2.5ltr classic's, how much oil do you burn
09 April 2008, 07:44 PM
#243
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: MY 98 STI 4
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You have been very patient with the tuner & the tuner has also given some valid replies, (and some I'd be insulted by) but I have a gut feeling you have been fobbed off. I'd get an independant engine builder to check the tolerances of the piston size to bore sizes.
Also there are people on this thread that do nothing but kiss **** to pretty much every tuner in the business, I'd ignore them & take it further. But, imo although its very interesting reading, a public forum is doing neither your tuner or yourself any good at all
Also there are people on this thread that do nothing but kiss **** to pretty much every tuner in the business, I'd ignore them & take it further. But, imo although its very interesting reading, a public forum is doing neither your tuner or yourself any good at all
Last edited by smokingkills; 09 April 2008 at 08:48 PM.
09 April 2008, 09:10 PM
#244
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Half way up
Posts: 4,791
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Was there any reason for the plugs (page 2) to be so black after so few miles..?
Also, a 35mm (that's nearly and inch and half..!) piece of tape was found behind a main journel..? How, and why hadn't it melted..?
Also, a 35mm (that's nearly and inch and half..!) piece of tape was found behind a main journel..? How, and why hadn't it melted..?
09 April 2008, 10:50 PM
#247
bighead,
You need to realise why some engines (perfectly acceptably) burn oil.
Take a Scoob 2.5L for instance..... one that has been freshly built (standard or otherwise). To understand why it burns oil, is all about it's design and use. The tighter the tolerances of piston fit etc, the less oil it may use. The tighter the tolerances, the more chance you have of nipping a piston...... especially when asking more of an engine, performance wise (so which would you rather have.... I know what I would rather have). It may be deemed unacceptable (by consensus) that an engine consumes oil, but if that was part of it's deisgn and absolutely fine to do so, then that is ok with me. It's when you get a design that should not consume oil, but does. That's when you want to start to worry.
In the 2.5L instance, then one person may not use much oil, but another does. All things being equal (on the same engine and assuming all is ok), it could be perfectly reasoned that person A who does not use oil, does not drive the engine anywhere near as hard as person B. Both scenarios are acceptable, in this "all things being equal" scenario.
It's not always bad, as you need to appreciate the full story.
You need to realise why some engines (perfectly acceptably) burn oil.
Take a Scoob 2.5L for instance..... one that has been freshly built (standard or otherwise). To understand why it burns oil, is all about it's design and use. The tighter the tolerances of piston fit etc, the less oil it may use. The tighter the tolerances, the more chance you have of nipping a piston...... especially when asking more of an engine, performance wise (so which would you rather have.... I know what I would rather have). It may be deemed unacceptable (by consensus) that an engine consumes oil, but if that was part of it's deisgn and absolutely fine to do so, then that is ok with me. It's when you get a design that should not consume oil, but does. That's when you want to start to worry.
In the 2.5L instance, then one person may not use much oil, but another does. All things being equal (on the same engine and assuming all is ok), it could be perfectly reasoned that person A who does not use oil, does not drive the engine anywhere near as hard as person B. Both scenarios are acceptable, in this "all things being equal" scenario.
It's not always bad, as you need to appreciate the full story.
09 April 2008, 10:59 PM
#248
bighead,
You need to realise why some engines (perfectly acceptably) burn oil.
Take a Scoob 2.5L for instance..... one that has been freshly built (standard or otherwise). To understand why it burns oil, is all about it's design and use. The tighter the tolerances of piston fit etc, the less oil it may use. The tighter the tolerances, the more chance you have of nipping a piston...... especially when asking more of an engine, performance wise (so which would you rather have.... I know what I would rather have). It may be deemed unacceptable (by consensus) that an engine consumes oil, but if that was part of it's deisgn and absolutely fine to do so, then that is ok with me. It's when you get a design that should not consume oil, but does. That's when you want to start to worry.
In the 2.5L instance, then one person may not use much oil, but another does. All things being equal (on the same engine and assuming all is ok), it could be perfectly reasoned that person A who does not use oil, does not drive the engine anywhere near as hard as person B. Both scenarios are acceptable, in this "all things being equal" scenario.
It's not always bad, as you need to appreciate the full story.
You need to realise why some engines (perfectly acceptably) burn oil.
Take a Scoob 2.5L for instance..... one that has been freshly built (standard or otherwise). To understand why it burns oil, is all about it's design and use. The tighter the tolerances of piston fit etc, the less oil it may use. The tighter the tolerances, the more chance you have of nipping a piston...... especially when asking more of an engine, performance wise (so which would you rather have.... I know what I would rather have). It may be deemed unacceptable (by consensus) that an engine consumes oil, but if that was part of it's deisgn and absolutely fine to do so, then that is ok with me. It's when you get a design that should not consume oil, but does. That's when you want to start to worry.
In the 2.5L instance, then one person may not use much oil, but another does. All things being equal (on the same engine and assuming all is ok), it could be perfectly reasoned that person A who does not use oil, does not drive the engine anywhere near as hard as person B. Both scenarios are acceptable, in this "all things being equal" scenario.
It's not always bad, as you need to appreciate the full story.
other than that same as my 2.0
ps burning oil is one thing, losing oil is another
Last edited by bighead; 09 April 2008 at 11:03 PM.
09 April 2008, 11:19 PM
#252
MD 321T( engine has run-in, Bob has mapped it twice already )
also you can't really boot it on the public highway as you will run out of roads (even more so in Manchester city centre where I do all my driving )
also you can't really boot it on the public highway as you will run out of roads (even more so in Manchester city centre where I do all my driving
)
Last edited by bighead; 09 April 2008 at 11:22 PM.
09 April 2008, 11:28 PM
#255
Former Sponsor
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Enginetuner.co.uk Plymouth 4wd Dyno Engine machining and building Apexi Ecutek Simtek mapping+more!
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Taking off slightly at a tangent here, but we recently rebuilt a 350 Z engine from a pile of parts supplied to us by a customer. His car was taken to a Nissan dealer with 8000 miles on the clock having run out of oil. He put 2 litres in at 4000 miles, but didn't realise the significance of the heavy oil consumption. The dealer stripped the engine, then refused to pay for anything on the warranty, saying it was his fault he'd run out of oil. After six months of arguing, they gave him his car back in boxes of bits, having also broken the sump, and lost a complete box of parts! considering he bought the car brand new from them, we thought that was a bit off!
We have now rebuilt the engine, with a new crank, one rod and pistons, and it's sweet, which I thought was damn clever of my staff, considering they hadn't seen the inside of a 350Z engine before! We had to have pistons made by JE, as we couldn't buy the correct grade from Nissan.
According to Nissan 800 miles per litre of oil is perfectly acceptable. It turns out practically every major manufacturer has the same policy!
Better read the small print in future before buying a new car!
We have now rebuilt the engine, with a new crank, one rod and pistons, and it's sweet, which I thought was damn clever of my staff, considering they hadn't seen the inside of a 350Z engine before! We had to have pistons made by JE, as we couldn't buy the correct grade from Nissan.
According to Nissan 800 miles per litre of oil is perfectly acceptable. It turns out practically every major manufacturer has the same policy!
Better read the small print in future before buying a new car!
09 April 2008, 11:41 PM
#256
bighead,
You need to realise why some engines (perfectly acceptably) burn oil.
Take a Scoob 2.5L for instance..... one that has been freshly built (standard or otherwise). To understand why it burns oil, is all about it's design and use. The tighter the tolerances of piston fit etc, the less oil it may use. The tighter the tolerances, the more chance you have of nipping a piston...... especially when asking more of an engine, performance wise (so which would you rather have.... I know what I would rather have). It may be deemed unacceptable (by consensus) that an engine consumes oil, but if that was part of it's deisgn and absolutely fine to do so, then that is ok with me. It's when you get a design that should not consume oil, but does. That's when you want to start to worry.
In the 2.5L instance, then one person may not use much oil, but another does. All things being equal (on the same engine and assuming all is ok), it could be perfectly reasoned that person A who does not use oil, does not drive the engine anywhere near as hard as person B. Both scenarios are acceptable, in this "all things being equal" scenario.
It's not always bad, as you need to appreciate the full story.
You need to realise why some engines (perfectly acceptably) burn oil.
Take a Scoob 2.5L for instance..... one that has been freshly built (standard or otherwise). To understand why it burns oil, is all about it's design and use. The tighter the tolerances of piston fit etc, the less oil it may use. The tighter the tolerances, the more chance you have of nipping a piston...... especially when asking more of an engine, performance wise (so which would you rather have.... I know what I would rather have). It may be deemed unacceptable (by consensus) that an engine consumes oil, but if that was part of it's deisgn and absolutely fine to do so, then that is ok with me. It's when you get a design that should not consume oil, but does. That's when you want to start to worry.
In the 2.5L instance, then one person may not use much oil, but another does. All things being equal (on the same engine and assuming all is ok), it could be perfectly reasoned that person A who does not use oil, does not drive the engine anywhere near as hard as person B. Both scenarios are acceptable, in this "all things being equal" scenario.
It's not always bad, as you need to appreciate the full story.
09 April 2008, 11:53 PM
#258
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Northants
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've been sat reading this thread for the last few days now waiting on an outcome. My car has been with Mike and his team for a few weeks now having a rebuild and a few other bits done. I was really confident with them and i have to say i still have the utmost faith in them.
From what i have read i believe cs is probably reacting in the same way a lot of people in his position would...... just blown 20k, done something he maybe wasn't skilled enough to do and is trying to rectify it.
I'm not saying i agree with anything that he has said or done but that he is probably clutching at straws. After all who can afford to lose 20k??
At the end of the day Scooby mania's reputation is being called into question. If i were them,(i have ran a business before) my outlook would be if you do something wrong you admit to it and take it on the chin. People and present/future customers will respect you for it, because word of mouth is the best advertisement any company will have.
I hope that cs and scooby mania can resolve this on a personal level. As previously posted, a public forum will only lead to misinterpretation and judgments from people who only know half the facts.
Will.
From what i have read i believe cs is probably reacting in the same way a lot of people in his position would...... just blown 20k, done something he maybe wasn't skilled enough to do and is trying to rectify it.
I'm not saying i agree with anything that he has said or done but that he is probably clutching at straws. After all who can afford to lose 20k??
At the end of the day Scooby mania's reputation is being called into question. If i were them,(i have ran a business before) my outlook would be if you do something wrong you admit to it and take it on the chin. People and present/future customers will respect you for it, because word of mouth is the best advertisement any company will have.
I hope that cs and scooby mania can resolve this on a personal level. As previously posted, a public forum will only lead to misinterpretation and judgments from people who only know half the facts.
Will.
10 April 2008, 12:46 AM
#259
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Nottingham with 620BHP & 530lb/ft @1.5bar boost on road fuel.
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mark,
Mike is away until Tuesday so I will try to answer some of your questions/statements.
The original quote was not for 500bhp and as such you were quoted for a Ecutek remap. After much discussion (which took place here in our office) you decided to go for 500bhp, this obviously required a few changes to the spec (different rods, turbo etc.). At that time I admit to forgetting to add the stand alone ECU (an extra Ł750) to your build quote. I also pointed out to you that we had never ran a car at 500bhp with a 2.5” exhaust, we agreed to see how it would go, and if need be change to our own 3” system. In the end we fell short of the 500bhp, I phoned you the very same evening from home and we agreed that you would buy our exhaust and we would fit it, remap and re-dyno the car (with no charge to you I might add). The reason for the fuel bill was because you asked us to do 1000mls in your car!?
No I personally didn’t show you around the car. However I spoke to you at great length out in the workshop (not in the office) when you came to collect the car. I told you how to warm the car up and cool it down, I told you to inspect your oil level regularly, especially if you do numerous short journeys, I also told you why short journeys would consume more oil. I warned you about the dangers of driving a 500hp car on the road (especially as you are a young guy and we had more than doubled the power output of your car). You had been sent dozens and dozens of pictures of your car. You were informed of what modifications we had done and why they had been done.
You were over the moon with how the engine bay looked. We had stripped and repainted your manifold (at no charge). If you remember your car came to us on the back of a lorry because you had modified it and couldn’t start it. What you had actually done was hydrolock the engine, brought on I think by painting the inside and outside of your fuel rails with what looked like powder paint! You had also fitted a second dump valve onto the top mount intercooler which was leaking.
We do not do MOT’s. We arranged for your car to be MOT’d at a local station. We have not modified one of your indicators to flash white. Why would we???
I took the decision that the short motor should be disassembled by the machine shop. One of the reasons was because of this thread. They are VERY experienced. They have worked on race winning super bikes to monster tractor-pulling engines. I though it prudent to let them analyse the engine.
We did not “strongly recommended me to stay away”. When you alerted us to the ‘problem’ we told you how busy we were, and that we didn’t have the physical space to house your car. IIRC we had 6 engine builds to complete before we could look at yours. We cannot just ring customers and ask them if they can take there car back for a few days (without an engine!) while we look at yours. As it happens most of the inspection work carried out on your car was actually done at night, out of hours so as not to impact on other jobs.
We photographed everything! We took pictures of all the cam seals, crank seals, inlet ports, exhaust ports, bearings, journals etc. Not one picture shows any evidence whatsoever of the motor either burning oil or leaking oil (apart from where you fitted the aforementioned temp sender).
We usually have more than one engine being built here at any one time. (in the last few weeks we have built 4 500hp engines). There are actually 4 people here who can build engines. Tomorrow for example, we have 2 engines to build.
I would still of recommended fitting an oil temp gauge, so I’m not sure 400hp would have helped you in anyway?
Mark, we are going round in circles. The demise of your engine was caused by an oil leak. If the engine had burnt 4 ltrs of oil in 40 miles you would have had a cloud of smoke a mile long. Your exhaust ports, manifold, turbine housing, turbine wheel and exhaust system are all bone dry. Both yourself and your friend Rob confirmed the car did not burn oil. I think we agree on that?
The cam seals, crank seals, block plugs, head plugs, turbo feed/return, sump mating surface, sump plug, modine, oil filter etc. showed no signs of leaking without question. However, oil was on top of the block, around the bell housing, down the back of the drivers side head and engine subframe.
BTW the piece of insulation tape the machine shop found is actually 5cms long when unravelled. This was located in the oil feed to number 5 main bearing, which is directly below the gallery plug used for temp sensor fitments. I do not believe in this instance the location of this contributed directly to the failure of your engine. If the engine hadn't of lost its oil then yes, it would have caused it to fail eventually (by blocking oil supply to no.5 main & no. 4 big end).
I really am very sorry that you engine has failed, but I hope you do now realize why it failed?
Jase.
Mike is away until Tuesday so I will try to answer some of your questions/statements.
Right at the begining of the build in your quote u forgot to mention a Ł1500 ecu and the fact I needed a complete new exhaust system and a Ł500 petrol bill
The original quote was not for 500bhp and as such you were quoted for a Ecutek remap. After much discussion (which took place here in our office) you decided to go for 500bhp, this obviously required a few changes to the spec (different rods, turbo etc.). At that time I admit to forgetting to add the stand alone ECU (an extra Ł750) to your build quote. I also pointed out to you that we had never ran a car at 500bhp with a 2.5” exhaust, we agreed to see how it would go, and if need be change to our own 3” system. In the end we fell short of the 500bhp, I phoned you the very same evening from home and we agreed that you would buy our exhaust and we would fit it, remap and re-dyno the car (with no charge to you I might add). The reason for the fuel bill was because you asked us to do 1000mls in your car!?
i wans't shown around the car when i picked it up, full stop, the only pictures you sent was because the build took 6months and i wanted to see the car,
No I personally didn’t show you around the car. However I spoke to you at great length out in the workshop (not in the office) when you came to collect the car. I told you how to warm the car up and cool it down, I told you to inspect your oil level regularly, especially if you do numerous short journeys, I also told you why short journeys would consume more oil. I warned you about the dangers of driving a 500hp car on the road (especially as you are a young guy and we had more than doubled the power output of your car). You had been sent dozens and dozens of pictures of your car. You were informed of what modifications we had done and why they had been done.
do not acuse me of lying, i did not make this up, you did not appologise once for the state of the car when i recieved it back, the response was, the mot never picked it up so therefor it was already there, well if so why is the front indicator white, its an instant fail...
the alternator bolt had sheered off on the way home, and the belt was slipping for the last 10miles of the journey,
the alternator bolt had sheered off on the way home, and the belt was slipping for the last 10miles of the journey,
You were over the moon with how the engine bay looked. We had stripped and repainted your manifold (at no charge). If you remember your car came to us on the back of a lorry because you had modified it and couldn’t start it. What you had actually done was hydrolock the engine, brought on I think by painting the inside and outside of your fuel rails with what looked like powder paint! You had also fitted a second dump valve onto the top mount intercooler which was leaking.
We do not do MOT’s. We arranged for your car to be MOT’d at a local station. We have not modified one of your indicators to flash white. Why would we???
i have recieved photos, none of them are of the strip down as mike did not carry the strip down himself, could i just ask why you never?
I took the decision that the short motor should be disassembled by the machine shop. One of the reasons was because of this thread. They are VERY experienced. They have worked on race winning super bikes to monster tractor-pulling engines. I though it prudent to let them analyse the engine.
you strongly recommended me to stay away why you carried out the strip saying YOU would take photos of it, however you haven't,
We did not “strongly recommended me to stay away”. When you alerted us to the ‘problem’ we told you how busy we were, and that we didn’t have the physical space to house your car. IIRC we had 6 engine builds to complete before we could look at yours. We cannot just ring customers and ask them if they can take there car back for a few days (without an engine!) while we look at yours. As it happens most of the inspection work carried out on your car was actually done at night, out of hours so as not to impact on other jobs.
We photographed everything! We took pictures of all the cam seals, crank seals, inlet ports, exhaust ports, bearings, journals etc. Not one picture shows any evidence whatsoever of the motor either burning oil or leaking oil (apart from where you fitted the aforementioned temp sender).
im confused, i asked you a while ago, WHO built the engine itself, your reply was YOU, jase and mark, and it was done 'in house' now hoever you sent the engine elsewhere to get it striped down?..
We usually have more than one engine being built here at any one time. (in the last few weeks we have built 4 500hp engines). There are actually 4 people here who can build engines. Tomorrow for example, we have 2 engines to build.
i don't see where or why i have to appologise,
yes you offered an easy way out of this, which was to take apart the gearbox, turbo engine, and settle for a 'cheaper' build, maybe i should have stayed with my original quote of 14k for 400bhp?
yes you offered an easy way out of this, which was to take apart the gearbox, turbo engine, and settle for a 'cheaper' build, maybe i should have stayed with my original quote of 14k for 400bhp?
I would still of recommended fitting an oil temp gauge, so I’m not sure 400hp would have helped you in anyway?
im still yet to see why in 40 miles i lost 4 ltrs of oil with out a trace, the oil would be everywhere yes?, well i only see it in the immediate area of the sensor, which as stated had leaked before i tried to re-tape it, i still lost 1 1/2 to 2 litres before i touched the car????
Mark, we are going round in circles. The demise of your engine was caused by an oil leak. If the engine had burnt 4 ltrs of oil in 40 miles you would have had a cloud of smoke a mile long. Your exhaust ports, manifold, turbine housing, turbine wheel and exhaust system are all bone dry. Both yourself and your friend Rob confirmed the car did not burn oil. I think we agree on that?
The cam seals, crank seals, block plugs, head plugs, turbo feed/return, sump mating surface, sump plug, modine, oil filter etc. showed no signs of leaking without question. However, oil was on top of the block, around the bell housing, down the back of the drivers side head and engine subframe.
BTW the piece of insulation tape the machine shop found is actually 5cms long when unravelled. This was located in the oil feed to number 5 main bearing, which is directly below the gallery plug used for temp sensor fitments. I do not believe in this instance the location of this contributed directly to the failure of your engine. If the engine hadn't of lost its oil then yes, it would have caused it to fail eventually (by blocking oil supply to no.5 main & no. 4 big end).
I really am very sorry that you engine has failed, but I hope you do now realize why it failed?
Jase.
10 April 2008, 01:30 PM
#261
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Half way up
Posts: 4,791
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mark,
Mike is away until Tuesday so I will try to answer some of your questions/statements.
The original quote was not for 500bhp and as such you were quoted for a Ecutek remap. After much discussion (which took place here in our office) you decided to go for 500bhp, this obviously required a few changes to the spec (different rods, turbo etc.). At that time I admit to forgetting to add the stand alone ECU (an extra Ł750) to your build quote. I also pointed out to you that we had never ran a car at 500bhp with a 2.5” exhaust, we agreed to see how it would go, and if need be change to our own 3” system. In the end we fell short of the 500bhp, I phoned you the very same evening from home and we agreed that you would buy our exhaust and we would fit it, remap and re-dyno the car (with no charge to you I might add). The reason for the fuel bill was because you asked us to do 1000mls in your car!?
No I personally didn’t show you around the car. However I spoke to you at great length out in the workshop (not in the office) when you came to collect the car. I told you how to warm the car up and cool it down, I told you to inspect your oil level regularly, especially if you do numerous short journeys, I also told you why short journeys would consume more oil. I warned you about the dangers of driving a 500hp car on the road (especially as you are a young guy and we had more than doubled the power output of your car). You had been sent dozens and dozens of pictures of your car. You were informed of what modifications we had done and why they had been done.
You were over the moon with how the engine bay looked. We had stripped and repainted your manifold (at no charge). If you remember your car came to us on the back of a lorry because you had modified it and couldn’t start it. What you had actually done was hydrolock the engine, brought on I think by painting the inside and outside of your fuel rails with what looked like powder paint! You had also fitted a second dump valve onto the top mount intercooler which was leaking.
We do not do MOT’s. We arranged for your car to be MOT’d at a local station. We have not modified one of your indicators to flash white. Why would we???
I took the decision that the short motor should be disassembled by the machine shop. One of the reasons was because of this thread. They are VERY experienced. They have worked on race winning super bikes to monster tractor-pulling engines. I though it prudent to let them analyse the engine.
We did not “strongly recommended me to stay away”. When you alerted us to the ‘problem’ we told you how busy we were, and that we didn’t have the physical space to house your car. IIRC we had 6 engine builds to complete before we could look at yours. We cannot just ring customers and ask them if they can take there car back for a few days (without an engine!) while we look at yours. As it happens most of the inspection work carried out on your car was actually done at night, out of hours so as not to impact on other jobs.
We photographed everything! We took pictures of all the cam seals, crank seals, inlet ports, exhaust ports, bearings, journals etc. Not one picture shows any evidence whatsoever of the motor either burning oil or leaking oil (apart from where you fitted the aforementioned temp sender).
We usually have more than one engine being built here at any one time. (in the last few weeks we have built 4 500hp engines). There are actually 4 people here who can build engines. Tomorrow for example, we have 2 engines to build.
I would still of recommended fitting an oil temp gauge, so I’m not sure 400hp would have helped you in anyway?
Mark, we are going round in circles. The demise of your engine was caused by an oil leak. If the engine had burnt 4 ltrs of oil in 40 miles you would have had a cloud of smoke a mile long. Your exhaust ports, manifold, turbine housing, turbine wheel and exhaust system are all bone dry. Both yourself and your friend Rob confirmed the car did not burn oil. I think we agree on that?
The cam seals, crank seals, block plugs, head plugs, turbo feed/return, sump mating surface, sump plug, modine, oil filter etc. showed no signs of leaking without question. However, oil was on top of the block, around the bell housing, down the back of the drivers side head and engine subframe.
BTW the piece of insulation tape the machine shop found is actually 5cms long when unravelled. This was located in the oil feed to number 5 main bearing, which is directly below the gallery plug used for temp sensor fitments. I do not believe in this instance the location of this contributed directly to the failure of your engine. If the engine hadn't of lost its oil then yes, it would have caused it to fail eventually (by blocking oil supply to no.5 main & no. 4 big end).
I really am very sorry that you engine has failed, but I hope you do now realize why it failed?
Jase.
Mike is away until Tuesday so I will try to answer some of your questions/statements.
The original quote was not for 500bhp and as such you were quoted for a Ecutek remap. After much discussion (which took place here in our office) you decided to go for 500bhp, this obviously required a few changes to the spec (different rods, turbo etc.). At that time I admit to forgetting to add the stand alone ECU (an extra Ł750) to your build quote. I also pointed out to you that we had never ran a car at 500bhp with a 2.5” exhaust, we agreed to see how it would go, and if need be change to our own 3” system. In the end we fell short of the 500bhp, I phoned you the very same evening from home and we agreed that you would buy our exhaust and we would fit it, remap and re-dyno the car (with no charge to you I might add). The reason for the fuel bill was because you asked us to do 1000mls in your car!?
No I personally didn’t show you around the car. However I spoke to you at great length out in the workshop (not in the office) when you came to collect the car. I told you how to warm the car up and cool it down, I told you to inspect your oil level regularly, especially if you do numerous short journeys, I also told you why short journeys would consume more oil. I warned you about the dangers of driving a 500hp car on the road (especially as you are a young guy and we had more than doubled the power output of your car). You had been sent dozens and dozens of pictures of your car. You were informed of what modifications we had done and why they had been done.
You were over the moon with how the engine bay looked. We had stripped and repainted your manifold (at no charge). If you remember your car came to us on the back of a lorry because you had modified it and couldn’t start it. What you had actually done was hydrolock the engine, brought on I think by painting the inside and outside of your fuel rails with what looked like powder paint! You had also fitted a second dump valve onto the top mount intercooler which was leaking.
We do not do MOT’s. We arranged for your car to be MOT’d at a local station. We have not modified one of your indicators to flash white. Why would we???
I took the decision that the short motor should be disassembled by the machine shop. One of the reasons was because of this thread. They are VERY experienced. They have worked on race winning super bikes to monster tractor-pulling engines. I though it prudent to let them analyse the engine.
We did not “strongly recommended me to stay away”. When you alerted us to the ‘problem’ we told you how busy we were, and that we didn’t have the physical space to house your car. IIRC we had 6 engine builds to complete before we could look at yours. We cannot just ring customers and ask them if they can take there car back for a few days (without an engine!) while we look at yours. As it happens most of the inspection work carried out on your car was actually done at night, out of hours so as not to impact on other jobs.
We photographed everything! We took pictures of all the cam seals, crank seals, inlet ports, exhaust ports, bearings, journals etc. Not one picture shows any evidence whatsoever of the motor either burning oil or leaking oil (apart from where you fitted the aforementioned temp sender).
We usually have more than one engine being built here at any one time. (in the last few weeks we have built 4 500hp engines). There are actually 4 people here who can build engines. Tomorrow for example, we have 2 engines to build.
I would still of recommended fitting an oil temp gauge, so I’m not sure 400hp would have helped you in anyway?
Mark, we are going round in circles. The demise of your engine was caused by an oil leak. If the engine had burnt 4 ltrs of oil in 40 miles you would have had a cloud of smoke a mile long. Your exhaust ports, manifold, turbine housing, turbine wheel and exhaust system are all bone dry. Both yourself and your friend Rob confirmed the car did not burn oil. I think we agree on that?
The cam seals, crank seals, block plugs, head plugs, turbo feed/return, sump mating surface, sump plug, modine, oil filter etc. showed no signs of leaking without question. However, oil was on top of the block, around the bell housing, down the back of the drivers side head and engine subframe.
BTW the piece of insulation tape the machine shop found is actually 5cms long when unravelled. This was located in the oil feed to number 5 main bearing, which is directly below the gallery plug used for temp sensor fitments. I do not believe in this instance the location of this contributed directly to the failure of your engine. If the engine hadn't of lost its oil then yes, it would have caused it to fail eventually (by blocking oil supply to no.5 main & no. 4 big end).
I really am very sorry that you engine has failed, but I hope you do now realize why it failed?
Jase.
Someone who has no practical knowledge rightly employs someone to build his car.
Then after spending Ł20k starts to mess..!
Why when you have no idea what your doing and after spending so much..? Lol, didn't the previous project wake you up to the dangers of playing with something like an engine when you're clearly out of your depth..? Painting the insides of the fuel rails FFS..!
There's not much else to say, just that it's a lesson to all..!
Edited to add: Sorry for the lack of punctuation..
Last edited by jasonius; 10 April 2008 at 05:30 PM.
11 April 2008, 08:16 PM
#264
i had a rebuild done by sm/area 52 and about two weeks later i got a call off mike telling me that they had identified a problem on another car that had the same pistons as mine and it would need to come back! at this point mine did not have a fault and as said to me may never develope the fault but just to be sure they stripped my engine and rebuilt it at no cost to me fitting new pistons and bearings resizing bore to piston ect,ect and i observbed it in various stages of the build as i only live 5 mins away i often pop in for advice and a coffee and a nicer more helpfull bunch you could not wish to meet! and they wont make you spend money on things that arnt necessary as ive experienced with other performance tuners! there arnt many out there that would have done that at there own cost of that i am sure!
ill expect a cheque in the post mike
ill expect a cheque in the post mike
Last edited by ditchmyster; 11 April 2008 at 08:19 PM.
12 April 2008, 09:15 PM
#265
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Half way up
Posts: 4,791
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i had a rebuild done by sm/area 52 and about two weeks later i got a call off mike telling me that they had identified a problem on another car that had the same pistons as mine and it would need to come back! at this point mine did not have a fault and as said to me may never develope the fault but just to be sure they stripped my engine and rebuilt it at no cost to me fitting new pistons and bearings resizing bore to piston ect,ect and i observbed it in various stages of the build as i only live 5 mins away i often pop in for advice and a coffee and a nicer more helpfull bunch you could not wish to meet! and they wont make you spend money on things that arnt necessary as ive experienced with other performance tuners! there arnt many out there that would have done that at there own cost of that i am sure!
ill expect a cheque in the post mike
ill expect a cheque in the post mike
Also good to hear..
14 April 2008, 06:14 PM
#266
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Nottingham with 620BHP & 530lb/ft @1.5bar boost on road fuel.
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the kind words Mr ditchmyster
Interesting is not the word I would use
The problem stemmed from the use of so called 'custom’ pistons that were supposed to be the bees knees. We had actually ran out of the normal forged pistons we use and with a lead time of around 2 weeks to restock we decided to use 2 sets of UK sourced ‘custom’ pistons to complete these particular builds (they actually cost us more than what we charged the customers!). Due to a woeful design fault we ended up having to pull both engines and had to replace all the pistons (and a liner)
The supplier actually dismissed our findings as ‘impossible’ and even went so far as to say if the 'fault' were true they wouldn’t exhibit the problems we experienced! Yeah right... so much for bedroom box shifters who don’t build engines!
We have since become aware of numerous other installs using these ‘custom’ pistons which exhibit the same symptoms. BTW a year on and we still have yet to be reimbursed
Ho-hum.
Jase.
Interesting is not the word I would use
The problem stemmed from the use of so called 'custom’ pistons that were supposed to be the bees knees. We had actually ran out of the normal forged pistons we use and with a lead time of around 2 weeks to restock we decided to use 2 sets of UK sourced ‘custom’ pistons to complete these particular builds (they actually cost us more than what we charged the customers!). Due to a woeful design fault we ended up having to pull both engines and had to replace all the pistons (and a liner)
The supplier actually dismissed our findings as ‘impossible’ and even went so far as to say if the 'fault' were true they wouldn’t exhibit the problems we experienced! Yeah right... so much for bedroom box shifters who don’t build engines!
We have since become aware of numerous other installs using these ‘custom’ pistons which exhibit the same symptoms. BTW a year on and we still have yet to be reimbursed
Ho-hum.Jase.
14 April 2008, 09:47 PM
#267
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: throwing pieces oot a 20 storey flat
Posts: 1,845
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
in the beginning i thought this would turn out bad for the tuner involved ie scoobymania but with the proper arguments and facts given i think it might be more beneficial,id certainly consider using them in the future,never heard much about them before now but the last few pages of rational thought (a first on Snet) show they do actually know what they are doing and taking about.But was the op billed for the removal and inspection of the failed engine,as i know it cost a bit to remove and refit mine when it last went **** up.
15 April 2008, 01:16 PM
#268
Have I missed something ? Cash strapped OP can't afford to send a car via transported to SM, but is able to have a nice Egyptian holiday?
My sympathy was there to start with, but wore off as the full story emerged.
On the other hand....
4-5 years ago, 500 hp was the stuff of legends. It was arrived at through considered trial and error. The tuner was someone who had experience of engines, their maintenance and how to monitor vital signs.
It now appears that Joe Public can wave a wad and get an engine outputting TWICE the designed output without any questions asked or assessing customer aptitude.
The signs were there for SM to see in the form of a knackered car arriving for repair.
I hope both sides learn a lesson out of this.
Nick
My sympathy was there to start with, but wore off as the full story emerged.
On the other hand....
4-5 years ago, 500 hp was the stuff of legends. It was arrived at through considered trial and error. The tuner was someone who had experience of engines, their maintenance and how to monitor vital signs.
It now appears that Joe Public can wave a wad and get an engine outputting TWICE the designed output without any questions asked or assessing customer aptitude.
The signs were there for SM to see in the form of a knackered car arriving for repair.
I hope both sides learn a lesson out of this.
Nick
16 April 2008, 10:38 AM
#269
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Nottingham with 620BHP & 530lb/ft @1.5bar boost on road fuel.
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks exvaux, we have more PM's regarding this thread (and also the dodgy custom pistons) than any other subject!
Nick, I see where you are coming from, but we are not a golf club
Banny, I find your post to appear less than neutral. You were quick to judge earlier in the thread when you had only read one inaccurate side of the story, yet now both sides of the story have been presented you claim no one knows the story and therefore no one should comment
Jase.
Nick, I see where you are coming from, but we are not a golf club
Banny, I find your post to appear less than neutral. You were quick to judge earlier in the thread when you had only read one inaccurate side of the story, yet now both sides of the story have been presented you claim no one knows the story and therefore no one should comment
Jase.
16 April 2008, 11:37 AM
#270
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Nottingham with 620BHP & 530lb/ft @1.5bar boost on road fuel.
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We don't want you to do anything at all for us?
We know it's gone to Pennine, as we had to arrange its delivery to them.
We already have the full story, it's not a "murder mystery" where someone thinks other than what there are facts to support?
We also think it prudent to get a second opinion and have stated so openly to the owner, who has no doubt received multiple conspiracy theories from people with allegiances elsewhere who would love it to be something that it is not, almost certainly none of whom have any engine build experience other than what they've read off the internet.
Our conclusions are based entirely on provable and documented evidentially supported facts, and our methodology has been comprehensive and meticulous beyond reproach. Have we missed something? It's possible I suppose, but highly unlikely.
There are no grey areas as has already been fairly widely acknowledged. Having not seen the car, but having ALL of the facts as has everybody here now, I don't know why it is that you appear to want it to be something other than it is?
Maybe Diana was murdered as well, Maybe JFK actually committed Suicide and we didn't land on the moon huh?
Mike.