Nissan 3.0 litre engine failure-final report
Submitted: Thursday, Oct 14, 2004 at 18:20
ThreadID:
17044
Views:
8511
Replies:
8
FollowUps:
17
This Thread has been Archived
fourstall2000
Over the last 6 months I have been pursuing a response from Nissan as to what was the difference between the 2000/2001 engine that failed,and the replacement fitted.
Finally through the assistance of the consumer affairs and Nissan customer service dept the following information has been obtained.
The first motors were fitted with a sump which held insufficient oil for Australian conditions.
A recall replaced this small sump with the current size .
Replacement engines fitted under warranty have an additional oil level sensor fitted,in addition to the existing oil pressure one.
Engines fitted to replace failed engines are current models and ordered direct from Japans production line.(ie 2003 if replaced last year,2004 if replaced this year)
The failures of the early engines is claimed to be that the oil levels were allowed to drop to a level that prevented sufficient splash feed to the upper piston and
bore area,leading to piston scoring and eventual failure.
Over extended oil change intervals increased this situation also in Nissans belief.
Apart from some component changes due to continual development,the engine design remains basically unchanged.
The engine is made by UD which is Nissans truck manufacturer,not by the French,Belgiums or any one else.
Although these countries do use the Nissan engine in trucks there.
Hope this is of interest to Nissan 3.0 litre drivers.
Regards
Reply By: Truckster (Vic) - Thursday, Oct 14, 2004 at 19:04
Thursday, Oct 14, 2004 at 19:04
Other issue was while they installed the crank, they were hitting the oil nozzles that spray the oil up into the bum of the pistons.. They now use a new jig which prevents any such movement.
Problems with the 3.0 GU?? Never heard of any
WATPOS.
AnswerID:
80226
Follow Up By: G.T. - Tuesday, Oct 19, 2004 at 11:50
Tuesday, Oct 19, 2004 at 11:50
All motors that I have worked on have had the oil spray to the underside of the piston/ cyl
bore coming through holes in the top of the con rod ` cap ` ie at the part where the rod rounds out to become the top half of the big end bearing cap. What you describe , to me , is unusual --- if I have understood you correctly, is the oil spray is coming from the crankshaft throw adjacent to the big end bearing ? and this was being damaged in some way during assembly ? Seems to me that this a departure from recognised motor design, or is it ? Am I out of date? Regards G.T.
FollowupID:
340082
Follow Up By: Ian from Thermoguard Instruments - Tuesday, Oct 19, 2004 at 14:49
Tuesday, Oct 19, 2004 at 14:49
GT,
Many diesels (and I assume the ZD30) have a dedicated oil nozzle that extends out from the side of the crankcase and points up under the base of the piston. I assume Truckster is saying that there were some assembly problems in the Nissan factory where these nozzles were being pushed out of alignment as the crank was being fitted, causing the oil jet to go in the wrong direction (Truckster?)
AFAIK, the holes in the big end web that you are talking about are to spray oil onto the cylinder walls for piston skirt lubrication.
The bit in the original post: "prevented sufficient splash feed to the upper piston and
bore area,leading to piston scoring and eventual failure." sounds like a load of cr*p to me. I'll stand corrected if anyone has better information, but I'd be amazed if any modern engine design relied on 'splash' lubrication of the cylinder bores. I believe overfilling a sump to the level where the crank webs actually 'splash' into the oil is just about guaranteed to kill a modern high speed engine.
FollowupID:
340126
Follow Up By: Truckster (Vic) - Wednesday, Oct 20, 2004 at 11:57
Wednesday, Oct 20, 2004 at 11:57
All motors for yrs have had the spray under the piston you are correct.
What I was told by Nissan Tech, is that the 'jet' that sprays oil under the piston was damaged/bent/moved out of alignment by the installation of the crank while building the donk. they now have a jig that is supposed to prevent that from happening at all.
With the 29034820348920394802893023984029384023984s of stories going round, I think $5000 for the 4.2 is
well worth it.
FollowupID:
340254
Follow Up By: Ian from Thermoguard Instruments - Wednesday, Oct 20, 2004 at 12:43
Wednesday, Oct 20, 2004 at 12:43
[joke]Why bother with a 4.2 when my Landy's 2.5L Tdi outperforms them all anyway??? [/joke]
FollowupID:
340262
Reply By: 80scruiser - Thursday, Oct 14, 2004 at 20:44
Thursday, Oct 14, 2004 at 20:44
What about the fuel pump problems?
What about the burnt pistons?
What about the cracked heads?
What about the clutch/dual mass flywheel problems?
What about the
seat recliner handles falling off constantly?
3.0 litre problems? Never heard of them.
I think you'll find it isn't a different sump, just a different dipstick and tube.
AnswerID:
80233
Follow Up By: Stew53 - Friday, Oct 15, 2004 at 05:30
Friday, Oct 15, 2004 at 05:30
you forgot the
water cooled turbo problems
FollowupID:
339613
Follow Up By: Truckster (Vic) - Friday, Oct 15, 2004 at 10:52
Friday, Oct 15, 2004 at 10:52
actually it is a different sump. I was sceptical until service mgr at local nissan showed me 2 different sumps. He "SAID" they were both 3.0,but might have wee weed in my ear.
Holden did the dipstick and tube a few yrs back.. didnt they cop a pasting over that one!
And yes, as other dude said, you forgot turbo and I'll add air cond pulleys and $1.21 resale value on them!!!
FollowupID:
339637
Follow Up By: David O - Friday, Oct 15, 2004 at 15:26
Friday, Oct 15, 2004 at 15:26
Jeez and people bag my Rangie HA!!!!
FollowupID:
339668
Reply By: SUNSEEKER - Thursday, Oct 14, 2004 at 23:21
Thursday, Oct 14, 2004 at 23:21
While in
Kununurra w.a. I talked with a salesman working for Toyota/ Nissan and he told me that his workshop was continually busy replacing motors on the 3 litre turbo Nissans, particularly the ones towing caravans so there must be a mejor problem somewhere----by the way I drive a Toyota Troopy with zero problems.
AnswerID:
80256
Follow Up By: manson - Friday, Oct 15, 2004 at 00:13
Friday, Oct 15, 2004 at 00:13
"A salesman working for Toyota / Nissan"
never seen a Toyota and Nissan Yard together, think you may be confused.
"by the way I drive a Toyota Troopy with zero problems. "
Must have a TD42 motor and nissan running gear does it??
What have you never heard of weak and leaky transfer cases, gearboxes that are too weak to tow in fifth and have been known to not be able to handle heavy towing in lower gears in padock work not easy highway stuff. Incredibly uncomfortable seating position, slow, underpowered, weak front diff not to mention bl*@dy ugly. Take a good look at what you drive before you comment on others........
FollowupID:
339608
Follow Up By: sean - Friday, Oct 15, 2004 at 01:38
Friday, Oct 15, 2004 at 01:38
Yep
Argyle motors is both a toyata and a nissan dealer and VERY good to deal with.
Sean
FollowupID:
339612
Follow Up By: Member - Chris M (QLD) - Friday, Oct 15, 2004 at 07:06
Friday, Oct 15, 2004 at 07:06
Manson,
That's pretty true mate, I was in a transmission/gearbox place yesterday and he kept raving on how my patrol would be the best purchase I'd ever made.
He said that he sees 200:1, that is 200 toyotas, 1 nissan, and the nissan is usually only ever for a clutch.
Chris.
FollowupID:
339616
Follow Up By: ToyMotor - Friday, Oct 15, 2004 at 19:27
Friday, Oct 15, 2004 at 19:27
Yeah Chris, that's probably because there's 300:1 more toyotas than nissans on the road!
Cheers
FollowupID:
339700
Reply By: GO_OFFROAD - Friday, Oct 15, 2004 at 00:03
Friday, Oct 15, 2004 at 00:03
Anyone who knows the history, and the problems of the 3.0 engine saga will also know that the response given is untrue, and not worth the paper they print it on to send it...........................
No response, rather than that one would of served them better.
AnswerID:
80262
Reply By: fourstall2000 - Friday, Oct 15, 2004 at 08:35
Friday, Oct 15, 2004 at 08:35
Guys,
This is a responsible
forum I believe.
Many 3.0 litre owners are very concerned to get the most information on the early model diesel failures.
Why shouldnt they, you are talking about a big investment.
It does no good to list all the faults,as anyone can respond with an equal list about any other manufacturer, ie Land rover flywheels,Toyota diffs and bearings.
I can accept the Nissan explanation as provided by my own experience.
However Trucksters information on the occasional oil spray damage during assembly, does explain why some engines in the first batch still failed even after larger oil capacity was provided.
The main piece of information sought was that the replacement engines were current models,so owners of the replaced engines can now have piece of mind.
I have not heard of any post 2001 motors failing.
Truckster from previous entries I deduce your are a member of the Nissan club here in
Melbourne.
As a fellow member of the association could you please elaborate on the spray nozzle damage and provide the source of your information which is most relevant.
Regards
AnswerID:
80279
Follow Up By: squizzy - Friday, Oct 15, 2004 at 12:33
Friday, Oct 15, 2004 at 12:33
Thanks for the info Fourstal2000. Very enlightening.
I am also a 3.0L owner purchased in May 2000, it has now done 80,000 Km's.
I had the sump changed during the recall, and so far have not had any problems.
I spoke to a
well known diesel mechanic near
Canberra who gave me some valuable advice on oil types, oil change frequencies, and oil filter replacement frequency which I believe has helped a lot.
With some luck it should see me out until changeover to the new model maybe next year.
FollowupID:
339643
Reply By: Banjo (SA) - Friday, Oct 15, 2004 at 11:19
Friday, Oct 15, 2004 at 11:19
Some people ! - I'm not a Nissan owner Fourstall but thanks for the post - all considered posts, especially those researched at some length like yours are worthwhile here in my view - we readers can form our own
views as to the usefulness of the info. Ignore the inconsiderate and/or un-appreciative knockers.
AnswerID:
80290
Follow Up By: GO_OFFROAD - Friday, Oct 15, 2004 at 14:28
Friday, Oct 15, 2004 at 14:28
I dont think anyone was knocking the post itself, just the reply nissan has "entertained" with.......
FollowupID:
339655
Follow Up By: Flash - Friday, Oct 15, 2004 at 20:13
Friday, Oct 15, 2004 at 20:13
If anyone would know Mr GO_OFFROAD would.
Ha!
I've been listening and waiting for any reports of 3litre failures on the later build motors and guess what.....
THERE ARE NONE.
Zero, zilch, nil, none. (get it?)
My dear old 4.2 will be replaced by a 3.0 maybe next year, and when oil hits $100 a barrel, diesel hits about $1.90 a litre, I'd rather be driving a 3.0 litre thanks.
On a recent 2200klm trip with mates ( all towing off road trailers) The 3.0 litre got the best consumption (by far) my 4.2 was next, and a very distant 3rd was the super hi tech 24 valve turbo cruiser. Great if you have shares in the oil companies I guess....
Bye
FollowupID:
339704
Follow Up By: GO_OFFROAD - Friday, Oct 15, 2004 at 21:40
Friday, Oct 15, 2004 at 21:40
shares in an oil company.....or if you need to be concerned enough about money you need to count every km per litre to go anywhere ;-)
FollowupID:
339719
Follow Up By: Truckster (Vic) - Wednesday, Oct 20, 2004 at 11:59
Wednesday, Oct 20, 2004 at 11:59
Actually flash, its not "THERE ARE NONE. Zero, zilch, nil, none. (get it?)". They are still having issues, but not to the extent of the original ones. Mate works for nissan head office in dande..
FollowupID:
340256
Reply By: SUNSEEKER - Friday, Oct 15, 2004 at 22:56
Friday, Oct 15, 2004 at 22:56
Mr. Manson
PLEASE EDUCATE YOURSELF BY GOING TO
KUNUNURRA AND YOU WILL SEE THAT THE TOYOTA MOTORS THERE ARE ALSO AJENTS FOR NISSON,so I am not confused as you say.Also all the problems mentioned by you about the Toyota troopys are a lot of --- as Ihave driven them in all conditions around the top end of Aus. on many occasions with no problems.That is why most mining companies and gov.departments use them,not for show but reliability.
AnswerID:
80390
Follow Up By: Brian - Thursday, Oct 28, 2004 at 21:30
Thursday, Oct 28, 2004 at 21:30
Sunseaker the reason that Troopies are so popular with mines and Giv Depts is that they are the only 11 seater 4x4 available.
The early ones were very reliable but in the last few years the front end ,Dif axel...etc are not made as strong, and are up for complete front end rebuild. This is in extreme mining conditions which are far harsher that normal 4X4ing!!!!
I to have spent the last Decade driving work Toyotas in extreme conditions and haveing to rely on them to get me
home!!
my 2¢ worth
Brian
FollowupID:
341290
Reply By: angler - Thursday, Oct 28, 2004 at 20:44
Thursday, Oct 28, 2004 at 20:44
Easy answer,
How about someone telling me how much oil the early 3 litre engine takes.
Mine take 8.2 litres. If it has a short dipstick or a different sump then this should be shown by capacity of the different models.
My 2003 Automatic Nissan gets close to 10L/100 on the highway with little load and about 15 to 16L/100 towing 2 tonnes of tandem caravan. Travelling companion beats me up the hills with his PETROL cruiser and gets between 35 to 40L/100 towing same van.
I catch up with him at the service stations.
I found a auto turbo cruiser was about $27,000 more than a auto turbo Nissan. In other words I got the van for free. I just couldn't afford the cruiser.
I drove a troopy for some years in the big telecom company, we had after market seating installed to allow us to drive long periods on rough tracks.
If I get 100,000Kms out of the nissan I will be more than happy.
AnswerID:
82158