Crash - Insurance Unaware Of Engine Swap - Consequences
Discussion
My comment wasn't smug, I was looking at the stereotype.
BMW engine swap for a straight six, not notified insurance - gives me a certain impression.
OP out of curiosity did he swap the brakes over?
It's a fairly valid point, if he has done the swap for more power then he obviously intends to use the power, if he hasn't swapped the brakes dare say he hasn't renewed the brake fluid or even upgraded the pads, the larger area of the brakes allow them to cool quicker - not just stop quicker, so when straight six boy has been showing off to the halfords staff he could have easily overheated the brakes causing failure.
Generally if a proper enthusiast wants the car to go quicker they will look at suspension, tyres, brakes and then put more power to it, when somebody just pops a bigger engine in it normally ends badly.
I can think of several manufacturers that fit different brakes to standard road cars, obvious the standard to hot versions but even a diesel vauxhall astra comes with larger brakes for a 2.0 cdti over the 1.7cdti.
If it come across as smug, sorry, but end of the day the post set a stereotype and the fact he stuffed it without insurance just adds to it.
BMW engine swap for a straight six, not notified insurance - gives me a certain impression.
OP out of curiosity did he swap the brakes over?
It's a fairly valid point, if he has done the swap for more power then he obviously intends to use the power, if he hasn't swapped the brakes dare say he hasn't renewed the brake fluid or even upgraded the pads, the larger area of the brakes allow them to cool quicker - not just stop quicker, so when straight six boy has been showing off to the halfords staff he could have easily overheated the brakes causing failure.
Generally if a proper enthusiast wants the car to go quicker they will look at suspension, tyres, brakes and then put more power to it, when somebody just pops a bigger engine in it normally ends badly.
I can think of several manufacturers that fit different brakes to standard road cars, obvious the standard to hot versions but even a diesel vauxhall astra comes with larger brakes for a 2.0 cdti over the 1.7cdti.
If it come across as smug, sorry, but end of the day the post set a stereotype and the fact he stuffed it without insurance just adds to it.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Olivera said:
Soov330e said:
4. Insurance company will recover costs in (3) from your idiot mate.
5. If he has a house, and he can't pay (4) above, he will lose his house as it will be sold to pay the claim.
The rest I agree with, but the above is often stated on PH for a myriad of cases. I've yet to see any proof that this occurs at all.5. If he has a house, and he can't pay (4) above, he will lose his house as it will be sold to pay the claim.
Edited by Soov330e on Thursday 7th September 14:39
Insurers forced house sale and the £750k went towards the tp claiim. And they still owe about £500K.
Usually it's a charge against the property and becomes applicable at the point of sale.
From what I recall the writ was enforced, on leave atm but can check when I'm back.
Looking forward to hearing the outcome of this. I've known of one person (a younger relative) who got away with paying the difference in premium for the mods after his accident which included his car and a third party. Wasn't a massive claim though.Had he run into the back of a new 911 they might have been a little less understanding.
ZOLLAR said:
http://www.echo-news.co.uk/news/8164221.Car_owner_...
Usually it's a charge against the property and becomes applicable at the point of sale.
From what I recall the writ was enforced, on leave atm but can check when I'm back.
Reading the article, I suspect there was also a fronting question with that one...Usually it's a charge against the property and becomes applicable at the point of sale.
From what I recall the writ was enforced, on leave atm but can check when I'm back.
ZOLLAR said:
http://www.echo-news.co.uk/news/8164221.Car_owner_...
Usually it's a charge against the property and becomes applicable at the point of sale.
From what I recall the writ was enforced, on leave atm but can check when I'm back.
That was for an incident 11 years ago, and the article covers Diamond Insurance only seeking such are ruling.Usually it's a charge against the property and becomes applicable at the point of sale.
From what I recall the writ was enforced, on leave atm but can check when I'm back.
Still waiting for verifiable evidence of this actually being enforced in a single case.
InitialDave said:
I think the brakes question is something of a red herring. Plus it depends what the swap is.
Putting an M54B30 into an E46 316i (some of which are 1.8L because reasons)? Probably not such a big deal.
Same engine in an E30 318i, or an RB30 into an S12 Silvia? Hmm, you're really upping both the power and weight there, and I suspect the brakes really wouldn't cope that well at all.
MG C engine into a B? 50% power hike, and an extra 100kg in a car with brakes and suspension that aren't exactly earth shattering.
Same with tyres. If the car is running reasonable, modern tyres anyway, it's probably fine. If you take it out on 14" hedgemasters when you've doubled the power, it might be a bit interesting.
I don't think you can make a blanket statement that related changes for a swap are inherently necessary or unnecessary, it's dependent on the exact situation.
And probably of little relevance to the specific kind of trouble the OP's friend is in, however you cut it.
Tyres should be the question NOT brakesPutting an M54B30 into an E46 316i (some of which are 1.8L because reasons)? Probably not such a big deal.
Same engine in an E30 318i, or an RB30 into an S12 Silvia? Hmm, you're really upping both the power and weight there, and I suspect the brakes really wouldn't cope that well at all.
MG C engine into a B? 50% power hike, and an extra 100kg in a car with brakes and suspension that aren't exactly earth shattering.
Same with tyres. If the car is running reasonable, modern tyres anyway, it's probably fine. If you take it out on 14" hedgemasters when you've doubled the power, it might be a bit interesting.
I don't think you can make a blanket statement that related changes for a swap are inherently necessary or unnecessary, it's dependent on the exact situation.
And probably of little relevance to the specific kind of trouble the OP's friend is in, however you cut it.
Soov330e said:
Sheepshanks said:
I think he'll be fine - he can just say it was like that when he bought it. You're not expected to know about modifications on used cars.
Possibly.
Great, Perverting the Course of Justice as well.Possibly.
That's jail time.
Bets advice ever.
I Don't think he was being serious...
Olivera said:
That was for an incident 11 years ago, and the article covers Diamond Insurance only seeking such are ruling.
Still waiting for verifiable evidence of this actually being enforced in a single case.
I work for the company that owns Diamond, I'm fairly sure it was.Still waiting for verifiable evidence of this actually being enforced in a single case.
I'll check after leave.
Just to add to that I work in fraud and in high value cases charges have been applied to private assets, most won't be reported in the media.
Remember, just because you haven't seen it doesn't mean it isn't real just that you're not privy to such details
Olivera said:
Soov330e said:
4. Insurance company will recover costs in (3) from your idiot mate.
5. If he has a house, and he can't pay (4) above, he will lose his house as it will be sold to pay the claim.
The rest I agree with, but the above is often stated on PH for a myriad of cases. I've yet to see any proof that this occurs at all.5. If he has a house, and he can't pay (4) above, he will lose his house as it will be sold to pay the claim.
Edited by Soov330e on Thursday 7th September 14:39
JagerT said:
Soov330e said:
Sheepshanks said:
I think he'll be fine - he can just say it was like that when he bought it. You're not expected to know about modifications on used cars.
Possibly.
Great, Perverting the Course of Justice as well.Possibly.
That's jail time.
Bets advice ever.
I Don't think he was being serious...
Although there isn't a Course of Justice yet. He's already made a false statement - don't two wrongs make a right? In for a penny....
cbmotorsport said:
A friends idiot son lost it on a bend and crashed into a house while driving drunk. His insurance is null and void as a result. They have paid out the third party's damage and are currently pursuing him for their outlay. It happens.
Eh? "Is My insurance policy is invalid if I drink and drive - Insurance companies do remain obliged under the Road Traffic Act to meet the costs of any claim by a third party for injury or damage."Olivera said:
cbmotorsport said:
A friends idiot son lost it on a bend and crashed into a house while driving drunk. His insurance is null and void as a result. They have paid out the third party's damage and are currently pursuing him for their outlay. It happens.
Eh? "Is My insurance policy is invalid if I drink and drive - Insurance companies do remain obliged under the Road Traffic Act to meet the costs of any claim by a third party for injury or damage."Nanook said:
JimSuperSix said:
What I called absolute rubbish was your statement that bigger engine = more weight = brakes have to work harder as justification that not upgrading the brakes makes the car unsafe in any way.
I found this on a Miata forum - "The weight gain from a stock 1.6 liter to the LS1 is about 90 pounds" , which is about 18kg if the various online converters are correct, so about 1/5th the weight of a passenger.
Unless you fit an absolutely huge engine, the extra weight is going to be irrelevant to road driving.
Ok, first things first, that was not my statement. The statement that bigger engine = more weight = brakes having to work harder is literally a fact. You can't just say "rubbish" and make it so I found this on a Miata forum - "The weight gain from a stock 1.6 liter to the LS1 is about 90 pounds" , which is about 18kg if the various online converters are correct, so about 1/5th the weight of a passenger.
Unless you fit an absolutely huge engine, the extra weight is going to be irrelevant to road driving.
Secondly, 90 pounds is not 18kg
There are 2.2 pounds in one kilogram, I'll leave the maths to you there.
And finally, if you're so sure you're correct, why do manufacturers bother? What's the point? Why don't they save money, complexity and effort, and just fit little brakes to everything?
Think about it. Really think about it.
Scenario 1: E46 318i with four occupants (4x 75kg) and 30kg of luggage. Total weight: 1690kg (1360kg + 330kg)
Scenario 2: E46 318i with E46 330i engine: Total weight: 1505kg (stated weight of 330i)
If 318i brakes are specified to deal with Scenario 1 within their tolerances, they are fine to deal with Scenario 2.
What's the damage?
If the op's mate has completely stoved in the front then maybe, just maybe, the assessor might not even bother trying to pry his way in to verify the engine. Again if the damage is extensive elsewhere and if it looks like a writeoff from afar, he may just glance over it especially if he's doing dozens a day.
A lot of maybes and wishful thinking there but there's always a little hope but your mate is still an arse though
If the op's mate has completely stoved in the front then maybe, just maybe, the assessor might not even bother trying to pry his way in to verify the engine. Again if the damage is extensive elsewhere and if it looks like a writeoff from afar, he may just glance over it especially if he's doing dozens a day.
A lot of maybes and wishful thinking there but there's always a little hope but your mate is still an arse though
spikyone said:
It's more often the case that the bigger engine is a performance version, rather than the insignificant extra weight, and bigger brakes are fitted to enhance the sportiness. Regardless of the crap maths, 90lb (41kg) is about half the weight of a fairly average male adult. Let's say your car is 2000kg with full fuel, five passengers, and their luggage. That 41kg is about 2% of its weight. Otherwise known as "not worth worrying about".
Most diesel engines weigh more than a petrol engine, yet your average base spec petrol and diesel will generally use the same brakes.
No they don't. There are often loads of different diameters when buying disks just for 1 model because the larger the engine the bigger the brakes. Most diesel engines weigh more than a petrol engine, yet your average base spec petrol and diesel will generally use the same brakes.
And it won't just be 41kg. The engine is bigger, the manifolds have to be bigger, the alternator, starter motor and wiring too. Then there is the gearbox and clutch. More fluids etc. It all adds up, you are looking at over 100kg in reality.
The stock brakes may still be able to cope (as in, bring it to a standstill) but will generate a ton more heat in the process. Repeat this for typical driving conditions - Start stop city, speeding up/slowing down for bends in the countryside etc and they will fade much quicker with the extra weight.
The brakes are also designed to bring the car to a stop from its max speed. I bet the brake fluid would be boiled by the time a 1.8's brakes has brought a 3.0 liter lump to a stop from 140mph.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff