Bill,
Sounds like you have covered yourself. I am always suspicious when something like an engine has been replaced.
The one problem we had with the reman was the faulty thermostats that were in that engine and caused a temperature fluctuation. I’m sure that they were the cause of a blown water hose that again left us on the side of I 15 for 3 hours before the tow truck came. I believe that it cost Western States nearly $3K for the tow and fix. After CAT technicians had me running around chasing bad connections and grounds, Bret was insistent that I replace those “new” thermostats. Seems like Bret and several mechanics knew that these faulty (Cal Therm) thermostats were being sold and used, but CAT was silent about it. I never was reimbursed for that fiasco.
It made me sensitive to the number of plastic radiator tanks made for Ford F8 trucks, which I have had to replace. As suggested by one CAT RV blogger, I replaced the 14# cap with a 5# cap and so far it is working fine. Don’t know if Beaver used the same tank.
Yes, prayer helps a lot. Prayer keeps me from being bitter! I haven’t resolved the agitated thing yet.
It has taken me a couple of weeks to cool down after the Caterpillar Product Support guy called for a second face-to-face meeting at Quinn CAT. A Quinn TEPS Manager attended both meetings and thankfully he was pretty quiet. I don’t think I could have contained myself with one more antagonistic bully.
Things started to get ugly when I started writing to Steven Wunning, President, Resource Industries Group. I ask to talk to someone in Caterpillar that could rationally discuss the facts surrounding my blown C12 and that so far I had encountered vagueness, incompetence, and condescension. I was naive to believe that there was integrity somewhere in the Caterpillar organization.
After the first meeting with the CAT guy and Quinn Manager, I let them know that I was in complete disagreement with the “failure analysis” presented by CAT as noted below. During our discussion, I showed them the oil analysis taken prior to the first oil change on the reman engine. They got alarmed and noted that the silicon level was 12 ppm and that I probably still had a problem with a breach in the air intake system even though it was not flagged as a problem in the analysis. When I got home I found out that the limit was 30 ppm and the two analyses on the blown engine from CAT and Amsoil were 14 ppm and 12 ppm respectively. There never was a problem with the air intake system since I owned the coach and there still is no problem.
When the CAT guy (under his name is “CAT Truck Sales” but he took offense to my statement that he used “salesman tactics”) called for the second meeting, I asked him what we had to talk about. I was led to believe that maybe we were going to have some rational dialogue. All he would do is recite the tired old warranty clause and would not discuss the validity of the CAT failure analysis. When he boastfully let me know that he was a mechanical engineer and trained in failure analysis, I kind of lost it. I suggested he had wasted an education, his time, and now my time. I don’t think that we are friends anymore and here is the CAT failure analysis that has caused this mess:
October 3, 2011, from Mark Rieter, Field Service Coordinator
“The picture provided by you of the broken rod does indicate that one rod bolt suffered a tensile fracture and the other bolt a bending fracture. The picture also shows fretting of the mating surfaces between the rod cap and the rod indicating the joint had been run with excessive clearance. The upper bearing shell still in the rod shows lack of lube due to insufficient oil film, also a result of excessive clearance. In conclusion, the rod bolts broke after the debris that entered the engine caused extensive in-cylinder damage resulting in a ventilated block. Without a cylinder to guide the piston and rod, it thrashed about the resultant debris until the rod bolts failed (pulled apart) as noted in your most recent photo.”
The rod was not broken; the upper bearing shell was not in the rod…it was in pieces in the pan; and from what I could see through the hole in the block, the cylinder was still there. I guess “ventilated block” is fancy for “broken.” The whole paragraph just doesn’t make sense.
November 15, 2011, from Greg Gauger, General Manager, Large Power Systems Division
“First, I understand you are the second owner of an RV equipped with one of our C12 engines…..thank you for purchasing a vehicle powered by our engine. Secondly, I regret you’ve had an issue with the engine and that we have not been able to resolve it to your satisfaction. I have reviewed the letters you’ve sent from December 2009 to the most recent letter received last month. I have also reviewed the responses to each of your letters from our product support team, including Cat dealer and factory representatives. I understand there have been teleconferences between you and our team regarding this issue, as well.
With this background, I reviewed photos and failure reports from the failure you experienced with our C12 engine, including the block, piston, rod, bearing cap and turbo. Looking at the evidence and in talking to my engineering team, it is clear to me there is damage to the compressor (clean air) side of the turbo that subsequently generated the debris necessary to cause a piston seizure, rod breakage and ventilated block. These are all typical cascading failures that occur when the turbo compressor is damaged to the extent seen. Conversely, if failure had initiated with the piston, rod, bearing or cap there would have been no damage to the compressor wheel as there is no path for this debris to enter into the compressor side of the turbo. Lastly there are no known pre-existing issues related to bearing or rod bolt failures on C12’s of this vintage.
We are highly confident in this analysis. What specifically caused the damage to the turbo compressor wheel is unknown, but most likely some form of debris was introduced from the air cleaner side of the engine at sometime in its life, possibly before you purchased the product. I see no indication of a defect in material or workmanship on behalf of Caterpillar. And regrettably, this is not a warrantable failure.”
Again, there was no “broken rod” or piston seizure. The block had a big hole with the rod sticking through with the steel top of the piston attached. The aluminum skirt was broken up and in the pan.
Brett, Suzanne, and anyone else,
If you can make sense out of this, and make the connection between a spun bearing and a seized piston (which is not evident), it would really be appreciated. Otherwise, my C12 had a latent defect in the #3 rod bearing assembly that caused the bearing to spin when perturbed by the overspeed load while the Jake brake was applied. Running with a rod bearing spinning will eventually break something in the lower end. Caterpillar hasn’t got the integrity to accept any responsibility.
Thanks for listening,
**** Reymore “And the truth will set you free”
