mgs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: non-LBC (Volvo) question: Why does a bad thermostat = new engine?

To: "T. Keith Vezina" <tkvezina@bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: non-LBC (Volvo) question: Why does a bad thermostat = new engine?
From: "James H. Nazarian, Ph.D." <microdoc@apk.net>
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 21:51:11 -0500
Volvo's deal could have disappeared as soon as some non-authorized mechanic
touched the engine. Ford has done this to me or my company twice. Once on an
Escort with a cracked head, the other with an Econoline conversion van with
brake / ABS problems that lasted 2+ years. An individual can't push an auto
company any further than they want to be pushed.

Jim

"T. Keith Vezina" wrote:

> 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)
> >> >
> >
> >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>