It’s definitely a possibility I put 2 quarts in it and it was still 1/4inch away from reading full on the dipstick.
The engine oil capacity is 4.2 quarts, two quarts low shouldn’t result in a thrown connecting rod however how much oil was in the leaking engine when the rod was thrown?
The main question is who takes responsibility? A vehicle with a significant oil leak should be towed to the repair shop. However an engine that has been repaired within the last week or two should not leak oil. Your good independent repair shop may not have the ability to absorb the cost of this mishap and the technician that performed the repair can’t afford to have this disaster drawn from his pay check.
Larger establishments like the ones that work on Subaru vehicles exclusively tend to absorb the cost of these accidents, if that is the case. But it is common advise to avoid car dealers after the warranty has expired, they charge $20 more per hour.
Subarus do not take overheating very well. If it overheated to the point that a cylinder head cracked then it must have been barbecuing. If the shop was aware of this they should have been astute enough to warn you of a potential looming problem that involves more than the cylinder head(s).
If engine coolant diluted the motor oil then I would suspect that was the cause of a thrown rod. The diluted motor oil washed the rod/main bearings out of it which means there was excessive oil clearance.
Whether or not the oil pressure light went out upon startup is irrelevant. The oil pressure lamp turns off at around 3 to 5 PSI of oil pressure. However, that 3 to 5 is not nearly enough to protect bearings and keep them in place. With excess wear and low oil pressure a bearing shell can swap sides and both bearing shells can end up on the same side of the rod. That means something is going to let go.
Sorry for what happened to you but I tend to think that engine even after the repairs was a dead man walking. A Subaru should not throw a rod at 110k miles unless it was influenced. In this case I tend to think oil dilution was the cause.
5 Likes
I think a lot of people here are missing the point. Surely the OP did not tow his vehicle to a shop and tell them “I am here to have the cylinder heads and timing belt kit replaced”. Presumably, he noticed that the engine was overheating and/or misfiring severely, and took it to the shop for diagnosis and repair. It was the shop, not the customer who recommended these repairs, and presumably told the customer that doing these repairs for $4k would result in a properly-running vehicle.
The fact is that the shop failed to provide what was paid for, i.e. that the engine would run properly upon completion of the work. In fact, the engine never ran properly, even during the very short time from when the vehicle was picked up, to when the engine blew up today.
This is the most important point–that what the customer actually paid for was never delivered. The fact that spending $4k to repair an old engine is a waste of money, or that a working junkyard engine could have been installed for less is really not the point. Unless there was signed paperwork stating that this work is being performed without any warranty or guarantee, and that the engine could fail at any moment, the shop owes you making the vehicle functional on their dime–which would mean installing a used engine from a junkyard that runs properly.
I would start with a polite conversation with the shop owner, if that goes nowhere, I’d contact my credit card issuer if that is how I paid. Otherwise, it sounds like small claims court is your only option.
I definitely agree with @ok4450 as well as @oldtimer-11 … This engine was surely put through some difficult situations…which should have been obvious to an experienced mechanic. That being said…that experienced tech should have been able to analyze the shituation and thusly begin asking many many questions as well as putting forth his opinion about the work to be performed not only on the basis of the works efficacy but the entire idea of the work to begin with. From my computer desk I had many a question in my mind and many thoughts that I would have shared with the customer…much would be informational and much would have been caveats to the proposed work.
That is indeed what should have occurred rather than wading so deeply into a costly repair of an engine that was most likely not a good candidate for a very expensive partial rebuild (more expensive than a full rebuild methinks). So right there it should have stopped. There should have been many dire warnings here from the tech…and as a tech they surely would know of more cost effective bang for your buck moves you could have been making.
If said warnings were not passed onto the customer than the work to be done was sold as a cure all…and since it did not cure anything…that is why the shop holds most of the blame…imho. Thats just me…ive never been accused of being closed lipped about what I thought about any job and what its risks were etc…I’m very good at pointing this out to people, because they need to be educated on this subject and…as it happens I can stand in as an informed entity…so I feel that it is my duty to properly set expectations (and it is). None of that seems to have been done here…and that may be the biggest mistake made to be honest.
1 Like
A competent mechanic would also have changed the oil and filter as part of this service. Then also check the oil for coolant. I don’t know what this mechanic did, but if he was halfway decent oil change would have been done before the engine was fired up. That is the only way I see the mechanic might have any responsibility here.
The thrown rod appears to me to be the result of a shop not being experienced with that engine nor particularly determined to get it right from the beginning compounded by the owner who assumed that the repair was masterfully done with close attention to detail. The owner’s lack of attention to the loss of oil and an almost certain indifference to the failing oil pressure toasted the engine. So ignorance and indifference on the part of the shop and owner doomed that engine. It didn’t have a chance.
1 Like
Knowing that the shop was at fault and proving it if the shop denied responsibility are two different things in the legal system. It can be done, but it ain’t easy. Best of luck to the OP in getting some compensation.
1 Like
If the car had run fine for several months and then quit, you are right that the owner would be facing an uphill battle in court to hold the shop responsible. Even if it had run fine for a month, the presumption would be that the shop had correctly performed the agreed-upon work, and that the subsequent failure was a separate problem which did not exist when the repairs were done. (For example, it might be due to coincidence, or due to the owner’s improper maintenance such as letting the oil get too low).
However, that is not the situation here. It sounds like the vehicle never ran properly upon completion of the work, and the owner presumably has paperwork showing that it was brought back a week after the repairs were completed due to engine problems, and it was then brought back a second time a week after that. Then, after one more week, the engine blows up, and the shop is claiming this is purely coincidental.
It really does not matter what B.S. explanations the shop might have given in the work orders each time the vehicle was brought back. A reasonable judge is going to rule that the shop’s position just doesn’t pass the “smell test”. The law assumes that a professional mechanic or repair shop has a huge advantage over a customer when it comes to technical knowledge and expertise. Thus, it is the duty of the professional mechanic/repair shop to correctly diagnose whatever technical problem(s) might exist, and to properly perform the repairs for its customer. It is not the customer’s duty to second-guess the professional diagnosis or to somehow “double check” the mechanic’s work for completeness or correctness.
To the extent that an overheated engine, or an engine which had coolant leak into the oil might be subject to cylinder wall damage, bearing damage, or any other additional damage which would make this engine a poor candidate for repairs, it is the duty of the professional to explain the situation to the customer. The customer is not assumed to be savvy enough to know this.
The court will assume that a customer authorizing thousands of dollars of repairs to his engine was led to believe that the engine will run properly once the work is done, unless the shop told the customer otherwise, and got a signed statement to this effect. Absent such a signed disclaimer, the presumption is that the customer paid for repairs which were expected to restore the vehicle to proper function, and that these repairs are subject to the shop’s normal warranty policy (typically 1 year or 12,000 miles). Thus, the shop needs to do one of two things: refund the customer’s money, or restore the vehicle to proper function by installing a used engine from a junkyard.
I just don’t see how the shop can weasel out of this legally.
2 Likes
Update, the shop admitted fault for what happened. They made insurance claim and are now putting a low mileage engine Engine in my car.
6 Likes
Good to hear. They really had no defense, and a used engine will probably give you many years of reliable service.