Garage wrecked my Range Rover engine… please help

[BricktopST205]

Gericho said:

That is a logical fallacy. It doesn't matter how someone pays for a car, or how expensive it is, it is not an foregone conclusion that they should expect a catastrophic breakdown at any point.

If you buy a large expensive house on a huge mortgage and you roof comes off in a storm, shall we blame you for not expecting that to happen?

That is a silly analogy because you have the insurance to cover that eventuality.

For example you buy a house with a mortgage and you a) get insurance to cover you in these sort of things and b) get life insurance to cover you in the case of death or serious illness that renders you unable to work. It is actually why it is law to have house insurance so these things do not happen.

There is far too much ignorance in this country without consequence that these kind of people never learn from their mistakes but in this case I guess she will.

Outstanding finance of 28k on a Range Rover which I guess she paid close to nothing on the deposit. Then doesn't think that on a car that would have retailed around the 80k+ mark to not get any sort of warranty on it, especially with it being a JLR product! This is madness in itself. I wonder what the service history is like if it even had any!

[Acuity30]

Ya know what they say about a fool and his money. Driving a car with a knackered timing chain is room temp IQ.

[SturdyHSV]

poppopbangbang said:

It's likely jumped timing on one bank due to the slack chains, the "running like a tractor" was where the damage had already occured, likely a bent valve/s

They'll have wanted to compression test it to confirm this.

Unfortunately one valve will have broken as a result of continuing to run it, it will have locked up due to the remains of this valve stopping the piston in the cylinder it dropped in reaching TDC.

It was already a head off job by the time it got there and likely an engine given the probable damage to the piston crown in the failed cylinder. Continuing to run it for diagnostics or any other reason has increased the amount of damage present once the head/s was/were off but it would have been rebuild or replace time regardless the second it started misfiring.


Edited to add: Well that post was mostly pointless then

InitialDave said:

If everyone is telling the truth, it's likely that rotating the engine backwards has skipped the chain a couple of teeth, yeah.

I don't know these engines specifically, but chain tensioners are normally putting pressure on the non-drive side of the chain. If you turn the crank in reverse, the chain straightens out on the non drive side, pushing back against the tensioner - if the valvetrain is already damaged, the tension will be higher, and the chain will straighten/push back the tensioner more before the cam moves.

Trouble is, while this is happening, the crank is feeding more chain round to the drive side, and particularly if it's already loose/stretched, it can bunch up enough that when you then try and rotate the engine the right way, it skips a few teeth before taking up the slack again, and the timing relationship between the crank and cam is now way out.

So if you try and start it up, without finding that out by hand first, bang, pistons into valves.

Thanks for these educational posts, disappointed I didn't make the connection between slack chain and rotating backwards increasing the likelihood of it skipping teeth and then of course running it reducing PTV clearance significantly.

[Andy86GT]

I think there is a large proportion of the general public (non motoring enthusiasts) that may consider the rugged, ruffty tufty image of a Land Rover product as 'durable' when clearly they are not the same thing.

[ChocolateFrog]

BricktopST205 said:

Outstanding finance of 28k on a Range Rover which I guess she paid close to nothing on the deposit. Then doesn't think that on a car that would have retailed around the 80k+ mark to not get any sort of warranty on it, especially with it being a JLR product! This is madness in itself. I wonder what the service history is like if it even had any!

I feel like that could be a thread in itself.

There must be a few people on here that have ended up in similar positions where they've got significant finance on a metal brick.

What do you do?

[GT9]

BricktopST205 said:

I wonder what the service history is like if it even had any!

Especially the all important oil seal change on the turbocharger at 60k.
If that hasn't been done, like clockwork, bang!

[-Lummox-]

Acuity30 said:

Ya know what they say about a fool and his money. Driving a car with a knackered timing chain is room temp IQ.

Yes, there is a whiff of "nobody expressly told me that driving the car in this state was a terrible idea so how was I to know?" about all of this.

My mum found herself in a similar position several years ago, where she was involved in a minor collision in her A6 (which was one of the old 4.2 V8 widebody ones, totally wasted on her as she only did c. 20k miles in it in more than 10 years of ownership) and the car went into a bodyshop for repair, and whilst there apparently suffered from timing chain failure. Very weird as the car only had 30k miles on it and a full Audi SH.

The insurance inspected it, wrote it off, and paid her out on it - even though she tried to get them to repair it. They didn't try to wriggle out of paying for it as the car was in the hands of their authorised repairer at the time the engine failure happened. She blamed the bodyshop as well, and still does to this day, and will not listen to any contrasting opinions as to how the bodyshop would have found it incredibly difficult to *cause* a timing chain failure whilst carrying out some minor cosmetic repairs (it didn't even need any new panels, just paint and a headlamp).

[-Lummox-]

ChocolateFrog said:

I feel like that could be a thread in itself.

There must be a few people on here that have ended up in similar positions where they've got significant finance on a metal brick.

What do you do?

You get a good independent warranty if planning on buying any expensive car mainly on finance. Or, you gamble.

If said warranty costs more than you can afford to pay, that tells you a couple of things:

1) the car is probably unreliable and/or expensive to repair, as reflected in the warranty costs - run away!
2) you probably can't afford the upkeep of the car you're trying to buy if you can't afford to properly protect yourself against borkage - also run away!

Trouble is there are far too many people these days that love to finance themselves to the hilt so they can fake their prosperity with no plan in place for when big bills crop up. Some gambles pay off. Some don't.

[motco]

SturdyHSV said:

poppopbangbang said:

It's likely jumped timing on one bank due to the slack chains, the "running like a tractor" was where the damage had already occured, likely a bent valve/s

They'll have wanted to compression test it to confirm this.

Unfortunately one valve will have broken as a result of continuing to run it, it will have locked up due to the remains of this valve stopping the piston in the cylinder it dropped in reaching TDC.

It was already a head off job by the time it got there and likely an engine given the probable damage to the piston crown in the failed cylinder. Continuing to run it for diagnostics or any other reason has increased the amount of damage present once the head/s was/were off but it would have been rebuild or replace time regardless the second it started misfiring.


Edited to add: Well that post was mostly pointless then

InitialDave said:

If everyone is telling the truth, it's likely that rotating the engine backwards has skipped the chain a couple of teeth, yeah.

I don't know these engines specifically, but chain tensioners are normally putting pressure on the non-drive side of the chain. If you turn the crank in reverse, the chain straightens out on the non drive side, pushing back against the tensioner - if the valvetrain is already damaged, the tension will be higher, and the chain will straighten/push back the tensioner more before the cam moves.

Trouble is, while this is happening, the crank is feeding more chain round to the drive side, and particularly if it's already loose/stretched, it can bunch up enough that when you then try and rotate the engine the right way, it skips a few teeth before taking up the slack again, and the timing relationship between the crank and cam is now way out.

So if you try and start it up, without finding that out by hand first, bang, pistons into valves.

Thanks for these educational posts, disappointed I didn't make the connection between slack chain and rotating backwards increasing the likelihood of it skipping teeth and then of course running it reducing PTV clearance significantly.

Not the same engine at all, but I had a 2.2D Jaguar X-Type and it was known to forum users that if the car was left in gear and the driver tried to start it without knocking into neutral or disengaging the clutch, it was highly likely to skip teeth due to no pressure in the hydraulic tensioner and the design of the timing chain path so that when the engine hit the dead stop of a drivetrain in gear and sprang backwards the chain would skip. Even simply turning the engine backwards by a wrench on the crankshaft nut would do it. Start it then and stuff your cheque book into the oil filler as that's where your money was going. It didn't need manic revving; the damage was inevitable.

[Heathwood]

BricktopST205 said:

That is a silly analogy because you have the insurance to cover that eventuality.

For example you buy a house with a mortgage and you a) get insurance to cover you in these sort of things and b) get life insurance to cover you in the case of death or serious illness that renders you unable to work. It is actually why it is law to have house insurance so these things do not happen.

There is far too much ignorance in this country without consequence that these kind of people never learn from their mistakes but in this case I guess she will.

Outstanding finance of 28k on a Range Rover which I guess she paid close to nothing on the deposit. Then doesn't think that on a car that would have retailed around the 80k+ mark to not get any sort of warranty on it, especially with it being a JLR product! This is madness in itself. I wonder what the service history is like if it even had any!

Re. the bolded bit - Really? I don’t think this is the case, at least in uk.

[Flumpo]

It wasn’t the law in 2019 as I can’t get life insurance and it wasn’t an issue for nationwide and I made it very clear as I failed their life insurance criteria - as I told them I would before hand!

Edit - bit confusing, you may be talking about house insurance. I suspect there are a lot of people breaking that law if it is one.

[LooneyTunes]

Heathwood said:

BricktopST205 said:

That is a silly analogy because you have the insurance to cover that eventuality.

For example you buy a house with a mortgage and you a) get insurance to cover you in these sort of things and b) get life insurance to cover you in the case of death or serious illness that renders you unable to work. It is actually why it is law to have house insurance so these things do not happen.

There is far too much ignorance in this country without consequence that these kind of people never learn from their mistakes but in this case I guess she will.

Outstanding finance of 28k on a Range Rover which I guess she paid close to nothing on the deposit. Then doesn't think that on a car that would have retailed around the 80k+ mark to not get any sort of warranty on it, especially with it being a JLR product! This is madness in itself. I wonder what the service history is like if it even had any!

Re. the bolded bit - Really? I don’t think this is the case, at least in uk.

It is usually a condition of your mortgage that you’ll have insurance.

[Megaflow]

You read threads like this and realise why car manuals used to tell you how to maintain the car, and now it tells you not to drink the contents of the battery…

[Richard-D]

LooneyTunes said:

Heathwood said:

BricktopST205 said:

That is a silly analogy because you have the insurance to cover that eventuality.

For example you buy a house with a mortgage and you a) get insurance to cover you in these sort of things and b) get life insurance to cover you in the case of death or serious illness that renders you unable to work. It is actually why it is law to have house insurance so these things do not happen.

There is far too much ignorance in this country without consequence that these kind of people never learn from their mistakes but in this case I guess she will.

Outstanding finance of 28k on a Range Rover which I guess she paid close to nothing on the deposit. Then doesn't think that on a car that would have retailed around the 80k+ mark to not get any sort of warranty on it, especially with it being a JLR product! This is madness in itself. I wonder what the service history is like if it even had any!

Re. the bolded bit - Really? I don’t think this is the case, at least in uk.

It is usually a condition of your mortgage that you’ll have insurance.

Which is nothing like a legal requirement to have home insurance. Which absolutely doesn't exist in the UK. Interested to hear where that does exist though.

[alscar]

Richard-D said:

Which is nothing like a legal requirement to have home insurance. Which absolutely doesn't exist in the UK. Interested to hear where that does exist though.

Indeed - other than where a condition of your mortgage provider.
A few countries might have mandated Natural catastrophe / Eathquake purchase requirements ( I think France and maybe Italy ?) but otherwise very few others.

[Cold]

GT9 said:

BricktopST205 said:

I wonder what the service history is like if it even had any!

Especially the all important oil seal change on the turbocharger at 60k.
If that hasn't been done, like clockwork, bang!

Well, first they would have to actually fit a turbocharger, then I suppose they could change the oil seal - but some might suggest it might be prudent to check it before fitting.

Otherwise, yes, like you say clockwork.

[GT9]

Cold said:

Well, first they would have to actually fit a turbocharger, then I suppose they could change the oil seal - but some might suggest it might be prudent to check it before fitting.

Otherwise, yes, like you say clockwork.

Not actually sure, are you due a parrot?

[macron]

Discendo Discimus said:

I'm amazed, somebody flounced and actually left for good. Normally they can't help but log back in for a second round.

Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaait for it!

[pinchmeimdreamin]

Cold said:

Well, first they would have to actually fit a turbocharger, then I suppose they could change the oil seal - but some might suggest it might be prudent to check it before fitting.

Otherwise, yes, like you say clockwork.

You Mysogynistic bar steward

[swisstoni]

Megaflow said:

You read threads like this and realise why car manuals used to tell you how to maintain the car, and now it tells you not to drink the contents of the battery…

And take 200 pages to do it.