They blew my engine up on test.

kengill

kengill

Well-Known Member
Joined
12 Sep 2005
Messages
1,319
Location
Me Cambridgeshire. Boat east coast.
Visit site
When the mechanic kindly tested my engine the other day he succeeded in poking a connecting rod - complete with gudgeon pin through the side of the block.

As it was in his professional care - he having just fitted a new cylinder head to cure a misfire - do I have a reasonable claim against him for a new engine?

Oh I forgot to mention that he did not consider continuously loosing coolant through the filler cap indicative of a blown head gasket.

Opinions please.
 
It would see likely that the engine was terminally sick before he started testing. You would be hard put to prove him negligent
 
ehmmm, if he connected the con rod to the cylinder head then there is something oh so very wrong, idont understand your reply lizzie
 
You say he fitted a new cylinder head. Did he replace the head gasket as well? I assume that he would have and if so, the fact that coolant was rapidly disappearing would indicate that water was getting into the cylinder head. I'm just a layman, but with a reduced area for the piston to go up into if the coolant was there, it just makes sense that that was the reason for the conrod to snap and come out of the casing. On that basis, the mechanic must be liable.
 
I think I agree with other posts but we need more information......
If the engine was in fact running before he started working on it, and if the water being blown out of the filler was only afterwards, then it looks as if he has assembled something wrongly, not tightened the head down properly, or fitted maybe the wrong cylinder head gasket for the engine causing a water leak into the cylinder. I do agree it sounds like a hydraulic lock. We can only guess. Either way and independent "expert" should be able to determine on strip down if the mechanic caused it. In which case he is liable if he did. Getting him to accept that liability may be difficult but with evidence from an expert witness you could persue a claim against him in the small claims court. The "expert" however will need to be a qualified marine engineer, or such like and be credible to the court. Either way if the same mechanic strips it down before agreeing liability to put it right you will have lost your evidence.
A further thought... You don't say what engine, but who supplied the new cylinder head, and are you sure it is the correct one, assuming that it is in fact new as you say and not a recon job? Either way the mechanic is liable for not having checked, but with some series engines, the "wrong" head will still fit!
 
You didn't state what type of engine you have, if its an early Volvo eg MD11/17 with seperate cylinders and he has removed the cylinder at some stage its essential that you measure the cyl block height at TDC as there are different thickness shims that go under the cylinder to get the correct height so the piston doesn't rise higher than the cyl block. Also the copper injector bushing needs to be ground flat if replaced as it protrudes through the cyl head at 45 degrees and will hit the piston at TDC if not ground to match the cyl head face.
 
Absolutely! Thats not the only engine with detailed fitting work to do when fitting a new c/h either. That's why I asked what engine it was...
 
Here I must confess 'twas my car engine and the engine in question one ford 130 ps tdci engine.

The car had developed a misfire just before service and they were instructed to eliminate the misfire. Their first port of call was to suggest that it was an injector that had failed so they got one of those £250 + VAT each and swapped it around the engine - but found no resolution. They then thought it might be a head gasket and stripped the head revealing a big leak between cylinders, this necessitated a new head, which they fitted and then took the car out on test. On test the piston in No 3 cylinder - the cylinder with the misfire - broke in half releasing the connetcing rod which then flailed around punching a large hole in the side of the bock with the connecting rod.

I reckon that the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 applies to this and that I should be able to have a good claim under Section 13- use of appropriate skill and section 4 supply of good quality products.
 
Were they back street artists?

I ask because you dont guess whats up, expect a customer to pay and swop bits around.

They obviously havent got the ability to plug it into a laptop and run a diagnostic.which would have shown any probs with the ecu amongst other things

So they stuck a 'new' head on? and new timing belt etc etc?
belt could have let go, either way ,on a modern engine failures like this dont just happen.

Mike
 
You may have a battle on your hands in proving negligence by the repairing garage, also it is not clear exactly what happened.
You say that the engine developed a misfire prior to a service, so clearly there was already a problem albeit cause unknown. You say that there was a big leak between cylinders. This would cause a misfire on two cylinders not just No 3 as indicated. It is not clear as to whether the misfire had disappeared ater fitment of a new head and gasket. If it had then the garage would think that the fault had been fixed and the final part of roadtesting to check operation would be correct. However if the misfire was still present then the vehicle should not have been driven. It is possible that a con-rod wa bent and weakened by the initil ingress of water across two cylinders. Did the garage measure the piston heights as part of the diagnosis?
I would have to say however that had the piston heights had shown a possible bent con-rod then a new engine may have been a cost effective repair in any case.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Were they back street artists?

,on a modern engine failures like this dont just happen.

Mike

[/ QUOTE ]

Engines old or new will fail if water is in the cylinder, It only requires a teaspoon full to cause problems on a diesel. Hence so many failed engines after drivers have failed to slow down in flood water and water entering the intake.
By the way although modern engines are computer controlled it does not follow tha all faults are established by plugging in a diagnostic machine. Underneath all the covers it is still mechanical
 
[ QUOTE ]
Here I must confess 'twas my car engine and the engine in question one ford 130 ps tdci engine.

The car had developed a misfire just before service and they were instructed to eliminate the misfire. Their first port of call was to suggest that it was an injector that had failed so they got one of those £250 + VAT each and swapped it around the engine - but found no resolution. They then thought it might be a head gasket and stripped the head revealing a big leak between cylinders, this necessitated a new head, which they fitted and then took the car out on test. On test the piston in No 3 cylinder - the cylinder with the misfire - broke in half releasing the connetcing rod which then flailed around punching a large hole in the side of the bock with the connecting rod.

I reckon that the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 applies to this and that I should be able to have a good claim under Section 13- use of appropriate skill and section 4 supply of good quality products.

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't say whether the cooling system was pressurising before or after the head replacement. If after, then poor workmanship. The head would be of good quality being new?

Why didn't they just swap the existing injectors around to see if the misfire moved?
WDT do a compression test?

However they arrived at the diagnosis they did find the head was U/S and realised it needed a new one ( it could have been repaired!)
However having found the "fault" they had no reason to strip the engine to see if ant pistons had been damaged - why would they? Top end problem found which explained the misfire.

I wonder what they have offered to do/will offer to do. Realistically, they had no reason to suspect that a piston would come apart - fortunately it let go on a test rather than 200 miles from home in the wee sma' hours.

If they charge you for a short motor but fit it complete with the new head (for which you are liable to pay + cam belt + gaskets + oil, filter and coolant) but only charge you the labour for fitting a new "complete" engine then that's a fair deal for you.
You are not liable to pay for the injector.
They can't be held liable for a fault which was no part of the original problem - cracked piston.

FWIW - 25 years on a complaints committee dealing with exactly this type of problem.
Please let me know how this progresses.
If you want some detailed advice don't be shy about asking me. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
 
Thanks for that. They didn't mention any piston height measurements even after they had the head off and they also apparently thought of a sticking ring so to check that they would of necessity have to have carried out the full set of tdc and bdc measurements.

Another one for the letter!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top