Wish me luck. Going in for the recall job.

[Gunman]

Originally Posted by Mr.ac

Well that is a pickle. The horror stories all come from Toyota mechanics working on Subaru engines.

There are plenty from Subaru's dealing with "horror" stories too. About 20% of the post recall issues on the spreadsheet are Subaru's, 1 in 5, which is about the same as the 2013 BRZ's to FRS ratio.

I am NOT convinced it's a mechanic issue.

[Turbo]

Originally Posted by Gunman

There are plenty from Subaru's dealing with "horror" stories too. About 20% of the post recall issues on the spreadsheet are Subaru's, 1 in 5, which is about the same as the 2013 BRZ's to FRS ratio.

I am NOT convinced it's a mechanic issue.

Except that the publicly available recall procedure updates quite clearly indicate it is.

[Gunman]

Originally Posted by Turbo

Except that the publicly available recall procedure updates quite clearly indicate it is.

Updates are an attempt to mitigate the failures, but I'm still not convinced it it 100% mechanic related. After watching everything that was done with my car, and the lack of excess sealant, there is something else going on as well.

[Turbo]

Originally Posted by Gunman

Updates are an attempt to mitigate the failures, but I'm still not convinced it it 100% mechanic related. After watching everything that was done with my car, and the lack of excess sealant, there is something else going on as well.

You mean, like, applying tri-bond in areas where it can block oil flow out of the timing cover? Or having pieces of old gasket material make their way into the oil pan where they later block oil flow by clogging the strainer or oil passages?


That's all covered off in the procedure updates as well.

[toast]

'After watching...' You actually watched them reassemble your motor?

[Gunman]

Originally Posted by Turbo

You mean, like, applying tri-bond in areas where it can block oil flow out of the timing cover? Or having pieces of old gasket material make their way into the oil pan where they later block oil flow by clogging the strainer or oil passages?


That's all covered off in the procedure updates as well.

Beyond just that. In my case, one piece of sealant was found partially blocking one passage in the cam carrier. Oil pan was dropped to check the pickup, and the pickup tube was boroscoped from the timing cover side, and nothing was found. Error codes were for the RH intake timing area, and they replaced cam sprocket (twice), ecm, intake cam, cam carrier, head...and the problem remained.

[Turbo]

Originally Posted by Gunman

Beyond just that. In my case, one piece of sealant was found partially blocking one passage in the cam carrier. Oil pan was dropped to check the pickup, and the pickup tube was boroscoped from the timing cover side, and nothing was found. Error codes were for the RH intake timing area, and they replaced cam sprocket (twice), ecm, intake cam, cam carrier, head...and the problem remained.

But is this not all related to technician error?

Getting sealant into the oiling system is a technician fault. Having that sealant blocking oil flow up by the cam carrier could easily have disrupted oil flow to the variable valve control system, right?

And I believe that would cause the VVT system to malfunction since it operates off of oil pressure, doesn't it? And that chain of events would trigger the CEL cam timing codes since the cam isn't doing what the computer thinks it should be doing and likely damaged the VVT system inside by running it dry.


I would think they should have just replaced the VVT unit itself instead of everything that they did.


As an aside- Personally, if I had the recall done and afterwards they found sealant blocking (or partially blocking) an oil passage in the heads I would demand a new engine, and involve a lawyer if necessary. There is a 100% chance that lubrication failure did permanent damage that will (at best) shorten the lifespan of the engine a bit and at worse cause a major failure just far enough removed from the recall fix that you will be shit-outta-luck having them cover the repair when it does happen.

[Gunman]

I'm only basing my thoughts, on what I have personally seen. i believe there is something going on, beyond just technician error.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Gunman

I'm only basing my thoughts, on what I have personally seen. i believe there is something going on, beyond just technician error.

There is. It is a poor design choice to use sealant so close to oil passages. Even a contentious tech that applies just a small dollop to the wrong place can partially block a passage. It wouldn't take much. The removal of the old sealant is more on the techs but even then all they have to do is miss one piece about twice the size of a pin head for it to block a bearing orifice and run it dry. The techs are taking the flake but in reality the design, use of the sealant and initial very poor instructions were setting them up for failure.
If you think it is something beyond the sealant I would be interested in your theory since there is piles and piles of evidence pointing at the removal and/or improper installation of the new stuff to be disregarded in favour of some mystery cause.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Gunman

Beyond just that. In my case, one piece of sealant was found partially blocking one passage in the cam carrier. Oil pan was dropped to check the pickup, and the pickup tube was boroscoped from the timing cover side, and nothing was found. Error codes were for the RH intake timing area, and they replaced cam sprocket (twice), ecm, intake cam, cam carrier, head...and the problem remained.

Easy

Originally Posted by Turbo

But is this not all related to technician error?

Getting sealant into the oiling system is a technician fault. Having that sealant blocking oil flow up by the cam carrier could easily have disrupted oil flow to the variable valve control system, right?

And I believe that would cause the VVT system to malfunction since it operates off of oil pressure, doesn't it? And that chain of events would trigger the CEL cam timing codes since the cam isn't doing what the computer thinks it should be doing and likely damaged the VVT system inside by running it dry.


I would think they should have just replaced the VVT unit itself instead of everything that they did.


As an aside- Personally, if I had the recall done and afterwards they found sealant blocking (or partially blocking) an oil passage in the heads I would demand a new engine, and involve a lawyer if necessary. There is a 100% chance that lubrication failure did permanent damage that will (at best) shorten the lifespan of the engine a bit and at worse cause a major failure just far enough removed from the recall fix that you will be shit-outta-luck having them cover the repair when it does happen.

This ^

[maslin]

I’ve been glueing engines together since 2006, Mercedes has been doing it a whole lot longer than that. I’ve never blown one up, never wiped a cam, nothing like that. Never even seen it happen to someone else.

Plenty of bulletins out there for over application, warnings in work instructions to clean thoroughly and not drop pieces down holes. You try to be as careful as possible, but I’m sure I’ve left plenty of strips of the stuff in there.

If it drops to the pan it will either get stuck in the strainer, not a big deal until there’s a lot of it there. Or blown though the pump to the filter, also not a big deal until there’s a lot in there.

The concept isn’t the problem. Engines that haven’t been worked on aren’t blowing up going down the road, and they’re all glued together the same way before and after the recall. Or at least they should be.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by maslin

I’ve been glueing engines together since 2006, Mercedes has been doing it a whole lot longer than that. I’ve never blown one up, never wiped a cam, nothing like that. Never even seen it happen to someone else.

Plenty of bulletins out there for over application, warnings in work instructions to clean thoroughly and not drop pieces down holes. You try to be as careful as possible, but I’m sure I’ve left plenty of strips of the stuff in there.

If it drops to the pan it will either get stuck in the strainer, not a big deal until there’s a lot of it there. Or blown though the pump to the filter, also not a big deal until there’s a lot in there.

The concept isn’t the problem. Engines that haven’t been worked on aren’t blowing up going down the road, and they’re all glued together the same way before and after the recall. Or at least they should be.

Sorry wasn't clear. It isn't the basic concept it is the application of it to that particular engine. The methodology appears to be different from others and that is what is messing with them.
And yes engines that were not worked on HAVE been blowing up for the very same reason going right back to 2013. It is well document on here way before the recall was ever even announced. In many of the factory fresh engines that blew they found sealant blocking passages so even the robots applying it couldn't do it right for a period of time. I am not saying that "gluing engines" together is bad overall just that this particular engine seems to be abnormally susceptible to even the slightest error. This is a result of some poor engineering not just careless or "dumb" techs.

[maslin]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Sorry wasn't clear. It isn't the basic concept it is the application of it to that particular engine. The methodology appears to be different from others and that is what is messing with them.
And yes engines that were not worked on HAVE been blowing up for the very same reason going right back to 2013. It is well document on here way before the recall was ever even announced. In many of the factory fresh engines that blew they found sealant blocking passages so even the robots applying it couldn't do it right for a period of time. I am not saying that "gluing engines" together is bad overall just that this particular engine seems to be abnormally susceptible to even the slightest error. This is a result of some poor engineering not just careless or "dumb" techs.

That makes sense. I was aware of the early engine problems, seemed like they had the figured out pretty early on.

Even better idea. Call up GE, produce a 3D printer sized robot. Fixtures to locate a known component, programs for every piece that needs sealant. Might take 20 years to pay off, but that no worse than a $80k alignment setup.

Machine shop buddy said they hired a robot and fired 4 employees. It’s the way of the future

[Ichima]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Sorry wasn't clear. It isn't the basic concept it is the application of it to that particular engine. The methodology appears to be different from others and that is what is messing with them.
And yes engines that were not worked on HAVE been blowing up for the very same reason going right back to 2013. It is well document on here way before the recall was ever even announced. In many of the factory fresh engines that blew they found sealant blocking passages so even the robots applying it couldn't do it right for a period of time. I am not saying that "gluing engines" together is bad overall just that this particular engine seems to be abnormally susceptible to even the slightest error. This is a result of some poor engineering not just careless or "dumb" techs.

Hey TCoat,
It seems you have pretty good advice in regards to our vehicles. I have been dealing with the dealership since February about my vehicle via the recall. Just 3 weeks ago they have taken fault because a Subaru Rep came and deemed it their fault after inspecting my car. He noted there was clogged oil passages due to old RTV in the oil pan and oil passages. The dealership repairing my vehicle now is only replacing the camshafts, intake and exhaust valves, oil and filter, and a rod bearing (not sure which or how many, they are not being transparent with me). Do you have think this work may seem sufficient, mind you i had driven nearly 400-500 miles after the recall and noticed the issues maybe 50miles in. They told me I was shit out of luck at the beginning and this was my only vehicle to get to work daily.