IllustrationREAD DIFF 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
What owners actually said
97 reportsFRONT DIFF ASSEMBLY REPLACED. *TR
2003 RANGE ROVER HSE. APPROXIMATELY 46,000 MILES. WITHIN THE 50,000 MILE WARRANTY BUT OUT OF TIME WARRANTY BY ABOUT 6 MONTHS. WERE TAKING A FREEWAY EXIT WHEN THE SPLINES ON THE FRONT DRIVESHAFT STRIPPED AND FAILED. RANGE ROVER WOULD NOT COVER THE PROBLEM AND DID NOT LET US KNOW THAT THIS WAS A KNOWN PROBLEM. WE TOOK THE VEHICLE …
Read full complaint
2003 RANGE ROVER HSE. APPROXIMATELY 46,000 MILES. WITHIN THE 50,000 MILE WARRANTY BUT OUT OF TIME WARRANTY BY ABOUT 6 MONTHS. WERE TAKING A FREEWAY EXIT WHEN THE SPLINES ON THE FRONT DRIVESHAFT STRIPPED AND FAILED. RANGE ROVER WOULD NOT COVER THE PROBLEM AND DID NOT LET US KNOW THAT THIS WAS A KNOWN PROBLEM. WE TOOK THE VEHICLE TO TRICOUNTY TRANSMISSION IN CLACKAMAS OREGON FOR REPAIR WHERE THEY HAD ANOTHER RANGE ROVER ON THE HOIST WITH THE SAME PROBLEM. THEY ORDERED A DRIVE SHAFT AND TOLD US THAT THE YOKE HAD SLIGHT WEAR FROM THE STRIPPED DRIVESHAFT BUT DID NOT NEED REPLACING. THE TOTAL WAS BETWEEN $700 AND $800. ON APRIL 14TH, 2007 OT STRIPPED OUT AGAIN. WE WERE THEN TOLD OF THE NEW CUSTOM DRIVESHAFTS FOR SOLVING THIS PROBLEM.*AK
I HAVE A RANGE ROVER. I WAS IN NEW JERSEY ON THE APPROACH HIGHWAY TO THE LINCOLN TUNNEL TRAVELING AROUND 50 MILES PER HOUR WHEN I NOTICED A BUMPING NOISE AND RHYTHMIC PULLING SENSATION AS IF I HAD A FLAT TIRE OR HAD PICKED UP SOMETHING THAT WAS DRAGGING AGAINST THE WHEEL. THEN THE CAR SLOWED AND AN "ENGAGE NEUTRAL" SIGNAL FLAS…
Read full complaint
I HAVE A RANGE ROVER. I WAS IN NEW JERSEY ON THE APPROACH HIGHWAY TO THE LINCOLN TUNNEL TRAVELING AROUND 50 MILES PER HOUR WHEN I NOTICED A BUMPING NOISE AND RHYTHMIC PULLING SENSATION AS IF I HAD A FLAT TIRE OR HAD PICKED UP SOMETHING THAT WAS DRAGGING AGAINST THE WHEEL. THEN THE CAR SLOWED AND AN "ENGAGE NEUTRAL" SIGNAL FLASHED ON THE DISPLAY. I MANAGED TO PULL ONTO THE SHOULDER AND WHEN I TRIED TO ENGAGE DRIVE AGAIN I GOT A WHINING NOISE AND THE CAR TRIED TO DO A NOSE DIVE. BECAUSE OF THE VOLUME AND SPEED OF THE TRAFFIC, I WAS LUCKY NOT TO CAUSE, AND BE IN THE MIDDLE OF, A MAJOR PILE-UP. THE CAR WAS TOWED TO THE MANHATTAN LAND ROVER DEALERSHIP. I WAS TOLD THE NEXT DAY THAT THEY WERE REPLACING THE DIFFERENTIAL AND THE DRIVE SHAFT. THERE WAS NO CHARGE BECAUSE THE CAR WAS STILL UNDER WARRANTY. *JB
WITHOUT ANY WARNING, I STARTED TO HEAR A "METAL-ON-METAL" LOUD GRINDING NOISE COMING FROM UNDERNEATH THE VEHICLE WHILE IT WAS MOVING FORWARD, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THE BRAKES WERE APPLIED OR WHETHER IT WAS IN DRIVE OR NEUTRAL. THIS WAS IMMEDIATELY REPORTED TO MY LAND ROVER DEALERSHIP IN WARWICK, RI. LAND ROVER ADVISED THAT THE…
Read full complaint
WITHOUT ANY WARNING, I STARTED TO HEAR A "METAL-ON-METAL" LOUD GRINDING NOISE COMING FROM UNDERNEATH THE VEHICLE WHILE IT WAS MOVING FORWARD, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THE BRAKES WERE APPLIED OR WHETHER IT WAS IN DRIVE OR NEUTRAL. THIS WAS IMMEDIATELY REPORTED TO MY LAND ROVER DEALERSHIP IN WARWICK, RI. LAND ROVER ADVISED THAT THE CAR WAS NOT SAFE TO DRIVE. SO, IT WAS BROUGHT TO THE DEALERSHIP TO BE DIAGNOSED. IT HAD FRONT DIFFERENTIAL AND DRIVE SHAFT FAILURE. PREVIOUSLY, LAND ROVER HAD INSPECTED THIS FRONT DRIVE SHAFT AND DIFFERENTIAL UNDER A LAND ROVER TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN, TO PREVENT THE DRIVE SHAFT AND DIFFERENTIAL FAILURE. THIS OCCURRED WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS UNDER WARRANTY. WHEN THE FAILURE ULTIMATELY OCCURRED, THE VEHICLE COULD NOT BE DRIVEN AND IT WAS OUT OF WARRANTY. COST TO FIX BY THE DEALERSHIP WAS $2,700. THE DEALERSHIP AND LAND ROVER NORTH AMERICA (INCLUDING APPEALS BOARD) REFUSED TO PROVIDE OUT OF WARRANTY ASSISTANCE EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE ALL WELL-AWARE OF THIS SYSTEMATIC FAILURE FOR 2003 RANGE ROVERS. THE TSB DELAYED THE FAILURE LONG ENOUGH SO THAT IT WAS NO LONGER COVERED UNDER THE VEHICLE'S WARRANTY. THE FAILURE COULD HAVE LEAD TO INJURY IF WE WERE TRAVELING AT A HIGHER RATE OF SPEED.*JB
I WAS DRIVING AND ALL OF A SUDDEN THE CAR STOPS RUNNING. MY SAFETY WAS NOT JEOPARDIZED BECAUSE I WAS DRIVING SLOWLY BUT IF IT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED ON A HIGHWAY VERY BAD THINGS WOULD HAVE SURELY OCCURRED. I AM IN THE PROCESSED OF FIXING THE PROBLEM. PROBLEM IS THE DIFFERENTIAL AND DRIVESHAFT PROBLEMS ON 2003 RANGE ROVER. *JB
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE TRAVELING 70 MPH, THERE WAS A LOUD NOISE AND THE VEHICLE ROLLED TO A STOP. AFTER BEING TOWED TO THE DEALERSHIP, IT WAS DETERMINED THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL FAILED AND THE DIFFERENTIAL WAS REPLACED. THIS OCCURRED A SECOND TIME FOUR MONTHS LATER AND THE VEHICLE WAS AGAIN TOWED TO THE DEALERSHIP. THE D…
Read full complaint
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE TRAVELING 70 MPH, THERE WAS A LOUD NOISE AND THE VEHICLE ROLLED TO A STOP. AFTER BEING TOWED TO THE DEALERSHIP, IT WAS DETERMINED THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL FAILED AND THE DIFFERENTIAL WAS REPLACED. THIS OCCURRED A SECOND TIME FOUR MONTHS LATER AND THE VEHICLE WAS AGAIN TOWED TO THE DEALERSHIP. THE DEALERSHIP DETERMINED THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL FAILED.
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING 55 MPH ON THE HIGHWAY, THERE WAS GRINDING NOISE FOLLOWED BY THE ILLUMINATION OF THE NEUTRAL LIGHT ON THE INSTRUMENT CLUSTER PANEL. THE CONTACT MANAGED TO PULL THE VEHICLE OVER WITHOUT INCIDENT. IT WAS TOWED TO A DEALER WHO DETERMINED THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL WAS FRACTURED AND NEEDED TO BE RE…
Read full complaint
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING 55 MPH ON THE HIGHWAY, THERE WAS GRINDING NOISE FOLLOWED BY THE ILLUMINATION OF THE NEUTRAL LIGHT ON THE INSTRUMENT CLUSTER PANEL. THE CONTACT MANAGED TO PULL THE VEHICLE OVER WITHOUT INCIDENT. IT WAS TOWED TO A DEALER WHO DETERMINED THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL WAS FRACTURED AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT CONTACTED. UPDATED 10/18/2006 - THE CONSUMER WAS TOLD BY THE DEALER THAT THE DESIGN OF THE FRONT DRIVESHAFT, WHICH HAS NO FLEXIBLE COUPLING AT THE FRONT END, SO ANY MINOR MISALIGNED PUTS SEVERE STRESS ON THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL INPUT SPLINES, LEADING TO FAILURE AND IMMOBILIZATION OF THE VEHICLE. *NM UPDATED 10/25/2006 - *NM
THERE WERE NO EVENTS LEADING UP TO THIS FAILURE. I WAS DRIVING IN LOS ANGELES ON THE VERY BUSY 405 FWY DURING THE LABOR DAY HOLIDAY WEEKEND. I WAS GOING ALMOST 70 MPH WHEN ALL OF A SUDDEN THE CAR LOST ITS POWER AND BEGAN TO MAKE A METAL TO METAL GRINDING NOISE. FORTUNATELY I WAS ABLE TO EXIT THE FWY WITHOUT CAUSING AN ACCIDEN…
Read full complaint
THERE WERE NO EVENTS LEADING UP TO THIS FAILURE. I WAS DRIVING IN LOS ANGELES ON THE VERY BUSY 405 FWY DURING THE LABOR DAY HOLIDAY WEEKEND. I WAS GOING ALMOST 70 MPH WHEN ALL OF A SUDDEN THE CAR LOST ITS POWER AND BEGAN TO MAKE A METAL TO METAL GRINDING NOISE. FORTUNATELY I WAS ABLE TO EXIT THE FWY WITHOUT CAUSING AN ACCIDENT. ONCE SAFE FROM TRAFFIC, I CALLED MY ROADSIDE ASSISTANCE WHICH DISPATCHED A TOW TRUCK. THE TRUCK WAS TOWED TO MY MECHANIC WHO DIRECTED THE PROBLEM TO BE THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL. HE NOTIFIED ME THAT THIS WAS A COMMON OCCURRENCE ON THIS VEHICLE AND THAT THIS PART WAS RECALLED. ALTHOUGH MY TRUCK HAS 55K MILES AND THE WARRANTY HAS JUST EXPIRED, I CALLED LAND ROVER USA AND SPOKE WITH A CUSTOMER CARE REP. NAMED DENNIS @ EXT. 2127 WHO SAID THAT THERE WAS NOTHING THE LAND ROVER CAN DO ONCE THE CAR IS OUT OF WARRANTY. THANKS RANGE ROVER FOR CARING SOOO MUCH ABOUT MY SAFETY!!!*JB
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE TRAVELING 70 MPH, THE FRONT END MADE A GRINDING NOISE AND THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT ACCELERATE. AFTER COASTING AT AN IDLE OFF THE ROAD, THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN INDEPENDENT REPAIR SHOP WHO DETERMINED THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL WAS STRIPPED CAUSING THE FAILURE. THERE WAS A RECALL FOR THIS, LANDROVER #B…
Read full complaint
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE TRAVELING 70 MPH, THE FRONT END MADE A GRINDING NOISE AND THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT ACCELERATE. AFTER COASTING AT AN IDLE OFF THE ROAD, THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN INDEPENDENT REPAIR SHOP WHO DETERMINED THE FRONT DIFFERENTIAL WAS STRIPPED CAUSING THE FAILURE. THERE WAS A RECALL FOR THIS, LANDROVER #B121F, REGARDING THE DIFFERENTIAL, PRIOR TO OWNERSHIP. THE MANUFACTURER STATED THE VEHICLE WAS OILED AND ALIGNED, BUT THE DIFFERENTIAL WAS NOT REPLACED.
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.