I don't think that the factory rep was personally involved in the diagnosis,
just the adjustment of the bill. It is the diagnosis and remedy that I
question. Personally, getting only 50K out of a modern engine and having to
pay $2000 is not my idea of a good deal; especially if an independent
mechanic discovers that all it needs is a new head gasket.
If it were me, I would spend the $60 for an independant mechanic to look at
it. I don't see why Volvo's "deal" wouldn't still be there.
-----Original Message-----
From: James H. Nazarian, Ph.D. <microdoc@apk.net>
To: T. Keith Vezina <tkvezina@bellsouth.net>
Cc: mgs@autox.team.net <mgs@autox.team.net>; Steve Shoyer <Steve@shoyer.com>
Date: Wednesday, March 15, 2000 8:26 AM
Subject: Re: non-LBC (Volvo) question: Why does a bad thermostat = new
engine?
>>From my experience, the Volvo Rep is the FINAL opinion. Steve got 50000
miles of
>use out of it, and will now get a new engine, all for $2000. Not a bad
deal:
>certainly not worth jeopardizing the offer by getting the rep pissed off.
Ford
>and GM have no provisions for a consumer to bypass or circumvent the field
rep's
>authority; I doubt Volvo is any different.
>
>Jim
>
>"T. Keith Vezina" wrote:
>
>> For this kind of major surgery, I would recommend a second opinion.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Steve Shoyer <Steve@shoyer.com>
>> To: 'mgs@autox.team.net' <mgs@autox.team.net>
>> Date: Tuesday, March 14, 2000 10:03 PM
>> Subject: non-LBC (Volvo) question: Why does a bad thermostat = new
engine?
>>
>> >After spending a couple of years working on my 1980 MGB, I thought I had
>> >picked up a little knowledge about engines. However, we have a 1997
Volvo
>> >850 GLT sedan. Every once in a while, the "low coolant" light would go
on,
>> >so I'd top it off (with the "special" Volvo coolant, of course). It
>> started
>> >happening more frequently, and when we took the car in with 49,500 miles
>> (it
>> >has a 50K warranty), we had them take a look at it. They said a hose
was
>> >loose, tightened a clamp, topped off the coolant, and told up it was
fixed.
>> >Soon after, the coolant light was back on, and the "Check Engine" light
was
>> >going on, too. The only other symptom was that the car would run pretty
>> >rough after a cold start, but it would be OK after a minute or two.
>> Anyway,
>> >they said replaced the upper radiator hose and thermostat, and checked
the
>> >head gasket for leaks. For the "check engine" light and rough running,
>> they
>> >found gas washed cylinders which they cleaned, and they replaced the
spark
>> >plugs, oil, and filter.
>> >
>> >A few weeks later the "low coolant" light was back, as was the "check
>> >engine" light. The coolant leak was becoming more pronounced. We took
the
>> >car back, and it's been at the shop for almost two weeks while they ran
>> more
>> >compression tests and waited for the Volvo regional service person to
get
>> >back to them about something. Today we got a message that they
recommend
>> >that the engine should be replaced, which should cost about $6500. It's
>> out
>> >of warranty, but Volvo is willing to pick up $4500 of the cost, leaving
us
>> >to pay $2000. From what I've picked up from my wife's translation of
what
>> >the service person told her, the bad thermostat caused a crack in the
head.
>> >They said that we could try to just replace the head gasket for about
>> $1000,
>> >but only if we were about to trade the car in.
>> >
>> >The car never overheated, and the temp gauge never showed that the
engine
>> >was getting hot. I still don't understand why there should be any
>> >interaction between the cooling system and the "check engine" light
(which,
>> >according to the owner's manual, relates to the emissions system). I
don't
>> >know how a bad thermostat could crack the head, especially without any
>> >external signs other than a low coolant level.
>> >
>> >We like the car, so we'll probably get it fixed, but can anyone tell me
why
>> >this might have happened? Is it something we should have to pay for,
and
>> if
>> >not, what would be our argument for getting the dealer to pick up the
whole
>> >cost? I'm not trying to weasel out of paying if it is my
responsibility,
>> >but the car was in a few times for the same problem, and each time the
>> >dealer said that they had fixed it. The $2000 would be better spent
fixing
>> >my rusted sills (although my wife might not agree).
>> >
>> >Sorry for the use of the bandwidth, but if anyone has any suggestions,
I'd
>> >like to know. Thanks.
>> >
>> >--Steve Shoyer (1980 MGB)
>> >
>
>
|