Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Please note that it is not permitted to have referral links posted in your signature. Keep these links contained in the appropriate forum. Thank you.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055940817/signature-rules

Shady Dealer

Options
1…34689…11

Comments

  • Options
    #152
    berrypendel
    Closed Accounts Posts: 365 ✭✭berrypendel


    zeteckiller wrote: »
    it wouldn't have passed the nct emissions test judging by the state of the engine, plus the engine management light came on which is also a failure point.

    p.s. limerick man, please don't attack me for having an opinion.
    how do you know?


  • Options
    #153
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 23,339 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    zeteckiller wrote: »
    it wouldn't have passed the nct emissions test judging by the state of the engine, plus the engine management light came on which is also a failure point.
    ...............

    I reckon it might well have passed an emissions test to be honest, I wouldn't be 100% sure that an engine warning light on a petrol is an NCT fail. I actually think it would pass, ABS and airbag warning lights etc are fails as a safety system has gone t1ts up.


  • Options
    #154
    zeteckiller
    Registered Users Posts: 23 ✭zeteckiller


    berrypendel wrote: »
    how do you know?
    If sn internet thread had weight in court everyone prosecuted would be posting saying they did no know the red light meant stop

    in my opinion it wouldn't. i'm a mechanic and i have seen engines in a similar state failing the nct on excessive emissions caused by worn piston rings, worn valve guides etc etc

    how do you know that it would pass? are you a mechanic?

    i said i don't know if an internet thread has any legal weight. i was only suggesting a possibility.


  • Options
    #155
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 23,339 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    ... I really think your wrong about the engine light being a fail, and I also think a Saab with a knock might well pass an emissions test.


  • Options
    #156
    L-M
    Registered Users Posts: 23,694 ✭✭✭✭L-M


    zeteckiller wrote: »
    in my opinion it wouldn't. i'm a mechanic and i have seen engines in a similar state failing the nct on excessive emissions caused by worn piston rings, worn valve guides etc etc

    how do you know that it would pass? are you a mechanic?

    i said i don't know if an internet thread has any legal weight. i was only suggesting a possibility.

    The picture of the sump sive that i posted past the Nct a week previous. I think you should just stop posting because you clearly haven't a clue and the advice you're giving the OP is hust confusing them further.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #157
    zeteckiller
    Registered Users Posts: 23 ✭zeteckiller


    Limerick man wrote: »
    The picture of the sump sive that i posted past the Nct a week previous. I think you should just stop posting because you clearly haven't a clue and the advice you're giving the OP is hust confusing them further.

    i will stop posting because obviously anybody that disagrees with your opinion must be wrong and to be honest i have far better things to be doing than arguing with people like you. i just gave my opinion based on my experience, if thats not good enough for you, thats your problem.


  • Options
    #158
    L-M
    Registered Users Posts: 23,694 ✭✭✭✭L-M


    zeteckiller wrote: »
    i will stop posting because obviously anybody that disagrees with your opinion must be wrong and to be honest i have far better things to be doing than arguing with people like you. i just gave my opinion based on my experience, if thats not good enough for you, thats your problem.

    You said the car wasn't "roadworthy" because the something is wrong with the engine and that it was illegal for the seller to sell it.

    it's not about opinion, that's wrong.


  • Options
    #159
    berrypendel
    Closed Accounts Posts: 365 ✭✭berrypendel


    how do you know that it would pass? are you a mechanic?
    I do not know and am not a mechanic. i did not say it would or would not pass. I never said i knew
    i said i don't know if an internet thread has any legal weight. i was only suggesting a possibility.
    You said
    the ''trade sale'' and ''sold as seen'' on the invoice could be shot down if you didn't know what these terms meant and the dealer didn't explain them to you. judging by your first few posts this seems to be the case and you can use this thread to prove the fact

    And I said i did not think an internet thread could be used to prove anything

    If you are going to stop posting it is because some of what you post is incorrect and you seem to be upset when you are corrected and not because, as you say
    i will stop posting because obviously anybody that disagrees with your opinion must be wrong


  • Options
    #160
    berrypendel
    Closed Accounts Posts: 365 ✭✭berrypendel


    OP how did you get on?


  • Options
    #161
    zeteckiller
    Registered Users Posts: 23 ✭zeteckiller


    If you are going to stop posting it is because some of what you post is incorrect and you seem to be upset when you are corrected

    i should have said could instead of can
    You said the car wasn't "roadworthy" because the something is wrong with the engine and that it was illegal for the seller to sell it.

    it's not about opinion, that's wrong.

    from the current nct manual, page 5.

    Testers may refuse a test in the following circumstances:
    (iii) where the vehicle’s engine does not comply with the
    preliminary check requirements under Test Item 2.


    the checks are listed under the diesel smoke test but they apply equally to petrol vehicles.
    item 4 of these checks on page 10 is the engine warning light. item 7 is that the engine is free of obvious defects (unusual noises, oil leaks, misfire, etc )

    a tester may refuse to carry out the test for these reasons. if the tester refuses to carry out the test, the vehicle will fail the test and therefore be unroadworthy in my opinion.

    i also asked all the other mechanics at work if they thought a car with an eml on would fail the nct, they all said it would.

    that's not wrong, that's my interpretation of the guidelines laid out in the nct manual. if you interpret them differently, that's not wrong either.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #162
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 23,339 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    zeteckiller wrote: »
    ..........

    the checks are listed under the diesel smoke test but they apply equally to petrol vehicles..........

    Just wondering, does the manual say that they apply equally to petrol vehicles or is that your interpretation? :)
    I haven't looked you see and would prefer not to bother.


  • Options
    #163
    L-M
    Registered Users Posts: 23,694 ✭✭✭✭L-M


    Buying a car with a check engine light on, or one that develops a few days later, does not make the car unroadworthy.

    Unroadworthy is the car being two cars welded together etc. or something relating to the brakes/tyres/steering etc. that would make the car unsafe

    Sec 13, par (2) of the Sale of Goods and Supply of Services Act 1980 provides:

    "Without prejudice to any other condition or warranty, in every contract for the sale of a motor vehicle (except a contract in which the buyer is a person whose business it is to deal in motor vehicles) there is an implied condition that at the time of delivery of the vehicle under the contract it is free from any defect which would render it a danger to the public, including persons travelling in the vehicle"

    Having a blown engine isn't unsafe, it's just unlucky.


  • Options
    #164
    zeteckiller
    Registered Users Posts: 23 ✭zeteckiller


    RoverJames wrote: »
    Just wondering, does the manual say that they apply equally to petrol vehicles or is that your interpretation? :)
    I haven't looked you see and would prefer not to bother.

    the manual says.....
    Testers may refuse a test in the following circumstances:
    (iii) where the vehicle’s engine does not comply with the
    preliminary check requirements under Test Item 2.

    the manual does not say that it applies to both but neither does it say that it applies to diesels only. there is no checklist specifically for petrol cars only. i have always been told that the rules applied to both and have applied them as such.


  • Options
    #165
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 23,339 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    zeteckiller wrote: »
    the manual says.....
    Testers may refuse a test in the following circumstances:
    (iii) where the vehicle’s engine does not comply with the
    preliminary check requirements under Test Item 2.

    the manual does not say that it applies to both but neither does it say that it applies to diesels only. there is no checklist specifically for petrol cars only. i have always been told that the rules applied to both and have applied them as such.

    It doesn't say it applies to diesel only but it does say....
    "
    Preliminary Check before carrying Out Diesel Engine Smoke Test
    "

    For example "
    1 Check with the vehicle owner /presenter that the camshaft belt has been changed at the manufacturer’s
    specified interval. Removing the camshaft belt cover is not part of the roadworthiness test" would you apply that to petrols too? The NCT folk don't.
    To me that's diesel only :)


  • Options
    #166
    zeteckiller
    Registered Users Posts: 23 ✭zeteckiller


    RoverJames wrote: »
    It doesn't say it applies to diesel only but it does say....
    "
    Preliminary Check before carrying Out Diesel Engine Smoke Test
    "

    For example "
    1 Check with the vehicle owner /presenter that the camshaft belt has been changed at the manufacturer’s
    specified interval. Removing the camshaft belt cover is not part of the roadworthiness test" would you apply that to petrols too? The NCT folk don't.
    To me that's diesel only :)

    fair point, but earlier in the manual it says ''the vehicles engine'' no mention of either petrol or diesel. i have always applied the rules to both because i think its good practice to do so. and i don't see why a diesel engine would be subject to a strict set of rules and not a petrol engine. it just doesn't make sense to me.


  • Options
    #167
    L-M
    Registered Users Posts: 23,694 ✭✭✭✭L-M


    You seem to be ignoring my post.

    This thread should be deleted, it's such a muddle of bad information that anyone that reads it would come out 10 times more confused than when they came in.


  • Options
    #168
    randy hickey
    Registered Users Posts: 1,935 ✭✭✭randy hickey


    Limerick man wrote: »
    You seem to be ignoring my post.

    This thread should be deleted, it's such a muddle of bad information that anyone that reads it would come out 10 times more confused than when they came in.

    I don't think it would be fair to the OP to delete this thread.I, for one, am very interested in finding out how his problem is resolved.
    Perhaps a couple of posts that were in danger of derailing the thread should be deleted, but surely not the whole thread?

    Anyways, back on topic; Any update Joeradd?


  • Options
    #169
    KamiKazi
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,201 ✭✭✭KamiKazi


    Some people talking serious bollocks in this thread.


  • Options
    #170
    JoeRadd
    Registered Users Posts: 90 ✭✭JoeRadd


    I got a few pictures and a breakdown of whats wrong from the mechanic.

    http://imgur.com/a/2gPAf

    On startup from cold knocking heard from engine and blue oil smoke from exhaust
    While running whine could be heard constantly - this is consistent with a blocked oil pump strainer guaze


    Sump removed and found to be very badly coated in carbon deposits
    Oil pump strainer almost completely blocked with carbon deposits
    Oil in bad condition, a lot of sludge in the bottom of the sump
    The oil filter is obviously quite old as there is rusting on the collar of the filter and it is dirty consistent with a long period of time since replacement


    Removed big end caps (cyl 3 & 4) to find scoring on both bearings and crankshaft
    Removed rocker cover to find, again, heavy carbon deposits in both the cover and around the camshafts
    Found play in timing chain - would need replacing


    Sludge deposits found in crank case breathers (although modified breather kit was fitted previously)
    The engine oil was low, dirty and thick
    There is excessive play in the turbocharger shaft and engine oil in the intercooler pipes


    Other items:

    Check Engine Light was coming on intermittently on initial examination - fault code stored for a failing coil pack
    Rear exhaust badly corroded
    Front anti-roll bar links needing replacement
    Service overdue (no indication of how far overdue, but filters & plugs look very old)
    Hard to start when cold on initial examination (possibly down to reduced compression and coil issue combined)


    Its seems to be a Giant lemon of a car altogether


  • Options
    #171
    dr.fuzzenstein
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 16,635 ✭✭✭✭dr.fuzzenstein


    That is shocking alright.
    It looks like there's worms in the oil strainer.
    That oil looks like it hasn't been changed in years! That car was neglected and thrashed.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #172
    JoeRadd
    Registered Users Posts: 90 ✭✭JoeRadd


    dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »
    That is shocking alright.
    It looks like there's worms in the oil strainer.
    That oil looks like it hasn't been changed in years! That car was neglected and thrashed.

    To my face they swore the engine was flushed and refilled with new oil!


  • Options
    #173
    samih
    Registered Users Posts: 2,795 ✭✭✭samih


    Apart from the engine your car does not seem too bad. Unfortunately the B205 and B235 engines fitted in 9-5 until about MY03 do not take well neglect and low quality oil and your's was probably suffering from both. As many people here said second hand engines for these are hard to find. Another typical fault apart from inadequate PCV and resulting sludge blocking the strainer is that oil rings in pistons get stuck in their grooves and cause excessive oil consumption. Garrett GT17 turbos are known to be weak too although most die due to oil starving from the sludge issue.

    This is what I'd do if I couldn't find a guaranteed low mile non-neglected engine from MY04+ 9-5. Either buy a fully reconditioned engine (ebay has some to give you an idea of cost) or buy a second hand engine with good crank. Disassemble both of the engines and assemble with the better of the two blocks after honing the cylinders with the better set of the two piston sets with new piston rings and bearings and that good crank. Get the better of the two heads skimmed, valves lapped and decarbonised and assemble with new valve stem seals. Renew the timing chain, sprockets and tensioner. Assemble with new oil seals all around. Fit a good Mitsubishi TD04 turbo from Aero. After that go to ecuproject.com and learn how to tune your car from 150bph to 250bhp with almost no cost.

    Parts to rebuild are quite cheap: About 600 EUR for full piston ring set, gasket set and timing chain set from partsforsaabs.com.

    PS. I own an oil burning 2.3. Going to do pretty much the above later this year when I have time/funds to do so. IMO a working 9-5 is a damn fine automobile. I have also solved two CELs with an ebay bluetooth diagnostic interface and Android torque very effectively in the past.


  • Options
    #174
    JoeRadd
    Registered Users Posts: 90 ✭✭JoeRadd


    samih wrote: »
    Apart from the engine your car does not seem too bad. Unfortunately the B205 and B235 engines fitted in 9-5 until about MY03 do not take well neglect and low quality oil and your's was probably suffering from both. As many people here said second hand engines for these are hard to find. Another typical fault apart from inadequate PCV and resulting sludge blocking the strainer is that oil rings in pistons get stuck in their grooves and cause excessive oil consumption. Garrett GT17 turbos are known to be weak too although most die due to oil starving from the sludge issue.

    This is what I'd do if I couldn't find a guaranteed low mile non-neglected engine from MY04+ 9-5. Either buy a fully reconditioned engine (ebay has some to give you an idea of cost) or buy a second hand engine with good crank. Disassemble both of the engines and assemble with the better of the two blocks after honing the cylinders with the better set of the two piston sets with new piston rings and bearings and that good crank. Get the better of the two heads skimmed, valves lapped and decarbonised and assemble with new valve stem seals. Renew the timing chain, sprockets and tensioner. Assemble with new oil seals all around. Fit a good Mitsubishi TD04 turbo from Aero. After that go to ecuproject.com and learn how to tune your car from 150bph to 250bhp with almost no cost.

    Parts to rebuild are quite cheap: About 600 EUR for full piston ring set, gasket set and timing chain set from partsforsaabs.com.

    PS. I own an oil burning 2.3. Going to do pretty much the above later this year when I have time/funds to do so. IMO a working 9-5 is a damn fine automobile. I have also solved two CELs with an ebay bluetooth diagnostic interface and Android torque very effectively in the past.

    I would absolutely love to do this, nothing interests me more than learning how to fix cars, unfortunately i don't have the funds for this kind of project, i paid less than 2000 for this car and i wouldn't want to spend the same again sorting it out, i was genuinely taken in by these guys, i didn't know what to look for and they made so many claims which turned out to be complete lies.

    Honestly it was a really comfortable and and smooth car (didn't like the clutch) i would buy another, but not without a full service history and a mechanics eye over it.


  • Options
    #175
    L-M
    Registered Users Posts: 23,694 ✭✭✭✭L-M


    JoeRadd wrote: »
    I would absolutely love to do this, nothing interests me more than learning how to fix cars, unfortunately i don't have the funds for this kind of project, i paid less than 2000 for this car and i wouldn't want to spend the same again sorting it out, i was genuinely taken in by these guys, i didn't know what to look for and they made so many claims which turned out to be complete lies.

    Honestly it was a really comfortable and and smooth car (didn't like the clutch) i would buy another, but not without a full service history and a mechanics eye over it.

    You have to realise this happens everyone of them. i knew of a 03 2.3 with 64k miles and a full service history and it was the same story!


  • Options
    #176
    delthedriver
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,958 ✭✭✭delthedriver


    What was the final outcome in this case?


  • Options
    #177
    JoeRadd
    Registered Users Posts: 90 ✭✭JoeRadd


    delthedriver wrote: »
    What was the final outcome in this case?

    Oh yeah, is just coming to a close now. I went the small claims route and they sent a registered letter to his home address about the claim which returned unclaimed. I had to get onto the CRO to confirm the business address and ask the court to resend the claim to the business address plain post, this took awhile but they did it.

    There was no response so they issued judgement in my favor and I'm waiting on the 4 week payment window to expire after which I'll need to get the sheriff onto him as assume he won't cough up the cash.

    Cheers


  • Options
    #178
    JoeRadd
    Registered Users Posts: 90 ✭✭JoeRadd


    mods? Now he's confirmed dodgy by the courts can I name the business?


  • Options
    #179
    JoeRadd
    Registered Users Posts: 90 ✭✭JoeRadd


    Seriously for the good of Dublin motorist and consumer can I out not name the company


  • Options
    #180
    goz83
    Registered Users Posts: 8,034 ✭✭✭goz83


    Let us know if you actually get paid OP. Also, did you get car sorted in the end? I have been reading the whole thread, but I must admit, i'm exhausted and might have missed a key post.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #181
    L-M
    Registered Users Posts: 23,694 ✭✭✭✭L-M


    JoeRadd wrote: »
    Seriously for the good of Dublin motorist and consumer can I out not name the company

    Firstly, thread cleaned to an extent.

    Secondly, no you cannot name the Dealer in question.

    Thirdly, anyone who describes the Dealer using derogatory terms will be banned.


Advertisement