Ouch. Big Bill Ahead I think.

Similar thing happened to one of my Mam's cars, a B reg Escort 1.6 and not a single valve bent! :eek:

They don't build them how they used too :cool:

Hope your lucky though :)

BeatMaster :D
 
iCraig said:
No offence, but I'm going to believe my mate who I know is a qualified car mechanic, than somebody off an internet forum. :)
Click to expand...




<------- A.S.E. certified master mechanic.

What Malachy said is correct. In fact just turning a car over once with the starter with the valve timing out WILL impact ALL the valves. RPM and load mean absolutely NOTHING when it comes to the amount of damage done to the engine due to a dumped timing belt.

Also it just makes sense. As he said, even at idle the camshaft will not immediately come to a stop, and if there is ANY variation between the crank and the cam, (on an interference engine) there is going to be valve impact. On ALL of the valves.

Don't just immediately write off information given on this forum. There are several people on here that I would believe and trust as to thier information one hell of a lot more than even a dealership mechanic. And I have been working on cars (in one way or another) for coming up on 30 years.
 
My dads merc snapped its timing chain at idle and only bent two valves. I would think if it had been running down the motorway at 4.5k rpm then there would have been much more damage.
 
iCraig said:
Again, I know him personally, and for a hell of a lot longer than you :)

I'm not saying you're wrong, just that between two judgements, I'd choose his :)
Click to expand...

Thats quite silly really when you have people in this thread with more knowledge who are more qualified than him telling you he is wrong :)

Is he the same age as you? I get the impression he's hardly head technician at, say, a Mercedes dealer... sounds like he's your age, and brandishes a spanner for a living. There are considerably more authoritative sources on cars than garage workers.
 
[TW]Fox said:
Thats quite silly really when you have people in this thread with more knowledge who are more qualified than him telling you he is wrong :)

Is he the same age as you? I get the impression he's hardly head technician at, say, a Mercedes dealer... sounds like he's your age, and brandishes a spanner for a living. There are considerably more authoritative sources on cars than garage workers.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't consider it silly, just that he provided a detail explanation (which I can't recall off the top of my head) the same as Mickey_D did. Both seem like logical explanations to me, and I'm not saying Mickey is wrong, far from it, it seems to make a little more sense to me. But I'm not a mechanic, so I don't know.

But my friend (28 years old - is a Jaguar mechanic, the head mechanic at that particular dealership) he has also serviced military vehicles in the past.

Just my preference on who I believe has the correct knowledge, thats all. :)
 
Malachy said:
do we have to explain this again........................
750 rpm = 12.5 revs per second , thats 12.5 impacts of valves to piston in 1 second at 750 rpm. It makes no difference if the engine is on idle or at max rpm to how much damage is done, this is an olds wifes tale.
Click to expand...

It could possibly make a difference, at higher RPM the piston will generaly move (very slightly) further up due to the inertial forces taking up more big end/main bearing clearances. I know that egnines have been built with such tight squish clearances that the piston touches the head at high RPM.

However, I totaly agree that if there is a negative clearance sisutation, it makes no difference wether you put your foot on the clutch within 1/2 a second or not. The damage will be done by the very first impact and even if you had the reactions of superman you simply could not stop the engine turning that quickly to prevent any damage.
 
ratface said:
RPM makes a big difference to the amount of damage caused, a faster moving piston has more energy and will cause more piston/valve damage because of this, its not how many times you hit something but how hard that is important. Drop a belt/chain at 10000 RPM and dont expect to find any pistons left either
Click to expand...

That explanation is pretty much what my mechanic friend said I think. He definately mentioned that it wasn't the frequency of the hits, but the power behind each one or something along those lines.
 
I just got the car back today.

9 weeks !

It's running great but I had a major haggle with the garage as it took a ridiculous amount of time. New fan belt, new timing belt, new glow plugs and the head had to come off.
 
I'd expect a whole new engine to take that long to arrive from another country, even if it was delayed. 9 weeks for that sort of work is a very long time!

At least its up and running though :)
 
Nice result mate, £500 well spent imo. :cool:



I remember timing belt snaps all too well, RIP my 1984 XR3i - Snapped 3 in the time I owned it. :eek:
 
djbenjo said:
And lots of new valves I would suppose too? Don't see how it could take 9 weeks. 9 days would be a bit of a push!
Click to expand...

Aye, 5 bent so while the head was off I told him to replace them all as the A4 is my main runabout and it is high mileage so I should get a lot more miles out of the engine.

thebrasso, I did have a big wrangle with the garage for the 9 weeks and as a result I woun't go back. The MR2 has cost me a small fortune in using it for work in that time, it's not what I got it for.

I think a lot of other cars I would have scrapped when I think back to the Pug 1.1 I had and a 1.1 Fiesta, it wouldn't have been worth fixing but I think the Audi was worth it and I know exactly whats been done to it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom