Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2010 19:06:36 -0400
Reply-To: Don Hundt <dhundt@BENDBROADBAND.COM>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Don Hundt <dhundt@BENDBROADBAND.COM>
Subject: Re: Diesel - too much oil saga
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=iso-8859-1; reply-type=original
Peter,
As long as oil reaches somwhere on the dipstick, why don't you just drain
the crankcase, fill with the recommended amount of fresh oil, take a file to
the old marks and cut new marks into the dipstick. That way you know exactly
how much oil you have. Then, for cripes sake, check your oil level
immediately after anyone else touches your van. Good luck, hope you get it
all back together easily.
Don
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Kraiker" <bybike@GMAIL.COM>
To: <vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM>
Sent: Friday, August 06, 2010 6:40 PM
Subject: Re: Diesel - too much oil saga
> Thanks for the clear reminder Scott, appreciate it. /me takes a deep
> breath, relaxes a little.
>
> News from the shop:
> Compression test showed cyl 3 has a pressure of 350, the rest are @
> approx. 380.
> 3 of the 4 glow plugs appear to be burned out (might explain it being
> reluctant to start)
> injectors show signs of significant carbon build-up, not recent (no
> comment)
>
> Dipstick... I'm not sure sure (yet) how to identify the model. I have
> assumed it's the original, and the change in the angle of the engine is
> why it doesn't measure as originally configured. is there a specific part
> # I should be looking at on it? (I won't get the vanagon back until Monday
> so I only have photos to go by...)
> http://picasaweb.google.com/pkraiker/MyWesty#
> There is a photo of the underside, and a shot of the dipstick in this
> dipstick's hand (it is still frydae, right?)
> There is also a photo of the mark we left on the side of the road, the
> burnt soot as well as the coolant that boiled over. a few drops of oil
> leaked out too i think.
>
>
> Peter Kraiker
> http://studiofstop.com
> '82 Westfalia 1.9TD 5spd
>
>
>
>
> On 2010-08-06, at 4:21 PM, Scott Daniel - Turbovans wrote:
>
>> I have a 'big rule' about 'speculation about a problem before the facts
>> are
>> known'...
>>
>> namely 'don't'.
>> like if someone is freaking out that their engien is blown or whatever ..
>> and no FACTS are known ..
>> it is useless and counterproductive to start worrying say, about what a
>> new
>> engine costs.
>> it might not be that at all.
>>
>> maybe I have not seen every word of the whole thread..
>> but seems to me, first thing is to find out how much oil is actually in
>> the
>> engine ..
>>
>> and if it was way too much and that caused a real problem
>> THEN talk about who might have messed up how.
>>
>> extra -
>> here's a 'dipstick story' for you ..
>> an example of how stupid 'too modern' things can be.
>> Some BMW's have no engine oil dipstick.
>> they have a warning light instead ..
>> one that says something like 'oil level low' ...
>>
>> here's what happens in the real world when that warning goes off - you
>> add
>> oil, cause it says it needs some.
>> if that doesn't make the light go out, you add more oil.
>> Meanwhile you can never actually know what the oil level is ..since there
>> is
>> no dipstick.
>>
>> so, the official way to trouble shoot that is to drain the oil, then put
>> the
>> correct amount back in and see how it works then.
>> and if there is still a problem, then you start thinking sensor , or
>> cirucit
>> etc.
>>
>> but isn't that frickin' DUMB ..
>> a warning system that can be faulty ....and the only way to test it is to
>> drain the oil and refill with proper amount ...
>> when the good ole dipstick costs 20 cents for the manufacture make, has
>> worked just fine since god invented cars ..
>> talk about stupid !!!
>>
>> anyway..
>> get the facts first.
>> how much oil is ACTUALLY in it.
>> is the dipstick goofy ?
>> and what is the actual condition of the engine .
>>
>> and I would have to say, if a driver of an AAZ engine vanagon knows there
>> is
>> anything strange or odd about thier non-stock engine arrangement..
>> then they should be very vigilant to make sure people do basic stuff
>> right
>> on it ..
>> and .
>> it just plain is not really safe to have strangers change your oil.
>> Frankly..it
>> 'should' be child's play easy to do right ..
>> yet oil changes are screwed up on cars hundreds of times a day across
>> north
>> america..
>> betcha !.
>>
>> Scott
>> www.turbovans.com
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Jim Felder" <jim.felder@GMAIL.COM>
>> To: <vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM>
>> Sent: Friday, August 06, 2010 9:48 AM
>> Subject: Re: Diesel - too much oil saga
>>
>>
>> Not to argue, but how is it negligent not to know that a previous
>> owner or shop made a change to a vehicle? Dipstick level is so seldom
>> altered that it is not likely on the checklist of things to look at
>> when a car comes into a shop. If shops did check a car over to this
>> level of detail, they would have been sued for padding the bill with
>> unnecessary procedures as only one in ten thousand vehicles might have
>> the problem. If they checked for everything that could possibly be
>> wrong with a car when it went in, nobody could afford ANY automotive
>> service.
>>
>> And, if the owner or previous owner knew about the modified oil level,
>> the car has been operating this way for some time, and the symptoms
>> should have shown up already. If the owner or previous owner DID know
>> about the situation and didn't tell the shop, then they are
>> responsible.
>>
>> The law normally looks at a course of action in light of whether a
>> reasonable person would take it. It seems unreasonable that a shop
>> would look at marks on a dipstick as anything but accurate, especially
>> if the car had never exhibited overfilling symptoms before.
>>
>> Jim
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Bob Stevens <mtbiker62@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> It's the mechanics responsibility to KNOW what they are doing, what they
>>> are
>>> working on, how to fix "the problem", while the customer
>>> has no responsibility or liability for any of that whatsoever. This is
>>> only
>>> one example, but there are hundreds if not thousands like it.
>>> http://ezinearticles.com/?Auto-Mechanics-Liability-For-Damages-Resulting-From-Negligent-Repairs&id=2675550
>>> State licensed technicians of ANY kind, who are taking $$ in exchange
>>> for
>>> their services, are always held liable for their work.
>>> It's a very poor precedent to let a paid individual off the hook for
>>> their
>>> "professional services".
>>> That's why Utah Imports drove 6 1/2 hours each way, to pick up my van in
>>> Montrose, CO after they installed a cam belt tensioner
>>> that seized after 600 miles in the fall of 2007 ... they know how this
>>> works.
>>> bob
>>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 10:17 AM, Don Hanson <dhanson928@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The idea to go to the manual and get the proper capacity from the
>>>> specs,
>>>> then fill the engine and mark the dipstick...that will solve the
>>>> problem
>>>> of
>>>> overfilling.
>>>>
>>>> Expecting that shop to 'make good' for damage to a motor they filled to
>>>> "the mark"? That might be difficult and actually a bit unreasonable.
>>>> They
>>>> can't be expected to double-check everything to make sure the vehicle
>>>> they
>>>> are working on conforms to the specs it is supposed to have. When you
>>>> get
>>>> a
>>>> vehicle to work on you can reasonably expect it to be accurately
>>>> configured. A miss-marked dipstick is not something any mechanic "must"
>>>> anticipate in his normal trade.
>>>> Don Hanson
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> signature database 5348 (20100806) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
| 
