• The Forums are now open to new registrations, adverts are also being de-tuned.

It's Not A Good Sign When...

A couple of questions re the con rod failure.
In which plane did the rod bend - such that it tilted the gudgeon pin, or as the bending would be visible viewed from either end of the engine? If the latter, did it bend with the 'kink' pointing inwards or outward, and on which bank (left or right - specify view point) is cylinder #5? (if any of this is known).
 
I’m kind of in the same place , I like nice cars but I try not to spend too much on them .
The most I ever spent on a car was the £14K my first W124 cost me 21 years ago , that car lasted me 11 years and I covered 200K in it before selling it for spares .
I also spent five grand on a W114 back in the early 80s , kept it a similar length of time and also got over 200K out of it .
In each case I felt I got my money’s worth , although I’d have felt hard done by if something catastrophic happened early on .
Most cars I buy nowadays tend to be at the pocket money end of the scale : my 500SEL cost me £1300 and lasted me 5 years without missing a beat , covering 100K in that time , I gave it away due to rot underneath which was going to cost a lot to fix . I’ve had three 190s , the most expensive being the 2.6 bought for £500 , all were good cars , still have the third one , bought for £250 , after a few months running it was evident from coolant loss that there were CHG problems ; I sourced a known good 2.3L engine for £200 and fitted it myself , also upgrading brakes and fitting a taller diff .The diff , bought for £75 has turned out to be a duffer so I’m looking for another ( well actually I’ve found one , just need to collect from the Black Isle . So far , between buying , the engine , diff , brakes , new rear springs , tyres , battery , exhaust , Oris detachable towbar, the car owes me a little over a grand but is still worth more than that . Again I’ve had the car 4 or 5 years and had good use out of it ; I have new front wings , rear wheelsrch repair sections, so at some point will get the bodywork sorted as it is sound underneath.
I can’t remember ever selling any of my cars for money , I usually either give them away to friends or family , or swap for something interesting; my troublesome S203 was swapped for my SL , which I’ve now had for 5 years but since none of these cars have a lot of money invested, I can walk away from them at any time and can afford to just go out and buy another . I was offered a W140 a couple of weeks back , tempted but said no as I really need another estate car , been looking at W124s again and W123s , just waiting for the right one to present itself .

At the end of the day, part of it is affordability of course but it's also what you are willing to spend - and the two are not necessarily linked.

I spend the most I am willing to spend to get whatever suits me the most at that time.

I'm by no means rich but go into it with your eyes open and some sensible spending on a car which is not at the top of the depreciation curve and you drive around in something special.

As long as you don't lose track of other important expenditure, I just see it as a hobby as before!
 
A couple of questions re the con rod failure.
In which plane did the rod bend - such that it tilted the gudgeon pin, or as the bending would be visible viewed from either end of the engine? If the latter, did it bend with the 'kink' pointing inwards or outward, and on which bank (left or right - specify view point) is cylinder #5? (if any of this is known).

Cylinder no.5 is the front pot on the LH bank of the engine, as viewed from sitting in the driver's seat. The rods were bent at their narrowest point, just below the small end, and as you would expect, it was the narrower cross-section at that point that bent, so nothing would have been visible viewed from the end of the engine, only from the side.
 
What do you deduce from the extra information, anything useful for other M157 owners?

Nothing unfortunately. Had the rods bent in the other plane, it might have been possible to deduce when in the cycle (BTDC or ATDC)) the bending occurred, but not the case here.

I can't remember off the top of my head if the car was re-mapped (6 pages is a lot of reading to check). Anyone more diligent than me care to say if it was or wasn't?
 
I don't know which were the other four bent rods.

So far as I know the car has not been remapped, and there's no reason to suppose that it has.
 
So far as I know the car has not been remapped, and there's no reason to suppose that it has.

The reason I ask, is not because I suspect a remap could take it further than it can physically handle, but that remaps possibly remove 'safeguards'.

Some time ago a forum member (Gizze?) posted a dyno run from his wife's car (BMW?). It was multiple pulls running through all the gears, Each successive pull exhibited a slightly lower power output such that the top gear trace was quite a bit lower than the first, first gear trace. The poster made the point that engine management strategies claw back parameters when the engine is undergoing hard usage as a protective measure. I'm curious as to whether remaps retain such (percentage?) cuts or obviate them. If the latter, then possibly that is a risk further than many would accept if aware of it.

Anyway, your's is fixed now. Guess you're just deciding to keep it or not.
 
Enjoy, Charlie; just watch out for unmarked police cars...
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom