Nikasil Issues

[Brakebuster]

the VIN number has nothing to do which generation engine that was fitted to the V8 , it is only rough guide to where the changeover may have been , as there was no 'use up all the nikasil engines before fitting a steel one' policy introduced,

there is even a distinct possibility that a later vin car then a steel lined engine could have a nikasil one fitted....

the only real way is the engine number,

there are several lists on the forums showing the actual cut off date and time of day of the last nikasil engine, any thing after this engine will be steel

BB

[joejag308]

Mr Dixon, sorry to be formal but i do not have your home area or your first name.........however re your own enquiry on the compression issue i have had information which may be of value to you and others on the subject.
Jaguar issued a rider to the vin number ref for Nikasil enquiries
they say......Jaguar stopped using Nikasil from the 2000 model year which they started manufacturing in Sept 1999.
It is widely believed and accepted that if the last 6 places of the vin number start with the letter "F" then the vehicle does not have Nikasil and is fitted with steel liners.
However the rider does say any numbers after the "F" that come under the engine number scrutiny and say it could still be Nikasil but are not considered to be "at risk" due to the government removal of sulpher from fuel. Your problem is not nessesary a Nikasil problem there is another test reffering to compressions which most main dealer and specialist garages are aware of......this is one i would reccomend you have a look at first.
If you could send me a PM or phone me re your home area i may be able to put you in touch depending on distance to someone who would answer your particular compression problem. Compression problems do not automatically involve Nikasil........Joe

[geo912]

There have been many "false dawns" with regard to the Nikasil issue
and Jaguar engines in particular. My impression ( could be wrong ) but too much spurious information well intended no doubt posted on information sites like this one has probably added to the confusion. Various methods are prumulgated to advise the seeker how to obtain a definitive answer to wether their motor, if purchased as a used vehicle has the dreaded Nikasil engine. Like you my X308 has an engine number prefixed by the F symbol, F19323 and although a late 2000 MY it still has a Nikasil engine. Fortunately so far no problem.
There is an excellent article by Garreth Coomber ( who should know what he is talking about ) in the April 2006 Jaguar World monthly magazine which I recommend you to read, it gives the most accurate account of the problem and a fairly detailed list of the vehicles involved.
Unfortunately non of this helps you if you engine is suffering.
Geo912

[Brakebuster]

you say your engine number starts with n F , is this correct or is it the VIN sequence that starts with a F ,

as its only the actual engine code, and not the VIN that is the definitive answer

BB

[ptjs1]

This might be just more noise to the debate but I've always understood it to be a fairly clear issue relating to either the age of the car or the age of the engine.

If you've got a VIN number ending Fxxxxx (as opposed to 8xxxxx) then you MIGHT have a nikasil engine BUT you're not deemed to be at risk because the sulphur level of fuel in the UK had dropped to 150ppm before the car was built

or

If you've got an ENGINE numbered later than 0008181043 (indicating built after 10:43 on 18th August 2000) then you've got a steel-lined engine anyway

Paul

[daveji]

I have reproduced the 2006 Jaguar World magazine article as a "sticky" in this section.
Those interested see "Nikasil Engines--Which cars are at risk ?"

[geo912]

Sorry to mislead Br. Bu. you are correct it is my vin no. that contains the F letter, whole vin is SAJAC13D3YKF19323, engine no. KCAB060442. I have been advised by Jaguar that I do indeed have a Nikasil engine but that the sulphur problem had been eradicated by the time my motor came into use. geo912

[ptjs1]

Geo912,

As you say, Nikasil engines in F-series Vins are deemed to be not at risk because of the timing of when sulphur was reduced.

However, that looks like a strange engine number that you've quoted. XJ8 engines have 10 numeric digits in their sequence indicating the year, month, day, hour, minute. eg 0008181043 = 10:43 on 18th August 2000. You seem to have a strange number structure. Are you sure it's correct?

Paul

[geo912]

ptjs1. Yes that is the engine number according to to Registration Certificate. Odd isn't it. would you know where to locate the number on the engine, had a cursory look without success, thanks geo912

[springelec]

Gentlemen,

I've just joined today and read with interest everyone's comments about the Nikasil problem.

I bought an XK8 about three years ago and like everyone else, studied the problems before commiting to purchase.

One of the Nikasil details I learned was that it only affected cars that performed short journeys, i.e. City cars that constantly stop, start etc.

The key detail was that these cars were seldom allowed to get up to proper running temp and breathe properly. Cold cylinder water residue combined with the high sulpher in 1990's fuel, created sulphuric acid which attacked the Nikasil lining when the car was stationary.

Jag and BMW failed to spot this flaw in Nikasil engines because they were more interested in long term fatigue tests which always got the engine breathing properly, up to temperature and burned off any residual water and sulpher.

So if your car is a Nikasil model, but used for motorway work, or summer holidays etc, anything but lots of short journeys, the chances are it's OK.

Having said that, if there is any doubt, there is no substitute for a pressure test and the 29L/min (max) test is Jag's own bench mark figure.

The further away from this number, the better, i.e. smaller pressure figures are good.

I'm reliving this experience as I'm interested in getting a X308 4L XJ8. I'm also reading lots about timing chain tensioners and trying to get a full appreciation of any other XJ8 bugs.

Any advice where to find a good one would be appreciated.

Thanks

Springelec

[springelec]

Hi everyone,

Just wanted to post David Mark's opinion about what constitutes a successful Nikasil pressure test.

I reproduced the perceived wisdom in an earlier bulletin and quoted 29Litres/min as the pass/fail criterion for a Nikasil engine.

However after recently discussing this subject with David Marks, he reckoned the pass/failure figure should be 15 Litres/min.

If David's figure is more accurate, it's easy to see why Jaguar set the bench mark so high. They wanted to reduce their financial liability passing as many Nikasil cars as possible.

As was, the Nikasil problem nearly broke Jaguar, so 29 Litres/min was probably the highest figure they thought they could get away with, without spooking the Jaguar buying public and causing mass panic and recalls.

These notes are my opinion and not based upon any hard evidence, but as an Engineer myself, I can almost imagine with perfect clarity the damage limitation meetings that would have been held at Jaguar back in the late nineties.

Springelec

[Brakebuster]

i have an original Nikasil 4 ltr engine in my 99 XJ8 Sovereign , a few years ago it ' passed ' a blow-by test with a reading of 19 ltr/min

this engine is still very strong after 106k miles, and compression is great , and after fitting my new ECM the emission test were negligible

peeps can talk and talk all day long about this issue , but a lot of it is supposition, and fear of buying a bad-un , this brings prices down , as no body wants a ' bad-un' ,

dont be afraid, just buy the best you can

BB

[rtddci]

MY 1998 3.2 has now reached 60,000 miles on it's original engine. Because of the scare over the nikasil issue I always use premium grade fuel (Shell V power or Tesco premium) and had a Jaguar pressure test. So far so good. Had a dealer quote for £1500 to resolve issue. I was advised by an independent to leave it until I heard rattling noises.
I had one scare when I had to move the car a short distance and turned off. Bad move. Wouldn't start again and Green Flag lift to dealers. Probably knew before I did that MOT had run out! I now ensure that I warm engine thoroughly before turning off.
I only do about 2000 miles a year. Car is garaged with battery on trickle maintenance charge. Taken for run at least once a month. Would it still be advisable to have it serviced yearly?

[joejag308]

rtddci.........if you want to keep your service history intact and up to date your service book needs to be stamped up to date by a recognised Jaguar specialist or main dealer........even if you only have few miles on the clock annually, to get this a service has to be conducted on either miles done or time and age spent........i had the same problem.......but if you are not bothered about your service history then you own judgement re servicing is down to your own discretion.
Have you checked to see if your engine is indeed a Nikasil lined engine? i would be more concerned with the timing chain tensioner problem myself.
Find your nearest jaguar specialist in your recomended suppliers list and call in and have a chat with him.........Joe