T180 head gasket repairs

[opelfruits]

I've just sent the following to Toyota UK head office.

Hi, I've a RAV4 T180 2006 which has just been diagnosed with a head gasket failure, I'm now reliably informed this is a major flaw with this engine. I'm in effect being forced to scrap the vehicle at practically zero value with no option for repair because this engine design makes common procedures such as head skimming impossible. I find it difficult to accept that regardless of vehicle age this has always been a ticking time bomb waiting to go off & there is no further customer compensation for this problem after the extended 7 year warranty period for those who purchased the vehicle thinking given Toyota's reputation they were getting a quality product that would last?

[opelfruits]

19 minutes ago, gjnorthall said:

The devil is in the detail. The level was topped up from min to max for what reason - eg because it suddenly dropped from max to min or it dropped from max to min over x weeks or y miles ..................... Just trying to establish the coolant loss vs time or mileage covered. A feature of gasket failure on this engine is that coolant is expelled from the vent - level drops and needs topping up  - same thing happens repeatedly.  If the loss is fairly small (less than the volume between max and min) over, say, a few weeks or a few hundred miles then this would suggest a leak rather than a gasket failure. Hopefully you can glean from Toyota what led them to suspect a gasket failure and what tests were conducted to confirm this. If no joy - I'd get a sniff test done to prove one way or another that there is a head gasket issue.

The oil consumption you quote is very good and certainly no cause for concern. 

The car has not long gone through the MOT & the technician commented on how remarkably good the emissions were given the age & mileage & that the engine was in superb condition.

[Heidfirst]

1 hour ago, opelfruits said:

I've just sent the following to Toyota UK head office.

Hi, I've a RAV4 T180 2006 which has just been diagnosed with a head gasket failure, I'm now reliably informed this is a major flaw with this engine. I'm in effect being forced to scrap the vehicle at practically zero value with no option for repair because this engine design makes common procedures such as head skimming impossible. I find it difficult to accept that regardless of vehicle age this has always been a ticking time bomb waiting to go off & there is no further customer compensation for this problem after the extended 7 year warranty period for those who purchased the vehicle thinking given Toyota's reputation they were getting a quality product that would last?

Define major? Only a very small % of the AD series engines develop the issue albeit it does seem that the chance increases the more powerful the engine so the T180 anecdotally is the most likely to.

You aren't the first owner, the car has been serviced outside the dealer network (as they say goodwill works both ways) & it is a 12 year old car with 165k on it. Toyota had a programme in place for 7 years/112k miles (when original warranty was 3 years/ 60,000 miles) to fix foc - compare that with the behaviour of many other manufacturers (BMW, Ford, Land Rover, Mazda, VAG etc.) with engines that failed even within warranty. I wouldn't expect anything although it is always worth a try.

However, you need to find out why it was diagnosed with a head gasket issue. Generally people become aware of it due to coolant or oil use before the garage. 

[opelfruits]

I've managed to hunt down a very low mileage 2.2 engine from a 2011 T180 from a reputable salvage yard with a guarantee, initial costs to install seem reasonable, i don't get the injector or the DPF but at this stage these are just repalcement parts.

This sounds like a much later 2AD engine, all things being equal is there anything i should do to confirm 100% that this not one of the bad 2AD engines ?

Edited June 9, 2018 by opelfruits
spelling

[Heidfirst]

I would check that your injectors etc. from your 2006 will work with that engine . Over 5 years I believe that there will have been a no. of changes.

Hopefully Devon Aygo can give an opinion.

[philip42h]

4 hours ago, opelfruits said:

I've managed to hunt down a very low mileage 2.2 engine from a 2011 T180 from a reputable salvage yard with a guarantee, initial costs to install seem reasonable, i don't get the injector or the DPF but at this stage these are just repalcement parts.

This sounds like a much later 2AD engine, all things being equal is there anything i should do to confirm 100% that this not one of the bad 2AD engines ?

Sorry, but there's no such thing as a 2011 T180 ... production stopped 2008 and the last one was registered in 2009. The same 177 bhp engine was then used in the SR180 in 2008 / 2009 (I had one of those). Following that production of the 177 bhp diesel ceased completely. The RAV4 SR with the 150 bhp engine was introduced in 2009 ...

[opelfruits]

3 minutes ago, philip42h said:

Sorry, but there's no such thing as a 2011 T180 ... production stopped 2008 and the last one was registered in 2009. The same 177 bhp engine was then used in the SR180 in 2008 / 2009 (I had one of those). Following that production of the 177 bhp ceased completely. The RAV4 SR with the 150 bhp engine was introduced in 2009 ...

Thanks for the info, I don't know where the salvage yard is getting it's info on it's engine.

So if this is a 150bhp engine manufactured in 2010/11 how would these be recognized ?

[Heidfirst]

22 minutes ago, philip42h said:

 The same 177 bhp engine was then used in the SR180 in 2008 / 2009 (I had one of those). Following that production of the 177 bhp diesel ceased completely...

being pedantic I don't believe that production of the 177bhp ceased until at least 2013 (for Avensis/Lexus IS). However, Toyota GB had stopped offering it in Toyotas in the UK before that.

It is possible that the salvage yard have a 177bhp from a 2011 vehicle but not a RAV.

[opelfruits]

7 minutes ago, Heidfirst said:

being pedantic I don't believe that production of the 177bhp ceased until at least 2013 (for Avensis/Lexus IS). However, Toyota GB had stopped offering it in Toyotas in the UK before that.

It is possible that the salvage yard have a 177bhp from a 2011 vehicle but not a RAV.

Not looking for a repeat performance, are all the basically 2.2's flawed in this way ?

[Heidfirst]

I had 2  Avensis 2.2's (both 150bhp, a 2007 & 2012), flawless but admittedly not with 165k on them. It is believed (Toyota of course won't release official stats) that under 5% develop the head/head-gasket issue.

At 165,000 miles I think that pretty much any car manufacturer these days woud say that for a modern, emission-equipped, common-rail turbodiesel that  it did it's design life. 

[opelfruits]

7 minutes ago, Heidfirst said:

I had 2  Avensis 2.2's (both 150bhp, a 2007 & 2012), flawless but admittedly not with 165k on them. It is believed (Toyota of course won't release official stats) that under 5% develop the head/head-gasket issue.

At 165,000 miles I think that pretty much any car manufacturer these days woud say that for a modern, emission-equipped, common-rail turbodiesel that  it did it's design life. 

I know what your saying but i've always been under the impression a well maintained diesel would & should be capable of far more miles than this, I've previously had 2 merc diesels & both went round the clock well past twice & I barely had to put a spanner on them.

I've a distant mechanic cousin I called when I got the news & i know he knows his stuff was told this is the only RAV4 i could have purchased which would realistically have failed like this. The really annoying thing seems to be there appears is no second chance to repair, it's a one time deal, once it's failed that's it.

I was thinking about going to see a 2011 2.2 RAV4 tomorrow but a big part of me is saying stay well clear & go & buy a 2ltr mondeo diesel or something to that effect.

[FROSTYBALLS]

10 hours ago, opelfruits said:

I've just sent the following to Toyota UK head office.

Hi, I've a RAV4 T180 2006 which has just been diagnosed with a head gasket failure, I'm now reliably informed this is a major flaw with this engine. I'm in effect being forced to scrap the vehicle at practically zero value with no option for repair because this engine design makes common procedures such as head skimming impossible. I find it difficult to accept that regardless of vehicle age this has always been a ticking time bomb waiting to go off & there is no further customer compensation for this problem after the extended 7 year warranty period for those who purchased the vehicle thinking given Toyota's reputation they were getting a quality product that would last?

The assistance Toyota provided for this issue was under goodwill on a case by case basis for a period of 7 years or 111,846 miles from first registration, whichever occurred first. There are topics on this forum where owners have had head gasket failure outside the appropriate measure (age or mileage, whichever was exceeded first) and been denied assistance as they are outside the scope of the goodwill. 

No other manufacturer I can think of, would better the assistance Toyota provided.

Unfortunately on both measures, age and mileage, the car is well beyond the scope of the goodwill, so I think one can expect assistance to be denied.

[gjnorthall]

At the moment - it’s still unclear whether the head gasket has failed so this needs to be ascertained before being concerned with possible next steps.

Many manufacturers produce engines that are not easily repairable and the vast majority will go on to complete a high mileage with no reliability issues. On the humble Ford Fiesta for example - it’s not possible to remove the crankshaft for grinding and fitting oversize bearings so basically a problem will result in having to fit a new short motor . There are many manufacturers who have produced cars with serious design flaws - some BMW engines are prone to failure of the valve timing gear with serious consequences - yet the manufacturer provides no support to owners outside the normal warranty period. Toyota are one the better companies in terms of customer support but there has to be a cutoff.

Remember also that in the quest for improved fuel efficiency, performance and emissions - Diesel engines are not the everlasting workhorses of the past.

[Heidfirst]

17 hours ago, opelfruits said:

I know what your saying but i've always been under the impression a well maintained diesel would & should be capable of far more miles than this, I've previously had 2 merc diesels & both went round the clock well past twice & I barely had to put a spanner on them.

Diesels used to be very reliable because there was very little to go wrong with them. Modern emission control equipped, common rail turbodiesels run at far higher pressures & simply have more to go wrong. Tbh I am kind of impressed if this RAV hasn't had a DPF or injectors replaced already.

I've a distant mechanic cousin I called when I got the news & i know he knows his stuff was told this is the only RAV4 i could have purchased which would realistically have failed like this.

Both the 150bhp 2AD & even the 2.0 1AD have been known to suffer from this albeit as I said earlier, anecdotally at least, the risk of failure seems to increase with power output making the 177bhp most likely to.

 

[opelfruits]

On 6/9/2018 at 8:20 PM, Heidfirst said:

I had 2  Avensis 2.2's (both 150bhp, a 2007 & 2012), flawless but admittedly not with 165k on them. It is believed (Toyota of course won't release official stats) that under 5% develop the head/head-gasket issue.

At 165,000 miles I think that pretty much any car manufacturer these days woud say that for a modern, emission-equipped, common-rail turbodiesel that  it did it's design life. 

Ok, so from another conversation with toyota today, there is soot not oil in the coolant system, though this on the face of it could probably mean the failure is of a lesser extent, the remedy still seems the same.

With regards to the extent of the HG failures, 5%.......or 1 in 20. One must ask themselves what percentage of failures does a component have to suffer for toyota to implement a recall, pound to a penny it's nowhere near 5%.

[FROSTYBALLS]

25 minutes ago, opelfruits said:

One must ask themselves what percentage of failures does a component have to suffer for toyota to implement a recall, pound to a penny it's nowhere near 5%.

Recalls are introduced when a problem occurs and after investigation is determined to be safety related - head gasket failure isn't safety related.

Aside from that, as stated earlier, Toyota did cover the issue for a period of 7 years/111,846 miles from first registration. A 12 year old car on 165,000 miles is outside scope of the cover.

[gjnorthall]

Failure wasn't predictable - the majority of cars were fine - therefore a recall would be unrealistic. For those cars where failure occurred - Toyota offered a decent deal to affected owners. 

In your case if there is a route between the combustion section and coolant which is depositing crud in the coolant - then by definition, combustion gases will also be entering the coolant system and can be confirmed with a sniff test.  Again, I'm not clear how much coolant is being lost. It's not unusual to get black crud into the coolant on a high mileage engine particularly if the coolant hasn't been replaced for a while.  Rubber deposits from hoses etc can result in a black film in the expansion tank. If the sniff test is negative, there is no significant loss of coolant  and there are no other running issues, I'd be inclined not to disturb the head . I may well flush and refill the coolant system.

Bottom line is that a sniff test is vital otherwise it's possible to draw the wrong conclusion!  

[Heidfirst]

4 hours ago, opelfruits said:

Ok, so from another conversation with toyota today, there is soot not oil in the coolant system, though this on the face of it could probably mean the failure is of a lesser extent, the remedy still seems the same.

With regards to the extent of the HG failures, 5%.......or 1 in 20. One must ask themselves what percentage of failures does a component have to suffer for toyota to implement a recall, pound to a penny it's nowhere near 5%.

5% is an upper limit guesstimate allowing for a large margin of error, tbh the actual failure rate is probably well under 5% but only Toyota have the actual facts. Toyota did implement a free scheme for upto 112k/7 years which is considerably better than the original warranty on the vehicle & longer than they would potentially be liable for under consumer law (6 years in England & Wales, 5 years in Scotland). At 12 years/165k miles it will be judged to have met or exceeded it's design life.

[gjnorthall]

Any outcome on the issue?