NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Fuel/propulsion System complaints
4 reportsClear category filterMileage unknown · Sep 26, 2024
EngineFuel/propulsion SystemPower Train
2012 Range Rover Evoque suddenly, and without warning died while driving in traffic, and would not restart. It needed to be pushed away from oncoming traffic. A sheriff deputy was summoned to control traffic, as we did this. There were no warning lamps, or messages appearing on the display, both before and after the incident. Cu…
Read full complaint
2012 Range Rover Evoque suddenly, and without warning died while driving in traffic, and would not restart. It needed to be pushed away from oncoming traffic. A sheriff deputy was summoned to control traffic, as we did this. There were no warning lamps, or messages appearing on the display, both before and after the incident. Currently the car is at a foreign repair facility here in Lexington, KY. The name of the facility is: Scheller Automotive, (859) 225-6277. I spoke earlier with Andy, who stated it was an issue with no compression, which prevented it from being started. He believed it had to do with a dislocated cam gear, which caused a timing failure. According to him, there is a Range Rover service bulletin which they received describing this engine failing, but no recall regarding this issue. He said they now have THREE vehicles in the shop, with this same problem. This catastrophic failure could lead to definite safety concerns, by causing the car to die unexpectedly, without warning, and losing power steering, power breaks, and the possibility of safely exiting vehicle while in traffic.
NHTSA ODI #11616650
Mileage unknown · Sep 16, 2021
EngineFuel/propulsion System
In about Feb 2017, we purchased this vehicle, a 2012 Range Rover Evoque (5 door), from a GMC dealership; it was previously owned. When purchased, an exhaust smell was noticed inside of the vehicle and the vehicle was returned to the dealership for service and inspection into the cause of the odor. It was ultimately transferred…
Read full complaint
In about Feb 2017, we purchased this vehicle, a 2012 Range Rover Evoque (5 door), from a GMC dealership; it was previously owned. When purchased, an exhaust smell was noticed inside of the vehicle and the vehicle was returned to the dealership for service and inspection into the cause of the odor. It was ultimately transferred to a Land Rover dealership in Scottsdale, Arizona (Land Rover North Scottsdale 18100 N Scottsdale Rd, Phoenix, AZ 85054) where they determined the turbo charger had a crack in the manifold. It was replaced. About one and a half years later, this smell returned and I contacted the dealership about it. I was told their repair warranty was only for one year and they would not repair it. Researching these turbo chargers on my own, I discovered they are commonly failing and people have experienced similar issues with the turbo and exhaust smell. This time, the exhaust odor seems to only last a short time when first starting the vehicle from a cold start, leading me to believe the crack in the manifold is small and seals itself after the manifold heats up and the metal expands. It is an expensive fix to have a dealership do the repairs, over $4000 at last estimate so I haven't made the repairs since it's probably close to what the vehicle is now worth. In researching the turbo, the OEM turbo manifold looks to be made of stainless steel but it is thin looking. Some aftermarket turbos I have found have cast iron manifolds which I may purchase and take on the repairs my self at this point.
NHTSA ODI #11433248
20,000 miles · Apr 16, 2013
EngineFuel/propulsion System
I WAS DRIVING VEHICLE AT ABOUT 65-70 MPH ON FREEWAY FOR ABOUT ONE HOUR. EXITED FREEWAY, STOPPED AT TRAFFIC LIGHT. WHEN LEAVING LIGHT, ACCELERATED NORMAL & INSTANTLY NOTICED THERE WAS VERY POOR ACCELERATION. THE ENGINE SERVICE LIGHT DISPLAYED & VEHICLE WOULD NOT GO OVER 35MPH. I THEN PULLED INTO PARKING LOT, TURNED CAR OFF FOR 2 …
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING VEHICLE AT ABOUT 65-70 MPH ON FREEWAY FOR ABOUT ONE HOUR. EXITED FREEWAY, STOPPED AT TRAFFIC LIGHT. WHEN LEAVING LIGHT, ACCELERATED NORMAL & INSTANTLY NOTICED THERE WAS VERY POOR ACCELERATION. THE ENGINE SERVICE LIGHT DISPLAYED & VEHICLE WOULD NOT GO OVER 35MPH. I THEN PULLED INTO PARKING LOT, TURNED CAR OFF FOR 2 MINUTES, RESTARTED & NO CHANGE IN PROBLEM. TOOK CAR TO DEALERSHIP WHERE I PURCHASED & VEHICLE WAS FIXED AT NO CHARGE. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10508351
5,000 miles · Sep 6, 2012
EngineFuel/propulsion System
ON JULY 28, 2012 MY MOTHER AND I WERE DRIVING TO NEW ENGLAND FROM MARYLAND THROUGH INTERMITTENT THUNDERSTORMS AT SPEEDS ABOVE 65 MILES PER HOUR. I ATTEMPTED TO ACCELERATE TO PASS A VEHICLE WHEN THE ENGINE BEGAN TO LOSE POWER AND TOOK OVER 30 SECONDS TO REACH 40 MILES PER HOUR. I OBSERVED THE SPEED WARNING LIGHT AND THE AMBER ?…
Read full complaint
ON JULY 28, 2012 MY MOTHER AND I WERE DRIVING TO NEW ENGLAND FROM MARYLAND THROUGH INTERMITTENT THUNDERSTORMS AT SPEEDS ABOVE 65 MILES PER HOUR. I ATTEMPTED TO ACCELERATE TO PASS A VEHICLE WHEN THE ENGINE BEGAN TO LOSE POWER AND TOOK OVER 30 SECONDS TO REACH 40 MILES PER HOUR. I OBSERVED THE SPEED WARNING LIGHT AND THE AMBER ?CHECK ENGINE? LIGHT COME ON. I TRIED TO ACCELERATE TO PULL OFF OF THE ROAD BUT COULD ONLY DRIVE APPROXIMATELY 35-40 MILES PER HOUR UNTIL THE NEXT EXIT WHICH WAS OVER 2 MILES AHEAD (AS CARS UNSAFELY HAD TO SUDDENLY STOP BEHIND ME ON I-95 AS I MANEUVERED BACK INTO THE RIGHT TRAVEL LANE) SINCE THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT GO ANY FASTER. ONCE OFF OF THE ROAD (THE RAIN HAD CEASED) I TURNED OFF THE VEHICLE AND REMOVED THE 74 MILE AN HOUR SPEED WARNING AND THE AMBER ?CHECK ENGINE? LAMP WENT OFF AFTER TEN MINUTES OF DRIVING. I RESUMED MY TRIP THROUGH THE ON-AND-OFF-AGAIN RAIN FOR ANOTHER THREE HOURS AND DID NOT ATTEMPT TO ACCELERATE AGAIN. I LATER TOLD MY HUSBAND THAT I THOUGHT THAT THE SUDDEN SLOW ENGINE ACCELERATION AND SPEED IMPEDIMENT WAS A FUNCTION OF THE SPEED WARNING AND ASSUMED THAT TO BE THE CAUSE OF THE LACK OF SPEED AND ABILITY TO ACCELERATE. NEEDLESS TO SAY THIS WAS A FRIGHTENING EXPERIENCE FOR ME AND MY MOTHER. ON AUGUST 25TH MY HUSBAND AND I WERE DRIVING FOR OVER AN HOUR IN HEAVY RAIN AND IT HAPPENED AGAIN. UNLIKE MY EXPERIENCE, A WARNING MESSAGE THAT SAID ?RESTRICTED PERFORMANCE? CAME UP ON THE DASHBOARD AND THE AMBER CHECK ENGINE LIGHT WAS ON (THERE WAS ALSO AN AMBER HAZARD SIGNAL ON THE DASHBOARD). WHEN WE PULLED OVER, WE LOOKED IN THE OWNER?S MANUAL UNDER THE FOLLOWING WORDS: ?PERFORMANCE, ENGINE, AND WARNINGS, TO FIND THE RESTRICTED PERFORMANCE WARNING AND WHAT IT MEANT TO NO AVAIL. THE RAIN CONTINUED ON THIS EVENING AND WE DROVE (SLOWLY) HOME FOR THE REMAINING 20 MINUTES WHILE THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT REMAINED RED. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10474124
NHTSA investigations
4EA21002 · Desiccated Air Bag Inflator Rupture
Opened Sep 17, 2021 · No close date supplied
Status: open (inferred from source dates) · Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module; Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module
From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module
From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.
Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module
From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.
EA20001 · Loss Of Brake Power Assist
Opened Aug 31, 2020 · Closed Feb 27, 2023
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Service Brakes; Service Brakes, Hydraulic:power Assist:vacuum
On August 31, 2020, ODI upgraded PE18-014 to Engineering Analysis (EA)20-001 to continue its investigation of brake vacuum pump failures in model year (MY) 2012-2013 Range Rover Evoque vehicles and peer Jaguar Land Rover (JLR) products equipped with 2.0L GTDI engines fitted with Magna vacuum pumps. This investigative activity has focused on the cause, scope, and effect of inadequate vacuum supply at the vehicles brake booster with its attendant increases of brake pedal effort and diminished braking performance. Following a detailed analysis of data collected, the alleged defect is progressive and reasonably detectable with adequate power braking assist available prior to complete pump failure; occurs at marginal failure rates, particularly where the vehicle age is considered; and the complaint trend dissipated to one occurrence per year over the last three calendar years.Based on the analysis conducted, this investigation has been closed. The closing of this investigation does not foreclose the Agency from taking further action, if warranted, or the potential for a future finding that a safety-related defect exists, based upon additional information the Agency may receive. For a detailed summary of the investigation see attached closing resume document.The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed at: http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID using the following complaint identification numbers: 10986358, 11025409, 11083348, 11131896, 11149724, 11231234, 11343256, 11425440, 11485127.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Service Brakes, Hydraulic:power Assist:vacuum
On August 31, 2020, ODI upgraded PE18-014 to Engineering Analysis (EA)20-001 to continue its investigation of brake vacuum pump failures in model year (MY) 2012-2013 Range Rover Evoque vehicles and peer Jaguar Land Rover (JLR) products equipped with 2.0L GTDI engines fitted with Magna vacuum pumps. This investigative activity has focused on the cause, scope, and effect of inadequate vacuum supply at the vehicles brake booster with its attendant increases of brake pedal effort and diminished braking performance. Following a detailed analysis of data collected, the alleged defect is progressive and reasonably detectable with adequate power braking assist available prior to complete pump failure; occurs at marginal failure rates, particularly where the vehicle age is considered; and the complaint trend dissipated to one occurrence per year over the last three calendar years.Based on the analysis conducted, this investigation has been closed. The closing of this investigation does not foreclose the Agency from taking further action, if warranted, or the potential for a future finding that a safety-related defect exists, based upon additional information the Agency may receive. For a detailed summary of the investigation see attached closing resume document.The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed at: http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID using the following complaint identification numbers: 10986358, 11025409, 11083348, 11131896, 11149724, 11231234, 11343256, 11425440, 11485127.
Service Brakes
On August 31, 2020, ODI upgraded PE18-014 to Engineering Analysis (EA)20-001 to continue its investigation of brake vacuum pump failures in model year (MY) 2012-2013 Range Rover Evoque vehicles and peer Jaguar Land Rover (JLR) products equipped with 2.0L GTDI engines fitted with Magna vacuum pumps. This investigative activity has focused on the cause, scope, and effect of inadequate vacuum supply at the vehicles brake booster with its attendant increases of brake pedal effort and diminished braking performance. Following a detailed analysis of data collected, the alleged defect is progressive and reasonably detectable with adequate power braking assist available prior to complete pump failure; occurs at marginal failure rates, particularly where the vehicle age is considered; and the complaint trend dissipated to one occurrence per year over the last three calendar years.Based on the analysis conducted, this investigation has been closed. The closing of this investigation does not foreclose the Agency from taking further action, if warranted, or the potential for a future finding that a safety-related defect exists, based upon additional information the Agency may receive. For a detailed summary of the investigation see attached closing resume document.The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed at: http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID using the following complaint identification numbers: 10986358, 11025409, 11083348, 11131896, 11149724, 11231234, 11343256, 11425440, 11485127.
PE18014 · Loss Of Brake Power Assist
Opened Dec 1, 2018 · Closed Sep 10, 2020
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Service Brakes; Service Brakes, Hydraulic:power Assist:vacuum; Service Brakes, Hydraulic:power Assist:vacuum:hoses, Lines/piping, And Fittings
On December 1, 2018, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened Preliminary Evaluation PE18-014 to investigate allegations of brake vacuum pump failure in model year (MY) 2012 through 2014 Range Rover Evoque vehicles. During PE18-014, ODI identified 33 complaints and field reports related to the alleged defect in the subject vehicles. Seven of the complaints were received by ODI and 26 were reported as consumer complaints or field reports in the Jaguar Land Rover (JLR) response to ODI's Information Request letter for PE18-014. All the complaints and field reports identified by ODI involved MY 2012-2013 Range Rover Evoque vehicles. ODI's analysis of warranty data supplied by JLR identified 198 claims related to the alleged defect in MY 2012-2013 vehicles, resulting in a claim rate of 0.84 percent. ODI identified just 6 claims in the MY 2014 Range Rover Evoque vehicles, resulting in a claim rate of0.09 percent.The subject vehicles are equipped with 2.0 liter Gasoline Turbocharged Direct Injection (GTDI) engines that utilize a mechanically driven single vane rotary vacuum pump supplied by Magna International (Magna). The 2.0L GTDI engines and subject Magna vacuum pumps were used by JLR in the following applications: MY 2012-2017 Land Rover Range Rover Evoque (L538), MY 2013-2015 Land Rover LR2 (L359), MY 2015-2017 Land Rover Discovery Sport (L550), MY 2013-2015 Jaguar XF (X250), and MY 2017 Jaguar XE (X760). Field return analyses of failed vacuum pumps from these products has determined that the failures were caused by blockage of the orifice supplying lubricating oil to the pump. Magna and JLR have attributed the blockage to oil sludge resulting from failure to perform oil changes at the specified maintenance intervals.This Preliminary Evaluation has been upgraded to an Engineering Analysis (EA20-001) covering MY 2012-2013 Range Rover Evoque vehicles (subject vehicles). Other JLR products equipped with 2.0L GTDI engines and subject Magna vacuum pumps will be included in the EA as peer vehicles. The EA will further assess the causes of pump failures in the subject and peer vehicles, the frequency and trends of pump failures in each population, the reasons for differences in experience between subject and peer vehicle applications, and the effects of pump failure on brake system performance in the subject vehicles.The ODI reports (VOQs) cited above can be viewed at NHTSA.gov under the following reference numbers: 10986358, 11025409, 11083348, 11131896, 11149724, 11231234, 11343256.
Additional source detail variants (3)
Service Brakes, Hydraulic:power Assist:vacuum:hoses, Lines/piping, And Fittings
On December 1, 2018, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened Preliminary Evaluation PE18-014 to investigate allegations of brake vacuum pump failure in model year (MY) 2012 through 2014 Range Rover Evoque vehicles. During PE18-014, ODI identified 33 complaints and field reports related to the alleged defect in the subject vehicles. Seven of the complaints were received by ODI and 26 were reported as consumer complaints or field reports in the Jaguar Land Rover (JLR) response to ODI's Information Request letter for PE18-014. All the complaints and field reports identified by ODI involved MY 2012-2013 Range Rover Evoque vehicles. ODI's analysis of warranty data supplied by JLR identified 198 claims related to the alleged defect in MY 2012-2013 vehicles, resulting in a claim rate of 0.84 percent. ODI identified just 6 claims in the MY 2014 Range Rover Evoque vehicles, resulting in a claim rate of0.09 percent.The subject vehicles are equipped with 2.0 liter Gasoline Turbocharged Direct Injection (GTDI) engines that utilize a mechanically driven single vane rotary vacuum pump supplied by Magna International (Magna). The 2.0L GTDI engines and subject Magna vacuum pumps were used by JLR in the following applications: MY 2012-2017 Land Rover Range Rover Evoque (L538), MY 2013-2015 Land Rover LR2 (L359), MY 2015-2017 Land Rover Discovery Sport (L550), MY 2013-2015 Jaguar XF (X250), and MY 2017 Jaguar XE (X760). Field return analyses of failed vacuum pumps from these products has determined that the failures were caused by blockage of the orifice supplying lubricating oil to the pump. Magna and JLR have attributed the blockage to oil sludge resulting from failure to perform oil changes at the specified maintenance intervals.This Preliminary Evaluation has been upgraded to an Engineering Analysis (EA20-001) covering MY 2012-2013 Range Rover Evoque vehicles (subject vehicles). Other JLR products equipped with 2.0L GTDI engines and subject Magna vacuum pumps will be included in the EA as peer vehicles. The EA will further assess the causes of pump failures in the subject and peer vehicles, the frequency and trends of pump failures in each population, the reasons for differences in experience between subject and peer vehicle applications, and the effects of pump failure on brake system performance in the subject vehicles.The ODI reports (VOQs) cited above can be viewed at NHTSA.gov under the following reference numbers: 10986358, 11025409, 11083348, 11131896, 11149724, 11231234, 11343256.
Service Brakes, Hydraulic:power Assist:vacuum
On December 1, 2018, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened Preliminary Evaluation PE18-014 to investigate allegations of brake vacuum pump failure in model year (MY) 2012 through 2014 Range Rover Evoque vehicles. During PE18-014, ODI identified 33 complaints and field reports related to the alleged defect in the subject vehicles. Seven of the complaints were received by ODI and 26 were reported as consumer complaints or field reports in the Jaguar Land Rover (JLR) response to ODI's Information Request letter for PE18-014. All the complaints and field reports identified by ODI involved MY 2012-2013 Range Rover Evoque vehicles. ODI's analysis of warranty data supplied by JLR identified 198 claims related to the alleged defect in MY 2012-2013 vehicles, resulting in a claim rate of 0.84 percent. ODI identified just 6 claims in the MY 2014 Range Rover Evoque vehicles, resulting in a claim rate of0.09 percent.The subject vehicles are equipped with 2.0 liter Gasoline Turbocharged Direct Injection (GTDI) engines that utilize a mechanically driven single vane rotary vacuum pump supplied by Magna International (Magna). The 2.0L GTDI engines and subject Magna vacuum pumps were used by JLR in the following applications: MY 2012-2017 Land Rover Range Rover Evoque (L538), MY 2013-2015 Land Rover LR2 (L359), MY 2015-2017 Land Rover Discovery Sport (L550), MY 2013-2015 Jaguar XF (X250), and MY 2017 Jaguar XE (X760). Field return analyses of failed vacuum pumps from these products has determined that the failures were caused by blockage of the orifice supplying lubricating oil to the pump. Magna and JLR have attributed the blockage to oil sludge resulting from failure to perform oil changes at the specified maintenance intervals.This Preliminary Evaluation has been upgraded to an Engineering Analysis (EA20-001) covering MY 2012-2013 Range Rover Evoque vehicles (subject vehicles). Other JLR products equipped with 2.0L GTDI engines and subject Magna vacuum pumps will be included in the EA as peer vehicles. The EA will further assess the causes of pump failures in the subject and peer vehicles, the frequency and trends of pump failures in each population, the reasons for differences in experience between subject and peer vehicle applications, and the effects of pump failure on brake system performance in the subject vehicles.The ODI reports (VOQs) cited above can be viewed at NHTSA.gov under the following reference numbers: 10986358, 11025409, 11083348, 11131896, 11149724, 11231234, 11343256.
Service Brakes
On December 1, 2018, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened Preliminary Evaluation PE18-014 to investigate allegations of brake vacuum pump failure in model year (MY) 2012 through 2014 Range Rover Evoque vehicles. During PE18-014, ODI identified 33 complaints and field reports related to the alleged defect in the subject vehicles. Seven of the complaints were received by ODI and 26 were reported as consumer complaints or field reports in the Jaguar Land Rover (JLR) response to ODI's Information Request letter for PE18-014. All the complaints and field reports identified by ODI involved MY 2012-2013 Range Rover Evoque vehicles. ODI's analysis of warranty data supplied by JLR identified 198 claims related to the alleged defect in MY 2012-2013 vehicles, resulting in a claim rate of 0.84 percent. ODI identified just 6 claims in the MY 2014 Range Rover Evoque vehicles, resulting in a claim rate of0.09 percent.The subject vehicles are equipped with 2.0 liter Gasoline Turbocharged Direct Injection (GTDI) engines that utilize a mechanically driven single vane rotary vacuum pump supplied by Magna International (Magna). The 2.0L GTDI engines and subject Magna vacuum pumps were used by JLR in the following applications: MY 2012-2017 Land Rover Range Rover Evoque (L538), MY 2013-2015 Land Rover LR2 (L359), MY 2015-2017 Land Rover Discovery Sport (L550), MY 2013-2015 Jaguar XF (X250), and MY 2017 Jaguar XE (X760). Field return analyses of failed vacuum pumps from these products has determined that the failures were caused by blockage of the orifice supplying lubricating oil to the pump. Magna and JLR have attributed the blockage to oil sludge resulting from failure to perform oil changes at the specified maintenance intervals.This Preliminary Evaluation has been upgraded to an Engineering Analysis (EA20-001) covering MY 2012-2013 Range Rover Evoque vehicles (subject vehicles). Other JLR products equipped with 2.0L GTDI engines and subject Magna vacuum pumps will be included in the EA as peer vehicles. The EA will further assess the causes of pump failures in the subject and peer vehicles, the frequency and trends of pump failures in each population, the reasons for differences in experience between subject and peer vehicle applications, and the effects of pump failure on brake system performance in the subject vehicles.The ODI reports (VOQs) cited above can be viewed at NHTSA.gov under the following reference numbers: 10986358, 11025409, 11083348, 11131896, 11149724, 11231234, 11343256.
PE16015 · Powered Vehicle Rollaway
Opened Dec 16, 2016 · Closed Aug 11, 2020
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Power Train:automatic Transmission
On December 16, 2016, ODI opened PE16-015 to investigate seven complaints alleging incidents of powered rollaway in model year (MY) 2012 through 2014 Land Rover/Range Rover Evoque and Jaguar XF vehicles. The complaints all alleged that the rollaway incidents occurred after the operators shifted to Park and exited the vehicle with the engine left running. All of the incidents alleged that crashes resulted from the unexpected vehicle movement and three alleged injuries. Two of the complaints counted in the opening resume (ID's 10760326 and 10884136) involved the same vehicle and incident. ODI has not received any new complaints since PE16-015 was opened, resulting in current ODI report totals of 6 incidents, 6 crashes and 3 injuries. Field data provided by Jaguar Land Rover (JLR) in response to ODI's information request letter for PE16-015 included 10 allegations of powered rollaway incidents in the subject vehicles, including 9 alleging crashes. Updates provided by JLR through October 25, 2019, have identified one additional powered rollaway allegation in the subject vehicles. The new incident included a crash allegation, bringing the JLR field incident totals to 11 incidents and 10 crashes. None of the JLR reports allege injuries. Two of the JLR reports are duplicates of incidents reported to ODI, resulting in a total of 15 incidents, 14 crashes and 3 injury allegations in the subject vehicles. ODI's analysis of system design and field incident investigative data has not identified any mechanical or electronic faults that have caused subject vehicle transmissions to shift out of Park with no operator input nor has the analysis identified any faults that would result in a failure to execute a valid Park shift selection. JLR's field investigations of powered rollaway incidents have assessed the root cause to be operator error. Based on these assessments and the low rate and declining trend in rollaway incidents, this investigation is closed. The closing of this investigation does not foreclose the Agency from taking further action if warranted or the potential for a future finding that a safety-related defect exists based upon additional information the agency may receive. For more detailed information about field incident analysis for the subject and peer vehicles see the attached report.The ODI reports (VOQs) cited above can be viewed at NHTSA.gov under the following reference numbers with duplicate records shown in parentheses: 10504853, 10548937, 10565212, 10631673, 10760326 (10884136), 10892346.
Illustration