Engine seize

[Woof999]

Even from a commercial point of view I think it was pretty lax from the dealer. It's the only place the car has been taken for mechanical work in the 6+ years I've had it. They know the service history better than anyone. They have computerised records. I have almost illegible scribbles in a service book. They took the time to list a whole load of stuff that I didn't ask for but didn't include a service, and, as discussed at length, didn't check the oil or comment that a service was overdue when asked if there was any other work needed. Remember that they did change the coolant pressure cap (and there were no obvious water leaks). Strange to do that and still go nowhere near the oil.

 

With that, and details such as them suggesting to use the old oil pump on the new half engine, not checking anything from the head upwards before presenting me with a bill, and of course going nowhere near the dipstick (both dipsticks if you want to include me), then there are some serious flaws - all my opinion of course.

 

Kind of reminds me of our pest control company. Paid for 12 months and they come like clockwork every month. After 3 months of not seeing them I say to the wife "what happened to the bug zappers?". She said she didn't know and gave them a call. The lady said - "12 months finished, you want more?".

[xylophone]

10 hours ago, alextrat1966 said:

Sorry that people don't tell you what you would like to hear. Sometimes it just so happens that it differs from reality. 

 

Destroying your engine because you think putting petrol in the tank is all it's needed to run a car, has no forgiveness. And this comes from someone whose dad not so long ago destroyed a beautiful Mercedes OM642 engine, again for not checking the oil level... 

 

If you wanna go defensive and think people have something against you, you're only fooling yourself then, oh and your wallet! cuz she's the one becoming thinner every time you "forget" to check the oil level. 

 

Regardless of whether the dealer will/will not pay for the repairs, and regardless of whether the engine was/wasn't low on oil. I hope this serves as a lesson for OP, and he starts checking his oil at the very least once a month from now on. 

It was not my car or my post, so suggest you direct your comments to the original poster........my comment was on something different!!!!!

 

 

Edited January 21, 2022 by xylophone

[Woof999]

Just now, xylophone said:

It was not my car or my post, so suggest you direct your comments to the original poster........my comment was on something different!!

Almost wrote something like that myself. I read the post and it seemed like you were being blamed for my failures - which kind of reinforced the point you were making.

[xylophone]

1 minute ago, Woof999 said:

Almost wrote something like that myself. I read the post and it seemed like you were being blamed for my failures - which kind of reinforced the point you were making.

I almost wrote exactly that as well.............but doubt he could see the irony of it!

 

What news on changing/choosing a new vehicle? AND IMO you did not fail.......I have had my car for over 10 years now and have never checked the oil, BUT the garage does this when I take it in for a service.

[Woof999]

4 minutes ago, xylophone said:

I almost wrote exactly that as well.............but doubt he could see the irony of it!

 

What news on changing/choosing a new vehicle? AND IMO you did not fail.......I have had my car for over 10 years now and have never checked the oil, BUT the garage does this when I take it in for a service.

I was hoping to be amazed by the Fortuner but ended up being totally disappointed. They brought round the 2.8 GR Sport - my choice would have been the 2.4 Legender 2.4 2WD. It looks great, the interior is pretty good but:

 

1.) It drives almost exactly the same as my old Pajero (when it had an engine that worked). Only the (very good) hugging front seat took anything away from the "you are driving a boat" feeling.

 

2.) The kickdown and lag is still far too noticeable - literally exactly like the Pajero. I would have thought a much newer car would have fixed these issues, but it's still a Hilux underneath sporting a tractor engine. They've done a good job removing road noise, which highlights the diesel noise.

 

3.) The in car entertainment is lacking. I don't want to have to rely on my phone for something as given as sat nav. The zooming / scrolling around on the map is more than painful and my phone is... my phone. My Android head unit is light years ahead but an aftermarket unit is not a good idea on a new car (if even possible).

 

4.) They have the market cornered and there are no obvious deals to be had.

 

5.) The 3rd row seats, when folded, take up a sizeable amount of room and just remind me of a Baht Bus. Pajero does this so much better with them sinking into the floor. Taking them out isn't a 5 minute job.

 

6.) The main dashboard is still mostly analog. I was expecting a full LED display. There is only a tiny LED (maybe LCD or whatever) section in the middle surrounded by two huge old style, always there gauges.

 

I was VERY impressed with the Corolla Cross GR Sport though. Lovely car, although it suffers from the same in car entertainment problems. Drives so well though.

 

Mrs is stuck on the Legender and she must always be obeyed. Much safer for her and the kids to be in it too and we can never have too much space.

 

Also looked at a friends Honda CRV. Nice car, but I think the Cross trumps it. Was told to look at the Ford Everest but the interior is massively lacking and there is an all-new one coming out later this year that is totally different. Some deals to be had but too lacking for me. The new one is probably too far out to consider.

[transam]

4 minutes ago, Woof999 said:

I was hoping to be amazed by the Fortuner but ended up being totally disappointed. They brought round the 2.8 GR Sport - my choice would have been the 2.4 Legender 2.4 2WD. It looks great, the interior is pretty good but:

 

1.) It drives almost exactly the same as my old Pajero (when it had an engine that worked). Only the (very good) hugging front seat took anything away from the "you are driving a boat" feeling.

 

2.) The kickdown and lag is still far too noticeable - literally exactly like the Pajero. I would have thought a much newer car would have fixed these issues, but it's still a Hilux underneath sporting a tractor engine. They've done a good job removing road noise, which highlights the diesel noise.

 

3.) The in car entertainment is lacking. I don't want to have to rely on my phone for something as given as sat nav. The zooming / scrolling around on the map is more than painful and my phone is... my phone. My Android head unit is light years ahead but an aftermarket unit is not a good idea on a new car (if even possible).

 

4.) They have the market cornered and there are no obvious deals to be had.

 

5.) The 3rd row seats, when folded, take up a sizeable amount of room and just remind me of a Baht Bus. Pajero does this so much better with them sinking into the floor. Taking them out isn't a 5 minute job.

 

6.) The main dashboard is still mostly analog. I was expecting a full LED display. There is only a tiny LED (maybe LCD or whatever) section in the middle surrounded by two huge old style, always there gauges.

 

I was VERY impressed with the Corolla Cross GR Sport though. Lovely car, although it suffers from the same in car entertainment problems. Drives so well though.

 

Mrs is stuck on the Legender and she must always be obeyed. Much safer for her and the kids to be in it too and we can never have too much space.

 

Also looked at a friends Honda CRV. Nice car, but I think the Cross trumps it. Was told to look at the Ford Everest but the interior is massively lacking and there is an all-new one coming out later this year that is totally different. Some deals to be had but too lacking for me. The new one is probably too far out to consider.

I would suggest that as you do have a lack of care for your rides, a Toyota would be an excellent choice for you, as they are near bulletproof, and now do not have a timing belt to take care of too...????

[Woof999]

1 minute ago, transam said:

I would suggest that as you do have a lack of care for your rides, a Toyota would be an excellent choice for you, as they are near bulletproof, and now do not have a timing belt to take care of too...????

How dare you. I wash the car (well, pay someone else) to, every year, even if it doesn't need it ????

[big dendrobenaes]

1 hour ago, Ralf001 said:

Its a diesel SUV.

That clean fresh golden colour oil will be black 10 seconds after the engine has started.

GOOD OLD DIESEL SUV !!!

[Yellowtail]

51 minutes ago, xylophone said:

I almost wrote exactly that as well.............but doubt he could see the irony of it!

 

What news on changing/choosing a new vehicle? AND IMO you did not fail.......I have had my car for over 10 years now and have never checked the oil, BUT the garage does this when I take it in for a service.

He took it in for a repair, not a service. 

 

The only time I check the oil is when I pick it up from from being serviced. 

[Ralf001]

40 minutes ago, big dendrobenaes said:

GOOD OLD DIESEL SUV !!!

Why are you yelling ?

[big dendrobenaes]

3 minutes ago, Ralf001 said:

Why are you yelling ?

I HAVE A BIG MOUTH !!!!

[Ralf001]

1 minute ago, big dendrobenaes said:

I HAVE A BIG MOUTH !!!!

and now on my blocked list.

Goodbye.

[big dendrobenaes]

1 minute ago, Ralf001 said:

and now on my blocked list.

Goodbye.

SO what who do you think you are ??????????????????

you think i am going to lose any sleep koz you blocked me ????

go play with your dolls

[Ralf001]

3 hours ago, transam said:

I think the days of checking oil levels are long gone on most modern engines. For instance, I had a Toyota Vigo 3.0 diesel for 11.5 years, though I did check the oil level at times, I never needed to top it up. Our weee runaround now, never needs topping up.

But, if an owner never has the oil changed, or there is a spot of oil on the drive, oil visible in the engine bay, then perhaps they should check it at times.

 

My point is, I doubt there are many modern engines that use oil as they did 50 years back. 

These older Mitsu engines are famous for being a bit thirsty with oil.

no need for a leak to lower the sump contents.

[transam]

1 minute ago, big dendrobenaes said:

SO what who do you think you are ??????????????????

you think i am going to lose any sleep koz you blocked me ????

go play with your dolls

Steady on ol' chap, quoting in capitals is a no-no here......???? 

[transam]

2 minutes ago, Ralf001 said:

These older Mitsu engines are famous for being a bit thirsty with oil.

no need for a leak to lower the sump contents.

Old, I thought it was a 2014 ride, plus I would have thought oil guzzlers would be high mileage jobby's, which hasn't been mentioned yet, unless I missed it....????

[Ralf001]

1 minute ago, transam said:

Old, I thought it was a 2014 ride, plus I would have thought oil guzzlers would be high mileage jobby's, which hasn't been mentioned yet, unless I missed it....????

Old tech.

 

Friend has a 2014 triton, it uses 500ml per 1000km.

 

He purchased new, odo show 98,000

[Woof999]

Car is 2013 I believe +/- a few months. Mileage was < 120k km.

[richard_smith237]

4 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

We do not know that they did not check the oil.

OK... IF the garage did check the Oil, they did nothing about it.

 

4 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

We don't know that the oil was low

The Op said [ Almost zero oil ] 

 

4 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

We don't know what was recommend

Lots of different thinks apparently [suspension rubbers, gators and a few other bits that I can't translate), plus an air filter, fuel filter and a couple of odds and sods]

 

4 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

We don't know what was actually done.

We don't know what was declined

We do know the OP takes it to the dealer for a power issue, knowing it is overdue for service and does not have it serviced.  

Agreed, he should have asked for a full service... However, with the other items they checked and recommended were switched out it would appear that the garage looked further into the vehicle than dealing only with the power issue. 

 

4 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

If the the OP had ordered the car serviced, and the dealership drained the oil and either left the drain-plug out or did not refill the oil, the dealership would be 100% responsible for all damages. 

Had the oil be drained incompletely, the plug put back in. Were short-cuts taken by the garage ?

 

4 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

The OP claimed the vehicle was delivered to his home after the repairs. The vehicle would not make it one kilometer with no oil. 

I'm not so sure about that, cars are known to travel a small distance without all. The Op also mentioned that the oil level was Almost zero - there was ’some oil’ in the vehicle - maybe this is why it travelled an estimated 20km before the Op noticed [loud banging noises (something like I'd expect big ends to make)]

 

4 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

The OP claims the oil-light never came on, and that there was no noise prior to catastrophic engine failure. 

The vehicle is 8 years old - Its not unfeasible that the sensor or light itself failed. 

 

The Op stopped the car because of the noise [the engine started making loud banging noises (something like I'd expect big ends to make), so the car was stopped immediately and taken on the back of a wagon to the main dealer. ]

 

----------------

 

I disagree with anyone implying the Garage is not at fault for not checking the oil levels while the car was in the garage - that is a very basic operation. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[transam]

8 minutes ago, Woof999 said:

Car is 2013 I believe +/- a few months. Mileage was < 120k km.

In theory, that is just about run-in....????

[richard_smith237]

 

Was the ’seizure’ perfect timing ? i.e. would the engine have seized at exactly the same time had it not gone into the garage ???

 

Or, did the garage empty the oil (incompletely) so that it was ‘almost empty’... someone put the plug back in (perhaps so they didn’t loose it while on a lunch break etc)... then whoever was supposed to add oil simply forgot...  ???

 

It easy to see how these things happen especially if SoP and check-lists are not followed etc... 

[Yellowtail]

21 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

OK... IF the garage did check the Oil, they did nothing about it.

Unless it was full when they checked it.

 

21 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

The Op said [ Almost zero oil ] 

After the failure, yes?

 

21 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Lots of different thinks apparently [suspension rubbers, gators and a few other bits that I can't translate), plus an air filter, fuel filter and a couple of odds and sods]

So the things he could not translate could well have include oil, yes?

 

21 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Agreed, he should have asked for a full service... However, with the other items they checked and recommended were switched out it would appear that the garage looked further into the vehicle than dealing only with the power issue.

Point? 

 

21 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Had the oil be drained incompletely, the plug put back in. Were short-cuts taken by the garage ?

You mean short cuts like doing an oil change, but not refilling with oil? What short cuts? 

 

21 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

I'm not so sure about that, cars are known to travel a small distance without all. The Op also mentioned that the oil level was Almost zero - there was ’some oil’ in the vehicle - maybe this is why it travelled an estimated 20km before the Op noticed [loud banging noises (something like I'd expect big ends to make)]

How would the OP know it was almost zero? 

 

21 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

The vehicle is 8 years old - Its not unfeasible that the sensor or light itself failed. 

At the same time the engine failed? 

 

 

[Kwasaki]

3 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

Up to thirty minutes. Even it that is true, up to would mean new, cool engine, fresh synthetic oil, engine idling. 

 

Now compare that to older, poorly maintained engine with tar in the sump, heavy vehicle driven at speed. 

 

In any event, it made it through the test drive, from the dealership to the OP's home, and then the OPs drove it for something less than 20km. With no oil? I think not.

Well your stating the obvious the op's probably would show signs early.

[transam]

My near conclusion as someone who has fooled around with rides for decades, though older stuff.

 

If someone came to me saying they had a power problem and to look over the ride for anything else, probably the first thing I would do is look at the dipstick to see if I can see anything going on. If I did, I would pull off the oil filter, open it up to see if anything unpleasant was present. If it were just very low on oil, I would top it up with something to see if any improvement.

If all seemed OK, then oil and filter and go to the next stage.

 

If indeed they didn't check the oil level, and the pump was being starved of oil, it wouldn't take long to wipe out the bearings on an engine with such a high compression ratio.

 

PS. The engine should have a new oil pump installed, that's sort of the done thing, usually don't cost much and good insurance.

PPS. I have a feeling your garage are a bunch of......

 

 

 

 

 

 

[alextrat1966]

 

[richard_smith237]

2 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

2 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

OK... IF the garage did check the Oil, they did nothing about it.

Unless it was full when they checked it.

In which case there is a huge pool of oil somewhere, either where it was parked since it was last checked or at some point within the final 20km of driving.

 

 

2 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

 

2 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

The Op said [ Almost zero oil ] 

After the failure, yes?

Valid point - that then creates the ‘chicken or the egg’ conundrum - did the ‘engine failure’ cause the loss of oil, or did the loss of oil cause the engine failure ?

 

 

2 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

 

2 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Lots of different thinks apparently [suspension rubbers, gators and a few other bits that I can't translate), plus an air filter, fuel filter and a couple of odds and sods]

So the things he could not translate could well have include oil, yes?

They could have, but the Garage admitted they didn’t check the oil (or covered up the fact that they forgot to add more oil after draining it).

 

 

2 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

 

2 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Agreed, he should have asked for a full service... However, with the other items they checked and recommended were switched out it would appear that the garage looked further into the vehicle than dealing only with the power issue.

Point? 

The Garage initially blamed the Op for not checking his own oil. Contributors to this thread have argued that the it was up to the Op to instruct the Garage to check the oil as they are unlikely to carry out work or checks they have not been instructed to - yet they did check other things they were not asked to check. 

 

2 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

 

2 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Had the oil be drained incompletely, the plug put back in. Were short-cuts taken by the garage ?

You mean short cuts like doing an oil change, but not refilling with oil? What short cuts? 

Yes, those sort of ’short-cuts’ like not working off a check-list... so that something such as ‘refilling the oil’ is easily forgotten.

 

2 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

 

2 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

I'm not so sure about that, cars are known to travel a small distance without all. The Op also mentioned that the oil level was Almost zero - there was ’some oil’ in the vehicle - maybe this is why it travelled an estimated 20km before the Op noticed [loud banging noises (something like I'd expect big ends to make)]

How would the OP know it was almost zero? 

At a guess, the dip-stick may have had ‘almost zero oil stuck to it’

i.e. when we check our oil there is a max and min mark on the dip-stick, was the oil significantly below the min-mark on the dip-stick indicating ‘almost zero’ oil (also meaning significantly below the min mark)

 

 

2 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

 

2 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

The vehicle is 8 years old - Its not unfeasible that the sensor or light itself failed. 

At the same time the engine failed? 

 

Thats an illogical response... The oil level warning light or sensor could have failed at any time in the last number of years, months or weeks.

[Yellowtail]

6 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

In which case there is a huge pool of oil somewhere, either where it was parked since it was last checked or at some point within the final 20km of driving.

Exactly

 

6 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Valid point - that then creates the ‘chicken or the egg’ conundrum - did the ‘engine failure’ cause the loss of oil, or did the loss of oil cause the engine failure ? 

A loose oil filter could quickly pump out all the oil. 

 

6 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

They could have, but the Garage admitted they didn’t check the oil (or covered up the fact that they forgot to add more oil after draining it).

The manager knows what is supposed to be checked, but do you think they really know what the tech did or did not check? Do you think if the manager asked the tech if they checked the oil, the tech would say no? 

 

6 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

The Garage initially blamed the Op for not checking his own oil. Contributors to this thread have argued that the it was up to the Op to instruct the Garage to check the oil as they are unlikely to carry out work or checks they have not been instructed to - yet they did check other things they were not asked to check.

Again, we don't know that they did not check the oil, and we don't know that they did not recommend an oil change, and the OP could not read the quote.

 

You keep going on about them changing the oil but leaving the plug out. Do you think they would change the oil without the OP ordering it? 

 

6 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Yes, those sort of ’short-cuts’ like not working off a check-list... so that something such as ‘refilling the oil’ is easily forgotten.

Again, do you think they would change the oil without the OP ordering it? And it would not have made it through the test drive and to the OP's home with the drain plug out. 

 

6 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

At a guess, the dip-stick may have had ‘almost zero oil stuck to it’

i.e. when we check our oil there is a max and min mark on the dip-stick, was the oil significantly below the min-mark on the dip-stick indicating ‘almost zero’ oil (also meaning significantly below the min mark)

With a seven liter capacity, the stick will read low at a 0.5-1 liter low and zero at 1-2 liters low. The engine could run without damage another 5,000 with the stick reading zero. 

 

6 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Thats an illogical response... The oil level warning light or sensor could have failed at any time in the last number of years, months or weeks.

What is this 1950? The light comes on every time you turn the key on, and if the sensor was out the engine would probably not start, and certainly the check engine light would come one. Most/all modern automotive engines will shut down when oil pressure is lost. 

 

I think the whole thread is a wind up. 

[Woof999]

14 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

I think the whole thread is a wind up. 

Thanks for your support.

[Yellowtail]

5 minutes ago, Woof999 said:

Thanks for your support.

Anytime 

[richard_smith237]

45 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

7 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

In which case there is a huge pool of oil somewhere, either where it was parked since it was last checked or at some point within the final 20km of driving.

Exactly

 

7 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Valid point - that then creates the ‘chicken or the egg’ conundrum - did the ‘engine failure’ cause the loss of oil, or did the loss of oil cause the engine failure ? 

A loose oil filter could quickly pump out all the oil. 

 

7 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

They could have, but the Garage admitted they didn’t check the oil (or covered up the fact that they forgot to add more oil after draining it).

The manager knows what is supposed to be checked, but do you think they really know what the tech did or did not check? Do you think if the manager asked the tech if they checked the oil, the tech would say no? 

 

7 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

The Garage initially blamed the Op for not checking his own oil. Contributors to this thread have argued that the it was up to the Op to instruct the Garage to check the oil as they are unlikely to carry out work or checks they have not been instructed to - yet they did check other things they were not asked to check.

Again, we don't know that they did not check the oil, and we don't know that they did not recommend an oil change, and the OP could not read the quote.

 

You keep going on about them changing the oil but leaving the plug out. Do you think they would change the oil without the OP ordering it? 

 

7 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Yes, those sort of ’short-cuts’ like not working off a check-list... so that something such as ‘refilling the oil’ is easily forgotten.

Again, do you think they would change the oil without the OP ordering it? And it would not have made it through the test drive and to the OP's home with the drain plug out. 

 

7 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

At a guess, the dip-stick may have had ‘almost zero oil stuck to it’

i.e. when we check our oil there is a max and min mark on the dip-stick, was the oil significantly below the min-mark on the dip-stick indicating ‘almost zero’ oil (also meaning significantly below the min mark)

With a seven liter capacity, the stick will read low at a 0.5-1 liter low and zero at 1-2 liters low. The engine could run without damage another 5,000 with the stick reading zero. 

 

7 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Thats an illogical response... The oil level warning light or sensor could have failed at any time in the last number of years, months or weeks.

What is this 1950? The light comes on every time you turn the key on, and if the sensor was out the engine would probably not start, and certainly the check engine light would come one. Most/all modern automotive engines will shut down when oil pressure is lost. 

 

I think the whole thread is a wind up. 

So... with all of that information and discussion behind us.... 

 

What do we think happened ???

 

The Op noticed a power loss....  took the car in to the garage. 

The garage returned the car, the car seized 3 days (20km) later. 

The op noticed nearly zero (extremely low) oil.

 

Had the Op been driving around for a few months with extremely low oil and the timing of engine seizure was coincidence ? - Should the garage have checked the oil levels (I think yes, others say its not their job because they weren’t asked to - which I disagree with). 

 

Then what ?...  Oil very low oil. Oil filter loosened somehow while in the garage ?

By the time the Op got the car home it had lost sufficient oil to to cause seizure ? - a possibility.