Worlds longest Resto, my C2 2.7 19/3/18 Vent guage action

[Andyboy]

Okay. Set the cam so that No.1 is at TDC, both lobes pointing down the same. Try to fit the cam pulley. If the dowel hole(s) aren't even remotely close and the TDC marks don't line up then the cam is junk. To prove the point, set the cam on another E30 head to TDC so that the pulley and head marks line up, remove the pulley (have the centre bolt loose) and compare the dowel holes. take photos. If they're different, the Schrick is definitely faulty and you have a legitimate claim for some dollars. The small claims court backed up with some credible independent witnesses won't cost you much.

[clarko74]

That would be good please Ady, showing the end where the cam sprocket fits and how many holes in it would help my cause! Part no. stamped on it also

Would you sell it if shcrick still tell me to shove it?

I'll see what I can do. Is this the part number?



Sorry, it's not for sale, one day i'll build mine into a 2.8 and it's going to go in that.

[Simon13]

whats the business end look like? those numbers match mine

[Simon13]

So i've dug these two old shots out for some sort of comparison, these are from the touring rebuild with the same cam. The top one is with the cam set at TDC. You can see inlet no. 3 and exhaust no. 2 valves are opening and no.6 inlet is just open. We'll come back to this engine also later on



Let put the cam and rocker back into an undamaged head for a looksie





This is "schricks" timing hole used. Here, so we can see no. 1 inlet is a little open and exhaust 5 and inlet 4 valves are open. We know this to be wrong and roughly 180 degrees out with no contact issues






Again this is now with "my" timing hole used. You can see its the reverse of before so inlet no.6 is a touch open and exhaust 2 and inlet 3 are open. We know this is in the right ball park as we have the tourings head in the top photo to confirm it. But there was contact issues when the engine ran this way.



I took the rocker off touring earlier when it stopped raining for 15mins! I took lots of photos but couldn't get some clear shots of the two heads for comparison. As its such a small amount difference its hard to hold the camera in the same spot on two different heads with one being in an engine bay!



Touring engine at TDC, look at the angle of the shcrick casting.............



And again here, this is timed up "my" way. So we know its a way off.


This lead me on to Andyboys post which i didn't think would yeild much, so i set the camera up on a solid place and took these 3, the first is a stock camshaft then the other 2 are with the schrick using each hole. So i fitted the timing pulley lined the cams up to the mark on the head. Took the pulley off and took these photos.




Stock 2.5 cam


Schrick cam timed "schricks" way


Schrick timed up "my" way.


Not really alot to glean from that but then i had a moment of rare intelligence which led me to do this. Again thinking of Everetts post in mind






I moved the cam round a touch to how i thought it should be set. See the bottom hole has moved round a touch to the right.





Heres both shots to make it easier to see






bottom pic being the one where i moved the cam to where i think it should be.



This me to this idea and reminded me of this pic i took the other day after marking the cam sprocket 180 opposite to the factory timing mark rememeber?!



Marked with the pencil





Which led to this with the cam timed up "my" way. It looks a tooth out? This got me thinking..............................could this hole be 1 tooth out and was dragging the inlet valves down 1 tooth too early! hence the contact.

Why not get the plasticine out again, bolt the head down and time it up 1 tooth out and see whats what?! Taken me a long time to get to this and no doubt a sharper person would of got here quicker in every sense of all this bullsh!t!!!





Belt all on and timed one tooth out. This will bring the inlet valves down 1 tooth later than before. As the engine turns over clockwise. Still with me? So there shouldn't be any contact in theory






The schrick logo now looks to be in the right place also?










The money shot, and no contact. I think this now conclusively proves that both holes on this camshaft are incorret. I felt like this was a break though and made me mucho happy!

So this begs the question that, could you of ever got the car to run properly knowing what we know now?

A) By timing it 1 tooth out like i have? maybe......i think, but the fixed postion ignition timing would of been out. But we know it ran with the valves clumping pistons! So who knows

B) Would of it run in "schricks" position? Maybe as there was no contact this way, i think if you had reversed the ignition leads and changed the firing order it might of ran.

Either way its wrong wrong wrong! I'm glad in a way i've worked it right out and now know exactly what where and when it all went tits up. I hope i've explained my thoughts good enough for people to catch my drift!

[bss325i]

Well i guess its just a waiting game now to see what schrick say but if they give you a new cam you've got them by the balls!

Compo claim!

[Simon13]

I'd settle for a correct cam at this stage but a bit of compo would be nice but i wouldn't be holding my breath on that one.

Why did it have to happen to this engine? This was supposed to be the ONE, the one that was going to be mustard

Another thought with this cam and a vernier pulley you could get it running properly. It would be like a 130mm rod 2.7 then with a decked block in a way.

My other thoughts are the bronzit is still here on the drive with no engine fitted and part of me thinks it should stay for round 2 for this now epic engineathon. Theres MOT till Oct on it so plenty of time!

[leeparkes]

Have you been in touch with Schrick yet?
Id gather everything together with your pics, details etc then work out how much it has cost you to put your engine/head back to how it was, then hit them with it.
If they offer you a new cam imo they are admitting its there fault, then you can push it further.
At the end of the day this engine is no bog standard M20 is it.

[Simon13]

i'll have to wait and see, i've not sent the cam off yet. If they admit to anything then i'll take it from there.

[DanThe]

I wouldnt send the cam anywhere until you have some proper qualified advice as to where you stand!

[clarko74]

Ok here you go. I've tried to take the shots as level as possible, the one of the end is a bit out of focus but hopefully it will do:

I lined the Schrick logo up as level as I could:


And here's the position of the hole:


Look's like you know yours is dodgy now but hopefully this will help. Let me know if you need any more photos of any of part of it.

[e30topless]

wow, so it seems schrick are definatly at fault here

did you get it mail order or something Si ?
would be good if you could take it along to where it came from along side a stock BMW cam and pics of the damage,
whats the duration ? can you get a similar stick from elsewhere?

[suchy]

Si is there anyone else (independant) that could check the cam first before sending it back to Schrick? I just a bit of a cynic and wouldn't trust them to say it's fine and then 'lose' your original cam therefore a need to send you a new one with no comeback re: compensation. I know they should be a reputable company and they'd probably settle out of Court anyway if it was proven to be faulty but that cynic gene always pipes up in my head....

[Steve]

Also use this thread, everything is documented right here.

[Gortour]

I tend to agree with Chris and Steve. Don't want them losing or swapping your cam and saying it's fine.

[capri_rob]

Where are shrick ?

In view of the cost of all the bits that this dodgy cam seems to have ruined would it not be worth speaking to them, providing them with the info seeing whether they will offer a replacement and/or compo and then once they make you an offer take the faulty cam back in person ?

[Jhonno]

I can see them turning round saying you shouldn't be relying on their markings and checking timing properly etc..

I hope you get somewhere with it Si, really do!

[Jos]

I hope so too, such a lot of work has gone into this and I have a lot of respect for you sticking with it. As a minimum they should replace the cam as it's technically a manufacturing fault.

Regards the compo although they will say you shouldn't rely on their markings if it had only had 1 hole (with the other plugged) then the TDC marks would still have been wrong no? Timed correctly it would have been 1 tooth out or 180 out depending on which one they plugged?
Would it be reasonably expected during assembly of an engine for plasticine checks to be done on every valve/cylinder?

[Jhonno]

Would it be reasonably expected during assembly of an engine for plasticine checks to be done on every valve/cylinder?

Yes.

[Speedtouch]

Definitely for custom build engines, where you need to establish whether there's going to be valve-piston contact.

On a bog-standard 'cooking' engine using all factory standard parts, there's probably no need, as a large amount of tolerance will have been factored in.

[Simon13]

The cam will have to go to Germany so i'm told. My biggest problem i think is i'm just "Fred in a shed" to coin a phrase and schrick are a huge well respected company.

The way this all works is Shrick won't deal with me direct, i have to go through the authorised agent who i bought it off. Which is Neal McDonald from a u t omac. He more than willing to help, as he was the first time round a few months ago.

It's all well saying don't send it off but wtf am i supposed to do? Its got to go off and so they can assess it themselves. Neils very sure that they aren't into pulling a fast one and will sort it out if they find the cam faulty. I've tried to get Neil to read this and insisted there has been no slander going on! Neils not keen on the forum for reasons best discussed elsewhere but i can work on that a bit more.

I did the plasticine check on the touring engine and all was ok, 30,000 miles later its still a belter of an engine. I'm sure alot can side with my relaxed attitude with this engine as i went for a tried and test cam. The engines would of been identical bar the schrick valve springs on the 2dr engine.

[DanThe]

I can see them turning round saying you shouldn't be relying on their markings and checking timing properly

If the cam pulley was floating I could understand it, but Schrick have to drill a locating hole for the pulley to fit in, otherwise you cant fit it. The hole they drill sets the cam at TDC, effectively

[Simon13]

exactly no vanos/valvetronic stuff here

[jmpwr]

Hi Simon

Looking through your camshaft woes it is clear that the camshaft is not correct and the locating hole is 180 degrees out.
The blanked hole looks to be about 6 to 7.5 degrees retarded.

Your issue is with the company who supplied the camshaft not with Schrick. If you bought a faulty electrical item like a tv you return it to the shop not the maker. You will need your proof of purchase. If you bought a faulty battery from a motor factor then you would return it to them for a replacement. The camshaft is no different but by fitting it the results were catastrophic.

You are entitled to a refund or replacement as the part is incorrect but compensation might prove difficult as if you had done the checks that you have now carried out then you would have spotted the problem during fitting.

The manufacturer states the checks should be carried out as it is not a standard part.

Good luck with the rebuild

[Jhonno]

I can see them turning round saying you shouldn't be relying on their markings and checking timing properly

If the cam pulley was floating I could understand it, but Schrick have to drill a locating hole for the pulley to fit in, otherwise you cant fit it. The hole they drill sets the cam at TDC, effectively

True I am not denying. I can just see Schrick admitting the cam is wrong but no compo for the damage for reasons mentioned.. Tis all.

[DanThe]

Of course, we are used to companies worming their way out of anything they can nowadays so it has to be expected, hence why I said dont send the cam anywhere until proper advice has been got.
Looks like jmpwr has raised a good point also

[B7]

Hi Simon

Looking through your camshaft woes it is clear that the camshaft is not correct and the locating hole is 180 degrees out.
The blanked hole looks to be about 6 to 7.5 degrees retarded.

Your issue is with the company who supplied the camshaft not with Schrick. If you bought a faulty electrical item like a tv you return it to the shop not the maker. You will need your proof of purchase. If you bought a faulty battery from a motor factor then you would return it to them for a replacement. The camshaft is no different but by fitting it the results were catastrophic.

You are entitled to a refund or replacement as the part is incorrect but compensation might prove difficult as if you had done the checks that you have now carried out then you would have spotted the problem during fitting.

The manufacturer states the checks should be carried out as it is not a standard part.

Good luck with the rebuild

Spot on.

I popped over to si's yesterday and we agreed, it should go back to Auto-mac and either the correct cam supplied free of charge or a full refund (plus a bit for the inconvenience would be nice). It's then up to Auto-mac to take it up with Shrick.

As above, it's normal practice when buying anything. Compensation for the damage is another matter.

[B7]

The cam will have to go to Germany so i'm told. My biggest problem i think is i'm just "Fred in a shed" to coin a phrase and schrick are a huge well respected company.

The way this all works is Shrick won't deal with me direct, i have to go through the authorised agent who i bought it off. Which is Neal McDonald from a u t omac. He more than willing to help, as he was the first time round a few months ago.

It's all well saying don't send it off but wtf am i supposed to do? Its got to go off and so they can assess it themselves. Neils very sure that they aren't into pulling a fast one and will sort it out if they find the cam faulty. I've tried to get Neil to read this and insisted there has been no slander going on! Neils not keen on the forum for reasons best discussed elsewhere but i can work on that a bit more.

I did the plasticine check on the touring engine and all was ok, 30,000 miles later its still a belter of an engine. I'm sure alot can side with my relaxed attitude with this engine as i went for a tried and test cam. The engines would of been identical bar the schrick valve springs on the 2dr engine.

Good positive post there Si but just read your thoughts again.

Neil is confident Shrick will not pull a fast one.
He's more than willing to help. I hope he does read this thread as that will prove he's willing to help.
Shrick will not deal with you direct (and therefore they will only deal with Neil).

You can and will have to work with Neil on this and supply him with the photos complete with all the info (basically what you've typed in this thread). But IMO, it's up to him as the supplying dealer to sort this. With either a full refund or the correct replacement cam FOC. It's his problem if Shrick don't play ball, not yours.

I was thinking about this on the way back last night and I'd be having the cam packaged and sent to Auto-mac's address registered post with a letter of your expectations (new cam or refund) and all the detail on how the cam enclosed in the same package, is no good with photos of the damaged caused to support your case.

[Gortour]

If the hole in the cam had been correct, the plasticine test would have passed.

As a one-off build, maybe Si could have checked more, but as he says, he's already built one to the same spec with the same cam.

Building a second one with the same spec, how many WOULD go over the same checks as last time? The Touring engine was effectively the prototype. The necessary checks were done on this. The fault is not with Si's calulations and measurements, but with the product.

I'd definitely be after compensation for the parts from Shrick. It's not as if this car was bolted together with old and worn parts, Si has spent a fortune on this build. Major credit to Si for sticking with it, after an epic build like this, with this end result, I'd be suicidal.

[Jhonno]

If the hole in the cam had been correct, the plasticine test would have passed.

As a one-off build, maybe Si could have checked more, but as he says, he's already built one to the same spec with the same cam.

Building a second one with the same spec, how many WOULD go over the same checks as last time? The Touring engine was effectively the prototype. The necessary checks were done on this. The fault is not with Si's calulations and measurements, but with the product.

I'd definitely be after compensation for the parts from Shrick. It's not as if this car was bolted together with old and worn parts, Si has spent a fortune on this build. Major credit to Si for sticking with it, after an epic build like this, with this end result, I'd be suicidal.

Manufacturing tolerances and errors is EXACTLY why you should plasticine every build..

Don't get me wrong, I am completely in support of Si on this one, just pointing out a possibly slightly harsh truth.

[Mayze]

Sorry to stick my oar in here but my understanding of the sale of goods act is the retailer is responsible not the supplier.

Si will have no contact with shrick and it will be the retailers responsibility to prove there is or isn't a fault with the cam, should the retailer choose to do so they can send it to the manufacturer for testing as part of this but it is up to the retailer to prove there is not a fault.

If a compensation claim is reasonable you would claim from the retailer as they are the responsible party it is then up to them to claim their money back from the supplier.

There is also a time limit on this so don't hang around.

[Simon13]

Theres some good brains on here so good to hear the thoughts. Well we're 1 step in the right direction. Neil has contacted Schrick and they'd like to inspect the camshaft. So this is it.

So ive got the address and its going to see Herbert C Becker to see what he thinks. Rather than me send it to Neil and then he sends it over i'm going to post it to Germany. I shall attach a little letter and diagram to help it along.









I hoard boxes so i had all the original packaging. Might make me look better! Lets hope this will be the last time i see it.

[e30-EVN]

have just recently read through this mate....
good luck for a nice outcome

ant

[jmpwr]

Hi Simon

I hope it is resolved to your satisfaction. Sending the camshaft to Germany if its at your expense should be noted as any item with an obvious fault is a direct refund/replacement. This is your right in law.
Saying it has to be returned for a verdict is not correct but is used as a tactic by retailers.

It is worth looking to the manufacturer for a good will gesture for the cost and incovienience of all of this. Tell them you have purchased a number of their products previously (1 is a "number") and were very disapointed with the time and expense in all of this which has led to the car being off the road for quite some time etc.

Componsation would be hard to get as they would have difficult questions re qualifications and installation methods.

I have always found that you have to be a good persistant complainer to get the best out of manafacturer or retailer. Being nice often means they try to fob you off.

Look forward to some good results.



[/b]

[DanThe]

Just dont put your invoice in the box

[toby]

jmpwr makes a good point regarding returning items.

It is the retailer who should sort this out (sounds like a good fella anyway).

I wish you all the luck in sorting this out, and, if it helps, here's some actual legal stuff to chew but it hopefully wont come down to having to pursue it in that way.

The law is a bit screwed up in this area as it protects big business.

The legal precedent was set by this case - Daniels and Daniels v. R. White & Sons Ltd. and Tarbard - when a family drank R. Whites lemonade - contaminated with acid! - that was bought from a retailer - but the retailer got sued!! It was said that R. Whites had taken 'all reasonable precautions' and that the retailer should be selling items of 'merchantable quality'. Totally immoral outcome!


Liability for defective products

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j& ... qtqULK_Ugg