You do not really mention what damage was done. You did mention dropping a valve but unless that smashed a piston and a rod came through the side then why is the engine so badly damaged. I don't think we have the whole story. Regards Peter
|
|
When I had a go of a Type R I took it to 115mph in 3rd gear, just about hitting the red line. This engine is designed to be revved, no way would 70 mph in 4th overrev it.
|
It's abour balance of probabilities, the engineer thinks it was probably overrevved, the manufacturer thinks you overrevved it and the evidence points to it having been overrevved.
Are you looking for evidence of other things that could lead to catastrophic engine failure ? In any event, you will have to do more than simply make things smell a bit - you will have to prove on the balance of probabilities that this new event, not overrevving, caused the failure.
I have to say, in the absence of other evidence (and maybe tainted by my experiences of how I see many TypeRs driven), I have to think the engineer's right, but that's because it's what it looks like. You need to raise something else tangible.
I should also suggest that, as I am sure you are not, going loco at Honda UK will get you less than nowhere - any percentage of goodwill you could get from them will go out of the window if you put toys out of pram, so no matter how cathartic it may be, resist the urge.
|
And BTW, my old 1.4 Civic 3 door would do an indicated 68 in second, and did so more than once a week for 5 years and 70,000 miles.
It also did 92 in third.
|
Speaking as an owner of a facelift (04) CTR, it does sound very much as if you accidentally got 2nd rather than 4th on changing down. I've done it myself once, very briefly, at a similar road speed and consider myself very fortunate not to have done any damage.
Given the brutal engine braking and high pitched scream that I know this generates, I find it impossible to believe that you wouldn't know all about it if you had got 2nd.
The only possibility I can think of is that the ECU logged an engine overspeed on another occasion; are you the first owner?
|
Incidentally, I'm afraid the fact that some idiot car salesman tells you that the engine is just "coming on song" doing 70mph in 2nd has absolutely no bearing on Honda's liability in this case.
|
"Travelling at 70mph I changed down from 5th gear to 4th gear for better acceleration, the engine went bang!! "
I doubt any court claim will succeed if the above is typical of the evidence...
Trying to break the legal speed limit sir?
etc etc..
madf
|
|
I've little doubt that you could run a Type-R engine up to 70mph in second gear, never mind 4th. This is different to changing DOWN into second gear though. If you drop from 5th to 2nd and lift the clutch abruptly then the load on the engine will be very high indeed. Think of the inertia load of the cams on the cambelt etc (Type R has belt cam IIRC?). Given what your independent engineer has said then I think you're on weak group. Collet failure would be extremely unlikely.
|
|
I would think Honda has a print out of the ECU showing excess revs ,speeds etc,before you go to court I would check this out because Honda armed with this info have you on a hiding to nothing and as it appears you were exceeding the speed limit at the time its a double whammy.
|
....and as it appears you were exceeding the speed limit at the time its a double whammy.
Where does it say he was on a UK public road?
|
>> ....and as it appears you were >> exceeding the speed limit at the time its a double whammy. Where does it say he was on a UK public road?
He says M54.
|
While this points towards excess revs causing the damage I would have thought that it is up to Honda to prove this, be it in a court of law or simply as a justification for rejecting a warranty claim.
After all the car is warrantied by Honda against mechanical failure, as such if they decide to reject a warranty claim that clearly relates to mechanical failure then surely the onus is on them to prove that it was maltreatment that led to the failure rather than for the driver to prove that it was not?
|
It's a fair cop! I should learn to read properly!
|
And where is our OP?
I smell a rat.
--
Espada III - well if you have a family and need a Lamborghini, what else do you drive?
|
And where is our OP? I smell a rat.
May be though he only posted last night, perhaps he will be back tonight.
|
As for Honda and courts of law, it's balance of probabilities, not reasonable doubt, they have an independent engineer's report to say it's probably overrevved and the best rebuttal of that is that he can't be 100% - he does not have to be. Case dismissed and costs against a vexatious plaintiff in my book [showing my age now by no doubt getting terminology wrong].
You should have to show on balance of probabilities it was something else that caused it which was covered by the warranty - you need the download from the ECU - I still think it's going to show it was buzzed and it was doing a lot more than 70mph at the time.
|
Is that really relevant though? Honda couldn't possibly defend that their cars are built never to go over 70mph.
|
"Is that really relevant though? Honda couldn't possibly defend that their cars are built never to go over 70mph."
If plaintiff is showed to be telling porkies on one item of evidence, court is going to judge everything else he says with GREAT suspicion..
"Now mR so and so" you are complaining that doing 5,000rpm in x gear - which equates to 90mph - on a motorway - you changed DOWN for better accleration...
Imagine the response. Of course it has no direct bearing on the case but destroys his credibility as a Truthfull witness.
I may of course be totally unfair and he was doing only 70mph and only wanted to accelerate to 90mph:-))
madf
|
Not sure that the 70mph point is relevant, afterall he is presumably only being honest, he could have said "I was doing 50 and changed down to 3rd", who would know?
The fact is that the engine should not have failed IF the driver changed into 4th at 70.
The question is whether the actions of the driver caused damaged that lead to the failure, i.e. whether the truth is different that his version of the story. However, as I have said above, it might have been in his interest to be economical with the truth so as to not be seen as attempting to speed, the fact that he has not avoided the speeding issue in my mind lends credibilty to his story.
|
Speeding has nothing to do with it. Honda specify the car as exceeding the speed limit so that is in no way relevant to the argument.
Only the speed/gear is of interest here.
------------------------------
TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
|
|
Incidentally, I'm afraid the fact that some idiot car salesman tells you that the engine is just "coming on song" doing 70mph in 2nd has absolutely no bearing on Honda's liability in this case.
Best response to this type of salesman is to request an immediate test drive to demonstrate the theory..!
Then after writing off the engine on the test drive tell him you like it, but "have you got one in green..?"
|
In response to Aprilia, the Type R is chain cam. All current Honda 2.0 litre fours are. Some of the smaller engines such as the old 1.7 are belt.
HJ
|
|
My son ( In the Trade ) has seen a couple of blown over-revved R's and both had bent valves and no 3 con rod through the casing. We still do not know what the terminal damage was on this one. Regards Peter
|
In response to Aprilia, the Type R is chain cam. All current Honda 2.0 litre fours are. Some of the smaller engines such as the old 1.7 are belt. HJ
OK thanks, I wasn't sure. I think maybe I once saw one of these being re-built to racing spec. It had two great long chain guides and a short second chain for the oil pump.....?
|
|
Come on Ryan, lets have the story. Regards Peter
|
|
Easy enough to draw a conclusion about the OP and why Honda have refused to play.
|
I was right. Ryan is a troll and we fell for it.
--
Espada III - well if you have a family and need a Lamborghini, what else do you drive?
|
He may not be a Troll. Do a Google on Ryan25 and look at the Honda website.
--
pmh (was peter)
|
He may not be a Troll.
Whether he is or not, let's give him the benefit of the doubt for now.
Some people don't look on a daily basis. Some people find this site via a search engine (google for instance), register an account and post a question, then forget where they posted, never to return again.
So can we drop the conspiracy theories, and get back to the question posted please.
DD.
|
Anyone who knows Honda and the word 'camchain' knows that the relationship has a very murky history indeed. To be fair, their problems were with motorcycle engines.
In my opinion (sorry HJ) Honda should have stuck with belts - I never heard of a failure - and shouldn't have bowed to possibly ill-informed opinion.
|
>>Easy enough to draw a conclusion about the OP and why Honda have refused to play.<<
Can someone tell me what an "OP" is please - is it Oringinal Poster by any chance.
I hate TLA's
|
|
Very Funny. Regards Peter
|
|
Why castigate chain cam drive? The vanished OP (VOP) may well have overrevved, breaking the con-rods: number 3 is the favourite:) There is nothing posted that implicates the chain at all. HJ is not wrong.
|
|
Honda's snapping chains on 70s and early 80s bikes were down to oil starvation and failed tensioners. I suspect that Honda were seriously embarrased by these enough to spend millions totally bomb proofing their motorcycle engines, this engineering would have crossed over into car engine designs.
|
|
I didn't 'castigate' anything - just pointed out there are other opinions than the one usually promoted on here.
|
|
If you are talking of belts in general, how have you missed the tales of woe with which the board has been regaled? I have personal experience of belt and consequential other fialures on VW, and there are many others. Chains I think are less likely to fail without warning - although the Honda bike tensioners gave problems maybe 20 years ago.
|
OK, dumb question - I have a Type-R but don't know my cam-belt from my seat-belt, just which pedals to press ( and which gears to use! ;) If I lift the bonnet, there's a big 'belt' showing which goes round when the engine's running. No 'chain' is visible. Is this not the cam-belt?
On the speeding issue, if you are honest in court about exceeding the speed limit, would you still be discredited at all as a character for flouting the law and therefore sway the judge against you?
--
Mattster
Boycott shoddy build and reliability.
|
|
No. The cam belt will run under a protective cover. What you see is either the alternator, air con or power steering belt.
|
|
The difference betwwen a cam belt and a seat belt is that you can stick you finger in a seat belt without crushing the end of the finger. OOOOOOHH Regards Peter
|
If you link to this: www.sportcompactcarweb.com/tech/0406scc_shortblock...l
you will see the innards. The drive is by chain, is oiled, and the cover is metal and is sealed. Belts tend to have a flimsy cover, and don't like oil at all....
|
I haven't missed anything. I guess personal experience counts but it seems to me that belt drive systems fail these days because manufacturers have so cheapened them and their associated parts that they just aren't as reliable as they once might have been.
Of course, some manufacturers appear to have used belts just because they were cheaper and never made them reliable from the start.
And plastic components in a valve drive chain? It beggars belief.
In my memory, which goes back a long way, Honda didn't even recommend actually changing a cambelt - just a condition check at the major service. But even they have bowed to public opinion.
If some manufacturers managed to cheapen belt systems until they became unreliable, then it seems likely to me that they will do the same with chain drives and and we'll see the consequences in years to come.
Bentley and Norton had it right, among others - if the camshaft is upstairs, use gears to drive it!
Maybe I'm just getting too old to accept what passes for best practice now. Why, I can even remember when brake discs lasted more than 12,000 miles...
|
I can even remember when brake discs lasted more than 12,000 miles...
Thing is nowdays if its not bio whatsit then its no good.
Years ago things were made to last but now they gag about any
material that cant be made into vegetable matter?
|
|
Is it not the case that Honda have had no failures of the VTEC system?
|
I think the claim is that Honda have never had a recall on the VTEC system i.e. no engineering defect that lead to failure.
|
|
Therefore implying that the OP probably over revved the engine........
|
|
OP is a strange bloke - is the word Troll involved? Joined the forum 6 days ago, made one post and never came back to re-post on the 60+ answers that he got!
|
If you look at the link I posted above (somewhere) you will find that he spent a considerable amount of money on modifications to the car. I guess that this is probably the real reason why Honda will not pay.
--
pmh (was peter)
|
|
pmh, that link suggests he is selling a 55 plate with lots of modifications. On here he is querying about an 04 plate. He obviously has enough money to own two Type Rs so I am sure he will be able to afford to buy a replacement engine.
|
|
|
|
|
