lol, amusing stuff. I've had my K for almost 3 months now - bought for £500 with 183K on the clock - and the HG hasn't failed on me. That's KMs and its been in the garage for that time with the bonnet up :)

Although the car has 'issues' - the coolant is spot on level and the bottle clean, so it looks as though the HG is not 1 of the issues. Has dropped a bit now though when the IRD came off!
 
This thread has turned a but anti K series for me.
The K series is a good engine that had a few design issues. Those can be overcome these days and at much less cost than a set of injectors for the TD4.
I know of several k's with over 180 K miles and still going strong. The engine is basically sound, except for its appetite for HGs. This is no big deal. Change the gasket while the timing belt is being done and it adds 3 hrs to the job. No big deal for anyone handy with a spanner.
There's little chance of it needing expensive injectors, crank dampers and doesn't have a DMF to add to the cost of a clutch replacement. I'm reasonably sure the full life maintenance costs of a K series Freelander is lower than the TD4 version.

Prob is at a time when most engines ran for ever rover introduced k series 1987...and while the bott end was bomb proof the top end suffered hg failure like there was no tomorrow...to small cooling capacity..wrong hg design...so while fords and vauxhall ect was racking up 100k no probs the poor k series were earning garages ..like i worked in a fortune, didnt know what hg was till k series came out...joking...it became the epitaph of unreliability..every freelander forum...or any car forum..says ..avoid k series ..even the land rover experts say it...now nodge68...you may own one but the remark..easy job if ya handy with the spanners .as i may be but for hundreds of owners its a massive garage bill dosent cut it...in the 60/70/80/90s...hg lasted some times life of the car..my 3 senators and 2 carltons all done 120k to 165k...no hg required thanks.
bad engine, bad design..and i was a mechanic in those days...the triple hg helped ..but damage is done
to highlight it ..been to tescos today...spend 200 quid..get 1.8 k series free...honest...no takers thou:):):):):D:D:D
 
lol, amusing stuff. I've had my K for almost 3 months now - bought for £500 with 183K on the clock - and the HG hasn't failed on me. That's KMs and its been in the garage for that time with the bonnet up :)

Although the car has 'issues' - the coolant is spot on level and the bottle clean, so it looks as though the HG is not 1 of the issues. Has dropped a bit now though when the IRD came off!
...
at 500 quid...just paid that for me citizen red arrows radio controlled solar watch..lol... you can run it and get ya money back on spares..bet ya life its on 3rd hg..or more...its folk who have spent thousands of pounds to only find its a lemon ..you cant lose at 500 quid
 
This thread has turned a but anti K series for me.
The K series is a good engine that had a few design issues. Those can be overcome these days and at much less cost than a set of injectors for the TD4.
I know of several k's with over 180 K miles and still going strong. The engine is basically sound, except for its appetite for HGs. This is no big deal. Change the gasket while the timing belt is being done and it adds 3 hrs to the job. No big deal for anyone handy with a spanner.
There's little chance of it needing expensive injectors, crank dampers and doesn't have a DMF to add to the cost of a clutch replacement. I'm reasonably sure the full life maintenance costs of a K series Freelander is lower than the TD4 version.
average cost on td4 ..rarely does dmf need replacing..is 450 quid...that will last min 80k driven in correct manner, never heard of all 4 injectors needing replacing...odd one maybe...lot easier that hg job
 
Jeepers @freelanderoig - has your life been destroyed at some point by a K Series engine? Were you returned to normality by a BMW diesel?

Didn't know BMW diesels went into umpteen Carltons, Senators or Fords - have you driven them at all?

I agree with @Nodge68 in that if you are a home mechanic the K Series will cost less over its lifetime - maybe even if you need to use mechanics. There are a lot of K Series owners on here, and yes, the HG is poor leading to changing more frequently than anybody's expectation of an engine - but there are hardly any other problems with it and it packs a decent punch for each litre of fuel you put in it.

The TD4 has numerous common faults that necessitate repetitive expensive part replacements to many owners - from fuel pumps to injectors and in some cases the engine is not economically repairable - such as crank shafts. Plus add in all the less costly, but similarly repetitive problems that stop the car or, if you are lucky, limp home - including the many sensors and housings that appear to be made from plasticine not strong plastic - and the costs add up and reliability drops. Just look at all the threads running at the moment because their TD4 just won't start!

It is a pet dislike of mine how people sellling LRs with BMW engines, how the first thing they say is "BMW engine" - like that means anything much. Plus ponsy purchasers who think they are getting a Rolls because they're buying a LR with a "BMW engine". I don't see L Series Freelanders being sold with the "Rover engine" - even though it is the lowest cost engine to run (even if belts need changing every 100K KMs) and will give you a higher chance of getting you to your destination and back than a TD4. The joke on Rover forums is that "after the nuclear holocaust all that will be left is cockroaches and L series engines".
 
Prob is at a time when most engines ran for ever rover introduced k series 1987...and while the bott end was bomb proof the top end suffered hg failure like there was no tomorrow...to small cooling capacity..wrong hg design...so while fords and vauxhall ect was racking up 100k no probs the poor k series were earning garages ..like i worked in a fortune, didnt know what hg was till k series came out...joking...it became the epitaph of unreliability..every freelander forum...or any car forum..says ..avoid k series ..even the land rover experts say it...now nodge68...you may own one but the remark..easy job if ya handy with the spanners .as i may be but for hundreds of owners its a massive garage bill dosent cut it...in the 60/70/80/90s...hg lasted some times life of the car..my 3 senators and 2 carltons all done 120k to 165k...no hg required thanks.
bad engine, bad design..and i was a mechanic in those days...the triple hg helped ..but damage is done
to highlight it ..been to tescos today...spend 200 quid..get 1.8 k series free...honest...no takers thou:):):):):D:D:D

Not entirely accurate and the kind of information that mis-informed press sprout tbh.
The K series when it first appeared was a brilliant power unit. It made more power and torque for its weight and fuel economy than any other engine on the market. In the original 1.4L capacity it was completely bomb proof. It would do 200K miles with a HG problem.
It was only after the capacity increase in 1994 that HG problems starting. There are a number of reasons for this happening. First off the thermostat is in the return from the radiator. This gives a delayed opening, not a problem for the cooler running 1.4 in a light vehicle, but it's bad news for the 1.6 and worse so on the 1.8, especially in the heavy Freelander. The PRT thermostat introduced in 2002/3 effectively controlled engine temperature, especially on the initial opening cycle. The cooling system isn't small, in fact the reverse is true. The radiator is to large, over cooling the coolant, closing the thermostat early.
Next the HG design was less than ideal. Rover or (PTP) used the elasopolyler gasket to ensure good sealing on the production line and through subsequent warranty period. The gasket was made badly, including the fire rings being upside down. De-lamination of the elasto took place at around 5 years or about 60K miles. Additionally the head used to be located with plastic dowels. This allows head shimmy on the block, resulting in the gasket's upside down fire rings eroding the head material and loosing clamping load.
So to cure the problem, the latest Payen blue elasopolyler with the steel dowels needs fitting along with the PRT thermostat. This will fix the K HG issues for the remainder of the useful life of the engine.

Rover weren't the only manufacturer to have engine problems. Peugeot 16 valve engines pop HGs before 100K and had large numbers of rod failures on there deisels. Vauxhall's Astra B&C 16 valve unit used to do HGs and timing belt tensioners regularly. Renault 1.9L diesel engines suffer piston failure at around 90K miles. The D3 TDV6 suffers random mileage crank failure rendering the engine as scrap and giving the owner a bill of £5K plus for a replacement engine. The same engine between 2006 and 2008 also had faulty oil pumps, scrapping the engine shortly after the belts were changed.
The list of engine failures is long and many of them cost much more to fix than the humble K series.
For the record, the only K series power vehicle I now own is my MGF, which I did the HG on.
I have had many K powered vehicles, including 5 Freelanders. Only 2 K powered vehicles I've owned have had HGF. One was my wife's 98 VVC coupe and the other was my VVC MGF.
I have spent many years repairing all manner of cars, both in the workshop and at the side of the road. Trust me, the K isn't the worst out there.
It still is a great engine that was badly publisized in the media.
It can be fixed and for pocket money compared to other vehicles out there.
 
read the post..never said bmw engines went into senators ect..i said...at the time k series were in melt down..other manufacturers and i stated..ive had 3 senators ..2 carltons..plus capris..audis...all were delivering 100k plus engine life hg trouble free, this made k series stick out like a sore thumb...look how many bmw cars from where the td4 engine came from are up for sale with 100k miles..many with 150k plus...when i worked in garage in the 80s...hg failure was a rarity ..untill k series came out
 
well written ..and i agree the k ..1.4 was excellent i also agree 1,8 was not able to cope with the big freelander , what youve said is indeed very accurate, but as one member on here correctly stated ..rover had use of buick engine for the freelander that is today a legend..it turned it down so maybe as you say the main fault was putting the k 1.8 in the freelander..dosent take away the fact freelander owners did and still do find them a nightmare
 
few days ago i posted a pic of my rover sd1..2.6 vp..straight six b reg....121 mph...now i did 40 k in that and it never missed a beat..
2012-12-11 21.24.56.jpg
.
 
that was a true rover succsess police used those all over the world..note my wifes audi 2.2 gti in back ground...superb german engineering
 
me and me senator..2.5..straight six..165k when it went...mate ran that till 185 k..only died when it got sided by a van
 
capri 1.6 lazer had that from 18m old...101 k when it went...point im making...it was std that in that time...cars did high mileage....so sorry k series 1.8 was crap in comparison ..still is
 
capri 1.6 lazer had that from 18m old...101 k when it went...point im making...it was std that in that time...cars did high mileage....so sorry k series 1.8 was crap in comparison ..still is

I agree that these older engines did good miles before failure. I still have a 72 Hillman Avenger GT that had a 138K miles on it when I retired the engine. It has a well sorted race engine in there now. However it can't match even a stand K for power or economy. This is why the K series was designed in the first place. It had to comply with up coming emission legislation, legislation that the Ford Pinto, Rover V8 or pretty much any other "old school" engine at the time, simply couldn't meet. The K was a ground breaking piece of technology able to efficiently move a car down the road and keep the tree huggers happy. There was nothing that could make as much torque per gram of fuel at the time. In this respect, the K series was way ahead of the game.
Here's a little bit of interesting trivia. The KV6 uses many parts supplied, under contract from BMW's suppliers. It's these very parts that cause 90% of KV6 breakdowns. The thermostat is plastic and cracks (sound familiar?) The cam sensor fails when hot. The crank sensor also fails as does the CTS. All these sensors are "borrowed" from other BMW engines. Even the dreadfully unreliable inlet plenum was made in Germany by one of BMW's main suppliers. So not everything Rover made was unreliable.
It's just the HG on the K series 4 pot. Everything else is basically bomb proof. Probably because BMW didn't add there own parts to that engine.
My wife has a BMW 318CI which she loves. It's got a nice engine which is lovely and quiet and powerful too. Not as powerful as an equivalent K series though. Sadly it's also suffered a whole host of sensor issues over the years we've had it. Annoyingly for her, it's still not as reliable as my MGF considering it's used about the same miles annually.
 
did you know...that rover worked with then rival triumph to make the sd1 cars and sd1 stood for.....special division 1....i won 50 quid of halfords vouchers years ago in a classic car pub quiz..for knowing that...also vauxhall ..got its name from ..lord vaux...who built steam engines at one time in grounds of his mansion...knowns vauxs hall..hence
vauxhall
 
and senator was named after roman hierarchy..ford prefect and consul also was..trivia eh
rolls Royce almost called a car the silver mist...untill a german worker told them it means sh...t..in german ..so it got called ghost
 
well grumpygel....ive only done 8k trouble free so far..one rattle that was exhaust bkt...and ive just had a full winter service,,,new aux belts..fully synthetic oil...but ive no doubt as with all motors ..ill have probs..and when i do..ill ask for help...im big believer in servicing
 

Similar threads