Buying a potential death trap!? Would you?

Honest John Back Room » Motoring discussion
What is life like with your car? Let us know and win £500 in John Lewis vouchers | No thanks
View Threaded
Thu 30 Sep 2010 00:42
Buying a potential death trap!? Would you? - Med

Hey guys, just a small question.

Would you purchase a car knowing that if you forgot to check your weekly oil levels or missed your service by a few miles that your car can have an engine run-away....(speed up on its own accord without user input)?

The fix for an engine run-away is an oil change!

So, would you buy one knowing this?

Edited by Med on 30/09/2010 at 00:53

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Thu 30 Sep 2010 01:16
Buying a potential death trap!? Would you? - Rob C

Sounds like a loaded question to me.

What's on your mind?

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Thu 30 Sep 2010 05:28
Buying a potential death trap!? Would you? - SteveLee

Sounds like a loaded question to me.

What's on your mind?

Sounds like a Mazda 6 diesel.
Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Thu 30 Sep 2010 11:56
Buying a potential death trap!? Would you? - Med

SteveLee,

Guessed it right! You see, i have tried complaining to VOSA for example and they do not see this being dangerous for the reason being they only have a handful of complaints for the same problem. I am reporting them because they ignored everything to do with Toyota until people got hurt.

We need something like the Lemon Law, even though most say the Sales of Good Act is similar it doesnt have the back-bone as the Lemon law in America.

I had an engine run-away and Mazda are not taking it serious.. they are telling me if we dont check our oil levels basically one day off the scheduled weekly checks then over-runs can happen. How is that not dangerous?

This is a loaded question :P

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Thu 30 Sep 2010 12:34
Buying a potential death trap!? Would you? - Rob C

Well, there was nothing wrong with Toyotas, it was just dumb people mashing the wrong pedal.

You are talking about dieseling, where the engine starts to pick up oil in the sump and run on that?

Are you therefore saying that the Full mark for sump oil is so high that a tiny drip into the sump over a week will cause it to rise enough for dieseling to occur?

Could there be a leak causing this, if it happens on a weekly basis or have Mazda simply told you you should be checking oil weekly and you have a problem with this car due to a long term buildup of fuel into the sump and are therefore linking the two together?

If not then yes, I would agree this is a bad design of engine, if it fills up with fuel / oil on a weekly basis.

Edited by Rob C on 30/09/2010 at 12:35

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Thu 30 Sep 2010 12:51
Buying a potential death trap!? Would you? - Med

Im not sure if you have read my previous posts in regards to the case with Mazda, still on-going.

I dont think it is dieseling, you see the difference - most cars that pick up on oil from the sump you can't switch the ignition off and you have to just let it go and go until the engine blows up unless your a mechanic and can cut off some sort of pipe. But, my case, i have a 62% diesel/oil contamination in the engine oil.

Mazda's reason's which are very brief believe me, over 1 year now trying to get a proper answer from them are telling me: "This engine over-run occured due to you not carrying out your weekly oil checks, the normal operation of the DPF allows diesel to be injected into the engine oil to burn the soot off once at the required temperature" (i could go on forever about the dpf)....To date, i have not got one viable answer from them why there is to much diesel, its an unacceptable limit right? They keep saying, i didnt check oil levels weekly because if i did then i would have noticed this & that i must have ignored all warning lights for the DPF..

I always check my oil levels, and no warning lights ever come on because when the engine over-run happend and luckily i switched the engine off i took a pic of my dashboard and there was nothing there & no fault codes have been found by Mazda.

My car is sitting on my drive for the past year as Mazda's words on 1 document "DO NOT DRIVE, DO NO START, DO NOT ALLOW TO WARM AND DO NOT REVV" So i listened to them and started to begin my legal battle. The car is now near the internal inspection stage so we will see what that brings up.

One important question Mazda have failed to answer: You say weekly checks are essential, you must be classing a certain average of miles that the average driver consumes in a week right? Then what happens for example in 1 week i were to drive the length of England and back ---- is there a mileage limit on when i should stop the car and check my oil levels. And what would happen if im on a long journey and stuck in 25 miles of traffic, the DPF has no hope in hell of regenerating - if the light comes on, what does the average person do in this stage.

No surprise why they have not answered.

Sorry if the above is confusing, i have tons to say but i have to stop somewhere.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Thu 30 Sep 2010 23:51
Buying a potential death trap!? Would you? - Rob C

Ah right, I was not aware of previous postings.

It all sounds like a bit of blame shifting. Whilst everyone here would agree that regular oil checks are essential for long life and efficent motoring, I would be surprised if all car manufacturers didn't build in some sort of negligence-proofing to their cars. I rarely see anyone on any of the streets I've lived on, checking their oil or tyres. Its a nice get-out-of-jail card for Mazda, but all cars should run for a long while with no maintenance at all.

My very first car, a basic Seat Ibiza with the fiat 903cc engine went untouched for 18 months before it started to cut out.

Presumably then you have already answered questions like " Do you do lots of short runs?"

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Fri 1 Oct 2010 11:26
Buying a potential death trap!? Would you? - Collos25

How old is the car and how many miles has it done is there a full service history with it.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Fri 1 Oct 2010 14:57
Buying a potential death trap!? Would you? - Med

When it happened...

The car was 10 months old, 11,981 miles and it wasn't even due a service yet. But Mazda are telling me i should have readlly had a service done before it was due (12,500 miles or 1 year)

It was not due....i wouldnt do a service early if it does not state that in the handbook.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Fri 1 Oct 2010 14:47
Buying a potential death trap!? Would you? - Med

Blame shifting is just the start! When it first got recovered to the garage and i argued that i could have got killed they said the following:

1. You didnt check your oil levels and we have ways to prove this (funny that because RAC checked it on-site where i got the car recovered :S lol)

2. You or your family must have gone to the petrol station recentely and topped the oil up with the diesel pump! Unbelievable right?

3. You've ignored all warning lights on the car (when i can prove there was none)

4. I am doing constant short journeys and not letting it open up now and again.

Number 4 seems like the more understandable one right? lol!

I am going to take, well in the process of taking mazda to court for 1st the car being mis-sold to me, it not being fit for its purpose and that it was damn right dangerous when i had the over-run.

The thing thats so stupid is as you say your first car, i had a vauxhall corsa 1l in white! lol and i never had a problem with it. The very WORST that should happen to a car if you don't check the oil is...a dead engine or the engine cuts out - not b***** revvs up on its own & i cannot see any court not agreeing with me there.

Mazda are simply telling me, if you had your oil changed you wouldnt have had this over-run! haha i have never heard so much crap in my life. The "Do you do lots of short runs" Yep! i laughed and asked if he was joking, then i told me family and they laughed asking me if i was joking and it went on all around work. No-one has heard of anything like that before.

Did anyone happen to watch watchdog last night about the vauxhall mariva's (i think that was the model)? it was about power steering failing without warning - VOSA of whom we all should put our trust in because they are the people you complain too told the customers "We understand that the powersteering is failing and we have had numerous complaints on this, but we cannot class this as a safety issue because the driver still has the use of steering" This is the same sort of lines they are using with me. "We cannot do anything because you could control your car and there are only a few complaints".

In VOSA's code of practise it states they can look at a case when a certain amount of people have complained or depending how life threatening the issue is.

Do you class an engine over-run to be potentially life threatening or have a risk of causing significant damage to a persons life? I certainly do.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Fri 1 Oct 2010 17:35
Buying a potential death trap!? Would you? - Collos25

I think you have been treated terribly I wish all the luck in retrieving your money and getting satisfaction.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Fri 1 Oct 2010 20:20
Buying a potential death trap!? Would you? - Cymrogwyllt

As I understand it feeding in excess fuel is part of the process of purging the DPF.

Some of this can find it's way in to the sump, especially with an older, worn, engine.

This can lead on to the the engine running on the contents of the sump, generally on only very worn engines where the piston rings are very worn.

The way to stop the engine in that case is to block the air intake, normally with a big rag or such.

I run a Polo Bluemotion and very rarely get the engine hot enough for long enough to complete the purging. We have a lack of high speed roads around here and seldom more than 5 mile runs.

The DPF warning light has come on four times in 6000 miles (ten months). The fix is in the manual. Run at 1800+rpm (60 mph+ in top gear) for as long as it takes to put the light out.

I've found that three or four miles at 2500 rpm in second or third puts out the light.

The manual strongly suggests that low miles running reverts to 10k/12 month service intervals. I'll probably be corrected but I think that the risk of running on is a factor. Running to extended intervals (remember oil changes every 3k?) is not a risk I'm willing to run.

As for weekly oil checks I check weekly until I establish that oil is not used or lost, then every few weeks then every now and again. I've not found a need to top up oil in the last 20 years plus

Edited by Avant on 01/10/2010 at 22:54

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Sat 2 Oct 2010 11:33
Buying a potential death trap!? Would you? - dieselnut

' I've not found a need to top up oil in the last 20 years plus '

With cars that have DPF & do lots of short runs, more likely to be checking how much the oil level has risen over the high mark, as the sump gradually fills with diesel due to the many aborted regenerations.

Then when the level gets high enough you have your potential runaway.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Sat 2 Oct 2010 12:06
Buying a potential death trap!? Would you? - Med

but what i still dont understand that if its so obvious to Mazda and other manufacturers including VOSA why is something not done about it? i.e. i was just reading a jag forum and the cars have an oil high sensor and an oil dilution sensor.

Its so dangerous that if they class it as not what's the point in having all other sfaety features?

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Sat 2 Oct 2010 14:18
Buying a potential death trap!? Would you? - madf

but what i still dont understand that if its so obvious to Mazda and other manufacturers including VOSA why is something not done about it? i.e. i was just reading a jag forum and the cars have an oil high sensor and an oil dilution sensor.

Its so dangerous that if they class it as not what's the point in having all other sfaety features?

It IS NOT dangerous. That's why you have a gearbox, clutch and brakes. To stop the engine driving the wheels and to stop the car.

Better to blow the engine than crash..( Toyota's runaway accelerator crashes in the US were - on latter review of the ECU - all caused by driver error - mainly pressing accelerator rather than brake)...

Does not excuse Mazda.. but VOSA are correctly unconcerned with consumer issues...

Of course, Mazda (and Renault before them) are to blame but that is a consumer issue..

New Mazda diesel owners should note that Googling "Mazda diesel faults" brings up threads on this forum as the first item in a search..

A little research before buying goes a long way..

And of course, this very subject was covered in:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/caradvice/honestjohn/7821469/Mazda-diesel-problems-not-part-of-a-recall-Honest-John.html

I can recommend google with internet searches for finding out basic facts of life..:-)

Edited by madf on 02/10/2010 at 14:26

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Sat 2 Oct 2010 19:42
Buying a potential death trap!? Would you? - Cymrogwyllt

[quote]

With cars that have DPF & do lots of short runs, more likely to be checking how much the oil level has risen over the high mark, as the sump gradually fills with diesel due to the many aborted regenerations.

Then when the level gets high enough you have your potential runaway

[end quote]

Thank you for confirming my thoughts on the matter. In practice an annual service means 7.5 to 8k between oil changes is probable here so hoping for the best.



Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Sat 2 Oct 2010 20:27
Buying a potential death trap!? Would you? - Med

Hey guys,

thanks for your replies. As i have told Mazda, i check my oil levels weekly - but in the week that i had this run-away i travelled approx 800 miles, so i still had the "1" day to check my oil levels.... from sunday - sunday.

The question i asked Mazda and the one they have failed to answer is if you specifiy you have to check your oils levels weekly then you are obviously averaging a certain mileage right? how many miles can i drive before i have to check it, thats not in the handbook.

Also, as many experts have told me - if i have such a large amount of diesel in my engine oil 62% contamination, then even if i didn't check my oil levels it just couldn't have got to that level unless there is a leak somewhere.

When i say this purley is dangerous i mean it, so, for example you guys check your oil levels let's say every day - if for some reason there is a leak and diesel gets into your engine oil without you knowing, you could be picking your kids up from school and bang, the engine starts to run-away and picking up speed in crazy time... you could kill, get hurt your self or in a different situation where you only ahve a few seconds to think smash into something.

It cannot come down to, well its not dangerous because if this happens you have your gearbox etc, the first thing any average driver would do is turn the engine off but by the short time you realise what's happening, a few seconds have gone by and that's all that is needed to crash! Imagine if you were in traffic?? how would you explain that to the person in front, explain it to the insurance and explain it to Mazda... they would think its bull what your saying.

The only thing i can't get my head round is why no-one thinks its dangerous - at the end of the day these kind of things with now days technology just SHOULDNT happen right? It doesn't mention in the handbook that if you dont check your oil levels your car can potentially over-run, if it did then good on Mazda for warning people at least. It says....if you dont check your oil levels on a periodic basis then it will cause severe engine damage.

If they bring out a design like this, it should be condemned. Ask any average driver take a school run mother for example - if you tell her this can happen to your car if you forget to check your oil levels that car would either be sold or taken back to the dealer.

As for long distance driving, what happens if you are doing a long journey and get stuck in 25 miles of traffic on the M25, half way through the DPF light comes on telling you to regenerate it, you can't because your in traffic....please guys, what would you do!?

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Sat 2 Oct 2010 20:41
Buying a potential death trap!? Would you? - Med

Hi madf, thanks for your message above.

I done my reasearch on this car before i bought it, but when i placed the order it was only a few months after it came out....so no-one would have reported anything yet as sales were slow at first. If you look on google now and type in mazda 6 dpf or as you say mazda diesel faults - loads will come up.

Do you not find it extremely funny how after all of these problems, the new shape Mazda was only out for like 1 1/2 years until they introduced a newer mazda, exactly the same shape but a 2.2d which with a sarcastic "Strangely" does not have the DPF issues that the 2.0d had due to certain loops being changed round from open to closed where the diesel is injected into the engine oil... that should say it all!

In regards to VOSA, i am not involving them into the consumer issue of the case, not once have i mentioned any legal terms, told them i would pass you onto my solicitor etc.... i want an answer to how they cannot investigate a serious issue like this, how they cannot class this to be potentially dangerous & not a risk to injury or death.

On watchdog the other day, they took on the Vauxall Mariva case about power steering, any of you see that? Basically, the Mariva's power steering failed without warning & to cut this short VOSA told the customers that this is not a safety issue nor will we invesitgate this because we have confirmed with the manufacturer nothing is of a dangerous nature and for the fact that the driver still has steering capabilities.....this changed when watchdog got onto them and the BBC Breakfast presenter drove the car and showed just how dangerous it is.

There was an article from thetimes online on how VOSA ignored everyones case with the Toyota, just google 'VOSA Toyota claims' and it should be the first one called "Toyota, VOSA Going on?"

Edited by Avant on 03/10/2010 at 00:01

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Sun 3 Oct 2010 11:36
Buying a potential death trap!? Would you? - Gotanoldhondar

Med you are right,Mazda are going to try to fob you off,this is clearly a safety issue and

needs looking at.VOSA are a toothless bunch like the FSA in the pockets of the big boys.

I wish you good luck and next time get a Honda as Mazda obviously cannot do diesels

right.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Sun 3 Oct 2010 13:17
Buying a potential death trap!? Would you? - Med

Hi Wade,

thanks for the support mate. Mazda have already tried to fob me off - this has been going on since August last year. Only recenetely did the selling dealer come to me with 3 offers and i dont even need to write them on here because they are damn right embarrasing and an insult.

Can you see any court denying what i am trying to say!?

Saying about Honda's it was a decision when i was looking for a new car either a Mazda or Honda! Shame i picked the wrong one?

The thing i am more angry about is i am getting a lot of complaints on my mazda-campaign site at how BAD mazda customer service is... when they have your money & you have an issue to get anything out of them even when you think the issue is covered under warranty, they deny it and make you pay....at the end of the day what choice do people have? we all rely on our cars now days but i am lucky i can borrow the family VW Crafter! reliable and big! :)

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Mon 4 Oct 2010 11:58
Buying a potential death trap!? Would you? - Med

An update wiht VOSA. I recentely sent them a letter re-stating all my points and telling them what they have ignored.

They sent a short reply that said....

"The responsibility for the investigation into reports of safety defects under the terms of the Code of Practice on Vehicle Safety Defects, supported by the General Product Safety Regulations 2005 rests with the manufacturer who possesses the detailed product knowledge. VOSA’s role is to see to establish, in conjunction with the manufacturer, whether or not a deficiency in the design or construction of the product exists, and whether that deficiency is likely to create a significant risk of personal injury or death.

VOSA have already acknowledged that the engine run away does have safety implications, however it is not deemed to be a safety defect as determined by the Code of Practice on Safety recalls."

-----

Obviously there is a safety issue if they confirm that a run-away does have safety implications but then the 1st paragraph says they seek to establish whether a deficiency in the design of construction can cause a significant risk of personal injury or death.... if a safety implication exists then that is surely a risk of personal injury right?

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Mon 4 Oct 2010 17:46
Buying a potential death trap!? Would you? - Gotanoldhondar

So VOSA are saying their is a safety issue but they are not going to do anything about it

because it is not their remit,that will look good for them and Mazda when it kills someone.

Med maybe you should seek some legal advice on how you could go forward with this ,as

sadly in the UK today it seems nobody is accountable for anything ,good luck.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Mon 4 Oct 2010 20:22
Buying a potential death trap!? Would you? - Med

Hi wade, thanks for your reply.

I am seeking legal advice, the whole situation has been with my solicitor for over a year now. Reason why its taking so long? Mazda selling dealer are taking over 1 month to reply even though we specify a 2 week response limit. Now if you imagine how many letters need to be sent back and forth? thats the time delay.

I only just got that response from VOSA today and as you say VOSA are saying there is a safety issue but are not going to do anything about it....i am now going to question no matter how long it takes me about their code of practice, does not make any sense if they will only investigate a case if it has a sign to create personal injury or death....does this mean they are putting a certain level on what they class as a "safety issue", maybe there is a scale 1-10? lol

You see, i would write my own letters and not use a solicitor but she is good at the moment and this kind of case has to be done legally and not by my self.

I am so fustrated with the whole thing now and i am praying for the day this will end.

It's totally wrong what VOSA are doing? I have even tried to complain to the SMMT and i have no response from them even though they promise to reply within 21 days.... i have waited 63! which means i have tried 3 times, each after the 21 days has ended.

But if anyone from Mazda reads this, i won't be giving up! Just a shame because its a nice looking car.

Who the hell do we go to for help? I feel really sorry for the people who cannot afford a solicitor & have to take on Mazda.....

Mehdi - www.mazda-campaign.co.uk

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Tue 5 Oct 2010 21:25
Buying a potential death trap!? Would you? - Gotanoldhondar

That is shocking customer service,good on you for keeping at them,just make sure it does

not ruin your life be it through money or your loved ones,i hope you get a result as this is

clearly dangerous.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link