Front prop shaft snapped.

[NQ94]

Most of the big Toyota recalls seem to come from the US made versions, at least Toyota reacts when they have a safety issue. There has been similar concerns with Grenadiers yet no recalls from Ineos.

 

[evomind]

Well....The inspiration comes from Land Rover and they dont fix stuff either so there ya go.

 

[Dokatd]

Well....The inspiration comes from Land Rover and they dont fix stuff either so there ya go.

Oddly enough Rover in the late 90's did at least update their front shafts. But they also introduced the Rotoflex soooo that wasn't great.

 

[evomind]

Oddly enough Rover in the late 90's did at least update their front shafts. But they also introduced the Rotoflex soooo that wasn't great.

Thats like 30 plus years ago.

Well hopefully in 30 years Ineos fixes our front driveshafts so we can put a lift on our off road adventure trucks.

 

[Dokatd]

Thats like 30 plus years ago.

Well hopefully in 30 years Ineos fixes our front driveshafts so we can put a lift on our off road adventure trucks.

Now you're just making me feel old.

 

[evomind]

Now you're just making me feel old.

You and me both.

 

[dreamalaska]

My truck came to me with the tie rod and drag links completely loose. The jam nuts weren't even touching. It's honestly amazing nobody got killed early on. Hopefully this isn't an ongoing problem.

The first TSB should be no more Wine with lunch at the Hambach factory!

 

[pmatusov]

Oddly enough Rover in the late 90's did at least update their front shafts. But they also introduced the Rotoflex soooo that wasn't great.

I can't remember Land Rover doing anything at all with respect to their front shafts.
If you remember, they were exactly in the same boat as INEOS with respect to the front driveline angles - but instead of using CV joints, they opted for bizarre 45-degree-phased front shafts. With the factory suspension, they were quiet. 2" of lift and you had 50% chance of driveline vibration. 3" of lift and that chance went to 80%.

Roto showed up in late Classics, and migrated to D1 (till mid-97) and P38A. Unless you had a rear locker and a habit of driving on one rear wheel, the rubber donuts held up fine.

 

[Dokatd]

I can't remember Land Rover doing anything at all with respect to their front shafts.
If you remember, they were exactly in the same boat as INEOS with respect to the front driveline angles - but instead of using CV joints, they opted for bizarre 45-degree-phased front shafts. With the factory suspension, they were quiet. 2" of lift and you had 50% chance of driveline vibration. 3" of lift and that chance went to 80%.

Roto showed up in late Classics, and migrated to D1 (till mid-97) and P38A. Unless you had a rear locker and a habit of driving on one rear wheel, the rubber donuts held up fine.

They went from the rotated joints to a Double Cardan at the T-case and a single cardan at the diff. This change was made with the DII. At the dealer we were often retrofitting on D1's and D90's.

 

[pmatusov]

They went from the rotated joints to a Double Cardan at the T-case and a single cardan at the diff. This change was made with the DII. At the dealer we were often retrofitting on D1's and D90's.

... and in the end, the DC D2 shafts had a shorter lifetime than D1/RRC because of the centering ball losing grease. I have heard maybe three stories of D1/RRC front driveshaft blowing up and taking out the transmission, but D2 stories were countless.

 

[TheDocAUS]

Most of the big Toyota recalls seem to come from the US made versions, at least Toyota reacts when they have a safety issue. There has been similar concerns with Grenadiers yet no recalls from Ineos.

Toyota delayed that recall for years, re the engines self destructing.

Toyota frequently deny warranty claims in AU. People are finally beginning to speak up.

Safety issues have been dealt with by INEOS as part of campaigns. They just do not tell you during a service, unless you ask. The new engine cover in AU was a safety issue.

 

[MattA]

And none of the LR drive shafts , front, rear, rubber donut, double cardon or single uni gave issue or failure at such low mileage as what we are seeing with the Ineos so a mute point and irrelevant

 

[pmatusov]

And none of the LR drive shafts , front, rear, rubber donut, double cardon or single uni gave issue or failure at such low mileage as what we are seeing with the Ineos so a mute point and irrelevant

It is likely unknown. The 90s came and went without much of the Internet, and definitely without social media. DokatD's admission of Land Rover dealers retrofitting D2 driveshafts into D1s and Classics is by itself an admission that the driveshafts were failing.
I am not making any excuses for Ineos Automotive for borderline design - but the number of failures is still very small. The people it happened to tend to be very vocal - which is completely understandable.

 

[NQ94]

Toyota delayed that recall for years, re the engines self destructing.

Toyota frequently deny warranty claims in AU. People are finally beginning to speak up.

Safety issues have been dealt with by INEOS as part of campaigns. They just do not tell you during a service, unless you ask. The new engine cover in AU was a safety issue.

I get to work with ex-dealer light vehicle techs, they have plenty of stories for warranty knock backs for all brands not just Toyota. All the manufacturers deny warranty regularly especially modified, tuned and gvm increased vehicles used extensively for heavy towing and off road is becoming more common. Fuel system failure is common to be knocked back for warranty on any make. Common reason from dealers, vehicle was used and modified outside of factory designed parameters.