IllustrationWHILE DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY THE CAR WITH NO PREVIOUS INDICATION JUST STARTED MAKING A GRINDING NOISE HARDLY ALLOWING ME TO PULL OFF TO THE RIGHT. THE DEALER STATED I HAD TO REPLACE THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL AND DRIVESHAFT. *TR
2003 Land Rover 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 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
60–25K
1525–50K
3350–75K
1975–100K
9100–150K
2150K+
84 reports with mileage · 13 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 74 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Steering. Review the 8 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Electrical System. Review the 6 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
1 crash reports1 fire reports0 injury reports
Power Train complaints
74 reportsFRONT DIFFERENTIAL FAILURE ON 2003 RANGE ROVER. FAILED TWICE ONCE UNDER WARRANTY AND AGAIN WITHOUT WARRANTY. FIGHTING WITH DEALERSHIP FOR COST. DIFFERENTIAL FAILED DURING CASUAL DRIVING WITH ENTIRE FAMILY. *TR
I HAVE A 2003 RANGE ROVER. THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL COMPLETELY FAILED AND BROKE CAUSING THE VEHICLE TO BE IMMOBILIZED. I CANNOT DRIVE OR USE REVERSE. THIS IS A KNOWN TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN 540103 AND NHTSA ITEM 10000919, HOWEVER IT CONTINUES TO HAPPEN AGAIN AFTER BEING FIXED ACCORDING TO SOME CUSTOMERS. THE ORIGINAL OWNER HAD …
Read full complaint
I HAVE A 2003 RANGE ROVER. THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL COMPLETELY FAILED AND BROKE CAUSING THE VEHICLE TO BE IMMOBILIZED. I CANNOT DRIVE OR USE REVERSE. THIS IS A KNOWN TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN 540103 AND NHTSA ITEM 10000919, HOWEVER IT CONTINUES TO HAPPEN AGAIN AFTER BEING FIXED ACCORDING TO SOME CUSTOMERS. THE ORIGINAL OWNER HAD IT FIXED ONCE AND I AM THE SECOND OWNER, IT HAPPENED AGAIN. MY VEHICLE WAS BOUGHT USED LAST MONTH WITH 44.8K MILES. IT NOW HAS 47K MILES. THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT SAFETY ISSUE AND SHOULD BE CONSIDERED A RECALL. MY VEHICLE IS SITTING AT THE DEALERSHIP. IT IS OUT OF THE 4 YEAR/50K MILE WARRANTY SO LAND ROVER MAY OR MAY NOT FIX IT. HERE IS A LINK WITH MORE DETAIL ON THIS ISSUE: HTTP://WWW.RANGEROVERS.NET/RRMKIIIREMEDIES.HTML#DIFF *TR
THE DIFFERENTIAL ASSEMBLY ON MY 2003 RANGE ROVER WENT OUT ON ME ON THE HIGHWAY ABOUT 80 MILES FROM CHICAGO ON OUR TRIP BACK FROM SCOTTSDALE AZ. IT WAS TOWED BACK TO CHICAGO BY RANGE ROVER 24HR. ROAD SERVICE (IT WAS OUT OF WARRANTY BUT THEY PAID TO HAVE IT TOWED TO MY FRONT DOOR). *TR
2003 RANGE ROVER WITH ENGINE PROBLEMS INCLUDING STALLING. CUSTOMER STATES THAT ONE DAY WHILE DRIVING THE VEHICLE LURCHED FORWARD MADE A GRINDING NOISE AND THEN LOST ALL POWER. *KB THE MECHANIC INFORMED THE CONSUMER THERE WAS A DEFECT WITH THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL. ACCORDING TO THE DEALERSHIP, THE PROBLEM WAS WITH THE DESIGN OF T…
Read full complaint
2003 RANGE ROVER WITH ENGINE PROBLEMS INCLUDING STALLING. CUSTOMER STATES THAT ONE DAY WHILE DRIVING THE VEHICLE LURCHED FORWARD MADE A GRINDING NOISE AND THEN LOST ALL POWER. *KB THE MECHANIC INFORMED THE CONSUMER THERE WAS A DEFECT WITH THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL. ACCORDING TO THE DEALERSHIP, THE PROBLEM WAS WITH THE DESIGN OF THE FRONT DRIVESHAFT WHICH HAD NO FLEXIBLE COUPLING AT THE FRONT END, SO ANY MINOR MISALIGNMENT PLACED SEVERE STRESS ON THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL INPUT SPLINES, LEADING TO FAILURE AND IMMOBILIZATION OF THE VEHICLE.
DIFFERENTIAL , DRIVE SHAFT TOTAL FAILURE . THIS HAS HAPPEN TO ME TWICE IN JUNE OF 2007 AND OCT OF 2007. *TR
MY 2003 LAND ROVER RANGE ROVER HSE HAD A FAILURE OF THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL SPILNES, AXLE SHAFT, DIFFERENTIAL UNIT AND DRIVE SHAFT WHICH CAUSED TOTAL LOSS OF VEHICLE PROPULSION AT 60 MILES PER HOUR ON A BUSY HIGHWAY DURING RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC. THE VEHICLE HAD TO BE TOWED TO LAND ROVER NORTH SCOTTSDALE WHERE IT STILL SITS BECAUSE NE…
Read full complaint
MY 2003 LAND ROVER RANGE ROVER HSE HAD A FAILURE OF THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL SPILNES, AXLE SHAFT, DIFFERENTIAL UNIT AND DRIVE SHAFT WHICH CAUSED TOTAL LOSS OF VEHICLE PROPULSION AT 60 MILES PER HOUR ON A BUSY HIGHWAY DURING RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC. THE VEHICLE HAD TO BE TOWED TO LAND ROVER NORTH SCOTTSDALE WHERE IT STILL SITS BECAUSE NEITHER THE EXTENDED WARRANTY COMPANY NOR THE LAND ROVER DEALERSHIP WILL CLAIM RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE REPAIRS WHICH ARE IN EXCESS OF $4,000. I ALSO HAD A FAILURE OF THE RETRACTABLE STEERING WHEEL WHICH RESULTED IN A DIAGNOSIS OF HAVING TO REPLACE THE ENTIRE STEERING COLUMN. *JB
I WAS DRIVING MY 2003 LAND ROVER RANGE ROVER HSE APPROX. 45 MPH AND THE CAR IMMEDIATELY BECAME INOPERABLE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE STREET. DEALERSHIP SAYS THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL HAS WORN DOWN AND IT IS NOT DUE TO MY DRIVING HABITS OR ANYTHING RELATED TO ME. THIS IS DEFINITELY A DEFECT AND ALL FORUMS SAY THIS VEHICLE HAS THIS PROBLEM…
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING MY 2003 LAND ROVER RANGE ROVER HSE APPROX. 45 MPH AND THE CAR IMMEDIATELY BECAME INOPERABLE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE STREET. DEALERSHIP SAYS THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL HAS WORN DOWN AND IT IS NOT DUE TO MY DRIVING HABITS OR ANYTHING RELATED TO ME. THIS IS DEFINITELY A DEFECT AND ALL FORUMS SAY THIS VEHICLE HAS THIS PROBLEM VERY FREQUENTLY. THIS IS A VERY SERIOUS AND POTENTIALLY DEADLY DEFECT IN DESIGN AND FUNCTION. MUST BE RECALLED. I COULD'VE EASILY BEEN IN A MAJOR ACCIDENT. NO THROTTLE CONTROL IS POSSIBLE WHEN THIS PROBLEM OCCURS, AND THE CAR WILL NOT PARK WHILE IN "P." THEREFORE, IF I WAS ON AN INCLINE, VEHICLE WOULD HAVE ROLLED WITH NOTHING THAT COULD BE DONE. A MAJOR ISSUE. THANK YOU FOR THIS SERVICE TO THE PUBLIC. SOMETHING MUST BE DONE TO PROTECT CONSUMERS FROM THE LACK OF RESPONSIBILITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY FROM THESE MAJOR AUTO CORPORATIONS. *JB
2003 RANGE ROVER HSE , LOUD KNOCKING NOISE WHEN GOING FROM REVERSE TO DRIVE, 5 MINUTES LATER A GRINDING NOISE HAPPENED THAT WAS VERY LOUD. THE CAR RESPONDED WITH A LOUD GRINDING SOUND WHEN TRYING TO APPLY GAS. I WAS LUCKY THAT I WAS NOT ON A HIGHWAY AND COULD PULL THE CAR OVER. *TR THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT ILLUMINATED, THERE WA…
Read full complaint
2003 RANGE ROVER HSE , LOUD KNOCKING NOISE WHEN GOING FROM REVERSE TO DRIVE, 5 MINUTES LATER A GRINDING NOISE HAPPENED THAT WAS VERY LOUD. THE CAR RESPONDED WITH A LOUD GRINDING SOUND WHEN TRYING TO APPLY GAS. I WAS LUCKY THAT I WAS NOT ON A HIGHWAY AND COULD PULL THE CAR OVER. *TR THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT ILLUMINATED, THERE WAS A RADIATOR LEAK AND THE LEFT REAR TIRE HAD A SLOW LEAK. UPDATED 10/11/07. *JB
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 LAND ROVER RANGE ROVER. WHILE DRIVING 65 MPH, THE VEHICLE LOST POWER, BUT THE ENGINE WAS STILL RUNNING. THE CONTACT DEPRESSED THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL, BUT THE VEHICLE FAILED TO MOVE. THE VEHICLE WAS PULLED OVER AND TOWED TO THE DEALER. THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL IN THE DRIVETRAIN FAILED AND WAS REPLACED.…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 LAND ROVER RANGE ROVER. WHILE DRIVING 65 MPH, THE VEHICLE LOST POWER, BUT THE ENGINE WAS STILL RUNNING. THE CONTACT DEPRESSED THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL, BUT THE VEHICLE FAILED TO MOVE. THE VEHICLE WAS PULLED OVER AND TOWED TO THE DEALER. THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL IN THE DRIVETRAIN FAILED AND WAS REPLACED. WHILE DRIVING 10 MPH, THE CONTACT HEARD A LOUD CLUNK COMING FROM THE FRONT PASSENGER SIDE OF THE VEHICLE. THIS FAILURE OCCURRED BEFORE AND AFTER THE PREVIOUS FAILURE. THERE IS AN OPEN INVESTIGATION NUMBER PE07019. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 66,000 AND FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 65,000.
Official recalls
108V635000 · Power Train:driveline:driveshaft
Dec 3, 2008
LAND ROVER IS RECALLING 19,168 MY 2003-2005 RANGE ROVER VEHICLES. THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL COUPLING SLEEVE AND THE PROPELLER SHAFT MAY BE MISALIGNED, RESULTING IN SPLINE WEAR OVER A PERIOD OF TIME. AS THE WEAR BETWEEN THE PROPELLER SHAFT AND THE DIFFERENTIAL SPLINE COUPLING PROGRESSES, NOISE AND VIBRATION ARE EXPECTED.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: CONTINUED VEHICLE OPERATION CAN EVENTUALLY RESULT IN THE SPLINES SHEARING AND A LOSS OF DRIVE, INCREASING THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSTALL A REVISED DESIGN OF THE PROPELLER SHAFT, THE FLANGE KIT AND HEAT SHIELD KIT. THE RECALL BEGAN ON JANUARY 6, 2009. OWNERS MAY CONTACT LAND ROVER AT 1-800- 637-6837.
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.