Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




Nerobro posted:

I.. can tell you a bit more of what is happening here. That square thing is the crossslide. On engines like that they have a crossslide to take the horizontal forces instead of the cylinder bore itself. I"ll bet that he cylinder, piston, and upper rod were all just fine after this.

Now, for the doxford link. Here are bigger copies of those images, bigger pictures give you some idea of the scale of those chips... http://www.shipsnostalgia.com/guide...oxford_and_Sons

From the link posted earlier it looked like the piston jammed in the sleeve somehow, causing a portal to Hell to open and allowing the demon hands of Beelzebub to reach through and do that to the lower connecting rod.

I find those factory photographs really entrancing but it took me a bit to realize why. Yes there are giant engine parts everywhere giving a strange mixed sense of scale, but I was really just struck at the lack of visible safety equipment. I'm so used to seeing shielding and brightly colored easily accessible kill switches on machinery and people wearing ear and eye protection that the images just hit me as very odd.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




heat posted:

Replace it with what? A metal plug?

Who the hell would be that stupid? LN2 dewars vent fairly regularly when they are sitting there and if people were pulling from it or filling it you would think that someone along the way would have noticed the pressure relief valve and burst disc were missing. It takes a while to fill or pull from those and while doing so you are just stuck there looking at the head so somebody must have thought "hmm this isn't like the other dewars".


I used to work at a semiconductor fabrication plant, using 12" wafers of single crystal silicon. Some of the failures were simply astonishing, both because the equipment was huge and complex and also because the wafers were super strong yet extremely brittle. I do not have any of my own photographs (trade secrets and whatnot) but I recall seeing a video (recorded by the camera inside the equipment) of a wafer which was undergoing a chemical treatment which used a high RPM spin to dry off the wafer. At 8k RPM the wafer simply disintegrated. The largest piece we found was about 10mm square. There was apparently a small 2mm long nick on the back of the wafer (we found it on the next wafer from the same batch) and that was enough.

Stuff like this was comparatively rare when you thought of the numbers of wafers processed, but it was pretty much a daily occurrence because of the volume we dealt with. Oh and we routinely went double the maintenance intervals on the equipment so that may have had something to do with it.

Once when recovering from a power outage (which is about the worst thing that can happen to a semiconductor fab) I saw someone place a cassette carrying 25 wafers on to a piece of equipment and press the button for the tool to run a small laser scanner up and down the cassette front to scan the cassette to check which slots had wafers in it (called indexing). Instead of extending the indexing reader (which is on the rear of the robot arm that picks the wafers up), the equipment extended the wafer pick up arm into the cassette, then moved that straight down breaking every single wafer in under a second. Only $14k worth of silicon down the drain... no big deal.

Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




Godholio posted:

So instead of reading the sticker on the outside, it just reached in and smashed everything? Clearly that robot didn't get it's coffee.

Not quite. the indexer looks like if you made a devil horns thing with your hand. Laser on one "finger" and a receiver on the other. The wafers protrude a bit from the cassette opening so the indexer is supposed to run down the front of the cassette and as the wafers are passed the beam is broken and it marks that slot occupied. Instead of doing that the robot gave every wafer the middle finger. We left that piece of equipment until last to bring back up.

Here's a diagram:


28 and 30 are the indexers and can move in and out to extend past the arm (they are shown halfway out) and 20 is the part that extends to pick up, or break, the wafer.

Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




some texas redneck posted:

Posting this for Mr 14 Inch Dick, his computer is still out of commision.


Apparently a Silverado came in for "funny sounding brakes". Also managed to eat away the piston from the caliper.

How does that only come in for "funny sounding brakes" and not "It take 400ft to stop when I hit the brakes at 30mph"? Did all the rotors look like that? I suppose it is being too assuming to say that he had gotten the tires rotated at any point recently.

Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




Powershift posted:




From what i can gather, he got it stuck under a bridge, let the air out of all of his tires to get it unstuck, and figured he would just keep driving until he could find a place to air them back up.

I liked how he chocked the tires after stopping. Safety first!

Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




Mr.Peabody posted:

Did anyone think to do a twin engine design with the engines spinning opposite directions, or had they moved on to radial engines by the time there was a twin?

Anything with two engines was a bomber.

I have read about some pilots who would swap the propeller with a pusher propeller, easily available because many early aircraft used rear facing engines until they figured out how to shoot through a propeller. They would then have their mechanic start the engine in reverse (these were all simple two strokes). This would let them surprise the enemy with an extremely fast turn in exactly the opposite direction than they normally would expect.

I don't know the truth to those stories or how widespread it would have been.

Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




Space Gopher posted:

And, to get things back on track for this thread - it wasn't terribly uncommon for that valve to stick open. I don't believe that there are any pictures out there, but that's the sort of scenario that makes "rod just hangin' out the side of the block" look positively sedate in comparison.

So an entire crankcase filled with fuel/air mix would have a nice open pathway to spark, possibly at several thousand feet?


Shifting gears, you don't need fuel to cause an horrific mechanical failure. In competitive cycling often times such things as durability and not turning into a whirling spike disc take back seats to shaving 10 grams off of the weight of a component.

One company called Mavic decided they wanted to make carbon fiber wheels so that they may sell them for thousands of dollars. This isn't too odd, other companies had made carbon wheels before. But they looked a bunch like alloy rims with wide slabs of carbon fiber. Mavic decided to cut weight even more and make carbon wheels with a spoked design. They didn't let the fact that carbon fiber in the bare minimum number of small long cylinders isn't exactly good for transverse shear strength stop them. When would that happen when riding?

Oh, right. There are turns in races.


One small wrong bump in a turn would cause the wheels to disintegrate. It mainly happened on the front tire, so the cyclist suddenly found themselves flying over the handlebars toward a bunch of sharp spikes of carbon.

The company then recalled the wheels, "fixed" the problem, said failures wouldn't happen, and anyway added fibers inside each spoke to contain any failures that wouldn't happen.

The next documented failure came at a public race, and happened to a writer for an online cycling site.

Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




jamal posted:

I thought the problem with those wheels was that they decided to put the spokes in compression

Its even worse than that: they designed the wheels to use both compression and tension. As the wheel spins, the spokes on the bottom were in compression and the spokes on the top were in tension. Oh and they also only did tension quality checks on the spokes, with no testing of their ability to hold a compressive load.

Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




Truing involves adjustment to the spoke tension at the hub, followed soon afterwards by a letter from Mavic denying any responsibility for the resulting failure.

Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




The Locator posted:

So the Boeing handled that a lot better than the Airbus. Hopefully the Airbus folks learned a few things about tires from their expensive looking test failure (presumably they did since the airplane was certified).

I read that in that test some thermal relief plugs failed to work right. They are supposed to deflate the tires in a controlled manner if the temperature gets near where the tires could burst. Obviously they didn't in that video.

Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




infrared35 posted:

My stepmom just rolled her eyes and shook her head. "You left out the part where the belt was squealing for a week because the pulley was seized up, but you kept driving. And you left out the part where the belt finally broke on a 60-mile trip but the engine was still running so you kept driving and then were mystified when the car wouldn't start again."

That is simply astonishing. The belt was continually screaming for a week yet he kept driving it, and then he drove it for likely 30 miles with no coolant flow. Just what would it have taken for him to actually do something, flames entering the passenger compartment?

Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




kastein posted:

god I hate that. Put the right loving tires on your car and the bead will stay seated.

My bet would be on sidewall failure, that seems to be how those tires die if they are actually driven anywhere:

Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




14 INCH DICK TURBO posted:

And not, of course, the gigantic caved in spot where it would bend if say clipping an especially deep pothole or other solid impact.

Totally discounted that likelihood because in my head I thought "how would a pothole cause that much damage when the tire would be there to absorb the impact?" and instead thought the car falling on the rim after failure caused it. My brain just refused to consider that anyone would so utterly break one of the best things about the pneumatic tire.

Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'












An inspector for DC's Metro found this on Friday the 6th and all it took was a light hit with a hammer to completely separate the rotor from the train car and into the bits above. It was last inspected on December 10th and was only reinspected because on the 20th one of these 200lb monsters broke off and made contact with the 3rd rail, stranding hundreds for hours in the tunnels under DC and completely loving up everyone elses' commutes.

There's not a single touch of rust on that crack either, so this wasn't gradual. Hooray for lowest bid parts!

Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




GnarlyCharlie4u posted:

gently caress. Looks like I better get a bike up and running so I can avoid the metro.

It really makes you think about their motto doesn't it? "Metro Forward: because stopping isn't really an option at this point."

Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




Even if the suspension wasn't supported by a single comically undersized bolt... is that kind of truck actually useful for anything?

Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




This caught my eye when I was wandering around town:



I'm a bit shocked nobody had stolen the spring to sell for scrap.

Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




Fucknag posted:

It might have been unintentional, but I'd hate to put a damper on your mood.

I worry that if I am obvious with my puns then people will start to tire of my posts.

It originally said amazed instead of shocked but I couldn't resist.

Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




Whoa, that much deterioration on a ten year old car? You must live in an area where they salt the roads.

Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




some texas redneck posted:

The switch, externally, looks the same, except it has a fuse a few inches away, and a sticker hanging off of it saying it's had the recall work performed (and to return to the dealer if the fuse blows).

The new switch has brake fluid seeping out around the wires. He wants to put a bigger fuse in. At least he parks it in the street. When the original switch went, it blew whatever fuse the cruise is on instead of setting the truck on fire. He put a bigger fuse in (before the recall) and he was greeted with smoke from under the hood. Up until then he'd kept saying he didn't need the recall work done.


They did something almost as bad with the brake light switches on a lot of models. Instead of a simple plunger switch that mounted to the pedal assembly (like everybody else), they used a pressure sensitive switch that went on the pedal arm. When the switches get really worn, the brake lights don't come on until you're really standing on the pedal.

loving stupid design, it's caught me off guard several times while following friends (and also in general traffic). I'm one of the few people I know who actually bother with keeping at least a few car lengths between myself and the car in front of me, but I've seen quite a few people get rearended because the lights didn't come on until they were almost stopped.



I drove around a black F-150 once which had this loving switch in it. The truck was a dedicated farm truck so normally you'd hit the brakes hard enough because you were pulling a trailer. Unloaded (as I drove it) the brakes were touchy as hell so I had the choice of either: attempting to light up the brake lights while giving myself whiplash as well as likely causing anyone without lightning reflexes to rear end me; or to slowly brake and hope the person behind me was paying attention. In a 120 mile trip I had three separate people take to the shoulder to keep from rear-ending me.


Here's an article for the crane wreck. Three injuries, two severe, but thankfully nobody killed. Also looks like less than a day earlier they announced they were going to be investing ~$50mil in new equipment for the port.

Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




DELETED posted:

That's when you kick on the parking lights and engage the Fake Brakes. Doesn't work so well at night though.

I eventually started to hit the hazard flashers when I knew I had to slow down. That truck was a rolling road hazard anyway (yay SC and no vehicle inspections) so it wasn't like I was lying or anything.

Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




SNiPER_Magnum posted:

I think the kooky Ford brake stuff comes from an old Lincoln problem, or more an old Lincoln driver problem. They used to rest their left feet on the brake pedal, so Ford accounted for a little bit of pedal pressure always being present. If you've ever wondered why Motorcraft DOT3 brake fluid has a dry boiling point greater than most DOT4 including ATE Super Blue/Type 200 or why Motorcraft brake caliper grease is rated for a billion degrees, it's because old people were dragging brakes all the time.

That explains it. The switch is designed to take a good bit of gradual pressure before it will engage. Here's how it is installed:



And here's what it looks like installed:



The black bushing allows enough play between the brake pedal and the vacuum booster such that for the first part of the force applied to the pedal the switch is the part transmitting the effort between the pedal and the brakes. However the spring on the switch is pretty darn stiff (if I recall correctly it is quite hard to actuate the switch by hand) so if you do a gradual brake application you can end up applying a great deal of stopping power before the plate in the switch gets depressed enough for the worn contacts in the switch to finally turn on the brake lights.

Also fun: this same switch controls cruise control cutoff. You have to apply a sharp, hard kick to the pedal to disengage the cruise control.

Shifty Pony fucked around with this message at 01:19 on May 27, 2012

Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




Sockington posted:

It doesn't have a master on/off?

Yes it does, right on the steering wheel. It just made for a brief "oh poo poo the truck is now Christine!" moment while driving. I can't recall what eventually killed that truck but I think the AODE transmission was the bit that did it in.

edit: this was a 1992 F-150 so it was before the fire switch.

Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




The one at 2:40 is the best. The guy running the dyno just calmly looks over at the car when it dies.

Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




Space Gopher posted:

Performance at high RPMs or with tough valve springs was never a priority for that engine, and it doesn't have a chain on both ends of each camshaft. The design was based on an OHV engine, so there's a short timing chain that runs from the crank to where an OHV camshaft would be in the middle of the V. Then, on each end of the shaft-with-no-cams, there's a gear and a separate timing chain that runs up to the heads. One bank's chain is at the front of the engine, and the other bank's chain is at the back.

Oh, and all the tensioners and chain guides are made of crappy plastic, too.

e: have a picture!


Even better when you find out that the early designs of that engine had a faulty timing chain tensioning system including cheap plastic guide material prone to accelerated wear, insufficient support (for practical purposes: no support) for those crappy guides leading to stress fractures, and a tensioner design which used a combination of springs and engine oil pressure neither of which provided sufficient tension on its own. Oh and that tensioner, especially the rear one, was prone to losing its oil supply resulting in a noisy slack chain with bad timing at best and complete failure of the passenger side SOHC drive system at worst. The engine was of course an interference design and even if the chain or guides didn't break you could still easily end up with the exhaust valves saying hello to the pistons.

Ford's "solution" was a recall where they replaced the tensioning parts with ones ever so slightly more durable to get the engine out of warranty before it inevitably failed. Add in having to pull the whole drat engine to replace the required parts and the common thinking that timing chains never need service (to be fair, the chains were normally fine, the supporting guides were the problem) and those engines do not have a sterling reliability reputation.

Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




Here's a really good writeup of the fallout from that test sequence. It seems the initial test that caused a near rollover was run at 100kg under maximum cargo capacity as rated by Chrysler, however the curb weight specification of the truck were not correct so it ended up being over gross vehicle weight by around 60kg. Chrysler has seized on this and nearly every statement they put out hints at overloading.

Chrysler also claims they ran their own "moose test" and didn't see any trouble, but they don't say it is the same test as run by the Swedish magazine and won't release the information about the layout of the test or show video so there is no way to know what that means. Despite this the newer tests run by the magazine which are linked above still look awful when run at the new cargo/passenger capacity of 470kg. Chrysler claims the tests vindicate them because the handling wasn't quite as bad a before, but to me it looks like the truck is just bouncing out of control.

Can you imagine if some of the weight had been on the roof for example, instead of being sandbags?

Shifty Pony fucked around with this message at 18:53 on Aug 5, 2012

Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




Splizwarf posted:

Parts in those applications (like bearings) will still wear at startup due to cold oil's higher viscosity and the time it takes the oil pump to build pressure, it's why we use multi-weight oils and even that's not a perfect solution. Oil does not negate wear, it only reduces it; in some cases to to practically nothing, but everything wears at least a bit.

However when kept running those fluid bearings can have incredibly low wear rates in many applications if the oil is kept in good condition. Essentially they only wear from the shear forces of the oil right at the surface of the bearing faces. Of course if you get any contamination in them then things can go bad in a hurry:


A massive Kingsbury thrust bearing supporting 220 tons in a hydroelectic plant has been in nearly constant operation since 1912. As far as can be guessed from the times they took things apart to check it out the bearing has at minimum an expected service lifetime of well over 1000 years, although knowing for sure is practically impossible because the thing looked nearly brand new every time, even after 57 years in operation. Here's an article on it from the ASME. Somewhat of the opposite of a horrible mechanical failure. I love stories of the serendipitous way some designs turn out to be orders of magnitude better than the designers ever could have hoped.

While poking around I also found this example of when a Porche 928 S4 crankshaft and block love each other very much and decide to get together despite the objections of the thrust bearings:

Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




Nathan Explosion posted:

That's the thing. I had it in my head that the fuel injectors were weak or something. I distinctly remember a friend of my mom having a diesel caprice. The smell of it was memorable. I recall the red velour and the smell of fake air freshener cherries. Also, the lady bitching about what a heap of poo poo that car was.

Pretty much the whole fuel system was a cascading failure. The water-fuel issue would cause rust particles which could clog the injectors, the injector timing would gradually get retarded due to the chain-driven high pressure pump, and the pressure regulation on the high pressure pump would start getting squirrely if you added alcohol treatments intended for gasoline engines to the fuel (something people were doing to tray and alleviate the water issue). That could cause pre-detonation and blown head gaskets. Finally unlike the gas version of the engine the heads were attached with single-use bolts so when the engine was disassembled it would often be reassembled using the same bolts. Then it was only a matter of time until it failed again.

Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




EightBit posted:

It's not just memories from twenty years ago holding diesels back in America, it's also the stricter emissions regulations, and lower sulfur in the fuel I think.

Our fuel having way too much sulfur in it was one of the main reasons Euro diesels were not coming to the US. Now that ULS fuel is nationwide the engines will run fine. The real expensive bit is the NOx regulations in the US being roughly 10x more stringent which requires rather extensive emission controls, with California's regs being even more difficult to overcome.

The new ULS fuel has been blamed for many mechanical failures in older diesels though, which relied on the sulfur's lubricating qualities.

I'll believe the reports of GM and Chevy releasing diesels in the US when I see them in showrooms. There has been news about diesels in many new domestic cars "in two years!" for a decade at least. I even got mildly excited about news of the Liberty being equipped with one, until they noted it was a nearly $4k option, was a limited run because of upcoming emissions regs, and required an automatic. I'd love to see the Focus diesel come to the US.

Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




CommieGIR posted:

I solved this by adding two stroke oil to my fuel.

My father has settled on running B5-B20 in his farm equipment. Fortunately he found a nearby supplier who sells off-road dyed bio blends. The only downside is that when you first run it in a 20 year old John Deere you better have a good supply of fuel filters handy because the biodiesel is a rather good solvent and will clean any gunk off the inside of the tank. A better solution is to just go ahead and replace the tank and fuel lines when you make the switch, but parts for those older engines can be quite pricey.

Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




dissss posted:

Perhaps they should concentrate on an engine which isn't rattly and horrible (like the diesel Cruze) before spending money on that type of advertising.

As for the VWs I still don't see the point of the diesel models - the TSIs are much nicer to drive and only marginally less fuel efficient (offset by cheaper purchase prices)

But the TDI is so torque-y and fun to drive...

Yet you are right that the TSI engines are pretty amazing. I'm glad they have reportedly made the decision to replace the 2.5l base engine for the Jetta and Passat with the 1.8 TSI. I do wonder how long it will be before someone tries to disable the supercharger clutch or tries to modify the exhaust manifold to cram in their own turbo and ends up in this thread.

Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




ultimateforce posted:

I get extremely paranoid when the temp needle goes a single millimeter above "normal."

I blame you for the trend of gauges which always point to a single reading no matter what the actual reading is! Well, OK.. maybe not you but instead those who would take their car into the dealer to complain about it overheating when the gauge goes ever so slightly up when they are running A/C at idle on a hot day.

My VW temperature gauge stays pointed at 190F when the actual coolant temp can be anywhere from 175-210 (that's as high as I've seen it go since getting my scangauge mounted, I'm sure Texas summers will make new records). That is pulling off of the OBD-II connector so the engine knows the right temperature but just isn't showing it

Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




joat mon posted:

The first self-sustaining nuclear reaction ever took place a dozen years before R1 in the middle of Chicago, in a converted handball court under the grandstands at the University of Chicago's football staduim.
e: links

You can't post about CP-1 without noting the safety system. It consisted of a man standing on the balcony and holding either (depending on the source, which tells you just how improvised and undocumented this was) a sharpened axe to cut the rope which lifted the control rods or a bucket of neutron-poisoning cadmium solution.

Then as far as failures go there is the Windscale Fire where we found out what happens when you air-cool graphite reactor cores, then try to anneal them in-place:

quote:

Operators were unsure what to do about the fire. First, they tried to blow the flames out by putting the fans onto full power and increasing the cooling, but this fanned the flames. Tom Hughes and his colleague had already created a fire break by ejecting some undamaged fuel cartridges from around the blaze and Tom Tuohy suggested trying to eject some from the heart of the fire, by bludgeoning the melted cartridges through the reactor and into the cooling pond behind it with scaffolding poles. This proved impossible and the fuel rods refused to budge, no matter how much force was applied. The poles were withdrawn with their ends red hot and, once, a pole was returned red hot and dripping with molten metal. Hughes knew this had to be molten irradiated uranium and this caused serious radiation problems on the charge hoist itself.

"It [the exposed fuel channel] was white hot," said Hughes' colleague on the charge hoist with him, "it was just white hot. Nobody, I mean, nobody, can believe how hot it could possibly be."

Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




kastein posted:

Yeah, it's basically ricing/hellaflush bullshit for redneck truck bros. "tractor pulling trucks make lots of smoke and look awesome, I am going to do that too!" <makes no power, but lots of smoke>

There is also a "gently caress the environment to show those darn liberals" aspect too. They absolutely hate Prius drivers and often trade stories about how they totally smoked out some stereotype straight out of San Francisco.

Just like ricers they are subject to intense mockery and generally not welcome on just about any diesel forum which is not dedicated to their "hobby". People blame them for giving diesel power a bad name and even for diesel particulate filters being required for new engines.

Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




On the subject of tires with metal things sticking out of them, I hope this counts:



The Kevlar did its job, but it was barely a millimeter away from jamming the brake and locking the rear wheel in the middle of an intersection.

Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




Someone wrecked into a car dealership here, managing to hit 18 new Hyundai cars:







Where is the mechanical failure?



I don't think that is supposed to happen.

Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




Speaking of turbos, I found this in a TDI forums post troubleshooting about a boost pressure engine code:



Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




MomJeans420 posted:

Are its eyes gone?

Rabbits have brilliant red eyeshine that really shows up in camera flashes, or even if just a flashlight is pointed on them.

Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




In fairness, they did say that they were a transmission shop and not an exhaust shop...









Wait nevermind, here's what they did to the bellhousing:

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Shifty Pony
Dec 28, 2004

Up ta somethin'




Zemyla posted:

I don't know welding, but I do know it's not supposed to look like a metal smore, right?

Well it is more a matter of when you wring off exhaust bolts connecting the pipe to the manifold/cat, the correct course of action is to contact the customer to let them decide how to proceed (and give an estimate of the cost of new bolts and nuts, ~$14 I think). The solution isn't to just weld the pipe to the manifold and hope nobody notices. This is especially not the correct choice when the transmission front seal leak you were hired to find wasn't actually fixed and your welding the manifold and pipe together makes removing the transmission impossible.

It isn't like anyone would blame you for wringing them off, they normally look like this:


wilfredmerriweathr posted:

Those pictures make me want to punch whoever thought that was a good idea.

Imagine what the shop owner is going to do when he sees the photos of what his mechanic did along with this estimate from the dealer to fix it:



  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply