The results are in: S6 reliability
Discussion
Haven't had chance to do too much analysis but, given that posts seem to have stopped now, here are the basics:
69 out of 176 cars have had serious engine problems. This is much more than the number of posts in the threads would suggest, as there are many who've had numerous rebuilds. Plus there are those who've put "no engine problems... except for the head gasket failure". Sorry, but to me that's an engine failure (especially given the low mileages), so it's in the thumbs-down category.
For those that don't have a calculator, that's a 39% failure rate.
And for those that like pretty pictures, below's a graph plotting all entered cars. Red is the mileage each car's done when it hits rebuild time. Green is the mileage those that've thus far escaped a rebuild have hit. And the X axis is the date when the car was made.
I'll have a bit of a think about what meaningful information we can pull out of this, but my (simplified) personal view is that I wouldn't even consider a pre-2002 car that hadn't been rebuilt. Truly appalling statistics given that there's been no recall.
>>> Edited by J_S_G on Wednesday 8th September 00:33
69 out of 176 cars have had serious engine problems. This is much more than the number of posts in the threads would suggest, as there are many who've had numerous rebuilds. Plus there are those who've put "no engine problems... except for the head gasket failure". Sorry, but to me that's an engine failure (especially given the low mileages), so it's in the thumbs-down category.
For those that don't have a calculator, that's a 39% failure rate.
And for those that like pretty pictures, below's a graph plotting all entered cars. Red is the mileage each car's done when it hits rebuild time. Green is the mileage those that've thus far escaped a rebuild have hit. And the X axis is the date when the car was made.
I'll have a bit of a think about what meaningful information we can pull out of this, but my (simplified) personal view is that I wouldn't even consider a pre-2002 car that hadn't been rebuilt. Truly appalling statistics given that there's been no recall.
>>> Edited by J_S_G on Wednesday 8th September 00:33
PetrolTed said:
Blimey, picture paints a thousand words eh?
awaits call from TVR...
Doesn't it just! Picture's hosted on my webspace, and won't be going anywhere for quite some time - that's for sure!
Worth making this one sticky, too? (I'll update with new figures/graphs if we get any more posts in either of the other threads, too) Edited to add: Beggars belief that you can withdraw "goodwill rebuilds" with stats like that.
>> Edited by J_S_G on Wednesday 8th September 00:18
Oct 02 to Aril 03 inclusive looks like the safest period to get one from then .
Not sure of the validity of this though, I appreciate well over a 100 responded and that it shows just under 40% have snags.
Out of interest how many Tuscans out there
, reasoning being those with an axe to grind (no disrespect to those that have responded btw) tend to shout the loudest.
Slightly OT but very similar IMHO to the JD Power surveys where they solicit people to give their opinions on their cars. Those with an axe to grind do, those that are happy don't and all those with Skodas do too because they want to see it do well, justifying their purchase
.
Harry
. Not sure of the validity of this though, I appreciate well over a 100 responded and that it shows just under 40% have snags.
Out of interest how many Tuscans out there
, reasoning being those with an axe to grind (no disrespect to those that have responded btw) tend to shout the loudest. Slightly OT but very similar IMHO to the JD Power surveys where they solicit people to give their opinions on their cars. Those with an axe to grind do, those that are happy don't and all those with Skodas do too because they want to see it do well, justifying their purchase
. Harry
HarryW said:
Oct 02 to Aril 03 inclusive looks like the safest period to get one from then
Not sure of the validity of this though, I appreciate well over a 100 responded and that it shows just under 40% have snags.
Out of interest how many Tuscans out there
Slightly OT but very similar IMHO to the JD Power surveys where they solicit people to give their opinions on their cars. Those with an axe to grind do, those that are happy don't and all those with Skodas do too because they want to see it do well, justifying their purchase
Regulations prevent TVR from selling more than 500 of each model per year, I believe, so, I'd guess at the following:
500 Tuscans per year 2000 onwards = 2250
350 Tamoras per year 2002 onwards = 875
350 T350s per year 2003 onwards = 475
100 S6 Cerbs per year 2000 onwards = 450
Rough estimate ~ 4000 S6 engines.
That gives us a 4.4% representative sample. The exact figures aren't really that important. Having spent many, many days sat in stats lectures in the past, the sample size is plenty big enough, assuming that the sample is representative, as you point out...
This is something that I think owners of good ones would want to post in, though - a bad rep = bad resale value on their car. Whereas those that've had problems might not want to admit to being so foolish as to buy a lemon, etc. Even if the figures are skewed by a factor of two, which is hugely unlikely (in my opinion):
1. That'd still give a 20% failure rate.
2. Just look at all those S6s that've yet to hit 10,000 miles, and look how many red dots there are above that line. Gut feel - Valve guides issue was fixed later than finger follower issue -> Longer before a rebuild, but still necessary for many...
I may be naieve, but would it be worth contacting something like Watchdog about this? If there is (evidentilly) an inherent prob with the S6, why should we have to pay £££s to get it rectified ourselves, when it shouldn't happen in the first place? We should at the very least all have some kind of good will flat rate to rectify the problems!
JSG, if you want your research to be given credibility I would suggest you need to present it in an objective unbiased way.
Let those reading it come to their own conclusions and no doubt a thread(s) will arise to discuss it.
Your comments thus far appear to be loaded, and may effect peoples view of the results.
Let those reading it come to their own conclusions and no doubt a thread(s) will arise to discuss it.
Your comments thus far appear to be loaded, and may effect peoples view of the results.
Hang on. I would suggest that most of those rebuilds WERE actually paid for by TVR or warranty companies.
You also haven't differentiated between 4.0 litre engines and 3.6 litre engines. From recollection I think that you'll find most S6s built AFTER Apr 02 are sorted and MOST failures after that date were 3.6 engines which also appear to be sorted post Jun 03. Since then your figures show ZERO failures.
My guess is that the issues are pretty much sorted and TVR DID actually pay for most of them !
You also haven't differentiated between 4.0 litre engines and 3.6 litre engines. From recollection I think that you'll find most S6s built AFTER Apr 02 are sorted and MOST failures after that date were 3.6 engines which also appear to be sorted post Jun 03. Since then your figures show ZERO failures.
My guess is that the issues are pretty much sorted and TVR DID actually pay for most of them !
delamars said:
Hang on. I would suggest that most of those rebuilds WERE actually paid for by TVR or warranty companies.
You also haven't differentiated between 4.0 litre engines and 3.6 litre engines. From recollection I think that you'll find most S6s built AFTER Apr 02 are sorted and MOST failures after that date were 3.6 engines which also appear to be sorted post Jun 03. Since then your figures show ZERO failures.
My guess is that the issues are pretty much sorted and TVR DID actually pay for most of them !
1. I've got a hole in my bank balance for several £k from a SECOND rebuild just a couple of months ago. Warranty company wouldn't touch it as they say it's an inherent flaw, and it's actually premature wear of the parts. I'm sure I'm not the only one...
2. TVR has made the statement that they're withdrawing goodwill rebuilds, even though there are clearly many early engines that've only done a couple of thousand miles.
3. Yep - could well be totally fixed post Jun 2003. Unfortunately, with only 1 car since then that's done over 8000 miles since then, it's very difficult to tell. Does look like a vast improvement however you look at it, though.
4. When I get a bit of time, I'll see if I can do a 4.0 vs. 3.6 breakdown.
swilly said:
JSG, if you want your research to be given credibility I would suggest you need to present it in an objective unbiased way.
Let those reading it come to their own conclusions and no doubt a thread(s) will arise to discuss it.
Your comments thus far appear to be loaded, and may effect peoples view of the results.
I'm not after credibility, etc. etc. The raw stats are there for anyone to do what they want with should this proceed further in any way. And, as with all stats, people will read into them whtatever they want to see. I doubt anyone here's weak minded enough to think "That's JS's opinion, so it must be true"!
I have stated them accurately, and I've given my opinion separately, beneath all of the facts, just as every man and his dog with an S6 will also do. Sorry, but I'm not going to be an apologist for the fact that at midnight I can't be arsed sanitising my views on what's clearly been an endemic problem.
Got the awful feeling this's going to polarise the views of those that've suffered a rebuild and those that've never had a problem...
>> Edited by J_S_G on Wednesday 8th September 09:03
delamars said:
Hang on... ... From recollection I think that you'll find most S6s built AFTER Apr 02 are sorted and MOST failures after that date were 3.6 engines which also appear to be sorted post Jun 03. Since then your figures show ZERO failures.
Don't shoot the messenger
Given the low mileages exhibited isn't it premature to conclude that the problems are fixed?
J_S_G said:
M@H said:
..so not a single engine made it over 30,000 miles without a rebuild !
True, but not a single engine over 30,000 miles full stop. Shame there aren't more high-milers (especially the newer ones).
Hang on there, I posted mine as having reached 30K with no problems.
Swilly said:
X-reg Dec 2000
30,000 miles, 16000 inlast year or so.
Previous owner had unspecified pre-emptive work done on engine.
Use it practically every day.
Most I have ever had to spend on it, is the total sum for petrol
In fact I dont even see mine on the graph.
>> Edited by swilly on Wednesday 8th September 09:18
swilly said:
X-reg Dec 2000
30,000 miles, 16000 inlast year or so.
Previous owner had unspecified pre-emptive work done on engine.
Uh-huh.
You KNOW it's had engine work done on it, which means I should probably have put it in the thumbs down category. However, I had to remove it from the stats as the history's unknown to an extent - it'd be wrong to put it in either column... Maybe it was preemptive cos he/she didn't want to take any risk at all. Maybe preemptive means it was burning oil at the same rate as petrol and he/she didn't want to wait the 20 extra miles it'd take for it to fail completely & start chewing up spark plugs, etc.
Along with the 2 that I put from "thumbs up" into "thumbs down" for head gasket failures, I think those are the only judgement calls I made. I'll check this again tonight to flag up any other calls I had to make. But feel free to question any of those.
If it makes you feel better that TVR have had no engine problems, you can download the graph and stick a big green cross on it for yours.
Edited to add: I've been through the "no rebuilds", and the only other usage of judgement that I had to discount was apprentice's two "other" tuscans with "in excess of 10,000 miles" and no other stats on mileage, build date, etc.
Stuck butterfly valves, strange noises currently coming from the engine, replaced throttle bodies, etc. I've all left as "no problem".
>> Edited by J_S_G on Wednesday 8th September 09:47
I would suggest that you present the results in an objective, observational way as possible.
Can you do some separate graphs based on type of fault ? Like followers, head gasket, valve seals ?
Cheers,
Andy.
P.S. Very difficult to conclude much from this graph. Maybe try visually comparing the 6 month period started Jan '00 with the period starting Jul '02. Similar spread and number of samples, much fewer red ?
>> Edited by andyvdg on Wednesday 8th September 09:46
Can you do some separate graphs based on type of fault ? Like followers, head gasket, valve seals ?
Cheers,
Andy.
P.S. Very difficult to conclude much from this graph. Maybe try visually comparing the 6 month period started Jan '00 with the period starting Jul '02. Similar spread and number of samples, much fewer red ?
>> Edited by andyvdg on Wednesday 8th September 09:46
It seems to me that additional pressure needs to be put on TVR somehow to reverse the "no goodwill rebuild" policy.
Maybe we need a similar survey to look at the number of people who have had "goodwill rebuilds" in order to help those who will need a rebuild before too long.
I think my Tuscan is the best thing ever but 20-40% (depending on interpretation) with engine problems is just ridiculous.
Maybe we need a similar survey to look at the number of people who have had "goodwill rebuilds" in order to help those who will need a rebuild before too long.
I think my Tuscan is the best thing ever but 20-40% (depending on interpretation) with engine problems is just ridiculous.
Gassing Station | Speed Six Engine | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff