how to tell if head gasket is gone?

[MGJohn]

MG CHRIS said:

Rammy76 said:

buzzer said:

Or you are in denial

I cant think of any other car that has such problems with Head Gasket failure...

I know many K series engined Rovers that have never suffered it including the one I used to own.

I also own a PD 130 VW diesel that has tried to destroy itself when the turbo seals blew. My workmate has the same engine in his Golf and it has cost £1200 so far on a head gasket and other faults. My cousins CR 170 bhp diesel SEAT has cost £2000 for new injectors and another workmate has the 140bhp diesel Passat and it's injectors have just failed.

Are all VW diesels rubbish?

Give me the price of a K series repair any day compared to what I'm having to pay out!

Someone with a bit of sense in the 3 years ive been working in the motor trade i have replaced 4 k-series headgasket at around £500-600 each in that time ive seen between 50-70 vag group cars with oil pump failing, turbo blowing seals/ destroying it self leading to a destroyed engine. Injectors failing is a major problem on vag diesels expecially in VW'S normally go at around 100,000 miles and are 250 quid each and most times needs 4. With that and diagnosing and fitting cost upwards of £1400.

In the last 2 weeks we have had 5 VW, 1 lost oil pressure and damaged the crank, 1 needing a new oil pump, 2 with injector failing and another with running problems and idleing problems which had to have a idle control valve, egr valve and various other parts either cleaned or replaced.

If the poster above doesn't like rover then why have so many and so many basicly 200 series rovers.

Don't believe a word of that. Foreign is best, Rovers are rubbish. Well known fact .... in the land of the ever more severely self-inflicted.

....

[MGJohn]

buzzer said:

Mr2Mike said:

Carrot said:

This.

I have yet to meet a standard rover owner (including one of my own) that has not had at least one failure in its miserable life.

Then I guess you haven't met that many Rover owners.

Or you are in denial

I cant think of any other car that has such problems with Head Gasket failure...

Love these threads.

Repeat after me.

Only Rovers have head gasket issues. Unknown in other marques.

Feeling better now ? ..

More seriously, cylinder head gaskets very rarely fail.... in any car. They are usually first damaged by some agency and then no longer able to do the job they are designed to do ... in any car. That damage is usually as a result of over heating invariably following coolant loss .... in any car!

Did I stress the any car bit sufficiently?

[RWD cossie wil]

MGJohn said:

Don't believe a word of that. Foreign is best, Rovers are rubbish. Well known fact .... in the land of the ever more severely self-inflicted.

....

I actually briefly worked for Rover, as an outside contractor fixing problems they could not solve.

The KV6 engine had major problems with camshaft seals leaking, we discovered that the tooling they were using to insert the seal was not fitting them correctly. It was a compressed air mandrel, that squeezed the seal in.

Now if you push a bit of rubber along, it will try to return slightly after the force is removed. Our solution was to use a hydraulic mandrel, with a 20 second dwell time to hold the seal in once it was pressed home. This method proved 100% successful, with no seal creep or deformation, and solved the problem.

However, Rover decided that it was cheaper to pay out on warranty work than it was to re-tool!!! I mean, talk about short term thinking, what a way to have customers lose faith in your product!!

Now, my dad bought an MGTF a couple of years ago, with 19k on the clock, with full history etc... I bet him £20 that the HG would fail before 25k. It failed at 23,700 miles, despite being constantly checked for coolant & oil levels etc, sorry but that really is a joke for a modern car.

The use of crappy plastic dowels to save about 19p an engine is ridiculous, as once they are replaced with the metal items, and a better HG, they never seem to fail again.

Quite why they let a cooling system with such little capacity out on the general (stupid, neglectful) public is beyond me. Yes cars should be looked after, but having such a borderline system is foolhardy, and being so fragile quickly earnt a rep for being unreliable, quite rightly in my opinion.

Rovers downfall was its arrogance that people would buy them because they were British, and neglected to make a decent product when compared to its peers.

[anonymous-user]

RWD cossie wil said:

MGJohn said:

Don't believe a word of that. Foreign is best, Rovers are rubbish. Well known fact .... in the land of the ever more severely self-inflicted.

....

I actually briefly worked for Rover, as an outside contractor fixing problems they could not solve.

The KV6 engine had major problems with camshaft seals leaking, we discovered that the tooling they were using to insert the seal was not fitting them correctly. It was a compressed air mandrel, that squeezed the seal in.

Now if you push a bit of rubber along, it will try to return slightly after the force is removed. Our solution was to use a hydraulic mandrel, with a 20 second dwell time to hold the seal in once it was pressed home. This method proved 100% successful, with no seal creep or deformation, and solved the problem.

However, Rover decided that it was cheaper to pay out on warranty work than it was to re-tool!!! I mean, talk about short term thinking, what a way to have customers lose faith in your product!!

Now, my dad bought an MGTF a couple of years ago, with 19k on the clock, with full history etc... I bet him £20 that the HG would fail before 25k. It failed at 23,700 miles, despite being constantly checked for coolant & oil levels etc, sorry but that really is a joke for a modern car.

The use of crappy plastic dowels to save about 19p an engine is ridiculous, as once they are replaced with the metal items, and a better HG, they never seem to fail again.

Quite why they let a cooling system with such little capacity out on the general (stupid, neglectful) public is beyond me. Yes cars should be looked after, but having such a borderline system is foolhardy, and being so fragile quickly earnt a rep for being unreliable, quite rightly in my opinion.

Rovers downfall was its arrogance that people would buy them because they were British, and neglected to make a decent product when compared to its peers.

Good post and informative from someone qualified to speak on the subject

[buzzer]

St John Smythe said:

RWD cossie wil said:

MGJohn said:

Don't believe a word of that. Foreign is best, Rovers are rubbish. Well known fact .... in the land of the ever more severely self-inflicted.

....

I actually briefly worked for Rover, as an outside contractor fixing problems they could not solve.

The KV6 engine had major problems with camshaft seals leaking, we discovered that the tooling they were using to insert the seal was not fitting them correctly. It was a compressed air mandrel, that squeezed the seal in.

Now if you push a bit of rubber along, it will try to return slightly after the force is removed. Our solution was to use a hydraulic mandrel, with a 20 second dwell time to hold the seal in once it was pressed home. This method proved 100% successful, with no seal creep or deformation, and solved the problem.

However, Rover decided that it was cheaper to pay out on warranty work than it was to re-tool!!! I mean, talk about short term thinking, what a way to have customers lose faith in your product!!

Now, my dad bought an MGTF a couple of years ago, with 19k on the clock, with full history etc... I bet him £20 that the HG would fail before 25k. It failed at 23,700 miles, despite being constantly checked for coolant & oil levels etc, sorry but that really is a joke for a modern car.

The use of crappy plastic dowels to save about 19p an engine is ridiculous, as once they are replaced with the metal items, and a better HG, they never seem to fail again.

Quite why they let a cooling system with such little capacity out on the general (stupid, neglectful) public is beyond me. Yes cars should be looked after, but having such a borderline system is foolhardy, and being so fragile quickly earnt a rep for being unreliable, quite rightly in my opinion.

Rovers downfall was its arrogance that people would buy them because they were British, and neglected to make a decent product when compared to its peers.

Good post and informative from someone qualified to speak on the subject

Agreed, informative.

Unfortunately, Rovers were, and still seem to be bought by same type of person who made them in the first place! I.E. head in the sand, stuck in the 60's dinosaurs who refuse to believe there is a problem!

[Rammy76]

buzzer said:

Agreed, informative.

Unfortunately, Rovers were, and still seem to be bought by same type of person who made them in the first place! I.E. head in the sand, stuck in the 60's dinosaurs who refuse to believe there is a problem!

So what about VW owners then?

I am one, as I was persuaded that the PD 130 was the most reliable engine I could buy for my needs.
Right now it is sitting outside, absolutely fked and as much use as a waterproof teabag.

To get to work I have had to acquire a £100 Toyota Corolla. German engineering you see.

I had a Rover, never once in its hard life did it try to destroy itself, and frighten the life out of my wife and kids. I have many friends and family that have fallen for the VAG spell and now they are also paying the price.

I don't care what you say, I had a Rover and it was a bloody good car. Why should I be ashamed to say what I think/have experienced? My head is not in the sand, it is real world experience.

I have also owned a TU engined Peugeot before, guess what, the head gasket failed, my sister's XU diesel Peugeot head gasket failed. I have owned a FIAT and the gearbox failed. I could go on and on.

The main difference I can see, especially in the European car industry, is that the French/German/Italian people are loyal to their own products. The respective governments will not allow their national car industries to fail either, so all the guff that they have churned out does not make one jot of a difference because they cannot fail.

If MG Rover were given some kind of support then who knows what they could be producing now, after all they managed to produce some damn good cars on a budget that RBS would squander in 1 day.

[PoleDriver]

1) 'Mayo' under the oil filler cap will either be condensation (happens often with cars which are only used for short journeys) or a head gasket which has blown in such a way as to allow water into the oilways.
2) Oily deposits in the water can be old antifreeze or a head gasket which has blown in such a way as to allow oil into the water jacket. (Which way the oil/water flows is dependant on the pressure differential)
3) Blue smoke from the exhaust can be worn rings or can be a head gasket which has blown in such a way as to allow the oil to get to the combustion chamber/cylinder.
4) Steam from the exhaust can be due to condensation in the exhaust system or can be a head gasket which has failed in such a way as to allow water into the combustion chamber/cylinder.
5) Head gaskets on some engines can fail between cylinders. Not having any contact with oil or water but will cause very poor running and loss of power.

[aw51 121565]

buzzer said:

St John Smythe said:

RWD cossie wil said:

MGJohn said:

Don't believe a word of that. Foreign is best, Rovers are rubbish. Well known fact .... in the land of the ever more severely self-inflicted.

....

I actually briefly worked for Rover, as an outside contractor fixing problems they could not solve.

The KV6 engine had major problems with camshaft seals leaking, we discovered that the tooling they were using to insert the seal was not fitting them correctly. It was a compressed air mandrel, that squeezed the seal in.

Now if you push a bit of rubber along, it will try to return slightly after the force is removed. Our solution was to use a hydraulic mandrel, with a 20 second dwell time to hold the seal in once it was pressed home. This method proved 100% successful, with no seal creep or deformation, and solved the problem.

However, Rover decided that it was cheaper to pay out on warranty work than it was to re-tool!!! I mean, talk about short term thinking, what a way to have customers lose faith in your product!!

Now, my dad bought an MGTF a couple of years ago, with 19k on the clock, with full history etc... I bet him £20 that the HG would fail before 25k. It failed at 23,700 miles, despite being constantly checked for coolant & oil levels etc, sorry but that really is a joke for a modern car.

The use of crappy plastic dowels to save about 19p an engine is ridiculous, as once they are replaced with the metal items, and a better HG, they never seem to fail again.

Quite why they let a cooling system with such little capacity out on the general (stupid, neglectful) public is beyond me. Yes cars should be looked after, but having such a borderline system is foolhardy, and being so fragile quickly earnt a rep for being unreliable, quite rightly in my opinion.

Rovers downfall was its arrogance that people would buy them because they were British, and neglected to make a decent product when compared to its peers.

Good post and informative from someone qualified to speak on the subject

Agreed, informative.

Unfortunately, Rovers were, and still seem to be bought by same type of person who made them in the first place! I.E. head in the sand, stuck in the 60's dinosaurs who refuse to believe there is a problem!

A camshaft seal and a head gasket are entirely seperate items ?

The reference to the "small coolant capacity K-series" refers to the block, which held around 400cc (from memory ) of coolant thus (according to the launch info) promoting quick warm up. Designed and engineered properly, this shouldn't have been a problem - they still had a radiator, hoses and expansion tank full of the then-blue stuff, when all was said and done . (Was it a problem on the early K-series? CAR Magazine took a 1.4 to 50,000 miles in six months, after all...)

Agreed about the plastic dowels - as used in the later engines . Nasty - but they were only used when costs were cut, and not on the earlier engines (An early 1.4 did 50,000 miles without problems, did I mention this? )

And is no-one going to mention the cracked liners on the first KV6s in the last 800s? MG Rover fixed this for the 45 and 75 2.5 V6s, but refused to pay for the repairs to the 800's KV6 engines which went up the swannee .

Unfortunately, I cannot name a friend whose K-series enbgine has done the boil up of doom - but none of them were early engines...

[MGJohn]

Rammy76 said:

buzzer said:

Agreed, informative.

Unfortunately, Rovers were, and still seem to be bought by same type of person who made them in the first place! I.E. head in the sand, stuck in the 60's dinosaurs who refuse to believe there is a problem!

So what about VW owners then?

I am one, as I was persuaded that the PD 130 was the most reliable engine I could buy for my needs.
Right now it is sitting outside, absolutely fked and as much use as a waterproof teabag.

To get to work I have had to acquire a £100 Toyota Corolla. German engineering you see.

I had a Rover, never once in its hard life did it try to destroy itself, and frighten the life out of my wife and kids. I have many friends and family that have fallen for the VAG spell and now they are also paying the price.

I don't care what you say, I had a Rover and it was a bloody good car. Why should I be ashamed to say what I think/have experienced? My head is not in the sand, it is real world experience.

I have also owned a TU engined Peugeot before, guess what, the head gasket failed, my sister's XU diesel Peugeot head gasket failed. I have owned a FIAT and the gearbox failed. I could go on and on.

The main difference I can see, especially in the European car industry, is that the French/German/Italian people are loyal to their own products. The respective governments will not allow their national car industries to fail either, so all the guff that they have churned out does not make one jot of a difference because they cannot fail.

If MG Rover were given some kind of support then who knows what they could be producing now, after all they managed to produce some damn good cars on a budget that RBS would squander in 1 day.

Rammy76, please stop talking from direct personal experience and making good sense. It is certainly not appreciated by many on this site who shall we say, are of a certain mindset.

Now go away and buy a superior foreign product. You know from direct experience that it makes sense in the land of the self-inflicted...

and .. aw51... I saw what you did there ...

[MGJohn]

It could simply be a myth that plastic locating dowels were used instead of steel for reasons of cost. I suspect any cost differences would be minimal considering the quantities used. On some engines where plastic was used instead of steel there were no problems. When severe overheating occurs in an engine following coolant loss so that metals expand to excess, even steel dowels are of little use.

When that metal expansion occurs to excess in the overheated K-Series, it can rupture the plastic dowel nearest the Timing side of the engine. That particular dowel does not simply locate the head-block interface, it contains the high pressure oil supply to the double overhead camshafts. When that plastic dowel is damaged, oil at high pressure can be sent straight into the cylinder head gasket and elsewhere in the engine.

A lady friend had her cylinder head gasket replaced on her Rover 25 by a professionally trained mechanic. I do not think it needed doing but, she went ahead anyway. Within eight miles after picking up her repaired car, it was obvious something was wrong. She asked me to look at her car.

My investigations showed that the pro-repairer was the actual failure. I removed the cylinder head on a 'no promises, see what I can do' basis to discover that the all important oil supply/locating dowel had NOT BEEN FITTED. I repaired the car and soon after the water pump expired. THAT was the cause of the coolant loss misidentified by professionals as the "They all do that" so called failure.

Still, what do you expect it's a Rover, they all do that ... well known fact! So, ALWAYS blame the Rover not the real failures.

Close to 40,000 miles later, she sold the car a while back and replaced it with a nice French car. After only a few weeks ownership of that ... guess what.... Correct! Mind you, those do NOT all do that... it's a French not British car you muppet!
.

[anonymous-user]

MGJohn said:

It could simply be a myth that plastic locating dowels were used instead of steel for reasons of cost. I suspect any cost differences would be minimal considering the quantities used. On some engines where plastic was used instead of steel there were no problems. When severe overheating occurs in an engine following coolant loss so that metals expand to excess, even steel dowels are of little use.

When that metal expansion occurs to excess in the overheated K-Series, it can rupture the plastic dowel nearest the Timing side of the engine. That particular dowel does not simply locate the head-block interface, it contains the high pressure oil supply to the double overhead camshafts. When that plastic dowel is damaged, oil at high pressure can be sent straight into the cylinder head gasket and elsewhere in the engine.

A lady friend had her cylinder head gasket replaced on her Rover 25 by a professionally trained mechanic. I do not think it needed doing but, she went ahead anyway. Within eight miles after picking up her repaired car, it was obvious something was wrong. She asked me to look at her car.

My investigations showed that the pro-repairer was the actual failure. I removed the cylinder head on a 'no promises, see what I can do' basis to discover that the all important oil supply/locating dowel had NOT BEEN FITTED. I repaired the car and soon after the water pump expired. THAT was the cause of the coolant loss misidentified by professionals as the "They all do that" so called failure.

Still, what do you expect it's a Rover, they all do that ... well known fact! So, ALWAYS blame the Rover not the real failures.

Close to 40,000 miles later, she sold the car a while back and replaced it with a nice French car. After only a few weeks ownership of that ... guess what.... Correct! Mind you, those do NOT all do that... it's a French not British car you muppet!
.

That's one serious chip you've got there

[buzzer]

St John Smythe said:

That's one serious chip you've got there

Probably drives a Rover

[Rammy76]

buzzer said:

Probably drives a Rover

Oh the irony, so your BMW has had a new head gasket because in your own words "they are prone to it".
Do you not think it's a bit hypocritical mocking other cars for the same thing?!

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

[buzzer]

Rammy76 said:

buzzer said:

Probably drives a Rover

Oh the irony, so your BMW has had a new head gasket because in your own words "they are prone to it".
Do you not think it's a bit hypocritical mocking other cars for the same thing?!

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

Irony?

where have I defended BMW? I have admitted they are prone to it? It had done 150K though... A rover would have had 10 by then!

My point is that Rover buyers seem to be in denial that there is a problem!

interesting to see that you have been rattled enough to dig into my posts! never had a stalker before

[PoleDriver]

I, for one, will never buy anything MG/Rover ever again! I've had a few and they've been really unreliable, I'll stick with my TVRs, they're much more reliable!

[buzzer]

PoleDriver said:

I, for one, will never buy anything MG/Rover ever again! I've had a few and they've been really unreliable, I'll stick with my TVRs, they're much more reliable!

Not sure I agree that the TVR is more reliable... but at least it was fun to drive!

[MGJohn]

PoleDriver said:

I, for one, will never buy anything MG/Rover ever again! I've had a few and they've been really unreliable, I'll stick with my TVRs, they're much more reliable!

Even if you wanted to you couldn't buy a new one now. The asset stripped remnants latterly known as MG-Rover are no more.

The thread title asks "How to tell if head gasket is gone?"

You, buzzer and Singe-int Smooth have failed miserably in that respect.

Simply demonstrating a very closed mind on the subject.

No doubt your splendidly helpful contributions are admired by all.
.

[buzzer]

MGJohn said:

PoleDriver said:

I, for one, will never buy anything MG/Rover ever again! I've had a few and they've been really unreliable, I'll stick with my TVRs, they're much more reliable!

Even if you wanted to you couldn't buy a new one now. The asset stripped remnants latterly known as MG-Rover are no more.

The thread title asks "How to tell if head gasket is gone?"

You, buzzer and Singe-int Smooth have failed miserably in that respect.

Simply demonstrating a very closed mind on the subject.

No doubt your splendidly helpful contributions are admired by all.
.

I thought my first post on the thread was being helpful...

As for "Simply demonstrating a very closed mind on the subject. "

I thinks its the rover guys denying there is a problem that have the closed mind!

Edited by buzzer on Friday 27th April 18:53

[Rammy76]

buzzer said:

Rammy76 said:

buzzer said:

Probably drives a Rover

Oh the irony, so your BMW has had a new head gasket because in your own words "they are prone to it".
Do you not think it's a bit hypocritical mocking other cars for the same thing?!

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

Irony?

where have I defended BMW? I have admitted they are prone to it? It had done 150K though... A rover would have had 10 by then!

My point is that Rover buyers seem to be in denial that there is a problem!

interesting to see that you have been rattled enough to dig into my posts! never had a stalker before

Don't flatter yourself, I remember your head gasket post from a while ago as I was thinking of buying a 6 cylinder barge to get around in. Your post put me off them

Anyway, I'm not rattled at all because I don't even own a MG Rover product, I just think your posts mocking other people for buying a particular make of car rather sad. That said you're not the only one.

[PoleDriver]

MGJohn said:

PoleDriver said:

I, for one, will never buy anything MG/Rover ever again! I've had a few and they've been really unreliable, I'll stick with my TVRs, they're much more reliable!

Even if you wanted to you couldn't buy a new one now. The asset stripped remnants latterly known as MG-Rover are no more.

The thread title asks "How to tell if head gasket is gone?"

You, buzzer and Singe-int Smooth have failed miserably in that respect.

Simply demonstrating a very closed mind on the subject.

No doubt your splendidly helpful contributions are admired by all.
.

Not 'closed mind' FACT!

Rover 75CDTi (new) Fuel pump had to be replaced at 150 miles and 12,500 miles plus many electrical problems
MG ZT-T 260. Radiator exploded (spectacularly), Fuel pump died, Maf died, cooling fan failed, air-con failed finally had an intermittent misfire which cost £750 to diagnose and still nobody could ever fix!
Rover 200 BRM, HGF had it repaired with all the latest recommended parts and it held, at least until the gearbox munched itself.

Never had any of these serious and expensive problems in either of my TVRs, or any of the Fords, Vauxhalls, BMWs Audi,Jaguars Triumphs etc etc that I've owned or had as company cars!