blowing up a GU patrol.

Submitted: Sunday, Jan 16, 2005 at 03:57
ThreadID: 19421 Views:3953 Replies:10 FollowUps:7
This Thread has been Archived
OK you guys, everyone's been on here giving us Nissan owners a hard time, and I don't expect anything less, but could someone tell me, If the 3.0 turbo patrols keep blowing up, what is it that causes this ?

I remember when the early 80 series 4.2 turbo diesels had a bad rep, but it was only a matter of dropping the sump and replacing the shells (bearings) on the crankshaft to avoid the problem. Toyota were gracious enough to recognise the problem, and it would be nice if Nissan started to be a little bit better in the public relations dept.

Can some one who's had a 3.0 T/D patrol go KABANG, tell me what part of the engine gives out, so we others can look at the possibilty of rectifying the problem before it becomes a dasaster.

Don't tell me to sell it, or burn it, just pro-active information please.

On an earlier thread, someone mentioned a government owned 3.0 patrol going bang, and other people stated that it had probably been given a thrashing without being warmed up, and this does make sense. I have heard of this happening at Western Power here in W.A.

Come on people, lets get some facts together and see if there is a common denominator.



Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: Peter 2 - Sunday, Jan 16, 2005 at 06:09

Sunday, Jan 16, 2005 at 06:09
Muzz don't have one, but been around for a while. The 3 litre for its size/displacement appears to have quite a high power output, which means that it is probably running at the upper end of the longevity/reliability versus life expextancy envelope.
Manufacturers tend to err towards the conservative end of that envelope when developing engines for public use. It is suspected that maybe Nissan pushed it just tad too far so that under a specific condition or combination of conditions engine parameters get out of hand leading to failure. To meet emissions regs the engine is run pretty close to the mark and if it gets just a little past the safe operating temps etc then engine damage happens.
The two engines I've seen after they went kaboom both had melted pistons and were early versions. Probably overfueled leading to high EGT and then failure.
Most reports of failure have the same symptons, lots of smoke and no go.
They did increase sump capacity (better oil cooling) by raising the marks on the dipstick (some conjecture on that as it was promoted as being a deeper sump) and probably different fuel mapping on later engines too.
Interestingly overseas the engines were replaced as a recall by Nissan in some parts of the world.
AnswerID: 93343

Follow Up By: rig pig - Sunday, Jan 16, 2005 at 06:37

Sunday, Jan 16, 2005 at 06:37
Probably overfueled leading to high EGT and then failure ??

Please Explain; my understanding is more fuel, cooler exhaust temps,less preformance/economy
FollowupID: 352319

Follow Up By: Flash - Sunday, Jan 16, 2005 at 07:54

Sunday, Jan 16, 2005 at 07:54
Overfuelling on a diesel is the opposite effect of the same on a petrol.
ie: overfuelling on a diesel gives High EGT.

FollowupID: 352324

Follow Up By: Ian from Thermoguard Instruments - Sunday, Jan 16, 2005 at 18:24

Sunday, Jan 16, 2005 at 18:24
Hi Rig Pig,
Yes, Flash is right. For a fuller explanation of this topic (and not too much hard-sell), please have a look at my website and download the "EGT Information Sheet" from near the bottom of the Home page.
FollowupID: 352422

Follow Up By: fisho64 - Monday, Jan 17, 2005 at 01:39

Monday, Jan 17, 2005 at 01:39
burnt valves, incorrect valve clearances, leaky injectors and incorrect pump timing all cause high EGT's also
FollowupID: 352487

Reply By: fourstall2000 - Sunday, Jan 16, 2005 at 09:28

Sunday, Jan 16, 2005 at 09:28
As one of the victims of an exploding 3.0 litre (melted Pistons) I can tell you that you will never get an answer from Nissan as to why they fail.
Their tactic has been to replace the failures, and keep aggressively selling the product while making neccesary modifications.
All their dealerships will deny there was ever a problem and continue to do so.
Even the consumer affairs in Victoria were unable to extract a meaningfull response.
Now you see even 4x4 monthly saying on a vehicle test that early failures "were ubsubstantiated" so the tactic of ignoring the problem exists is finally paying off.
From the information that I have gleaned it appears the 2002 models onward are not giving problems,some early 2001 models are still suspect.
The problem appears to be the lubrication,or lack of,in the upper cyl areas.
I have also heard that several different pistons were fitted in the early years.
Another story is that the piston spray jets were being bent during crankshaft fitment.
What I can confirm is that the replacement engines have additional oil pressure sensors fitted with a modified loom.
Ayone owning a 2000 to mid 2001 has every reason to be concerned,mine went at 118,000 others as early as 80,000,there is a design/manufacturing fault with these engines and it is a matter of luck as to whether yours is affected.
My main beef is that Nissan dealers continue to sell these early models from their yards with the full knowledge of the potential problems.(avoiding a recall?)
Having said all that, the 3.0 litre is in fact a great performer,giving excellent economy,Nissan are right in developing this engine for the future but their public relations is a disaster.
Some one will doubtless say what more do you expect,they gave you a new engine,but are you as a driver of the affected model ever going to relax in remote areas without knowing the problem or if it is fixed?

AnswerID: 93353

Reply By: Member - Lindsay S (Int) - Sunday, Jan 16, 2005 at 10:32

Sunday, Jan 16, 2005 at 10:32
I have owned numerous four wheel drives but never a Nissan. No particular reason other than lease deals at the time etc. No axe to grind. The 3 litre debate seems to always deteriorate into left brain territory and implode. With all the collective information available has the question of whether the failures show a bias towards autoumatic or manual transmissions been addressed.
I am a self confessed fan of the current electronically controlled fuel systems and would make the statement that with the piezoelectric technology surfacing in production engines at this time the days of the manual transmission are numbered. The full potential of these power trains cannot be realized with the weakest link, the human driver, still in the loop. Maybe these engines with their superior power to displacement ratios are simply being lugged to death.
AnswerID: 93361

Reply By: Truckster (Vic) - Sunday, Jan 16, 2005 at 11:00

Sunday, Jan 16, 2005 at 11:00
When assembling the engines, when the crank went in, the jig they were using wasnt correct. What was happening is that the crank was hitting the 'oil' jets and they werent aimed correctly. Thus causing thebleepheaps to go Poo.

Its been mentioned on here before.
AnswerID: 93366

Follow Up By: Member - Davoe (WA) - Sunday, Jan 16, 2005 at 20:25

Sunday, Jan 16, 2005 at 20:25
Before you rubish them too much T I believe there lack of reliability is the only thing keeping your beloved 4.2 going. Think about it they use way less fuel, produce more power and cost less and produce less emmisions. I believe the 4.2 would have been dropped or soon to be if it wasnr for the ongoing problems.
FYI I am a total ludite and think there is nothing better than a big lazy n/a diesal 6 for offroading but the above is jmho
FollowupID: 352439

Reply By: GO_OFFROAD - Sunday, Jan 16, 2005 at 12:39

Sunday, Jan 16, 2005 at 12:39
Not quite correct truckster,
but from the units I have inspected when stripped down, there is a poor design of the pistons for the application, which sees them crack under stress, especially pistons 1 and 4, and the only real warning you get just before, if it gets a chance to idle before the piston breaks, is a rough idle.
AnswerID: 93385

Follow Up By: 80scruiser - Sunday, Jan 16, 2005 at 14:24

Sunday, Jan 16, 2005 at 14:24
The ones I have done have been burnt holes in pistons in number 1.
Also cracked heads in number 1 and 4.
FollowupID: 352392

Reply By: Member - 'Lucy' - Sunday, Jan 16, 2005 at 13:02

Sunday, Jan 16, 2005 at 13:02
Is it true that the European equivlent of Consumer Affairs made/frorced NISSAN to recall all these vehicles with the 'defective' engines in them and replace, not fix, them.
AnswerID: 93392

Reply By: 80scruiser - Sunday, Jan 16, 2005 at 14:27

Sunday, Jan 16, 2005 at 14:27
The funny thing is that when I was speaking to a Nissan mechanic they readily admit to never pulling them apart only fitting new ones.
This is why they don't know what is going on inside them.
The point of not recalling them is an issue. If they had of done this in the first place this debate would not have ended up this way.
AnswerID: 93402

Reply By: Member - muzzgit - Sunday, Jan 16, 2005 at 22:15

Sunday, Jan 16, 2005 at 22:15
Thanks for your responses guys. Iv'e been out all day at the SuperMoto, which is motocross bikes with street tyres racing around a go kart track.... FAST !!!!

I had to check if I didn't make any spelling mistakes last night, cos I'd had a FEW wines with me dinner. te he

I must say I find it hard to believe that nissan wouldn't pull the failed engines down and check that it isn't more than one cause for these failures.

From what I can gleen, from what you have said, some motors melt holes in the piston or get a cracked head, and others have an oil cooling/lubrication problem. Would this be right ?

Anyway, I'm going to continue to give mine a caning. te he
AnswerID: 93476

Follow Up By: fisho64 - Monday, Jan 17, 2005 at 01:45

Monday, Jan 17, 2005 at 01:45
Muzz I think maybe they mean that the dealers dont pull them down, they likely give them to the manufacturers to examine.
FollowupID: 352489

Reply By: gujonesy - Sunday, Jan 30, 2005 at 21:29

Sunday, Jan 30, 2005 at 21:29
Hey Muzz
Yeah I just blew a 3.0l in our Patrol coming home from a trip to Frazer Island, hence why I am now reading and replying to this old debate on blown motors. Ok what happened to us was the turbo started whizzing like a failed bearing then siezed.
The dealership confirmed failure and advised on doing a compression test with low compression on cyclinders 1,3,4 and 2 at normal. The dealer advised on a new motor etc would be approx $20000. We had only just purchased at auction with it being a 4/2002 GUIII ex NSW Police country car. When it blew it had 101800km's on the clock and no service history as books are not given with police cars. Nissan came to the party replaced the motor and turbo but we had to pay for a replacement intercooler (leaking), new clutch and flywheel skim and belt tensioner assy all up approx $1700 but where general wear items in my opinion.
The dealer we used told me that what caused failure was long hard driving for many hours caused too much heat build up and so early failure. Before he told me I did advive him of my 15 years in the motor trade as auto electrician with a restricted mechanics licence. So he knew he couldn't tell too many tall tales.
After reading about similar incidents my advice would be change your oil every 5000kms and if heavily loaded or towing take it easy on your trip with more stops and let your motor idle down for a few minutes before you shut it down.
Something you get 5
minutes after you needed it !!) You bet ya!!!!!!

AnswerID: 95715

Reply By: Chizz - Tuesday, Feb 08, 2005 at 16:02

Tuesday, Feb 08, 2005 at 16:02
Hi our 2000 GU Nissan Patrol which was fully serviced as per schedule every 10,000 k's with 108,000k's on ther clock blew up 2000 k's from home. We will never know what the real problem was due to Nissan service and customer service incompetence

The Nissan service centre we took it to replaced

Lift pump (twice thinking the first replacement was faulty)
Injector pump (thinking bad fuel, Bosh said pump was just worn out no foreign matter or water found)
Timing chain and timing chain guides
Intercooler (diagnosed as cracked)
Pin that locks the gear to the camshaft (diagnosed as broken but certainly not broken in their workshop?? no one else had worked on car and car was running when driven to service centre just made funny noise, blew black smoke and lacked power?)
Crankshaft (worn keyway and loose pulley)

Then 25+ days after they first pulled our car into their workshop Nissan decided to replace whole engine... all up they had our car for 7 weeks, we arrived home after 4 in a hire car.

A 9 page letter to Nissan 's customer service manager listing all the stuff-ups was well recieved and we were fully refunded the repairs done before engine replacement and also for our hire car and accomodation...

I will never tell anyone Nissan are a great car, though mine has a brand new 2004 engine in it to me it's still a lemon! my opinion only of course...

If your interested in the whole list of complaints we had please leave your Email and i'll forward it on to you...

Cheers Kerston

AnswerID: 97258

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (11)