I have taken out a warranty for about £300 which covers most things including cambelt.
Check the small print.
I would wager that although the cambelt is covered, the tensioner/pulleys are not.
A few years ago I paid the most I ever have on a car, backed up with a warranty that refused to pay out when the tensioner pully broke up, trashing 50% of the valves... this was about 2000 miles after the belt had been changed, according to the service history.
I ended up rebuilding the engine myself, and the 'old' belt IMO did look new.
|
Just to add another similar experience to these:
Two days ago my wife was driving our 57 plate V70 2.4D at about 30 mph when she heard a "horrendous grinding noise" from the engine. At the same time the information display warned of "engine failure".
The car failed completely and was trucked back to the dealership.
It seems that a tensioner on the auxiliary belt failed, shredding the belt and causing ribbing on the timing belt to shred. Debris from this got behind the timing cover and fouled the timing gears. Undoubtedly pisons hit valves and valves have been bent. Don't yet know about con rod damage.
The cars is covered by warranty and the dealership have said they will provide a full written report on damage to the engine once it is stripped down.
|
|
I forgot to add that the car has done 26,000 miles
|
It's amazing how brands such as Mercedes, Saab and Volvo that once produced quality cars seem to have far more problems these days than Skodas or Korean motors
How the world has changed.
Edited by MVP on 14/01/2010 at 12:42
|
It seems like that - particularly with modern diesel engines. The 'quality cars' built their reputation mainly on petrol engines, and there were the older designs of diesels, like the VAG 1.9, the Peugeot / Citroen XUD and (especially) the good old Perkins Prima, that rattled on indestructibly for years.
Newer diesels seem to have too many add-ons (and too many three-leter acronyms) in the name of refinement which cause major failure.
|
Newer diesels seem to have too many add-ons (and too many three-leter acronyms) in the name of refinement which cause major failure.
Delete 'diesels' replace with 'vehicles' now you have it exactly right!
|
>>>the VAG 1.9, the Peugeot / Citroen XUD and (especially) the good old Perkins Prima, that rattled on indestructibly for years. Newer diesels seem to have too many add-ons (and too many three-leter acronyms) in the name of refinement which cause major failure.
Yet the tensioned is a basic mechanical component that should be so easy to get right.... just a bearing on a bracket sometimes with a spring.
The XUD tensioner (which rarely ever fails) is heavily built like a bit of military kit... tensioners on other makes can be like the proverbial christmas cracker toy.
|
|
Yes, on petrol as well as Diesel.
|
|
I know this thread is quite a few months old, but I thought I should add my story to it as a warning to other Volvo D5 owners.
On our way back from holiday recently the engine on our Volvo XC90 '04 2.4 D5 (55k) cut-out on the motorway, without any warning. The problem was that a cambelt tensioner had failed causing the cambelt to come off, causing all sorts of damage inside the cylinder head. My dad was also travelling back on the same day and passed us on the motorway. Within an hour I heard that he had also broken down in his Volvo V70 '04 2.4 D5 (70k), and you've probably guessed the cause - cambelt tensioner failure.
As I now know from this thread, not to mention other Volvo forums, this component has been seen to fail well before the recommended 96k/8 years service interval. As my car is out of warranty and the last 2 services were performed by an independent garage, I don't expect (nor am I likely to receive) any 'good will' from Volvo, but it would seem that they urgently need to revise the recommended service interval of the tensioner pulley. Given the cost of the repair(s), it would have been nice to know of such failures when I bought the car (or when I registered my ownership on the Volvo UK website shortly after purchase 2 years ago). Afterall, how much would it really cost Volvo UK to suggest a shorter interval and to update customers - Honest John suggests "D5 timing belts, tensioners, pulleys and waterpumps all best changed at 60,000 miles or 4 years whichever comes first".
If some of these failures could be prevented, surely that would help to maintain brand loyalty?
|
|
As I started this thread off some time ago now I'll bring it to a conclusion. It took 18 months, a solicitor (paid by Legal Expenses Insurance), a report by a motor engineer and a lot of time on my part but finally the dealer at the 11th hour paid up. I had put in a claim for circa £2900 but settled at £2500. (I knocked off the independent garages cost and a transportation fee to get the vehicle to Volvo main dealer. Cheque received from dealer via my solicitor and has been cashed. So a reasonable result for me.
I recall Alta Ego being negative about the prospects to recover the costs so please don't be put off by such comments. If you feel annoyed then have a go. Seek out advice and pursue the claim. Most car insurance poicies have an optional Legal Expenses section and if there is a better than 50% chance of success they may take it on. The thing that tipped the balance in my favour was getting a Motor Engineers Report.
Annoyed Volvo Owner (slighly less annoyed now)
|
|
Very similar experience here except with a V50.
After 20,000 miles, the cam belt frayed, knocked the timing belt out and trashed the engine. Under the Sale of Goods Act mentioned here, you have 10 years to claim in respect of a defective product. My claim against Volvo (and I am now dealing with the head of the legal department in Gothenburg) is that the cam belt was defect or that the design of that part of the car was defective if it allowed the cam belt or tensioner to become damaged. Volvo deny there was a defect but give no explanation why.
There have been 3 recalls for this sequence of events (see below) but from the above Volvo seems to be ignoring the problem in a lot of cases. If these engines keep failing someone is going to get killed sooner or later.
http://www.theaa.com/allaboutcars/recalls/recalls.jsp?&makeName=Volvo&modelName=XC70&modelID=D5&makeId=E9&lowIndex=6
http://www.dft.gov.uk/vosa/apps/recalls/searches/expand.asp?uniqueID=DF126BD34221D2F38025796F004800B7&freeText=Blank&tx=VOSA
|
|
Sorry...it's the Consumer Protection Act 1987 section 2 and Schedule 1, 11A (3)
www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1987/43
I hope this helps someone so that they don't get ripped off.
|
Under the Sale of Goods Act mentioned here, you have 10 years to claim in respect of a defective product
SOGA gives you up to 6 years to claim, although I'm happy for someone more knowledgable than me to correct me
My claim against Volvo
SOGA gives you rights against the retailer who sold you the car, not the manufacturer; perhaps that's why you are geting no joy with Volvo
Good luck
|
|
Any manufacturer who offers to contribute 50% towards the repair of a 6 year old 75,000 mile old car should be aplauded and not critised. When you buy a car you have to consider that one day it might just break and cost you money after the warranty has run out. If this is something you cannot accept or afford you should use the train or bus.
|
|
How old is your V50, Seafield?
The Sale of Goods Act covcere the condition of a car when bought, which includes the possiblity of manufacturing faults. If it's 6 years old then the problem is likely to be that the manufacturer, Volvo in this case, hasn't made it clear what the advised age and mileage are for changing a component.
|
|
Thanks for the reply. The car is 5 and a half years old. The relevant part that broke is supposed to be changed after 120,000 miles according to the Volvo scheduled maintenance guide and mine broke after 20,000miles.
As you'll see from the recalls for the other cars I mentioned, this is happening on enough occasions to merit 3 separate recalls (at least 3, there may be others I don't know about).
On the legal side of things, I was confusing things mentioning the SOGA (sorry, my fault). It is the Consumer Protection Act 1987 that is important. Under that act you can sue the manufacturer or the dealer. In my case the dealer, was refusing to even consider that they might be responsible, which is why I contacted Volvo Gothenburg (Volvo Car Corporation) directly. You can complain until the car is 10 years old but this covers "defects" not normal wear and tear.
One of the previous postings mentioned that after 5 or 6 years you have to expect problems with the car and to pay for repairs. That is of course right, everything suffers from wear and tear. If you dont change the tyres on your car for ten years, you cant complain if you lose grip and crash the car.
However, if a part is designed to last 120,000 miles and breaks after 20,000 that is more than just the usual "wear and tear". That part is not even inspected in the Volvo service until 120,000 miles so it is obviously designed to last at least that long.
Obviously, I'm annoyed this has happened to my car but the worst that can happen to me is I have to spend a few thousand for a new engine. If it happens to someone else on a motorway, it could end up killing them which is why I think I have to say something about it.
|
|
Sorry for the dumb question - this is a long post and I havent managed to read all the posts yet.
Are you saying that 20,000 miles ago, an independant garage replaced the tensioner, or are you saying that the car is nearly six years old and has only done 20,000 miles?
This is becoming a failry regular occurence now. There seem quite a few D5 cars of various sorts on ebay sufferening this problem.
If the independant garage replaced the tensioner, I suspect they over tightened the belt, as many small garages dont bother to invest in the tools to measure belt tension.
I thought the replacement interval was 90K on these. Personally, I always change any timing belt at 50. Its not worth the risk.
|
|
Not a dumb question at all. The car has only done a total of 20,000 miles and it will soon be 6 years old (a combination of moving cities/having a second car/much shorter commute etc means it doesnt cover many miles). I've always dealt with the Volvo dealership where I bought the car new.
I know nothing about the technical side of things so i dont know if this is relevant, but I put the car into the garage to get them to repair the air con 2 months before the damage happened. They replaced the condenser and added new refrigerant/R13.
I wonder whether they maybe damaged something while doing that repair...
What I am surprised about is how this fault can happen on so many cars ie S80, V70, XC70, XC60 etc etc
|
It is the Consumer Protection Act 1987 that is important. Under that act you can sue the manufacturer or the dealer
I haven't read the full wording but a brief look suggests this applies to losses suffered as a result of a defect & not the defect itself. eg if an OEM brake system failed under normal use resulting in an accident then retailer & / or the manufcaturer could be held responsible for the consequences of the accident
That part is not even inspected in the Volvo service until 120,000 miles so it is obviously designed to last at least that long
Sorry but this is wishful thinking, I would suggest. Only the courts can decide how long a piece of string is
|
Thanks. Your reading of the Act is correct. However, the part which broke was the cambelt. The damage it caused was to the engine so legally I am entitled to compensation for the damage to the engine. As you point out, I am not entitled to compensation for the actual defective part that broke ie the cambelt.
The cost of a new cambelt isn't too much so I'm not that worried about having to pay for a new one.
|
|
