fuel pump fails in current production

[Miserablegit]

I wasn’t aware of any PE having fuel pump issues (alternator issues -yes)

Your (au) premier edition was from a later run of vehicles for the Australian market (built 2019 weren’t they?) I seem to recall there were slight differences from the original PE.

[a110au]

“ Alpine A110: Half of initial Oz allocation sold
12 Oct 2018 — Alpine has sold 32 of the 60 initial A110 'Premiere Edition' cars it's been assigned for 2018, and has five pre-orders for its 2019”

[springfan62]

I have suffered the dreaded alternator failure in my PE but I have also not heard of any fuel pump failures in PE's.

I know they made some changes to satisfy WLTP rules after the PE's were finished so maybe something in that has affected the fuel pump issue it would be nice to know as the fuel pump issue does create a bit of uncertainty in the car, especially when you have suffered one know failure.

Will be getting my car back next week after having alternator replaced and paint repaired so I would like to renew my love affair without fear!

[neil-g8km6]

CharleyFarley66 said:

..

Next, after seeing the post this week about MP Rezeau's fuel starvation/fuel pump experience under what sounded like pretty warm (albeit racing) conditions, and the twin fan device as their solution to suspected overheating fuel pump electrics, I messaged them.

After establishing in our best Franglais that their device works for all fuel pumps, not just their own version, and that it'll be 99 euros once it's available in a couple of weeks' time, I've since ordered two - one for myself, one for another very concerned Alpine owner on the A110 Owners Facebook page - plus fitting instructions.

sounds interesting could you post a link to the device on here please, don't do Facebook.
Thanks

[a110au]

since all failures documented required fuel PUMP replacement not controller replacement I have no idea how this helps.

[Colin P]

I think that the inference may be overheating causing damage into the fuel pump itself, presumably as a result of an electrical surge or something. I agree it doesn’t sound the most plausible explanation but this sort of thing isn’t unheard of.

For example, and it’s not uncommon, in my daughters Fiat 500 a failed coil pack sent a power spike back into the ECU causing damage to the ECU necessitating a rebuild of that too.

[a110au]

Colin P said:

I think that the inference may be overheating causing damage into the fuel pump itself, presumably as a result of an electrical surge or something. I agree it doesn’t sound the most plausible explanation but this sort of thing isn’t unheard of.

For example, and it’s not uncommon, in my daughters Fiat 500 a failed coil pack sent a power spike back into the ECU causing damage to the ECU necessitating a rebuild of that too.

I suppose if the controller overheated it could malfunction and over drive the pump but that sounds like something Alpine could have figured out years ago. I wonder if MP-R are stating this is the probable cause or just a different failure point.

[Miserablegit]

I don’t think any of the Australian models were from the original PE run- the screenshot below lists the original destinations. I think the Australian PE was built from later parts - I think the wheels were different as an indicator. That might be why there are fuel pump failures on Australian PE and (hopefully) not other PE but I might be completely wrong.
It has been known.

[ThisInJapanese]

I'm off to Europe tomorrow in my November 22 build. I'll let you know how I get on or if I'll be added to the growing list!

[CharleyFarley66]

neil-g8km6 said:

sounds interesting could you post a link to the device on here please, don't do Facebook.
Thanks

Here you go:, this is from the previous page:

Looks like M-P Rezeau have also had a failure. Don't know if they are running the standard pump or their upgrade, but overheating electronics does sound like what's been happening here.

A little look back at the electrical issues we encountered at the Nürburgring a few days ago...
Simply the power module that drives the fuel pump in tension
An isolated case we think, but since this critter is made up in part of power transistors, we made it a little evolution...
A stand and two fans to make it easier to cool.

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=...

[a110au]

Miserablegit said:

I don’t think any of the Australian models were from the original PE run-

Yeah the key there is LHD.
The first UK RHD Premier editions were at the same time, approx, as the australia production batch. I can probably find the month/year build date of mine to narrow it down.

[jont-]

Since we think it might be heat related, a few more random thoughts...

Did folk who had the pump fail have a full frunk at the time? (I did, coming back from the airport and a couple of others mentioned being on road trips). I know stuff in my frunk does get warm on a long trip - not as bad as the boot, but not ambient.

And then I had to do a couple of hours on the motorway last night. I already noticed that in 7th on the motorway the car runs quite warm (coolant seems to slowly oscillate between 107/8 and 95 ish). But when you give it some stick - eg blatting or even on track, it runs much cooler (maybe 80s). So with cruise control set, I tried 7th, 6th and 5th. 7th is as above, 6th is similar,. However 5th is interesting. Revs are just under 4000 rpm, and the temp quickly drops to about 80C and remains stable. Putting the car back up to 6th maintains that too at just over 3000 rpm. In 7th it starts to climb again. So that means a 15-25C difference between 7th and 5/6th. I'm guessing the water pump is electic, so maybe in 7th it's reduced in power to save fuel? And maybe similar reason for running slightly hotter? But if that reflects the rad temp, it's going to be a lot more heat soak throughout the frunk - an ultimately fuel pump area.

So, could heat soak in the frunk area be contributing to fails?

[worldwidewebs]

jont- said:

Did folk who had the pump fail have a full frunk at the time? (I did, coming back from the airport and a couple of others mentioned being on road trips). I know stuff in my frunk does get warm on a long trip - not as bad as the boot, but not ambient.

No, mine was empty

[bcr5784]

worldwidewebs said:

jont- said:

Did folk who had the pump fail have a full frunk at the time? (I did, coming back from the airport and a couple of others mentioned being on road trips). I know stuff in my frunk does get warm on a long trip - not as bad as the boot, but not ambient.

No, mine was empty

If it is heat related, surely the heat soak into the petrol from the radiators, and therefore distortion of the pump that is the concern. That might be affected by stuff in the frunk - but I doubt by a massive amount.

[Miserablegit]

Its hard to believe that after all the fuel pump issues and all this time there’s still no official word from Alpine…

[serial_carnogomist]

Miserablegit said:

Its hard to believe that after all the fuel pump issues and all this time there’s still no official word from Alpine…

I have a feeling that's not going to change. I had a 996 for a year or so, and remember very well all of the online discussion about the IMS/RMS issues. My car needed a replacement RMS while I owned it. Despite a lot of controversy in all of the online places, as far as I know (happy to be corrected) Porsche never made a public acknowledgement of any such issues, or of the bore scoring that affected the 996/997/Cayman/Boxster.

I feel sure that Alpine's board will be aware of the fuel pump issue, but who knows what metrics they will use to determine that they need to acknowledge it publicly. It would be fascinating to get an insight from an auto industry insider into how company boards make the risk calculations inherent in announcing a recall. So many moving parts.

For now, I think all we can do is make our own personal risk calculations in how we use our cars.

[Miserablegit]

serial_carnogomist said:

I have a feeling that's not going to change. I had a 996 for a year or so, and remember very well all of the online discussion about the IMS/RMS issues. My car needed a replacement RMS while I owned it. Despite a lot of controversy in all of the online places, as far as I know (happy to be corrected) Porsche never made a public acknowledgement of any such issues, or of the bore scoring that affected the 996/997/Cayman/Boxster.

I feel sure that Alpine's board will be aware of the fuel pump issue, but who knows what metrics they will use to determine that they need to acknowledge it publicly. It would be fascinating to get an insight from an auto industry insider into how company boards make the risk calculations inherent in announcing a recall. So many moving parts.

For now, I think all we can do is make our own personal risk calculations in how we use our cars.

It’s very difficult to make a risk calculation when there is such a dearth of information. If it fails in the outside lane it could be catastrophic…A smoky engine is one thing but a potential death trap is another.

[serial_carnogomist]

Miserablegit said:

It’s very difficult to make a risk calculation when there is such a dearth of information. If it fails in the outside lane it could be catastrophic…A smoky engine is one thing but a potential death trap is another.

I agree. It's very difficult, and seriously bad for Alpine's reputation, at least within its current enthusiast market. I'm not trying to exonerate Alpine for their silence on this, but I am being realistic about the likelihood that they will publicly admit a problem. I do hope I'm wrong, and that they act to restore confidence.

[jont-]

serial_carnogomist said:

It would be fascinating to get an insight from an auto industry insider into how company boards make the risk calculations inherent in announcing a recall.

It's very simple. If cost of recall > cost of downside then don't bother. Nothing to do with risk. Even if someone were to be killed or seriously injured as a result of an RTC after a pump failure, I doubt they would ever be held liable. Might be different in the US legal system but they aren't present in that market. Looking at howmanyleft there are ~700 cars in the UK. ~7 recent fails so that's 1%. Is that enough for TPTB to care? I don't know. If it was 1% of Golfs/Astras they'd probably be more interested. And see the comment above about Porsche not really caring over reputational damage despite all the various engine issues. Maybe Alpine should care more as they don't have the badge to fall back on?

[serial_carnogomist]

jont- said:

If cost of recall > cost of downside then don't bother. Nothing to do with risk.

I disagree here. For the board of Alpine it's all about risk. At present, I think we can conclude that they currently believe that the cost of a recall, or any other customer-level remedial action, outweighs the risk to their brand from the FP failure incidents to date, and the ones yet to occur. Maybe that will change.

I've written elsewhere (the Facebook A110 owners' group, I think) that their risk calculations might be different if they weren't in the process of pivoting their brand towards the mass market via EV SUVs. Us noisy, demanding, high-expectation enthusiasts will progressively become their legacy market. I think this will definitely be affecting their calculations as to how far they go to keep A110 owners happy. Sorry if that sounds cynical. Again, I hope I've read things wrong.