V60 Drive-E new engine - Page 2
Username
Do you already have an account?
Forgot your password?
  • Log in or Sign up

    Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
    Results 36 to 70 of 108
    1. #36
      Quote Originally Posted by meade18 View Post
      Yikes. The cost for an oil change is already ridiculous at my dealer. I'd hate to see how much they claim they have to charge now that they are importing special oil.
      If I were keeping this car forever, I guess I would consider biting the bullet and having it served at the dealer to keep the warranty since I do have a dealer installed engine replacement. But I just can't wrap my head around paying that much for an oil change. If I have problems with my new engine even after using Liqui Moly 0W-20 (Volvo VCC RBS0-2AE) oil, I'll just consider myself the unluckiest Volvo owner ever and sell the car.
      Tech said that using the 0-20 is mandatory in vehicles that have had a piston / engine job. So I am not sure you'd be assessed an extra charge. I, not having a problem and HOPEFULLY NEVER having a problem, was curious as a preventative. I plan to keep my car long term. And if the type of oil being used could shorten its life, I'm more than willing to pay a few extra bucks.

      I'm a bit luckier because I have the Prepaid Maintenance + Wear package. Cost me zilch (great apology from Dealer). So if I have to spend $10 or $20 per service visit to get dealer to use other oil, I'll manage.

    2. Remove Advertisements

      Advertisements
       

    3. #37
      Member
      Join Date
      Aug 2017
      Posts
      2,831
      Quote Originally Posted by MyVolvoS60 View Post
      Tech said that using the 0-20 is mandatory in vehicles that have had a piston / engine job. So I am not sure you'd be assessed an extra charge. I, not having a problem and HOPEFULLY NEVER having a problem, was curious as a preventative. I plan to keep my car long term. And if the type of oil being used could shorten its life, I'm more than willing to pay a few extra bucks.

      I'm a bit luckier because I have the Prepaid Maintenance + Wear package. Cost me zilch (great apology from Dealer). So if I have to spend $10 or $20 per service visit to get dealer to use other oil, I'll manage.
      Yeah, my reply to you was with the knowledge that you have the prepaid services. Those are billed out to Volvo... essentially a warranty claim. So since your car does not require the 0W-20, I don't think they will pay for it, so you would have to cover the difference.

      However, if you had a consumption problem that was fixed with rings or a new engine, your car would then require the 0W-20 and that would be paid.

    4. #38
      Quote Originally Posted by Tech View Post
      Yeah, my reply to you was with the knowledge that you have the prepaid services. Those are billed out to Volvo... essentially a warranty claim. So since your car does not require the 0W-20, I don't think they will pay for it, so you would have to cover the difference.

      However, if you had a consumption problem that was fixed with rings or a new engine, your car would then require the 0W-20 and that would be paid.
      Understood and thanks. Volvo clearly has a reason to believe the 0w-20 Castrol Oil is superior to the 5w-30. If I recall properly, Volvo Engines were designed with Europeans in mind where 0w-20 is widely available. And the closest substitute was 5w-30. Is that an accurate assessment?

      Thereby, now that the 0w-20 is being imported, sounds like a prudent decision to go with what the engine was designed to consume. I hope my car lasts a few hundred thousand with proper maintenance!
      Last edited by MyVolvoS60; 11-18-2019 at 09:39 PM.

    5. Remove Advertisements
      SwedeSpeed.com
      Advertisements
       

    6. #39
      Junior Member
      Join Date
      Feb 2017
      Location
      NJ
      Posts
      601
      Thanks for bringing this to light, I may as well just buy 0w 20 instead of 5w 30. Maybe my 2012 T5 will burn less of that. May cost a bit more but may be worth it. Key word may.
      2012 S60 T5 FWD & 2013 XC90 AWD

    7. #40
      Member
      Join Date
      Aug 2017
      Posts
      2,831
      Well the updated spec is for Drive-E engines, not the 5 cylinder.

    8. #41
      Junior Member
      Join Date
      Feb 2017
      Location
      NJ
      Posts
      601
      At this point I doubt 0W 20 would harm my T5 which is at 112K. May as well give it a shot for a few oil changes and note any change in oil consumption.
      2012 S60 T5 FWD & 2013 XC90 AWD

    9. #42
      Junior Member
      Join Date
      Aug 2016
      Location
      Quincy, MA
      Posts
      163
      My assumption has always been if I had a bit of oil consumption to maybe try a thicker oil, not a thinner one. So this is interesting
      2013 XC60 T6
      2015 V60CC T5

    10. #43
      Junior Member msmith's Avatar
      Join Date
      Sep 2009
      Location
      Ottawa (Kanata), Canada
      Posts
      984
      Hey Tech,

      What are your thoughts on the I6 engines in term of oil? Since I purchased mine I have been running 5W30 full synthetic but recently have been looking at maybe a 0W40 Euro full synthetic. I believe this is what they run in Mercedes and Porsche.

      Is this something I should be looking at or is the 5W30 sufficient?
      In the driveway: 2012 S60 T6 AWD | Black/Beechwood | Premium/Climate/Convenience Packages | BLIS | Sunroof | Active Bending Bi-Xenon | iPd Skid Plate | TFT DIM upgrade (mine), ... Former - 2006 S40 2.4i M56
      2009 Acura RDX & 1995 Celica GT Convertible (wife), 2017 GMC Sierra SLE | Elevation Edition | Crew Cab (son)

    11. #44
      Junior Member
      Join Date
      Jun 2017
      Posts
      74
      Quote Originally Posted by Highwayman View Post
      At this point I doubt 0W 20 would harm my T5 which is at 112K. May as well give it a shot for a few oil changes and note any change in oil consumption.
      I would not use an oil that isn't spec'd for your engine. The oil pump and oil passages are designed around a particular weight oil.

      The Drive-E oil pump was described as "fully variable" at it's release:

      https://www.media.volvocars.com/uk/e...-technologies9

      The Drive-E engine family is characterised by the following:

      Reduced Inner Friction - Generally improves the engine's efficiency, resulting in lower fuel consumption and higher power output. Examples of friction-improving measures include improved surface treatment of cylinder bore and crankshaft, as well as a fully variable oil pump. A new thinner synthetic engine oil is also used to improve friction.

    12. #45
      Junior Member
      Join Date
      Jan 2015
      Location
      Bellingham, WA
      Posts
      98
      Re: possible insurance payout...we are of two minds on this. Clearly, a payout that covers part or all of the engine replacement costs would be welcome from a strictly financial point of view. However, the downside is that we would obviously lose our present “lowest-risk” policyholder status, get kicked down to a higher-risk pool, and see probably an alarming increase in policy rates. No “win-win” here at all, IMHO.

    13. #46
      Junior Member
      Join Date
      May 2018
      Location
      Lewisberry Penn
      Posts
      267
      I used to sell Ford trucks and spend a good amount of time on those forums. From time to time you'd see a story of a guy putting DEF in the fuel and then just running it long enough to move out of the way, ruining the entire fuel system in the process. Most guys seems to have insurance cover this, but I'm sure it's like other things, better insurance, easier claim.

      Have you ever looked up the price for BWM motors? They can start well over $15k for a 4 cylinder.

    14. #47
      Quote Originally Posted by john_hamster View Post
      Re: possible insurance payout...we are of two minds on this. Clearly, a payout that covers part or all of the engine replacement costs would be welcome from a strictly financial point of view. However, the downside is that we would obviously lose our present “lowest-risk” policyholder status, get kicked down to a higher-risk pool, and see probably an alarming increase in policy rates. No “win-win” here at all, IMHO.
      So what's your game plan weighing both options?

    15. #48
      Member
      Join Date
      Aug 2017
      Posts
      2,831
      Quote Originally Posted by msmith View Post
      Hey Tech,

      What are your thoughts on the I6 engines in term of oil? Since I purchased mine I have been running 5W30 full synthetic but recently have been looking at maybe a 0W40 Euro full synthetic. I believe this is what they run in Mercedes and Porsche.

      Is this something I should be looking at or is the 5W30 sufficient?
      I would recommend what is outlined in the owner's manual. This goes for any car.

    16. #49
      Junior Member
      Join Date
      Jan 2015
      Location
      Bellingham, WA
      Posts
      98
      Quote Originally Posted by MyVolvoS60 View Post
      So what's your game plan weighing both options?
      You may well ask...if engine replacement NOT covered by insurance, then three options: (1) do it out of pocket, keep car indefinitely with new/rebuilt engine plus warranty; (2) do it out of pocket, then use as trade-in for new Volvo, assuming we get at least a couple of thousand above engine replacement costs on trade-in; (3) don’t do the repairs and work a salvage credit with dealer and lease a new Volvo.
      If engine worked covered by insurance, need to first get firm numbers of impact on insurance premium if accepting payout.
      None of these scenarios is particularly attractive.

    17. #50
      Senior Member Wayne T5's Avatar
      Join Date
      Nov 2002
      Location
      Russell Twp, OH
      Posts
      10,748
      Just looking quickly at kbb it suggests that your car has a trade in value of around $12-13k so if you're not going to do option 1 then you might consider going straight to option 3. YMMV. Seems like you have a great relationship with your dealer so they can probably offer advice. Sorry that you are in this situation.
      Past: '94 854, '99 S70 T5 SE, '99 S70 GLT, '04 S60R M, '12 S60 T5, '13 S60 T5, '15 S60 RD, '05 V70R GT
      Present: '95 854 T-5R, '06 XC70, '15.5 XC60 T6, '16 V60 P*

    18. #51
      Junior Member
      Join Date
      Jan 2015
      Location
      Bellingham, WA
      Posts
      98
      Quote Originally Posted by Wayne T5 View Post
      Just looking quickly at kbb it suggests that your car has a trade in value of around $12-13k so if you're not going to do option 1 then you might consider going straight to option 3. YMMV. Seems like you have a great relationship with your dealer so they can probably offer advice. Sorry that you are in this situation.
      Actually, given that the vehicle is Platinum Edition, with loads of extras, full Safety/Security packages, in “clean” (not “excellent” condition), using both the Edmunds and KBB “What’s my trade-in worth?” calculators, we come up with round $16,500, a value very close on both sites. Of course, a dealer would say so what, we’ll give you only $12K, so there’s that.

    19. #52
      Quote Originally Posted by john_hamster View Post
      Actually, given that the vehicle is Platinum Edition, with loads of extras, full Safety/Security packages, in “clean” (not “excellent” condition), using both the Edmunds and KBB “What’s my trade-in worth?” calculators, we come up with round $16,500, a value very close on both sites. Of course, a dealer would say so what, we’ll give you only $12K, so there’s that.
      Big dilemma is that the car is worth around $16-18K whether trade in or private sale. Give or take some. So if the repair is actually $15,000 (out of pocket), then you're dumping in the value of the vehicle. Two arguments to make. You've got a replacement engine that already had piston issue addressed. And you can keep car long term. Or you realize that this isn't economically feasible and negotiate a trade in with dealer.

      You're right, none of these options are super attractive. Made worse by if the Claim IS APPROVED, you best your ass the insurance company is going to recoup through a major price hike. Meaning going to another carrier to avoid the issue would be the only work around.

    20. #53
      Junior Member meade18's Avatar
      Join Date
      Mar 2018
      Posts
      432
      Quote Originally Posted by john_hamster View Post
      You may well ask...if engine replacement NOT covered by insurance, then three options: (1) do it out of pocket, keep car indefinitely with new/rebuilt engine plus warranty; (2) do it out of pocket, then use as trade-in for new Volvo, assuming we get at least a couple of thousand above engine replacement costs on trade-in; (3) don’t do the repairs and work a salvage credit with dealer and lease a new Volvo.
      If engine worked covered by insurance, need to first get firm numbers of impact on insurance premium if accepting payout.
      None of these scenarios is particularly attractive.
      I never understood people that buy insurance, and then when it comes time to use it, don't. I can't imagine a scenario where your insurance would go up enough that would negate saving $11,000+ on an engine replacement. Then again, I can barely imagine a scenario where your car insurance would pay out on a claim for you putting antifreeze in your crankcase, so in the end it's probably moot.

      I think your options are:
      - If you really want to keep the car, pay out of pocket to have a much cheaper used engine put in your car. If I needed an $11,000 engine in my $16,000 car, I don't think I could do it. I couldn't imagine spending more than half the value of the car on an engine replacement.
      - Hope the dealer offers you $5,000 on trade for your totaled car
      - If they don't, find a mechanic to sell it to for $3,000-4,000. He will put a used engine in for $5,000 and then sell it for a profit.
      2015.5 Volvo V60 Premier T5 FWD (with a new engine)

    21. #54
      Junior Member
      Join Date
      Jan 2015
      Location
      Bellingham, WA
      Posts
      98
      Quote Originally Posted by meade18 View Post
      I never understood people that buy insurance, and then when it comes time to use it, don't. I can't imagine a scenario where your insurance would go up enough that would negate saving $11,000+ on an engine replacement. Then again, I can barely imagine a scenario where your car insurance would pay out on a claim for you putting antifreeze in your crankcase, so in the end it's probably moot.

      I think your options are:
      - If you really want to keep the car, pay out of pocket to have a much cheaper used engine put in your car. If I needed an $11,000 engine in my $16,000 car, I don't think I could do it. I couldn't imagine spending more than half the value of the car on an engine replacement.
      - Hope the dealer offers you $5,000 on trade for your totaled car
      - If they don't, find a mechanic to sell it to for $3,000-4,000. He will put a used engine in for $5,000 and then sell it for a profit.
      Well, you’re probably quite correct in saying that an indie shop - or even the dealer - will get a cheaper engine, drop it in and flog the car close to Edmunds/KBB pricing for that model/mileage. So, assuming NO insurance coverage, it seems as the best bet is to negotiate a “good” credit for salvage against a new leased Volvo, which has already been hinted at by a salesperson - though no dollar amt. mentioned.

    22. #55
      Junior Member
      Join Date
      Sep 2018
      Posts
      120
      Quote Originally Posted by john_hamster View Post
      Interestingly enough, shortly after the car was towed in, we were contacted by one of the dealership’s sales people, who went on about “working something out”, implying that some allowance would be made for disabled vehicle IF we wanted to buy/lease a new car...hmmm.
      That's because the car is still worth $2K as salvage. There are relatively few 2015.5 junkers available for used parts....heck, the wheels alone could fetch $800, the seats $500, not to mention the Sensus electronics, transmission, headlight assemblies.

    23. #56
      Junior Member
      Join Date
      May 2007
      Location
      Bellevue, WA
      Posts
      1
      I went through a somewhat similar incident in Washington state involving my wife's Mercedes ML320 diesel (cautionary tale: although most diesel handles in the states and in Europe are green, BP seems to use a green handle for mid-range gasoline) when she mistakenly filled the diesel tank with gas. I would make two points (please note that I am an attorney, so reading contracts and arguing with an adjuster is second nature):

      First, after going back and forth with the adjuster, being denied, and discussing definitions of covered claims, insurer covered about $8K of repairs (less deductible). The short story: Insurer took the position misfuelling event is not “among the named perils for which Comprehensive coverage is afforded,” and claimed also it was not covered under the mechanical breakdown policy exclusion. I explained that policy agreed to pay for “sudden, direct and accidental loss” to covered auto. For insurer to avoid liability for accidental misfuelling required either that the accidental misfuelling loss fell into an express policy exclusion or the accidental misfuelling loss was not a “sudden, direct and accidental loss.” There was no specific misfuelling exclusion. The misfuelling was not “[d]amage due and confined to: . . . [m]echanical . . . breakdown or failure” because the loss was caused by misfuelling and not “confined to” a mechanical or functional event in the car (it was contamination in the fuel system), and because any mechanical breakdown was subsequent to the misfuelling loss. It was nothing more than simple normal negligence on my wife’s part. Because the misfuelling event resulted in a “sudden, direct and accidental” loss (sudden: unexpected, occurring quickly, without warning; direct: without intervening factors and stemming immediately from a source; and accidental: happening unintentionally, without intent, through carelessness and often with unfortunate results). In Washington, I believe the wrong liquid in the wrong part of the engine, unless intentional, and unless specifically excluded by the policy, is going to be covered, but you need to read policy definitions.

      Second, this is what you buy insurance for. Did my rates increase? Yep. I lost the no claims discount we had for the last five years. The policy increase on the autos (three autos) was maybe $300-$400 a year. Was it worth making the claim? Yes. In the case of the new engine or totaled Volvo, it will certainly pay out. I don't see the yearly rates increasing $1,000.00 a year, so thinking of doing this as a self-insured event seems a no brainer to me.

      Anyway, that's my $.02.

    24. #57
      Junior Member
      Join Date
      May 2015
      Location
      It's raining - must be near Seattle
      Posts
      531
      Quote Originally Posted by wonderlaw View Post
      I went through a somewhat similar incident in Washington state involving my wife's Mercedes ML320 diesel (cautionary tale: although most diesel handles in the states and in Europe are green, BP seems to use a green handle for mid-range gasoline) when she mistakenly filled the diesel tank with gas. I would make two points (please note that I am an attorney, so reading contracts and arguing with an adjuster is second nature):

      First, after going back and forth with the adjuster, being denied, and discussing definitions of covered claims, insurer covered about $8K of repairs (less deductible). The short story: Insurer took the position misfuelling event is not “among the named perils for which Comprehensive coverage is afforded,” and claimed also it was not covered under the mechanical breakdown policy exclusion. I explained that policy agreed to pay for “sudden, direct and accidental loss” to covered auto. For insurer to avoid liability for accidental misfuelling required either that the accidental misfuelling loss fell into an express policy exclusion or the accidental misfuelling loss was not a “sudden, direct and accidental loss.” There was no specific misfuelling exclusion. The misfuelling was not “[d]amage due and confined to: . . . [m]echanical . . . breakdown or failure” because the loss was caused by misfuelling and not “confined to” a mechanical or functional event in the car (it was contamination in the fuel system), and because any mechanical breakdown was subsequent to the misfuelling loss. It was nothing more than simple normal negligence on my wife’s part. Because the misfuelling event resulted in a “sudden, direct and accidental” loss (sudden: unexpected, occurring quickly, without warning; direct: without intervening factors and stemming immediately from a source; and accidental: happening unintentionally, without intent, through carelessness and often with unfortunate results). In Washington, I believe the wrong liquid in the wrong part of the engine, unless intentional, and unless specifically excluded by the policy, is going to be covered, but you need to read policy definitions.

      Second, this is what you buy insurance for. Did my rates increase? Yep. I lost the no claims discount we had for the last five years. The policy increase on the autos (three autos) was maybe $300-$400 a year. Was it worth making the claim? Yes. In the case of the new engine or totaled Volvo, it will certainly pay out. I don't see the yearly rates increasing $1,000.00 a year, so thinking of doing this as a self-insured event seems a no brainer to me.

      Anyway, that's my $.02.
      As a fellow attorney, I just want to step in and say that your post is beautifully explained.
      I'm not good, I'm not nice, I'm just right.
      2012 S60 T6 R-Design | 1998 S70 T5 SE | 1986 944 Turbo

    25. #58
      Junior Member
      Join Date
      Jan 2017
      Posts
      4

      Amazing!

      Quote Originally Posted by john_hamster View Post
      Massive brain fart, was in a rush, never checked manual...brutal.
      You mean the manual is needed for this car to tell the difference between a radiator/coolant filler cap and a valve cover/oil-fill cap? Pretty unbelievable.

    26. #59
      Junior Member
      Join Date
      Sep 2008
      Location
      Detroit, MIchigan
      Posts
      473
      DOnt worry,

      If your insurance doesn't cover it, get the engine form the junkyard (probably 2k) and drop it in (probably 1k)

      You will be back on the road with it for ~3-4k
      2018 XC80 T8 Inscription

      2011 XC60 R Design

      1999 E55 AMG

    27. #60
      Member
      Join Date
      Aug 2017
      Posts
      2,831
      Quote Originally Posted by shadowlord View Post
      DOnt worry,

      If your insurance doesn't cover it, get the engine form the junkyard (probably 2k) and drop it in (probably 1k)

      You will be back on the road with it for ~3-4k
      Drop it in for $1000? Probably not.

    28. #61
      Junior Member
      Join Date
      Jan 2015
      Location
      Bellingham, WA
      Posts
      98
      Quote Originally Posted by normadel View Post
      You mean the manual is needed for this car to tell the difference between a radiator/coolant filler cap and a valve cover/oil-fill cap? Pretty unbelievable.
      Whatever...I’ve already beaten myself up about this contretemps, so no piling on, please!

    29. #62
      Junior Member
      Join Date
      Jan 2015
      Location
      Bellingham, WA
      Posts
      98
      For a non-attorney policyholder, I heartily concur regarding the cogency of the “$.02” response!

    30. #63
      Junior Member
      Join Date
      May 2015
      Location
      It's raining - must be near Seattle
      Posts
      531
      Quote Originally Posted by Tech View Post
      Quote Originally Posted by shadowlord View Post
      DOnt worry,

      If your insurance doesn't cover it, get the engine form the junkyard (probably 2k) and drop it in (probably 1k)

      You will be back on the road with it for ~3-4k
      Drop it in for $1000? Probably not.
      But his roommate's girlfriend's brother's friend knows a guy who's into cars and says that's all it should cost!
      I'm not good, I'm not nice, I'm just right.
      2012 S60 T6 R-Design | 1998 S70 T5 SE | 1986 944 Turbo

    31. #64
      Senior Member Wayne T5's Avatar
      Join Date
      Nov 2002
      Location
      Russell Twp, OH
      Posts
      10,748
      Quote Originally Posted by john_hamster View Post
      Whatever...I’ve already beaten myself up about this contretemps, so no piling on, please!
      Ignore the nuts in the gallery, stuff happens. I could see getting large gray plastic jugs confused.
      Past: '94 854, '99 S70 T5 SE, '99 S70 GLT, '04 S60R M, '12 S60 T5, '13 S60 T5, '15 S60 RD, '05 V70R GT
      Present: '95 854 T-5R, '06 XC70, '15.5 XC60 T6, '16 V60 P*

    32. #65
      Member
      Join Date
      Aug 2017
      Posts
      2,831
      It seems obvious you like the car if you are willing to drop $15k on a new engine. If you really like it, once you get the breakdown on the price I would certainly see if they will give you a discount for the job. They can sell the parts at whatever price they want and can adjust the labor rate. Not all parts are marked up the same, but for arguments sake, let's just say these are cost plus 75%. And let's say their labor rate is $165 an hour and their top paid guy makes $35 an hour. Some shops have a "competitive" labor rate for maintenance and easy jobs. Otherwise paying $165 an hour for a simple brake job that another shop can do for $120 an hour will price them out of a lot of jobs.

      So they could sell the parts at cost plus 50% (or whatever you want to use) and charge a labor rate of $140 an hour and still make plenty on the job while saving you money to keep a loyal customer.

      Not a guarantee but it would certainly be worth a conversation. My dealer has done this, even with installing used engines.
      Last edited by Tech; 11-21-2019 at 01:12 PM.

    33. #66
      Junior Member meade18's Avatar
      Join Date
      Mar 2018
      Posts
      432
      Quote Originally Posted by wonderlaw View Post
      The misfuelling was not “[d]amage due and confined to: . . . [m]echanical . . . breakdown or failure” because the loss was caused by misfuelling and not “confined to” a mechanical or functional event in the car (it was contamination in the fuel system), and because any mechanical breakdown was subsequent to the misfuelling loss.
      I don't understand why the insurance company would give in on this. If I were their attorney, I would argue that the misfuelling is one event and that barely damaged your car. The misfuelling ends the moment she stopped pumping gas into the tank. She could have realized her mistake at that point and not start the engine. I could see the argument that the insurance company should cover that mistake. There is no mechanical breakdown from a misfuelling event. The repair would consist of dropping the tank, draining the gas, etc. However, when you start the car, that is a distinct and separate event. The MECHANICAL BREAKDOWN begins to occur due to gas inside the diesel engine at that point. Depending on how much diesel is in the tank that the gas mixes with, you could easily argue two things, 1. it's a mechanical breakdown specifically excluded, and 2. it's not sudden.

      You were fortunate. While I don't think that you are the only person to have this mistake covered by their insurance (I googled "does insurance cover gas in diesel" and the resounding result was "it depends"), I think most people aren't able to have it covered. The OP should consider hiring you. While many policies have a misfuelling exclusion (I'm surprised yours didn't), I doubt many have a mis-antifreezing or mis-oiling exclusion.


      As an aside... I noticed your join date says May 2007 and this is your very first post. I honestly have no idea what to make of that.
      2015.5 Volvo V60 Premier T5 FWD (with a new engine)

    34. #67
      Junior Member
      Join Date
      May 2015
      Location
      It's raining - must be near Seattle
      Posts
      531
      Quote Originally Posted by meade18 View Post
      Quote Originally Posted by wonderlaw View Post
      The misfuelling was not “[d]amage due and confined to: . . . [m]echanical . . . breakdown or failure” because the loss was caused by misfuelling and not “confined to” a mechanical or functional event in the car (it was contamination in the fuel system), and because any mechanical breakdown was subsequent to the misfuelling loss.
      I don't understand why the insurance company would give in on this. If I were their attorney, I would argue that the misfuelling is one event and that barely damaged your car. The misfuelling ends the moment she stopped pumping gas into the tank. She could have realized her mistake at that point and not start the engine. I could see the argument that the insurance company should cover that mistake. There is no mechanical breakdown from a misfuelling event. The repair would consist of dropping the tank, draining the gas, etc. However, when you start the car, that is a distinct and separate event. The MECHANICAL BREAKDOWN begins to occur due to gas inside the diesel engine at that point. Depending on how much diesel is in the tank that the gas mixes with, you could easily argue two things, 1. it's a mechanical breakdown specifically excluded, and 2. it's not sudden.

      You were fortunate. While I don't think that you are the only person to have this mistake covered by their insurance (I googled "does insurance cover gas in diesel" and the resounding result was "it depends"), I think most people aren't able to have it covered. The OP should consider hiring you. While many policies have a misfuelling exclusion (I'm surprised yours didn't), I doubt many have a mis-antifreezing or mis-oiling exclusion.


      As an aside... I noticed your join date says May 2007 and this is your very first post. I honestly have no idea what to make of that.
      Lots of people join to research and learn about common issues with their cars but see no need to post.

      As for your legal analysis of what constitutes a mechanical breakdown... Let's say that I find it rather specious and am not at all convinced that it would hold up over wonderlaw's argument in court. How much contract litigation have you been involved with?

      As for why the insurance company would acquiesce, that's simple. If wonderlaw had taken them to court they would have incurred legal costs in excess of the payout to fix the car. As an attorney, wonderlaw's costs of litigation are effectively nil since this sort of civil matter is one in which an attorney can easily represent himself or herself. Wonderlaw had a solid argument and a credible threat of eventual litigation over the policy terms. It would not have been fiscally wise for the insurance company to press the issue.
      Last edited by zenmervolt; 11-21-2019 at 11:48 AM.
      I'm not good, I'm not nice, I'm just right.
      2012 S60 T6 R-Design | 1998 S70 T5 SE | 1986 944 Turbo

    35. #68
      Junior Member meade18's Avatar
      Join Date
      Mar 2018
      Posts
      432
      Quote Originally Posted by zenmervolt View Post
      Lots of people join to research and learn about common issues with their cars but see no need to post.
      I've never seen a 12 year lurker make his first post before. It just jumped out at me as something quite unique.

      As for your legal analysis of what constitutes a mechanical breakdown... Let's say that I find it rather specious and am not at all convinced that it would hold up over wonderlaw's argument in court. How much contract litigation have you been involved with?
      I don't know the legal definition of a mechanical breakdown. I just know the common sense car guy definition. When the ENGINE won't RUN because the fuel ignites prematurely and the fuel pump, injectors, and senors are damaged, I consider those things mechanical breakdowns. What else could they be? I know that comprehensive insurance does cover repairs for events that result in mechanical breakdowns, i.e. driving into a giant body of water. So that is why my argument would center more on the "sudden" side of wonderlaw's claim. If you were to drive into a lake (or a road covered in water during a flash flood), the mechanical breakdown would be sudden and you can't separate the driving event from the mechanical failure. In wonderlaw's case, I think you can separate the two events and claim the second event isn't sudden (or at least that is one argument I would attempt if I were the insurance company). If I didn't screw my oil plug back in all the way when changing my oil and it all leaked out, I assume the resulting engine failure wouldn't be considered sudden. Why is the engine failure from the wrong fuel considered sudden?

      As for why the insurance company would acquiesce, that's simple. If wonderlaw had taken them to court they would have incurred legal costs in excess of the payout to fix the car. As an attorney, wonderlaw's costs of litigation are effectively nil since this sort of civil matter is one in which an attorney can easily represent himself or herself. Wonderlaw had a solid argument and a credible threat of eventual litigation over the policy terms. It would not have been fiscally wise for the insurance company to press the issue.
      This makes perfect sense and I totally understand it. But, I have a personal experience with my insurance company forcing someone to sue me and then taking that suit all the way to a bench verdict when they had zero chance of winning. And it was a small amount of money (around $14,000). Yes, that is an N=1, but there was nothing special about my crash, so I assume that insurance companies take claims to court fairly regularly. Wouldn't wonderlaw's claim be a perfect one to take up? When I asked the lawyer Geico sent out, (because I assumed the same thing as you that it wasn't economically smart to fight the case) he told me he worked directly for the insurance company on salary so it didn't actually cost them that much. I asked why they fought this case that was so simple (I rear ended the other guy) and he couldn't give me a straight answer. AND it wasn't like he even fought the case. We had NO defense. They just forced the plaintiff's attorney to put on a case. So based on the fact that my insurance company did that in a case that they had no chance of winning, I don't see why they wouldn't at least TRY in wonderlaw's case where they have a decent argument. At least make him file the lawsuit (his post makes it seem like he didn't have to go that far).
      Last edited by meade18; 11-21-2019 at 12:33 PM.
      2015.5 Volvo V60 Premier T5 FWD (with a new engine)

    36. #69
      Junior Member
      Join Date
      Jan 2015
      Location
      Bellingham, WA
      Posts
      98
      Well, the claim has now been advanced by the adjuster to a third-party vendor for “market-value appraisal”, which suggests to me that a determination will be shortly made to either pay the repair costs for replacement engine, OR a lump-sum payment for (low?) book value and the car taken by the insurer for salvage. Updates will follow.

    37. #70
      Junior Member
      Join Date
      May 2015
      Location
      It's raining - must be near Seattle
      Posts
      531
      Quote Originally Posted by john_hamster View Post
      Well, the claim has now been advanced by the adjuster to a third-party vendor for “market-value appraisal”, which suggests to me that a determination will be shortly made to either pay the repair costs for replacement engine, OR a lump-sum payment for (low?) book value and the car taken by the insurer for salvage. Updates will follow.
      It may be worthwhile to consider "buying the car back" after it's totalled and paying for the repairs yourself. If the salvage value is low enough and you like the car enough that may be the way to go. Usually you don't have to actually go through the motions of buying it back, the insurance company will simply deduct the salvage value from what they pay out to you.

      This may result in the car having a "rebuilt" or similar mark placed on the title but if your intent is to keep the car for a long time (10+ years) the rebuilt title may not matter.
      I'm not good, I'm not nice, I'm just right.
      2012 S60 T6 R-Design | 1998 S70 T5 SE | 1986 944 Turbo

    38. Remove Advertisements

      Advertisements
       

    Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast

    Similar Threads

    1. New to Forum: New V60 release date? Planning to OSD a V60 in Summer of '18
      By Mockingbird812 in forum S60, S60CC & V60, V60CC (2011-2018)
      Replies: 2
      Last Post: 06-14-2017, 07:59 PM
    2. V60 T5 Drive-E first minor engine problem
      By boybees in forum S60, S60CC & V60, V60CC (2011-2018)
      Replies: 2
      Last Post: 09-26-2014, 09:38 AM
    3. Car and Driver V60 Drive-E First Drive
      By ProfessorDDD in forum S60, S60CC & V60, V60CC (2011-2018)
      Replies: 1
      Last Post: 04-29-2014, 10:24 PM
    4. Autoguide Reviews the New V60 Drive-E Engine
      By TrboBrik in forum News & Rumors
      Replies: 49
      Last Post: 01-31-2014, 10:16 AM
    5. Replies: 0
      Last Post: 09-12-2013, 08:33 PM