sonixtorm

Registered Member
  • Content Count

    56
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5 Neutral

About sonixtorm

  • Rank
    Club Member

Profile Information

  • First Name
    Nial
  • Gender*
    Male
  • Toyota Model
    Yaris
  • Toyota Year
    2006
  • Location
    Carmarthenshire
  1. You are probably going to hate me fore saying this, but think long and hard before you go for a T180. They seem particularly prone to the issues discussed on this thread (not scientifically, but that is my perception), and when things go wrong they can be expensive to repair. Bear in mind that the early engines were 'repaired' (with varying degrees of success) rather than getting the 3/4 engine from Toyota. If you do decide to get one, worth ensuring you establish that your chosen vehicle has had the latter. Thank for the infoWhen you say later cars do you mean after a certain time I.e 2007+? Also is it only the T180 that were affected or all the 2.2 models. Really strange as the prices are quite strong for the Rav T180. I think if I find something that's a later 2008 model am I correct in assuming they would be covered in the extended warranty. In the mean time I will continue looking and hopefully if I find one that's had the engine changed and everything adds up I'll be happy. It's not so much the age of the car, but rather when the issue was identified. I think the belief early on was that the engines could be rebuilt in the dealers, but it's my perception that quite a number of these failed again, so Toyota moved to fitting a rebuilt engine. The improved parts fitted with the engine vary from car to car from what I recall reading. For instance, I know some improvements were made to EGR valve design and the pipework for the differential pressure sensor. The decision on whether these were fitted was down to evidence of an issue (which makes me think it's feasible a few extra issues may lurk down the line for some engines). I've driven Toyotas for years and would no hesitation in recommending any of the others, but I'm not sure the price commanded match the risk profile in the case of the T180.
  2. You are probably going to hate me fore saying this, but think long and hard before you go for a T180. They seem particularly prone to the issues discussed on this thread (not scientifically, but that is my perception), and when things go wrong they can be expensive to repair. Bear in mind that the early engines were 'repaired' (with varying degrees of success) rather than getting the 3/4 engine from Toyota. If you do decide to get one, worth ensuring you establish that your chosen vehicle has had the latter.
  3. The code you got was probably P2002. Prior to getting to replacement the engines can get very sooted up, and I don't know what the Toyota procedure cleans/checks as a part of the replacement. If not the DPNR/CAT itself, blocked pipework to the differential pressure sensor can cause this code (the pressure sensor is how the ECU measures the CAT). If this is the case, a decent blow through with an air line will likely do the trick. I have a vague recollection that modified pipework was fitted to later cars.
  4. I think the other point worth bearing in mind is that the extended warranty is "good will". Essentially, Toyota determine the rules. I hope some evidence of a pre-existing carbon clogging issue can be found (is an alternate Toyota garage able to pick anything up from the computer system?) as the offer to reconsider suggests that TGB may be open to replacing the engine. Terrible situation to be in :(
  5. I'm pretty sure the oil light is a level sensor on the Rav, rather than a pressure sensor, so not as catastrophic as it would be on a lot of cars. Maybe a premonition on the part of Toyota? ;)
  6. There is a fuse you can pull to clear codes. I think it's labelled ECU, but a quick search should confirm.
  7. Exactly - that was the explanation proffered at the time. They have since changed the head gasket material and I am quite sure that the coolant that is used in 150 engines is more cerise than the redish of earlier models so maybe that has changed in production too. A head gasket is a fairly inert thing once it is clamped up by the head so I doubt any change in compression from carbon could be significant enough to lead to failure There are two known issues that cause head gasket failure on the AD engines 1. Gasket failure due to faulty materials used in the gasket construction recognised and fixed by late 2007. Basically the coolant and head gasket suffered from a chemical reaction breaking down the gasket. 2 Gasket failure due to " Carbon stamping". Excessive amounts of carbon in the combustion chambers from engine oil burning as it had not been cleared from the bore due to poorly designed piston rings, allowed the carbon to slowly build up around the join between cylinder head and cylinder block, eventually the carbon starts to be " stamped" by the piston slowly pushing more and more carbon into the joint sealed by the head gasket. Ultimately causing the gasket to fail, this was recognised and fixed in early 2009 Thanks for this; really interesting information.
  8. Exactly - that was the explanation proffered at the time. They have since changed the head gasket material and I am quite sure that the coolant that is used in 150 engines is more cerise than the redish of earlier models so maybe that has changed in production too. A head gasket is a fairly inert thing once it is clamped up by the head so I doubt any change in compression from carbon could be significant enough to lead to failure I agree. Increased compression would likely not cause it, but detonation can and one can lead to the other. For the potential effects of detonation on head gaskets in diesel engines see here: http://www.enginebuildermag.com/Article/66704/uncovering_the_culprits_that_cause_head_gaskets_to_fail.aspx As you likely know, the timing of the combustion in a diesel is dictated by the fuel injection, but will be influenced by the position of the EGR and the amount of compression amongst other things. The 2AD appears to have problems in both regards (i.e. it may think the EGR is shut tight and adjust the timing accordingly, but the valve is actually partially open, affecting the timing of the combustion and causing detonation). As an aside, according to Charlie's thread, the good will warranty covers: "2) Overheating & Head Gasket failure due to carbon deposits on the pistons", rather than "contamination".
  9. I read anchorman's post and it does explain some of the history; thanks for repeating it; but head gasket failure would ordinarily be caused by overheating (not likely the cause in this case, from what I have read) or detonation, which is a much more likely candidate given the carbon clogging. The increased pressure would be looking for the weakest link, which would either be down past the rings or the head gasket, which could feasibly weaken over time (the route via the rings could lead to more oil consumption). The EGR issue could make things much worse in this scenario as the ECU may believe the valve is closed, potentially affecting the timing of the combustion, and leading to further detonation issues. Speculatively, given carbon accumulation (increasing compression), 'posh' diesel with its higher cetane rating could exacerbate detonation issues once clogging has begun, or at least you'd be wondering if the detergent effect of the diesel would have any benefits over the risk of detonation. This doesn't really contradict the commonly received wisdom of the forum though, as I think most would agree that once the issues have set in, there's not a lot can be done to head them off. I am intrigued by 'head gasket contamination' though. Are you describing the cause of the failure here or the result of it? If the former I'd be interested to read some more around it as it's not a phenomenon I am familiar with.
  10. Only Toyota know for sure, but I spent some time thinking about it when I had the T180. Toyota have stated that 'carbon clogging' indicates a problem in the bulletin, and I would speculate that it's either scoring of the cylinders or carbon deposit build-up on the pistons that causes premature wearing of the rings, leading to excessive oil consumption or head gasket failure in the case of the latter. It's likely a combination issue, which is why engines were failing with the dealer rebuild, and merely replacing pistons and rings won't fix every issue; I don't buy the 'it's too complex for our dealers to rebuild' line to be honest. The tendency for the EGR to suffer creeping death can't help and I am mildly astonished that it's not replaced with the newer part as a matter of course under the good will warranty extension (a flawed design is a flawed design, even if it is operating normally when the car arrives at the dealer). I also reckon the DCAT models will and do suffer far more on the way to terminal failure because they have more sensors/complexity on the exhaust side. All just my humble opinion of course.
  11. I might be tempted to argue that you booked it in within the warranty period - presumably you phoned up a few days before?
  12. Toyota have a really comprehensive document to work through for P2002, which includes checking the pipework (it has been posted around these parts somewhere). It may be worth confirming that they have worked through the procedure.
  13. sonixtorm

    T180 Mpg

    I have owned a lot of cars over the years and our T180 remains the only one that stubbornly refused to respond to careful driving with much better fuel consumption. Driven without too much concern on a mixture of roads, it delivered ~30mpg - with a featherlight touch on the motorway I'd be lucky to see 32mpg. Ours didn't have the replacement engine, which could have been a factor.
  14. sonixtorm

    Egr Blanking

    It seems possible/likely to me that the 2AD issues are caused by carbon build up on the pistons, and consequential damage to rings or head gasket. Anyone who has ever seen an EGR valve on one of these cars will know how much carbon gets pushed back through the cylinders when the EGR valve opens. For the longevity of the engine (rather than the environment), the best place for this carbon is likely to be down the exhaust, which blanking ensures. Note that this is just an idle musing based on my (somewhat limited) understanding of the mechanics. Please do not take it as advice to modify your car.