough comparable history to draw a useful model-year comparison.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all New Range Rover years →Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.
What owners reported most
All reported categories
Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.
When problems were reported
Mileage at the reported incident
30–25K
625–50K
950–75K
775–100K
2100–150K
1150K+
28 reports with mileage · 3 unknown
NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.
What to inspect
Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.
- Power Train. Review the 27 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Suspension. Review the 3 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Equipment. Review the 1 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
2 crash reports0 fire reports1 injury reports
Power Train complaints
27 reports1)NONE REGULAR AND UNEVENTFUL DRIVING. 2)TOTAL LOSS OF DRIVE POWER WHILE DRIVING, WITHOUT ANY PREVIOUS SYMPTOMS, LEAVING ME STRANDED IN BETWEEN THE EMERGENCY LANE AND RIGHT LANE OF HIGHWAY. SECOND TIME 3RD LANE OF FREEWAY RIGHT AFTER SERVICE FROM THE DEALER FROM THE FIRST INCIDENT. 3) THE FAILURE WAS A MISALIGNMENT BETWEEN TH…
Read full complaint
1)NONE REGULAR AND UNEVENTFUL DRIVING. 2)TOTAL LOSS OF DRIVE POWER WHILE DRIVING, WITHOUT ANY PREVIOUS SYMPTOMS, LEAVING ME STRANDED IN BETWEEN THE EMERGENCY LANE AND RIGHT LANE OF HIGHWAY. SECOND TIME 3RD LANE OF FREEWAY RIGHT AFTER SERVICE FROM THE DEALER FROM THE FIRST INCIDENT. 3) THE FAILURE WAS A MISALIGNMENT BETWEEN THE DRIVESHAFT AND THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL ON A 2003 LAND ROVER, RANGE ROVE. *JB
DIFFERENTIAL FAILURE I HAD JUST EXITED THE FREEWAY AND CAME TO A STOP AT THE LIGHT AS THE LIGHT CHANGES I APPLY THE GAS AND EXPERIENCE A HORRIBLE METAL ON METAL GRINDING NOISE ACCOMPANIED BY SUDDEN AND COMPLETE LOSS OF POWER. I IMMEDIATELY SHUT THE CAR OFF AND PUT IT INTO PARK WHICH DIDN'T WORK SO I USED THE EMERGENCY BRAKE…
Read full complaint
DIFFERENTIAL FAILURE I HAD JUST EXITED THE FREEWAY AND CAME TO A STOP AT THE LIGHT AS THE LIGHT CHANGES I APPLY THE GAS AND EXPERIENCE A HORRIBLE METAL ON METAL GRINDING NOISE ACCOMPANIED BY SUDDEN AND COMPLETE LOSS OF POWER. I IMMEDIATELY SHUT THE CAR OFF AND PUT IT INTO PARK WHICH DIDN'T WORK SO I USED THE EMERGENCY BRAKE TO KEEP FROM ROLLING BACKWARD. THIS IS EXTREMELY DANGEROUS AND I AM TOLD QUITE COMMON. THIS HAPPENED TO ME IN THE MIDDLE OF A BUSY INTERSECTION AT THE BOTTOM OF A FREEWAY OFF-RAMP. *NM
I RECENTLY PURCHASED A 2003 RANGE ROVER. AFTER DRIVING THE VEHICLE FROM THE DEALERS LOT TO MY HOME, I DECIDED TO TAKE MY FIANCE FOR A DRIVE. I DROVE DOWN A FAIRLY BUSY HIGHWAY WHICH IS LESS THAN ONE MILE FROM MY HOME. AS I PROCEEDED DOWN THE HIGHWAY, I ATTEMPTED TO ACCELERATE AND THE VEHICLE MADE A LOUD GRINDING NOISE AND BECAME…
Read full complaint
I RECENTLY PURCHASED A 2003 RANGE ROVER. AFTER DRIVING THE VEHICLE FROM THE DEALERS LOT TO MY HOME, I DECIDED TO TAKE MY FIANCE FOR A DRIVE. I DROVE DOWN A FAIRLY BUSY HIGHWAY WHICH IS LESS THAN ONE MILE FROM MY HOME. AS I PROCEEDED DOWN THE HIGHWAY, I ATTEMPTED TO ACCELERATE AND THE VEHICLE MADE A LOUD GRINDING NOISE AND BECAME IMMOBILE. LUCKILY, TRAFFIC WAS NOT EXTREMELY HEAVY AND OTHER DRIVERS ALLOWED ME TO DRIFT INTO THE MEDIAN. ONCE IN THE MEDIAN, I PLACED THE VEHICLE IN PARK AND ATTEMPTED TO PLACE IT IN GEAR SO THAT I COULD DRIVE AGAIN BUT IT CONTINUED TO MAKE THIS GRINDING NOISE AND WOULD NOT MOVE AT ALL. THE POLICE SHOWED UP AND CALLED A TOW TRUCK SO THAT I COULD GET OFF OF THE BUSY HIGHWAY. I CALLED THE CAR DEALERSHIP AND THEY WERE CONCERNED THAT I HAD JUST PURCHASED THE VEHICLE AND THIS PROBLEM OCCURRED. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A LOCAL EUROPEAN MECHANIC SHOP AND THE MECHANIC INDICATED THAT THE TRANSFER CASE WOULD NEED TO BE REPLACED. I WAS SHOCKED AS TO WHY THIS HAPPENED, SINCE THE VEHICLE APPEARED TO BE IN EXCELLENT CONDITION AND THE DEALER IS A REPUTABLE BUSINESS. THE QUOTE FOR THIS WORK IS $5000 AND I WAS ASKED BY THE DEALER IF I COULD COME UP WITH A PORTION COST FOR THE REPAIRS. SINCE THE INCIDENT, I HAVE RESEARCHED THIS VEHICLE AND THIS APPEARS TO BE A COMMON INCIDENT AMONG OTHER RANGE ROVER OWNERS OF MODELS 2002 THROUGH 2006. IN MY FINDINGS, THIS APPEARS TO BE A DESIGN FLAW AND MECHANICAL ISSUE, NOT TO MENTION A MAJOR SAFETY CONCERN. I WOULD LIKE THIS COMPLAINT TO BE FILED WITH SIMILAR COMPLAINTS IN HOPES THAT A VEHICLE RECALL OR INSPECTION IS PROMPTED. *JB
I OWN A 2003 RANGE ROVER, AND I HAVE READ OF NUMEROUS PROBLEMS CONCERNING THE DRIVESHAFT AND FRONT DIFFERENTIAL FAILING IN THESE MODEL SUVS. I WANT TO DO MY PART AND REPORT THAT I TOO HAD MY FRONT DIFFERENTIAL FAIL ON THE ROAD AT 40200 MILES. I HOPE THAT REPORTING THIS WILL ULTIMATELY REQUIRE LAND ROVER TO REDESIGN THIS P…
Read full complaint
I OWN A 2003 RANGE ROVER, AND I HAVE READ OF NUMEROUS PROBLEMS CONCERNING THE DRIVESHAFT AND FRONT DIFFERENTIAL FAILING IN THESE MODEL SUVS. I WANT TO DO MY PART AND REPORT THAT I TOO HAD MY FRONT DIFFERENTIAL FAIL ON THE ROAD AT 40200 MILES. I HOPE THAT REPORTING THIS WILL ULTIMATELY REQUIRE LAND ROVER TO REDESIGN THIS PART, BECAUSE THIS WILL EVENTUALLY CAUSE SOMEONE TO LOSE THERE LIFE. THE TRUCK IS TOTALLY UNDRIVABLE. I WAS ON THE HIGHWAY AT SPEEDS OF 65 MPH, AND THE ACCELERATION JUST GAVE OUT. I WAS LUCKY THAT IT WAS LIGHT TRAFFIC, AND I WAS ABLE TO SOMEHOW GET THE TRUCK TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. *NM
WHILE CLIMBING A MOUNTAIN GRADE THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL ASSEMBLY COMPLETELY FAILED, ELIMINATING POWER TO THE DRIVE TRAIN. VEHICLE CAME TO A STOP AND ROLLED BACKWARDS DOWN THE HILL AND ENDED UP SIDEWAYS IN A 60 MPH HIGHWAY. FORTUNATELY, THE APPROACHING TRAFFIC HAD SUFFICIENT TIME TO STOP THEREBY AVERTING AN ACCIDENT. THERE IS NO W…
Read full complaint
WHILE CLIMBING A MOUNTAIN GRADE THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL ASSEMBLY COMPLETELY FAILED, ELIMINATING POWER TO THE DRIVE TRAIN. VEHICLE CAME TO A STOP AND ROLLED BACKWARDS DOWN THE HILL AND ENDED UP SIDEWAYS IN A 60 MPH HIGHWAY. FORTUNATELY, THE APPROACHING TRAFFIC HAD SUFFICIENT TIME TO STOP THEREBY AVERTING AN ACCIDENT. THERE IS NO WARNING WHATSOEVER PRIOR TO FAILURE AND THIS IS EXTREMELY DANGEROUS TO THE OCCUPANTS OF THE VEHICLE AND THE NEARBY TRAFFIC. *JB
FRONT DIFFERENTIAL FAILURE: 2 TIMES, WITH IN 21K MILES IF EACH, FIRST REPAIR SPLITTING COST WITH LAND ROVER, SECOND TIME REPAIRED UNDER PARTS WARRANTY. NO WARNING OF FAILURE, BOTH TIMES, FIRST TIME LEFT STRANDED UNABLE TO MOVE IN BUSY INTERSECTION, SECOND TIME FAILURE OCCURRED ON I-5 AT SPEED, CAUSING FRONT WHEELS TO LOCK MOMENT…
Read full complaint
FRONT DIFFERENTIAL FAILURE: 2 TIMES, WITH IN 21K MILES IF EACH, FIRST REPAIR SPLITTING COST WITH LAND ROVER, SECOND TIME REPAIRED UNDER PARTS WARRANTY. NO WARNING OF FAILURE, BOTH TIMES, FIRST TIME LEFT STRANDED UNABLE TO MOVE IN BUSY INTERSECTION, SECOND TIME FAILURE OCCURRED ON I-5 AT SPEED, CAUSING FRONT WHEELS TO LOCK MOMENTARILY. AGAIN STRANDED. BOTH TIMES COST FOR TOWING AND LODGING TRANSPORTATION HOME AN BACK TO RETRIEVE VEHICLE. *NM
Official recalls
0No recalls in this snapshot.
Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗
NHTSA investigations
2EA07012 · Front Diff. / Propeller Shaft Failure
Opened Aug 14, 2007 · Closed Dec 10, 2008
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Power Train:axle Assembly; Power Train:axle Assembly:axle Shaft; Power Train:driveline; Power Train:driveline:differential Unit; Power Train:driveline:driveshaft
SUMMARY:IN A LETTER DATED DECEMBER 2, 2008, FORD MOTOR COMPANY (FORD) NOTIFIED NHTSA THAT LAND ROVER IS CONDUCTING A SAFETY RECALL OF MODEL YEAR (MY) 2003 THROUGH 2005 RANGE ROVER VEHICLES BUILT AT THE SOLIHULL (UK) ASSEMBLY PLANT FROM JANUARY 3, 2002 THROUGH FEBRUARY 22, 2005, TO REPLACE THE FRONT DRIVESHAFT JOINT (NHTSA RECALL NO. 08V-635, LAND ROVER RECALL NO. P041). THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL COUPLING SLEEVE AND THE PROPELLER SHAFT MAY BE MISALIGNED RESULTING IN SPLINE WEAR OVER TIME, WHICH MAY EVENTUALLY RESULT IN THE SPLINES SHEARING.THE DEFECT CONDITION CAN RESULT IN A LOSS OF PROPULSION AND SUBSEQUENT VEHICLE DISABLEMENT IN THE ROADWAY OR ON THE SHOULDER OF THE ROADWAY. FURTHERMORE, THE DEFECT CONDITION CAN ALSO CAUSE LOSS OF THE TRANSMISSION LOCK FUNCTION WHEN THE VEHICLE IS SHIFTED INTO THE PARK POSITION.THE LOSS OF THE TRANSMISSION LOCK FUNCTION CAN CAUSE A VEHICLE ROLLAWAY CONDITION IF THE EMERGENCY BRAKE IS NOT APPLIED AND THE VEHICLE IS UNATTENDED BY THE DRIVER. IN JULY 2008, LAND ROVER INITIATED A SERVICE ACTION (Q041) INSTRUCTING DEALERS TO INSTALL A REDESIGNED FRONT PROPELLER SHAFT, FRONT DIFFERENTIAL COUPLING AND HEAT SHIELD KIT TO ADDRESS THE MISALIGNMENT AND SUBSEQUENT SPLINE WEAR.THIS IS THE SAME REPAIR PROCEDURE THAT WILL BE USED IN SAFETY RECALL 08V-635.APPROXIMATELY 48 PERCENT OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES (18,000) HAVE HAD THE REMEDY PERFORMED UNDER SERVICE ACTION Q041 AS OF DECEMBER 2, 2008. ODI BELIEVES THAT SUDDEN LOSS OF MOTIVE POWER WITHOUT WARNING AND FAILURE OF THE TRANSMISSION LOCK FUNCTION ARE SAFETY CONSEQUENCES THAT, PARTICULARLY IN THE CONTEXT OF THE HIGH FAILURE RATE OF THE SUBJECT COMPONENTS, REPRESENT AN UNREASONABLE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY AS STATED IN A RECALL REQUEST LETTER SENT TO FORD AND LAND ROVER ON NOVEMBER 6, 2008.LAND ROVER DOES NOT AGREE, BUT IS CHANGING ITS CUSTOMER SATISFACTION PROGRAM TO A SAFETY RECALL AS ODI REQUESTED. LAND ROVER NOTED THAT IT WAS AWARE OF ONE ALLEGED ACCIDENT; HOWEVER, IT WAS UNAWARE OF ANY INJURY OR VEHICLE DAMAGE ASSOCIATED WITH THE ALLEGED ACCIDENT.LAND ROVER'S RECALL RESOLVES THE SAFETY DEFECT CONCERNS PURSUED BY THIS INVESTIGATION. THIS ENGINEERING ANALYSIS IS CLOSED.
Additional source detail variants (5)
Power Train:axle Assembly:axle Shaft
SUMMARY:IN A LETTER DATED DECEMBER 2, 2008, FORD MOTOR COMPANY (FORD) NOTIFIED NHTSA THAT LAND ROVER IS CONDUCTING A SAFETY RECALL OF MODEL YEAR (MY) 2003 THROUGH 2005 RANGE ROVER VEHICLES BUILT AT THE SOLIHULL (UK) ASSEMBLY PLANT FROM JANUARY 3, 2002 THROUGH FEBRUARY 22, 2005, TO REPLACE THE FRONT DRIVESHAFT JOINT (NHTSA RECALL NO. 08V-635, LAND ROVER RECALL NO. P041). THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL COUPLING SLEEVE AND THE PROPELLER SHAFT MAY BE MISALIGNED RESULTING IN SPLINE WEAR OVER TIME, WHICH MAY EVENTUALLY RESULT IN THE SPLINES SHEARING.THE DEFECT CONDITION CAN RESULT IN A LOSS OF PROPULSION AND SUBSEQUENT VEHICLE DISABLEMENT IN THE ROADWAY OR ON THE SHOULDER OF THE ROADWAY. FURTHERMORE, THE DEFECT CONDITION CAN ALSO CAUSE LOSS OF THE TRANSMISSION LOCK FUNCTION WHEN THE VEHICLE IS SHIFTED INTO THE PARK POSITION.THE LOSS OF THE TRANSMISSION LOCK FUNCTION CAN CAUSE A VEHICLE ROLLAWAY CONDITION IF THE EMERGENCY BRAKE IS NOT APPLIED AND THE VEHICLE IS UNATTENDED BY THE DRIVER. IN JULY 2008, LAND ROVER INITIATED A SERVICE ACTION (Q041) INSTRUCTING DEALERS TO INSTALL A REDESIGNED FRONT PROPELLER SHAFT, FRONT DIFFERENTIAL COUPLING AND HEAT SHIELD KIT TO ADDRESS THE MISALIGNMENT AND SUBSEQUENT SPLINE WEAR.THIS IS THE SAME REPAIR PROCEDURE THAT WILL BE USED IN SAFETY RECALL 08V-635.APPROXIMATELY 48 PERCENT OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES (18,000) HAVE HAD THE REMEDY PERFORMED UNDER SERVICE ACTION Q041 AS OF DECEMBER 2, 2008. ODI BELIEVES THAT SUDDEN LOSS OF MOTIVE POWER WITHOUT WARNING AND FAILURE OF THE TRANSMISSION LOCK FUNCTION ARE SAFETY CONSEQUENCES THAT, PARTICULARLY IN THE CONTEXT OF THE HIGH FAILURE RATE OF THE SUBJECT COMPONENTS, REPRESENT AN UNREASONABLE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY AS STATED IN A RECALL REQUEST LETTER SENT TO FORD AND LAND ROVER ON NOVEMBER 6, 2008.LAND ROVER DOES NOT AGREE, BUT IS CHANGING ITS CUSTOMER SATISFACTION PROGRAM TO A SAFETY RECALL AS ODI REQUESTED. LAND ROVER NOTED THAT IT WAS AWARE OF ONE ALLEGED ACCIDENT; HOWEVER, IT WAS UNAWARE OF ANY INJURY OR VEHICLE DAMAGE ASSOCIATED WITH THE ALLEGED ACCIDENT.LAND ROVER'S RECALL RESOLVES THE SAFETY DEFECT CONCERNS PURSUED BY THIS INVESTIGATION. THIS ENGINEERING ANALYSIS IS CLOSED.
Power Train:axle Assembly
SUMMARY:IN A LETTER DATED DECEMBER 2, 2008, FORD MOTOR COMPANY (FORD) NOTIFIED NHTSA THAT LAND ROVER IS CONDUCTING A SAFETY RECALL OF MODEL YEAR (MY) 2003 THROUGH 2005 RANGE ROVER VEHICLES BUILT AT THE SOLIHULL (UK) ASSEMBLY PLANT FROM JANUARY 3, 2002 THROUGH FEBRUARY 22, 2005, TO REPLACE THE FRONT DRIVESHAFT JOINT (NHTSA RECALL NO. 08V-635, LAND ROVER RECALL NO. P041). THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL COUPLING SLEEVE AND THE PROPELLER SHAFT MAY BE MISALIGNED RESULTING IN SPLINE WEAR OVER TIME, WHICH MAY EVENTUALLY RESULT IN THE SPLINES SHEARING.THE DEFECT CONDITION CAN RESULT IN A LOSS OF PROPULSION AND SUBSEQUENT VEHICLE DISABLEMENT IN THE ROADWAY OR ON THE SHOULDER OF THE ROADWAY. FURTHERMORE, THE DEFECT CONDITION CAN ALSO CAUSE LOSS OF THE TRANSMISSION LOCK FUNCTION WHEN THE VEHICLE IS SHIFTED INTO THE PARK POSITION.THE LOSS OF THE TRANSMISSION LOCK FUNCTION CAN CAUSE A VEHICLE ROLLAWAY CONDITION IF THE EMERGENCY BRAKE IS NOT APPLIED AND THE VEHICLE IS UNATTENDED BY THE DRIVER. IN JULY 2008, LAND ROVER INITIATED A SERVICE ACTION (Q041) INSTRUCTING DEALERS TO INSTALL A REDESIGNED FRONT PROPELLER SHAFT, FRONT DIFFERENTIAL COUPLING AND HEAT SHIELD KIT TO ADDRESS THE MISALIGNMENT AND SUBSEQUENT SPLINE WEAR.THIS IS THE SAME REPAIR PROCEDURE THAT WILL BE USED IN SAFETY RECALL 08V-635.APPROXIMATELY 48 PERCENT OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES (18,000) HAVE HAD THE REMEDY PERFORMED UNDER SERVICE ACTION Q041 AS OF DECEMBER 2, 2008. ODI BELIEVES THAT SUDDEN LOSS OF MOTIVE POWER WITHOUT WARNING AND FAILURE OF THE TRANSMISSION LOCK FUNCTION ARE SAFETY CONSEQUENCES THAT, PARTICULARLY IN THE CONTEXT OF THE HIGH FAILURE RATE OF THE SUBJECT COMPONENTS, REPRESENT AN UNREASONABLE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY AS STATED IN A RECALL REQUEST LETTER SENT TO FORD AND LAND ROVER ON NOVEMBER 6, 2008.LAND ROVER DOES NOT AGREE, BUT IS CHANGING ITS CUSTOMER SATISFACTION PROGRAM TO A SAFETY RECALL AS ODI REQUESTED. LAND ROVER NOTED THAT IT WAS AWARE OF ONE ALLEGED ACCIDENT; HOWEVER, IT WAS UNAWARE OF ANY INJURY OR VEHICLE DAMAGE ASSOCIATED WITH THE ALLEGED ACCIDENT.LAND ROVER'S RECALL RESOLVES THE SAFETY DEFECT CONCERNS PURSUED BY THIS INVESTIGATION. THIS ENGINEERING ANALYSIS IS CLOSED.
Power Train:driveline:differential Unit
SUMMARY:IN A LETTER DATED DECEMBER 2, 2008, FORD MOTOR COMPANY (FORD) NOTIFIED NHTSA THAT LAND ROVER IS CONDUCTING A SAFETY RECALL OF MODEL YEAR (MY) 2003 THROUGH 2005 RANGE ROVER VEHICLES BUILT AT THE SOLIHULL (UK) ASSEMBLY PLANT FROM JANUARY 3, 2002 THROUGH FEBRUARY 22, 2005, TO REPLACE THE FRONT DRIVESHAFT JOINT (NHTSA RECALL NO. 08V-635, LAND ROVER RECALL NO. P041). THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL COUPLING SLEEVE AND THE PROPELLER SHAFT MAY BE MISALIGNED RESULTING IN SPLINE WEAR OVER TIME, WHICH MAY EVENTUALLY RESULT IN THE SPLINES SHEARING.THE DEFECT CONDITION CAN RESULT IN A LOSS OF PROPULSION AND SUBSEQUENT VEHICLE DISABLEMENT IN THE ROADWAY OR ON THE SHOULDER OF THE ROADWAY. FURTHERMORE, THE DEFECT CONDITION CAN ALSO CAUSE LOSS OF THE TRANSMISSION LOCK FUNCTION WHEN THE VEHICLE IS SHIFTED INTO THE PARK POSITION.THE LOSS OF THE TRANSMISSION LOCK FUNCTION CAN CAUSE A VEHICLE ROLLAWAY CONDITION IF THE EMERGENCY BRAKE IS NOT APPLIED AND THE VEHICLE IS UNATTENDED BY THE DRIVER. IN JULY 2008, LAND ROVER INITIATED A SERVICE ACTION (Q041) INSTRUCTING DEALERS TO INSTALL A REDESIGNED FRONT PROPELLER SHAFT, FRONT DIFFERENTIAL COUPLING AND HEAT SHIELD KIT TO ADDRESS THE MISALIGNMENT AND SUBSEQUENT SPLINE WEAR.THIS IS THE SAME REPAIR PROCEDURE THAT WILL BE USED IN SAFETY RECALL 08V-635.APPROXIMATELY 48 PERCENT OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES (18,000) HAVE HAD THE REMEDY PERFORMED UNDER SERVICE ACTION Q041 AS OF DECEMBER 2, 2008. ODI BELIEVES THAT SUDDEN LOSS OF MOTIVE POWER WITHOUT WARNING AND FAILURE OF THE TRANSMISSION LOCK FUNCTION ARE SAFETY CONSEQUENCES THAT, PARTICULARLY IN THE CONTEXT OF THE HIGH FAILURE RATE OF THE SUBJECT COMPONENTS, REPRESENT AN UNREASONABLE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY AS STATED IN A RECALL REQUEST LETTER SENT TO FORD AND LAND ROVER ON NOVEMBER 6, 2008.LAND ROVER DOES NOT AGREE, BUT IS CHANGING ITS CUSTOMER SATISFACTION PROGRAM TO A SAFETY RECALL AS ODI REQUESTED. LAND ROVER NOTED THAT IT WAS AWARE OF ONE ALLEGED ACCIDENT; HOWEVER, IT WAS UNAWARE OF ANY INJURY OR VEHICLE DAMAGE ASSOCIATED WITH THE ALLEGED ACCIDENT.LAND ROVER'S RECALL RESOLVES THE SAFETY DEFECT CONCERNS PURSUED BY THIS INVESTIGATION. THIS ENGINEERING ANALYSIS IS CLOSED.
Power Train:driveline:driveshaft
SUMMARY:IN A LETTER DATED DECEMBER 2, 2008, FORD MOTOR COMPANY (FORD) NOTIFIED NHTSA THAT LAND ROVER IS CONDUCTING A SAFETY RECALL OF MODEL YEAR (MY) 2003 THROUGH 2005 RANGE ROVER VEHICLES BUILT AT THE SOLIHULL (UK) ASSEMBLY PLANT FROM JANUARY 3, 2002 THROUGH FEBRUARY 22, 2005, TO REPLACE THE FRONT DRIVESHAFT JOINT (NHTSA RECALL NO. 08V-635, LAND ROVER RECALL NO. P041). THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL COUPLING SLEEVE AND THE PROPELLER SHAFT MAY BE MISALIGNED RESULTING IN SPLINE WEAR OVER TIME, WHICH MAY EVENTUALLY RESULT IN THE SPLINES SHEARING.THE DEFECT CONDITION CAN RESULT IN A LOSS OF PROPULSION AND SUBSEQUENT VEHICLE DISABLEMENT IN THE ROADWAY OR ON THE SHOULDER OF THE ROADWAY. FURTHERMORE, THE DEFECT CONDITION CAN ALSO CAUSE LOSS OF THE TRANSMISSION LOCK FUNCTION WHEN THE VEHICLE IS SHIFTED INTO THE PARK POSITION.THE LOSS OF THE TRANSMISSION LOCK FUNCTION CAN CAUSE A VEHICLE ROLLAWAY CONDITION IF THE EMERGENCY BRAKE IS NOT APPLIED AND THE VEHICLE IS UNATTENDED BY THE DRIVER. IN JULY 2008, LAND ROVER INITIATED A SERVICE ACTION (Q041) INSTRUCTING DEALERS TO INSTALL A REDESIGNED FRONT PROPELLER SHAFT, FRONT DIFFERENTIAL COUPLING AND HEAT SHIELD KIT TO ADDRESS THE MISALIGNMENT AND SUBSEQUENT SPLINE WEAR.THIS IS THE SAME REPAIR PROCEDURE THAT WILL BE USED IN SAFETY RECALL 08V-635.APPROXIMATELY 48 PERCENT OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES (18,000) HAVE HAD THE REMEDY PERFORMED UNDER SERVICE ACTION Q041 AS OF DECEMBER 2, 2008. ODI BELIEVES THAT SUDDEN LOSS OF MOTIVE POWER WITHOUT WARNING AND FAILURE OF THE TRANSMISSION LOCK FUNCTION ARE SAFETY CONSEQUENCES THAT, PARTICULARLY IN THE CONTEXT OF THE HIGH FAILURE RATE OF THE SUBJECT COMPONENTS, REPRESENT AN UNREASONABLE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY AS STATED IN A RECALL REQUEST LETTER SENT TO FORD AND LAND ROVER ON NOVEMBER 6, 2008.LAND ROVER DOES NOT AGREE, BUT IS CHANGING ITS CUSTOMER SATISFACTION PROGRAM TO A SAFETY RECALL AS ODI REQUESTED. LAND ROVER NOTED THAT IT WAS AWARE OF ONE ALLEGED ACCIDENT; HOWEVER, IT WAS UNAWARE OF ANY INJURY OR VEHICLE DAMAGE ASSOCIATED WITH THE ALLEGED ACCIDENT.LAND ROVER'S RECALL RESOLVES THE SAFETY DEFECT CONCERNS PURSUED BY THIS INVESTIGATION. THIS ENGINEERING ANALYSIS IS CLOSED.
Power Train:driveline
SUMMARY:IN A LETTER DATED DECEMBER 2, 2008, FORD MOTOR COMPANY (FORD) NOTIFIED NHTSA THAT LAND ROVER IS CONDUCTING A SAFETY RECALL OF MODEL YEAR (MY) 2003 THROUGH 2005 RANGE ROVER VEHICLES BUILT AT THE SOLIHULL (UK) ASSEMBLY PLANT FROM JANUARY 3, 2002 THROUGH FEBRUARY 22, 2005, TO REPLACE THE FRONT DRIVESHAFT JOINT (NHTSA RECALL NO. 08V-635, LAND ROVER RECALL NO. P041). THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL COUPLING SLEEVE AND THE PROPELLER SHAFT MAY BE MISALIGNED RESULTING IN SPLINE WEAR OVER TIME, WHICH MAY EVENTUALLY RESULT IN THE SPLINES SHEARING.THE DEFECT CONDITION CAN RESULT IN A LOSS OF PROPULSION AND SUBSEQUENT VEHICLE DISABLEMENT IN THE ROADWAY OR ON THE SHOULDER OF THE ROADWAY. FURTHERMORE, THE DEFECT CONDITION CAN ALSO CAUSE LOSS OF THE TRANSMISSION LOCK FUNCTION WHEN THE VEHICLE IS SHIFTED INTO THE PARK POSITION.THE LOSS OF THE TRANSMISSION LOCK FUNCTION CAN CAUSE A VEHICLE ROLLAWAY CONDITION IF THE EMERGENCY BRAKE IS NOT APPLIED AND THE VEHICLE IS UNATTENDED BY THE DRIVER. IN JULY 2008, LAND ROVER INITIATED A SERVICE ACTION (Q041) INSTRUCTING DEALERS TO INSTALL A REDESIGNED FRONT PROPELLER SHAFT, FRONT DIFFERENTIAL COUPLING AND HEAT SHIELD KIT TO ADDRESS THE MISALIGNMENT AND SUBSEQUENT SPLINE WEAR.THIS IS THE SAME REPAIR PROCEDURE THAT WILL BE USED IN SAFETY RECALL 08V-635.APPROXIMATELY 48 PERCENT OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES (18,000) HAVE HAD THE REMEDY PERFORMED UNDER SERVICE ACTION Q041 AS OF DECEMBER 2, 2008. ODI BELIEVES THAT SUDDEN LOSS OF MOTIVE POWER WITHOUT WARNING AND FAILURE OF THE TRANSMISSION LOCK FUNCTION ARE SAFETY CONSEQUENCES THAT, PARTICULARLY IN THE CONTEXT OF THE HIGH FAILURE RATE OF THE SUBJECT COMPONENTS, REPRESENT AN UNREASONABLE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY AS STATED IN A RECALL REQUEST LETTER SENT TO FORD AND LAND ROVER ON NOVEMBER 6, 2008.LAND ROVER DOES NOT AGREE, BUT IS CHANGING ITS CUSTOMER SATISFACTION PROGRAM TO A SAFETY RECALL AS ODI REQUESTED. LAND ROVER NOTED THAT IT WAS AWARE OF ONE ALLEGED ACCIDENT; HOWEVER, IT WAS UNAWARE OF ANY INJURY OR VEHICLE DAMAGE ASSOCIATED WITH THE ALLEGED ACCIDENT.LAND ROVER'S RECALL RESOLVES THE SAFETY DEFECT CONCERNS PURSUED BY THIS INVESTIGATION. THIS ENGINEERING ANALYSIS IS CLOSED.
PE07019 · Front Differential/driveshaft Failure
Opened Apr 4, 2007 · Closed Aug 15, 2007
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Power Train:axle Assembly:axle Shaft; Power Train:driveline:differential Unit; Power Train:driveline:driveshaft
IN RESPONSE TO AN INFORMATION REQUEST (IR) LETTER SENT BY THE OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI), FORD STATED THAT THE PRIMARY CAUSE FOR THE MAJORITY OF THE REPORTED FRONT DIFFERENTIAL/DRIVE SHAFT FAILURES IS A MISALIGNMENT OF THE JOINT BETWEEN THE TWO COMPONENTS.CERTAIN LEVELS OF MISALIGNMENT MAY OVER TIME CAUSE AN UNEVEN WEAR OF THE SPLINES.CONTINUED WEAR OF THE SPLINES MAY RESULT IN A SHEARING OF THE SPLINES AND THE INABILITY OF THE DRIVESHAFT TO TRANSFER TORQUE TO THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL. TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE IN THE FIELD, FORD INITIATED A SERVICE CAMPAIGN IN JUNE 2003 TO CORRECT THE MISALIGNMENT ISSUE AND, IF NECESSARY, REPLACE THE FRONT DRIVE SHAFT AND/OR DIFFERENTIAL.THE SERVICE CAMPAIGN COVERED MODEL YEAR (MY) 2003 AND MY 2004 VEHICLES BUILT FROM APRIL 18, 2002 THROUGH JULY 3, 2003.IN PRODUCTION, FORD INTRODUCED A CHANGE TO THE LUBRICATING GREASE OF THE JOINT IN FEBRUARY 2003 AND A CHANGE TO THE ASSEMBLY PLANT ALIGNMENT PROCESS IN JULY 2003 TO ADDRESS THE MISALIGNMENT AND WEAR ISSUE. ODI IDENTIFIED ONE CRASH RELATED TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT.THE CRASH INVOLVED A SUBJECT VEHICLE BEING STRUCK IN THE REAR AFTER BECOMING DISABLED BY A FRONT DIFFERENTIAL/DRIVESHAFT FAILURE AND PULLING TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. THIS PRELIMINARY EVALUATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (EA07-012) TO FURTHER ASSESS THE SCOPE, FREQUENCY AND SAFETY CONSEQUENCES OF FRONT DIFFERENTIAL/DRIVESHAFT FAILURES IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLE POPULATION.
Additional source detail variants (3)
Power Train:axle Assembly:axle Shaft
IN RESPONSE TO AN INFORMATION REQUEST (IR) LETTER SENT BY THE OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI), FORD STATED THAT THE PRIMARY CAUSE FOR THE MAJORITY OF THE REPORTED FRONT DIFFERENTIAL/DRIVE SHAFT FAILURES IS A MISALIGNMENT OF THE JOINT BETWEEN THE TWO COMPONENTS.CERTAIN LEVELS OF MISALIGNMENT MAY OVER TIME CAUSE AN UNEVEN WEAR OF THE SPLINES.CONTINUED WEAR OF THE SPLINES MAY RESULT IN A SHEARING OF THE SPLINES AND THE INABILITY OF THE DRIVESHAFT TO TRANSFER TORQUE TO THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL. TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE IN THE FIELD, FORD INITIATED A SERVICE CAMPAIGN IN JUNE 2003 TO CORRECT THE MISALIGNMENT ISSUE AND, IF NECESSARY, REPLACE THE FRONT DRIVE SHAFT AND/OR DIFFERENTIAL.THE SERVICE CAMPAIGN COVERED MODEL YEAR (MY) 2003 AND MY 2004 VEHICLES BUILT FROM APRIL 18, 2002 THROUGH JULY 3, 2003.IN PRODUCTION, FORD INTRODUCED A CHANGE TO THE LUBRICATING GREASE OF THE JOINT IN FEBRUARY 2003 AND A CHANGE TO THE ASSEMBLY PLANT ALIGNMENT PROCESS IN JULY 2003 TO ADDRESS THE MISALIGNMENT AND WEAR ISSUE. ODI IDENTIFIED ONE CRASH RELATED TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT.THE CRASH INVOLVED A SUBJECT VEHICLE BEING STRUCK IN THE REAR AFTER BECOMING DISABLED BY A FRONT DIFFERENTIAL/DRIVESHAFT FAILURE AND PULLING TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. THIS PRELIMINARY EVALUATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (EA07-012) TO FURTHER ASSESS THE SCOPE, FREQUENCY AND SAFETY CONSEQUENCES OF FRONT DIFFERENTIAL/DRIVESHAFT FAILURES IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLE POPULATION.
Power Train:driveline:differential Unit
IN RESPONSE TO AN INFORMATION REQUEST (IR) LETTER SENT BY THE OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI), FORD STATED THAT THE PRIMARY CAUSE FOR THE MAJORITY OF THE REPORTED FRONT DIFFERENTIAL/DRIVE SHAFT FAILURES IS A MISALIGNMENT OF THE JOINT BETWEEN THE TWO COMPONENTS.CERTAIN LEVELS OF MISALIGNMENT MAY OVER TIME CAUSE AN UNEVEN WEAR OF THE SPLINES.CONTINUED WEAR OF THE SPLINES MAY RESULT IN A SHEARING OF THE SPLINES AND THE INABILITY OF THE DRIVESHAFT TO TRANSFER TORQUE TO THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL. TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE IN THE FIELD, FORD INITIATED A SERVICE CAMPAIGN IN JUNE 2003 TO CORRECT THE MISALIGNMENT ISSUE AND, IF NECESSARY, REPLACE THE FRONT DRIVE SHAFT AND/OR DIFFERENTIAL.THE SERVICE CAMPAIGN COVERED MODEL YEAR (MY) 2003 AND MY 2004 VEHICLES BUILT FROM APRIL 18, 2002 THROUGH JULY 3, 2003.IN PRODUCTION, FORD INTRODUCED A CHANGE TO THE LUBRICATING GREASE OF THE JOINT IN FEBRUARY 2003 AND A CHANGE TO THE ASSEMBLY PLANT ALIGNMENT PROCESS IN JULY 2003 TO ADDRESS THE MISALIGNMENT AND WEAR ISSUE. ODI IDENTIFIED ONE CRASH RELATED TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT.THE CRASH INVOLVED A SUBJECT VEHICLE BEING STRUCK IN THE REAR AFTER BECOMING DISABLED BY A FRONT DIFFERENTIAL/DRIVESHAFT FAILURE AND PULLING TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. THIS PRELIMINARY EVALUATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (EA07-012) TO FURTHER ASSESS THE SCOPE, FREQUENCY AND SAFETY CONSEQUENCES OF FRONT DIFFERENTIAL/DRIVESHAFT FAILURES IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLE POPULATION.
Power Train:driveline:driveshaft
IN RESPONSE TO AN INFORMATION REQUEST (IR) LETTER SENT BY THE OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI), FORD STATED THAT THE PRIMARY CAUSE FOR THE MAJORITY OF THE REPORTED FRONT DIFFERENTIAL/DRIVE SHAFT FAILURES IS A MISALIGNMENT OF THE JOINT BETWEEN THE TWO COMPONENTS.CERTAIN LEVELS OF MISALIGNMENT MAY OVER TIME CAUSE AN UNEVEN WEAR OF THE SPLINES.CONTINUED WEAR OF THE SPLINES MAY RESULT IN A SHEARING OF THE SPLINES AND THE INABILITY OF THE DRIVESHAFT TO TRANSFER TORQUE TO THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL. TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE IN THE FIELD, FORD INITIATED A SERVICE CAMPAIGN IN JUNE 2003 TO CORRECT THE MISALIGNMENT ISSUE AND, IF NECESSARY, REPLACE THE FRONT DRIVE SHAFT AND/OR DIFFERENTIAL.THE SERVICE CAMPAIGN COVERED MODEL YEAR (MY) 2003 AND MY 2004 VEHICLES BUILT FROM APRIL 18, 2002 THROUGH JULY 3, 2003.IN PRODUCTION, FORD INTRODUCED A CHANGE TO THE LUBRICATING GREASE OF THE JOINT IN FEBRUARY 2003 AND A CHANGE TO THE ASSEMBLY PLANT ALIGNMENT PROCESS IN JULY 2003 TO ADDRESS THE MISALIGNMENT AND WEAR ISSUE. ODI IDENTIFIED ONE CRASH RELATED TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT.THE CRASH INVOLVED A SUBJECT VEHICLE BEING STRUCK IN THE REAR AFTER BECOMING DISABLED BY A FRONT DIFFERENTIAL/DRIVESHAFT FAILURE AND PULLING TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. THIS PRELIMINARY EVALUATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (EA07-012) TO FURTHER ASSESS THE SCOPE, FREQUENCY AND SAFETY CONSEQUENCES OF FRONT DIFFERENTIAL/DRIVESHAFT FAILURES IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLE POPULATION.