Also visit: http://www.freelanderheadgasket.co.uk for more information on this issue. If you would like to contribute information that may assist other Freelander owners that have experienced head gasket failure, please email the author via the address below. Technical data and mechanical reports from qualified technicians are most welcome.

**********************************************************************

This site has been created to provide k-series Freelander owners with as much information as possible about the well known head gasket failure and cylinder liner issues that plague the K-series Petrol Land Rover Freelander. Links are also provided to other resources on the Internet to enable owners to gather further data and communicate with others experiencing the same dilemma. Opinions expressed are that of the author (a Freelander owner). Content is based on data freely available on the internet as well as anecdotal information from other Freelander owners around the world.

It is widely accepted by 4WD mechanics that Freelander K-series engines are known to drop the cylinder liners into the block. Because the liners are steel and the block is alloy, the liners being harder, work their way into the block. Because the engine block and cylinder head are composed of different materials they expand at different rates with heat generated during running of the vehicle, causing the head gasket to fail. The bad news is; If the cylinder liners drop too low, the engine needs to be replaced (there is no economically viable repair procedure) -  this is fact, confirmed by Land Rover in their Technical Advices.

There is almost no warning of the impending failure, and the problem is unlikely to be identified during routine maintenance checks. The fault has nothing to do with vehicle maintenance - more to do with poor design.

It seems the problem with the design is acknowledged in Land Rover's own Technical Bulletin 0036 issued 18 June 04 and Bulletin 0026 (distributed to it's dealerships worldwide). The bulletin highlights an engine overheating problem caused by a leak from any part of the engine/cooling system. Although this bulletin is designed to assist mechanics to repair the fault, in the vast majority of cases serious engine overheating has already occurred resulting in oil contamination of the cooling system and total engine failure.

There are many checks that need to be done to establish if the engine is repairable, however the Land Rover technical bulletin states "if the cylinder liners have dropped below the block face, the engine must be replaced". This is the crux of the problem. If you owned a k-series petrol Freelander, anecdotal data widely available on the internet suggests that the statistical odds are against you getting past 80000 km without a total engine failure and replacement. Once you have spent about $A7000.00 on a new K-series engine, statistics say that it will fail again before 80000 km.

 That's not just bad luck.... that's poor design.

The early Freelanders (pre 2001) were sold with a 2 year 50000 km warranty, which seems to be about the average lifespan for this engine. The head gasket/cylinder liner design fault has not been classified as a recall (probably because of the sheer volume of complaints and the huge cost of rectification). Land Rover is unlikely to honour any claims beyond the product warranty period.

If you paid for an engine replacement, would you expect the engine to have been modified to overcome the original design fault? Why have so many K-series Petrol Freelanders had multiple head gasket failures?

From any angle the ownership of a K-series Petrol Freelander should be carefully considered. This website is merely to give you a better appreciation of the problems associated with it's engine, and Land Rover's typical responses when a Freelander is beyond its product warranty. 

This K-series engine saga has plagued Land Rover for several years. Unfortunately they have chosen to ignore the torrent of complaints and hide behind their 2 year 50000km warranty. This attitude is false economy and comes with a hefty price tag in the form of lost goodwill and brand loyalty. The overall damage to the Land Rover name has probably been considerable.

Click here to see some typical Freelander stories

Here are some quotes lifted straight from correspondence I have received from Land Rover Australia:

"We do review all repairs that have been diagnosed by an authorised Land Rover retailer, however there is no guarantee of assistance".  Fact: Many instances have reported that Land Rover have refused to offer assistance when a vehicle has not been serviced by a Land Rover dealer (although servicing is irrelevant to the fault occurring in k-series Freelander engines). The law does say that a vehicle can be log book serviced at any workshop, if genuine parts are used; it does not have to be maintained at a Land Rover dealer in order to protect any warranty or statutory rights. New car franchise dealers cannot maintain a monopoly on "Log Book" Service. Nor can they suggest that a new car warranty is void if servicing is carried out by other than the new car franchise dealer.

"Your vehicle was provided with a 2 year or 50,000 kilometre warranty (which ever occurs first) to cover you against manufacturing defects that may arise within that period.  During the time of this repair your vehicle was well outside of the warranty period". Fact: Land Rover conveniently overlooks the consumers Statutory rights under the Trade Practices Act (1974) which states clearly that products must be "fit for the purpose for which they are supplied". Statutory rights apply whether the goods are new or second-hand and implies that the goods must be of "merchantable quality". This means that they must meet a basic level of quality and performance that would be reasonable to expect, considering their price and the manner in which they are described. When a Freelander engine requires replacement at 60000km most of us would say that it was "not fit for the purpose". But not Land Rover. When total engine failure is almost always caused by the cylinder liners "slipping" into the engine block most of us would say that the product was "not of merchantable quality". But not Land Rover.

"Whilst you refer to your head gasket concern as common, our records do not indicate that we have had an exceptional amount that would warrant this claim". This is an interesting claim given that the K-series engine is statistically prone to suffer a total failure resulting from slippage of the cylinder liners due to inherent poor design.  Why has this problem been highlighted in Land Rovers own Technical Bulletin 0036 issued 18 June 04 if it doesn't exist?

"Your vehicle is now over 4 and half years of age and at this point in the vehicles life repairs are considered owners responsibility." Even if there is an acknowledged documented design issue!

"We confirm there are no inherent concerns with the Freelander Model" The ACCC has some concerns that the head gasket failure extends beyond the effects of wear and tear, or age and mileage. The ACCC is concerned that there may be a defect in the engine design. If a product repeatedly fails due to a continuing problem, whether it is the head gasket or the cooling system, the whole system can be deemed to be a design fault. An engine is made up of a number of components which in themselves are systems which must work together to be able to operate. If one or more of these systems continually fails whether or not regular maintenance is undertaken then I submit it is a design fault.

"Unfortunately, Land Rover Australia cannot comment on an independent article published on the internet, as it purely represents individual opinion or experience and may not be based on fact". Yes, it is true that all Freelander head gasket victims experience their total engine failure individually! The "opinion" of the owner, when this happens is usually based on the "fact" that the car no longer moves. Land Rover would like you to believe your Freelander's engine failure is an isolated case. 

"The Land Rover Freelander has an excellent reputation as an on and off-road vehicle, which it has established over time". The high volume of complaints received by both Land Rover and the ACCC would suggest that the k-series petrol Freelanders are "not fit for the purpose intended" and the the engines are "not of merchantable quality". It is unwise for a manufacturer to claim that their product meets the requirements of the Trade Practices Act when the market clearly indicates that it does not.

Freelander Timeline Memo

Head-Gasket Defect

Acknowledgement

This information memo with data provided by the University of Michigan has been compiled by

Ronald D. DiMattia

Master of Accounting.  Bachelor of Business Administration (with distinction), The University of Michigan

Certified Public Accountant (CPA), licensed in Ohio
Accredited in Business Valuation (ABV) certification awarded by the AICPA
Certified Management Accountant (CMA), member of the Institute of Management Accountants

Time Line

1948 Land Rover is designed by the Wilks Brothers and is manufactured by the Rover Company

1967 Rover becomes part of Leyland Motors Ltd, later British Leyland

1970 Introduction of the Range Rover

1975 BL collapses and is nationalised, publication of the Ryder Report recommends that Land Rover be split from Rover and be treated as a separate company within BL

1980 Rover car production ends at Solihull, which is now exclusively for Land Rover manufacture. 5-door Range Rover introduced.

1986 BL, now known as the Rover Group, is privatised and becomes part of British Aerospace

1987 Range Rover is introduced to the U.S market

1989 Introduction of the Discovery (Disco I to enthusiasts)

1994 Rover Group is taken over by BMW. Introduction of second-generation Range Rover.

1998 Introduction of the Freelander

1998 – The Economist Magazine reports (Dec 5, 1998 v349, i8097, p.70(1)) That BMW was undertaking steps to “turn round its loss-making British business,” and that “Germans have been shocked by the weak technical standards in Britain.”  BMW was proposing a “productivity deal” to workers before it would commit to modernizing factories and developing new models.  The article notes that BMW’s share price had declined due to trouble in Britain.

1999 (Midyear) Introduction of the second generation of Discovery (Disco II)

2000 – The New York Times reports that (New York Times March 12, 2000 p43(N), pAU1(L), col 1 (35 col in)) “In one of the largest and costliest service campaigns ever by an automaker, the Ford Motor Company will provide compensation to owners of 718,000 vehicles with 3.8-liter V-6 engines that have been prone to head-gasket failures.”  The article also noted that, “Ford will extend its head-gasket warranty for the vehicles, all with front-wheel drive, to seven years or 100,000 miles.”  The article notes that “Ford first publicly acknowledged the gasket problem in 1998, when it extended the three-year or 36,000-mile warranty on the Taurus, Sable and Windstar to five years or 60,000 miles.”  The article also notes, “Thousands of customers have complained of problems with the 3.8-liter engine, an overhead-valve motor made at the Essex engine plant in Windsor, Ontario, and at least one had set up a Web site that became a magnet for other disgruntled owners.  Ford also faced class-action suits in Chicago and Toledo and lobbying from the Center for Auto Safety in Washington.”

2000 – According to the Automotive News (Automitive News, May 1, 2000, v74, i5872, p97) Ford extended the previously cited product recall to include more cars.  The article notes, “Until last week, Ford had moved to placate only the owners of front-wheel-drive vehicles equipped with the 3.8-liter V-6.  The warranty campaign was extended to the rear-wheel-drive Mustang, Thunderbird, and Cougar after customers complained, the company said.”  The article further notes, “Head gaskets on the rear-wheel-drive models fail less frequently than on the affected front-wheel-drive vehicles, said Mike Vaughn, a Ford spokesman.”  Additionally, the article quoted Mike Vaughn as follows, “The rear-wheel-drive models have a different cooling system flow pattern than the front-wheel-drive vehicles.  Because of that, they have experienced a lower rate of head gasket failure.”

2000 – (New York Times, June 2, 2000 pF1(L), col 1 (35 col in))  The New York Times reported that “Ford changed its mind this spring, saying it now realizes that owners of those cars were also having problems.  It is extending the head-gasket warranty on about 294,000 of the rear-drive cars and reimbursing owners who already paid for repairs.”  The article also noted “Ford will extend to seven years or 100,000 miles, whichever comes first, the warranty on the head gaskets on the 3.8-liter V-6 in ’94-’95 models.”

 2000 BMW breaks up the Rover Group and sells Land Rover to Ford.

2000 – Ford Motor brings in a new executive for the Solihull facility (reportedly, Solihull is where the Freelander was manufactured, see below citation) Marin Burela, who acknowledges quality problems (Automotive News, Nov. 6, 2000, v75, i5902, p.32X): “Land Rover has been under British, German and now American control.  How can you maintain quality when you have had all of those culture changes?”  Marin Burela is also quoted in the article, “We have no plans to move production out of Solihull, England.”

2001 – Land Rover North America CEO Howard Mosher is quoted as saying (Automotive News, Sept. 10, 2001, v75, i5947, p.3) “It’s time for Land Rover to settle down and get some consistency.  For the last 3 ˝ years we’ve been in an almost constant state of flux as a result of what was going on with the BMW organization.”  The article quotes an industry analyst as saying, “the marque has been held back by pricing and its poor reputation for quality.”  The article also notes, “But Land Rover has far to go to improve quality.  On the last J.D. Power Initial Quality Survey, a copy of which was obtained by Automotive News, Land Rover ranked 34^th out of 37 brands, with a reported 207 problems per 100 vehicles sold.  The industry average was 147.”  The article aslo quotes Mr. Mosher as saying, “We can’t on the one hand say that we’re premium, charge premium prices and not deliver superior quality reliability and durability.”

2002 Introduction of third-generation Range Rover

2002 – The Freelander is introduced in the United States (Consumer Reports, May 2002, v67, i5, p48(3)).

2002 – In May 2002, Consumer Reports reported (Consumer Reports, May 2002, v67, i5, p.52(1)), “Reliability.  We have no relaibility data yet.  Our Freelander had three defects, one of which necessitated a trip to the dealer.”

2003 – In early June 2003 (Automotive News, June 2, 2003, v77, i6041, p.44) it is reported that Land Rover management indicated that if workers “don’t accept changes at the company’s Solihull, England plant, production of some models may be moved elsewhere.”  The article also notes that Land Rover finished 35^th of 36 brands in a “recent J.D. Power and Associates Initial Quality Study.  Only Hummer fared worse.”  Reportedly, Steve Coultate, Land Rover’s factory director “…sent a letter to employees on May 20 that referred to the J.D. Power results and warned that change is necessary.”  The article continues, quoting Mr. Coultate:  “Solihull employees sent a very clear message that they are unwilling to embrace even simple change.  As a result, not only is the compnay questioning short term replacement product but more importantly whether Solihull deserves investment in the long term.”  The article also quoted Mr Coultate: “Other plants in the Ford family perform better than Solihull on quality, volume, cost and willingness to change.”

 2003 - In late July 2003 (Automotive News, July 28, 2003, v77, i6050, p.45) an Automotive News article states, “Substandard quality was just one reason that Ford Motor Co. decided to shift Freelander Production out of Land Rover’s Solihull plant in the English midlands.”  The article continues, noting, “Land Rover has not measured up to industry standards, and company officials recently warned that they might transfer some manufacturing out of Solihull if workers did not agree to changes in working practices.”  The article also states, “And Land Rover again finished next to last in J.D. Power’s 2003 Vehicle Dependability Study in the United States, released this month, beating only Kia.”  The article continues, noting, “But like BMW, Ford has struggled to raise quality at Solihull, a mostly ramshakle plant with a complicated history going back to the days when British Leyland owned Land Rover.”  Mark Fields, the Ford Motor Company Premier Automotive Group CEO is quoted as saying, “It’s a very, very complex plant.  It’s almost like two or three plants in one.  This will allow that plant to become less complex and to focus on the multivehicle platform we’re investing in.  It’s also a challenge to the Solihull work force.”  The article also quotes Mr. Fields implying that other products could be moved out of the Solihull plant, “…if we don’t improve, everything is up for question.”

2005 – the Freelander model is discontinued after the 2005 model year.

2005 Introduction of the third-generation Discovery/LR3

2005 Introduction of Range Rover Sport

2005 Adoption of the Jaguar AJ-V8 engine to replace the BMW M62 V8 in the Range Rover  

Engineering / Design Information from Publicly-Available Resources: 

Freelander information: 

“To adapt the Freelander for the North American market, 70 percent of the parts are new.” (Automotive News, Sept. 10, 2001, v75, i5947, p3).

            Upon information and belief - new parts tend to have a higher failure rate 

“The Freelander is Land Rover’s first SUV to use unibody construction and independent suspension.” (Consumer Reports, May 2002, v67, i5, p48(3)).

            Upon information and belief – new designs tend to have a higher failure rate 

“But Freelander also treads a lot of new ground for Land Rover, such as the company’s first V-6 engine, permanent all-wheel drive, a sophisticated five-speed automatic transmission with sport/manual shifting modes and a fully independent suspension.” (Business Record (Des Moines), Jan 21, 2002 v18, i3, pS2(2)).

            Upon information and belief – new designs tend to have a higher failure rate

 “So the offending lines were sheathed with insulation.” (Ward’s Auto World, Oct. 1, 2001, p70)

            Upon information and belief, additional insulation could increase engine heat

            Increased engine heat increases risk of head-gasket malfunction (see below)

“Interestingly, Freelander’s engine compartment received the most radical redo in preparation for its anticipated December debut.  To satisfy U.S. crash test requirements, it was enlarged to accommodate crumple zones.  And because stricter U.S. emissions standards called for catalytic converter capacity 50% greater than Europe requires, airflow was re-engineered to offset the resulting temperature increase.” (Ward’s Auto World, Oct. 1, 2001, p70)

            Increased engine heat increases risk of head-gasket malfunction (see below)

 “Noise control systems specialists Collins & Aikman has worked alongside acoustic materials supplier Huntsman Polyurethanes to develop a new sound-proofing systems for the Land Rover Freelander.”  And, “The analysis pin-pointed the Freelander’s biggest problem areas so insulation materials could be specified where they were most needed.”  (Auto Industry, July 7, 2000, v21, i259, p6)

            Upon information and belief, additional insulation could increase engine heat

            Increased engine heat increases risk of head-gasket malfunction (see below)

“Among possible causes Land Rover identified in a letter to the US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration are problems with poor coolant hose quality and insufficient hose clamping.” (European Rubber Journal, Oct. 1, 1998, p2)

            Land Rover has had cooling system problems in the past. 

The 2002 Land Rover Freelander is rated as having Poor: Engine, Cooling, Transmission and Drive System, among other poor ratings. (Consumer Reports.Org Used Model Overview, Land Rover Freelander). 

Motor – 174-hp, 2.5-liter DOHC 24-valve aluminum V-6 (Business Record (Des Moines), Jan 21, 2002 v18, i3, pS2(2)) and (Automotive Industries, Jan 2004, v184, i1, p.33(1))

 Head-Gasket information: 

“1. Make sure the reason for head gasket failure is properly diagnosed – rarely does a head gasket fail on its own accord!”  And “B. Make sure overheating engines are properly repaired.”  (Motor Age, Nov. 2004, v123, i11, p68(1)).

The statements imply underlying design flaws and poor cooling systems will affect head gasket performance.

“Replacing the head gasket may only be a temporary fix.  If the underlying problem that caused the localized hot spots to form has not been identified and corrected, the new head gasket will eventually fail again.” (Motor Age, August 1994, v113, n8, p32(2)).

            Increased engine heat increases risk of head-gasket malfunction. 

“Aluminum cylinder heads with Siamese exhaust valves (such as the Chrysler 2.2L and Honda 1.5L) seem to be especially vulnerable to localized overheating in the area between adjacent exhaust valves, particularly if the design of the cylinder head restricts or limits coolant flow and circulation in critical areas.”  And, “Some engine blocks with Siamese cylinders also provide minimal cooling between the cylinder bores.” (Motor Age, August 1994, v113, n8, p32(2)). 

“One of the most common causes of localized hot spots is air pockets in the cooling system.”  And, “Though air can be trapped in any engine, it’s primarily a concern with FWD cars and minivans where the heater core is mounted higher than the engine.” (Motor Age, August 1994, v113, n8, p32(2)).

 “Head gaskets on the rear-wheel-drive models fail less frequently than on the affected front-wheel-drive vehicles, said Mike Vaughn, a Ford spokesman.”  Additionally, the article quoted Mike Vaughn as follows, “The rear-wheel-drive models have a different cooling system flow pattern than the front-wheel-drive vehicles.  Because of that, they have experienced a lower rate of head gasket failure.” (Automitive News, May 1, 2000, v74, i5872, p97)

Ford’s experience was consistent with the problem cited in Motor Age (above)

 Conclusion – ample data in publicly-available resources indicate that the Freelander’s head-gasket problem is due to design problems, which were known to Ford Motor Company and to Land Rover. 

* Contents copywrite

 LR Action Committee

LRActionCommitee@aol.com

There are literally hundreds of examples of the k-series engine's poor design resulting in engine replacement (and financial misery) posted on the Internet. If you are still unsure if there is a reliability issue with Freelander's K-series engine have a look at some of these links:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freelander_head_gasket_failure

http://www.carsurvey.org/viewcomments_review_72378.html

http://www.preloved.co.uk/go/?thread_id=10411&cs=70624f24

http://search.complaints.com/search?q=freelander

http://www.freelanderheadgasket.co.uk/

http://www.honestjohn.co.uk/index.php?url=/carbycar/index.htm

http://www.hat.net/pop/autos.four_wheelers/land_rover_freelander/

http://www.motorsm.com/AUS/cars/complaints_corner.htm

http://www.british-cars.co.uk/cgi-bin/gen5?runprog=lrbbs&mode=thread&access=&subject=5307&source=T&thread=2003070720211031059

http://www.landrover.org/wwwboard/messages/2068.html

Legal Disclaimer:

The content of this site is factual information sourced from data freely available on the internet. Anecdotal information is  based on my own experiences, as well as others that have chosen to contribute content.  Information on external links should be verified with the site publishers.
freelander   LR aLR action committeed gasket

Updated Thursday May 11, 2006 08:40 PMd gasuket