RS265 cup breakdown

[gardener345]

Hi, I have a 2013 Renault Megane RS265 Cup.  At 48,800 km approximately one year ago as part of routine maintenance I had the auxiliary drive and timing belts replaced.  About 11 months and 2,900 km later I had a complete engine failure with loss of compression.  Renault diagnosed this as a broken drive belt which then got under the timing cover, resulting in disruption of the timing belt and consequent bending of the valves.  They concluded the cause was a workshop fitment error in replacing the belts, and repaired the engine at their cost (approx. $5000 in parts).  Four days and 55 km after I collected the repaired car, I had another complete engine failure with loss of compression.  The car was delivered back to the Renault dealer. The assessment was that again the drive belt was damaged and caused the timing belt to be disrupted. This time, however, they concluded the reason was due to crankshaft end float that caused the belt to jump ribs and split. They would not repair the car at their cost.

I have a photo of the drive belt taken from the top of the engine after the second breakdown.  This shows that the belt was still on the pulley, but on the RHS what appears to be an almost perfect “delineation” of the belt has occurred.  It is my understanding the drive belt on a F4RT engine is a 7-rib belt. I can’t accurately determine how many ribs are left but it doesn’t look like 7. I am still trying to get an independent inspection of the damage.

I have had very little response from the local Renault dealer. Accordingly, I have discussed the issue with many mechanics, and with the local roadside assistance organisation.  All have agreed that end float, unless very extreme, would not cause this problem, and I would have been aware of it if it was that severe.   

The car had only travelled 51,700 km before the first engine failure and has always been serviced according to specification by Renault dealers.

Is there anyone who can help with the diagnosis?

Thanks

[Docmattic]

Sorry to hear of these troubles. It must be frustrating.
 

Isn’t the dealers work warrantied under law? 55km later sounds like their screw up! that could literally be the trip home from the repair shop for some people.
 

Are you Sydney based? Give renotech a call.

Edited 25, May 2022 by Docmattic

[cairnsy]

Sorry to hear of your troubles. 

I'd guess, if this has happened a couple of times, they don't know what they are doing.

It may be that they have an unsupervised apprentice doing the work.

In any case, if you have had the car serviced regularly, according to your maintenance manual, you should not be liable for the costs under Australian consumer law.

I'd suggest you 'swat' up on consumer law and armed with that knowledge go back to the dealer and see what they say.

Agree with above comment and would contact Miles at RenoTech for advice.

Be advised he can be a bit hard to get hold of.

Good luck and let us know how you go.

 

[Matt205]

I'd be going straight to Renault, thats complete horseshit.

[acidwestern]

It looks like they have blatantly used a 6pk belt rather than a 7pk, that's far too clean to have delineated.

Have you got more photos? 

There is absolutely no way the factory tolerances on end float would result in a timing belt failure!

 

 

[slick]

1 hour ago, Matt205 said:

I'd be going straight to Renault, thats complete horseshit.

Yes - and with a really good lawyer, and pen and paper in preparation for writing a writ !!!!

[Clio43]

7 hours ago, gardener345 said:

.This time, however, they concluded the reason was due to crankshaft end float that caused the belt to jump ribs and split. They would not repair the car at their cost.

I have a photo of the drive belt taken from the top of the engine after the second breakdown.  This shows that the belt was still on the pulley, but on the RHS what appears to be an almost perfect “delineation” of the belt has occurred.  It is my understanding the drive belt on a F4RT engine is a 7-rib belt. I can’t accurately determine how many ribs are left but it doesn’t look like 7. I am still trying to get an independent inspection of the damage.

What a load of shit.  Excessive crankshaft end float can be quickly checked by looking at the crank pulley while depressing the clutch, you will see the crank move, also the clutch would be inoperative,  as the clutch release travel would be lost with crankshaft movement.

That belt has not lost a rib, if it had were is the edge not worn or torn.  My guess is that that potentially the cambelt tensioner has either been incorrectly set or not unlocked after fitting the belt.  After 55km the belt had its initial stretch and it has jumped a tooth (or 2), valves into pistons again.  Either poor workmanship or a faulty part.  Definitely a warranty repair.  If no joy with the repair I would contact your local Consumer Body, and also the MTA (if that is what they are called in SA.)

Should also add.  IF it was crankshaft end float why would that not be covered by warranty?  

Good luck

Mark 

Edited 25, May 2022 by Clio43

[gardener345]

 I am new to forums  so not sure how to reply to comments.   So here goes:

Thanks to all that have replied

 Docmatic/Cairnsy :  Yes it is very frustrating, essentially I have  not had the car since  mid Feb ( well for 4 days only).  I am not Sydney based but will try and contact  Renotech.

 I have been  researching consumer law and it is my view they  are responsible from a unsatisfactory service point of view and consumer law, but I need more info to go ahead (hence forum).

Matt205:  I have been in contact with Renault Australia in Melbourne who have been reasonably helpful.   It is my understanding that  the local dealer sent a post warranty claim to Renault Australia about 4 weeks ago but it seems from  a recent call I made to Melbourne that a decision has not been  made. The  local road side assistance organization is waiting to hear about the warranty claim  before making an  onsite inspection (and so it goes).

Acidwestern:  The photo shown is the best I have . Your thoughts on the use  of a 6 vs 7 rib belt ( presumably non turbo vs turbo engine) are very interesting.  I also find the very CLEAN "delamination" of the belt curious.   The measurement of the end float by the local dealer is 0.13mm (0.03 is apparently the specified tolerance).  Every mechanic I have spoken to says that a 0.1mm difference would not cause the belt to jump.  I was given a list of the parts used in the initial repair and have a part number for the accessory belt kit used and will try and track this down.

[Clio43]

48 minutes ago, gardener345 said:

 The measurement of the end float by the local dealer is 0.13mm (0.03 is apparently the specified tolerance).  Every mechanic I have spoken to says that a 0.1mm difference would not cause the belt to jump.  I was given a list of the parts used in the initial repair and have a part number for the accessory belt kit used and will try and track this down.

Sorry but I don't know where the so called Renault Dealer is getting their information from.  No engine is going to be set up to run with .03mm (.0012") end float clearance.  .13mm (.005") sounds about right to me.

The figures that I found for crankshaft end float for Renault 4FR is  .07-.23mm (.003-.009") so your engine is spot on spec.  Most engine run around .003 to .008" crank end float clearance.

[gardener345]

  1 hour ago, gardener345 said:

 The measurement of the end float by the local dealer is 0.13mm (0.03 is apparently the specified tolerance).  Every mechanic I have spoken to says that a 0.1mm difference would not cause the belt to jump.  I was given a list of the parts used in the initial repair and have a part number for the accessory belt kit used and will try and track this down.

Sorry but I don't know where the so called Renault Dealer is getting their information from.  No engine is going to be set up to run with .03mm (.0012") end float clearance.  .13mm (.005") sounds about right to me.

The figures that I found for crankshaft end float for Renault 4FR is  .07-.23mm (.003-.009") so your engine is spot on spec.  Most engine run around .003 to .008" crank end float clearance.

 

 Thanks Clio43.  Missed your comment while I was writing earlier reply.   I am VERY glad to  see your comment that my engine is spot on spec for end float.   I suspected it was, it has been carefully maintained and has only travelled about 52k km.   The figures I quoted were what were given to me in a hand written report  in discussion with the service manager  when they explained they would not cover the  cost of the second engine rebuild.

[HamishW96]

Even if the crankshaft end float was their cause, and failure occurred after 55km, wouldn't the technician (maybe I'm being too kind here) have picked it up when installing the belt?

I've driven a knocking f4r about 100km which literally rattled the crank pulley off the engine (a few threads holding it 'on' and had no belt failure. I think you may be getting the run around...

[Gambit]

Take it straight to your consumer affairs office and also lodge it with your local Civil and Administrative tribunal and send them the case number to the Renault dealer once submitted. That will get the ball moving and send them into overdrive to sort it out. 

[ALLEZ]

+1 you see, to have a number of available arguments under s54 of the Australian Consumer Law. 

You should get legal advice about the following:

1. The car is not of acceptable quality because it is not as durable as a reasonable consumer would regard as acceptable having regard to the nature of the vehicle (especially, low kms etc);

2. The failure is a major failure because it has rendered the car undriveable, and a reasonable consumer would not have purchased the vehicle knowing that it would go through 2 engines in quick succession before the first major service 60k is even scheduled;

3. if it is a major failure, it follows that you're entitled to reject the vehicle and elect either a refund or replacement.  (If the failure is minor, the dealer has to remedy the defect, but can choose how to do so).

You need to be careful and get legal advice about your communications with the dealer/Renault. 

Rejecting a vehicle has to be done clearly and correctly.  If they offer a repair, be cautious because this might amount to you electing a remedy (instead of refund/replacement).

 

Separately, aside from the vehicle, there is a consumer guarantee that service work will be of acceptable quality. The service work doesn't seem to have been of acceptable quality given that it was followed by a catastrophic engine failure on 2 occasions in quick succession. The claim for a remedy on this front will be replacement of the engine and associated costs inc. rental car.

If you need to issue proceedings, be mindful of the jurisdictional limit in your State - if you're Victoria there is no issue with VCAT but the position in NSW may be different. 

From the looks of it, this is a case where if you issued against both the selling dealer and Renault, Renault would be looking to the selling dealer's service practices and tie around the dealer's neck.  They would say the car was fine until it was blown up by the bad service.

Get in touch with a lawyer in your jurisdiction who has experience running ACL claims.  If you can't find one, PM me.

[gardener345]

Replies to comments not already addressed:

Thanks for your comments they are very helpful.

HamishW96:    I  agree with your tech assessment. The workshop test drove the repaired car for 10km and when I collected it said  that it was good to drive interstate (Hmmm)..  I had no indication of the problem  until the engine blew again with an instant loss of power, i.e. no untoward  noise/vibration etc.

Gambit and Allez:    There is some terrific advice and wording in your comments.  As a legal novice it is difficult to get ones head around the terminology used. I have  approached the  Consumer and Business Commission in SA  previously and  will do so  again with more understanding of the processes.  The local  Renault dealer  seem to be dragging its feet  and a more legal approach  may  get them to be more proactive.