2003 Mk1 Focus had timing belt replaced at same time as routine service having driven the vehicle to garage with no problems just like it was driven every day for the 10 years I've owned the vehicle. Garage then spend 6 days trying to start engine.

Vehicle towed to Ford dealer who find timing out by 7teeth and crankshaft pulley bolt insufficiently tightened. Timing reset but mechanical resistance evident when hand turning engine prior to attempting to start - suspect valves bent.

Head removed and taken for refurbishment - no bent valves. Valves reseated and head reassembled after being skimmed and valve seats recut due to some age related burning.

Head put back on - no mechanical interference evident - vehicle started and runs fine.

First garage refusing to pay for costs of removing refurbishing and replacing head on vehicle - about 1200 pounds due to no valves being bent and therefore claim the work was uneccessary even though this work cured the problem.

Is there anything else other than bent valves which could have caused the mechanical interference experienced by Ford dealer that would justify the removal, refurbishment and refitting of the cylinder head ?

strange one

if timing was out by 7 teeth, then suprised this didnt cause valve to piston damage.

also find it odd that when ford retimed it they found mechanical resistence....to me only way they can do that is time it up and turn the engine by hand, only to find it locks up...if thats the case then i would have expected finding a bent valve.

its a tough one, but i would be at least looking for a contribution towards the ford cost for the simple fact they either timed it badly/didnt tighten the crank correctly...result being ford had to sort out their mistake...done correctly in the first place, you wouldnt have incurred a £1200 bill

strange one

if timing was out by 7 teeth, then suprised this didnt cause valve to piston damage.

also find it odd that when ford retimed it they found mechanical resistence....to me only way they can do that is time it up and turn the engine by hand, only to find it locks up...if thats the case then i would have expected finding a bent valve.

its a tough one, but i would be at least looking for a contribution towards the ford cost for the simple fact they either timed it badly/didnt tighten the crank correctly...result being ford had to sort out their mistake...done correctly in the first place, you wouldnt have incurred a £1200 bill

Thanks. Yes The 1200 pounds is what I paid Ford and a head rebuilder - that's in addition to the 400 odd I paid the first garage to do the job in the first place ! Ford did retime it and found that it locked up when turning it by hand. When the head was removed there were marks on each piston caused apparently by contact with the exhaust valves. I'm assuming this 'locking' wouldn't have been evident when cranking it on the starter before the vehicle was taken to Ford ? Also the first garage say that compression was OK on all four, further evidence that there was no damage to the head. Still can't work out what the problem might have been other than something which was inadvertently fixed by Ford during the head removal and replacement. Unless there was something fixed by the removal and reseating of the undamaged valves ?

if it was me, i would ask for a report from ford that despite the valves not actually being bent, they found evidence of valve to piston contact, which can only be caused by misalignment of the belt...this wouldnt have happened by turning engine by hand only, would have to be done by key

but it is a strange one, doesnt appear to make any sense...only thing that i can think of is the contact was minimal...but if ford were correct in the timing was out by 7 teeth that doesnt really add up right???

either way, the original garage should at least be considering reimbursing you their charges...i really cant see how they can argue against that

if it was me, i would ask for a report from ford that despite the valves not actually being bent, they found evidence of valve to piston contact, which can only be caused by misalignment of the belt...this wouldnt have happened by turning engine by hand only, would have to be done by key

but it is a strange one, doesnt appear to make any sense...only thing that i can think of is the contact was minimal...but if ford were correct in the timing was out by 7 teeth that doesnt really add up right???

either way, the original garage should at least be considering reimbursing you their charges...i really cant see how they can argue against that

Agreed - I have a report from Ford saying what they found and that valve damage was suspected - I also have photos of the marks on the top of each piston. Only flaw in Ford's thinking is that there was no valve damage.

never had it or heard of it before, but i dont see what choice fords had, but to remove the head, once they found mechanical interference by turning by hand then turning by key could have caused further damage..

if you have the report and photos, then its kind of backed up by the fact the original garage claimed a compression test was showing no fault...in a way, that is saying that although the contact didnt actually bend any valves, the only reason the car didnt start was because of the timing being wrong....so they got very lucky, but they still got it wrong..

lets just imagine that the valves had the minimalist of contact, could it be feasible that the seats being recut is what actually compensated for the slight contact??????...recutting the seat will actually make the valve sit lower in the head....sounds far fetched, but its the only thing that makes any kind of sense to me

never had it or heard of it before, but i dont see what choice fords had, but to remove the head, once they found mechanical interference by turning by hand then turning by key could have caused further damage..

if you have the report and photos, then its kind of backed up by the fact the original garage claimed a compression test was showing no fault...in a way, that is saying that although the contact didnt actually bend any valves, the only reason the car didnt start was because of the timing being wrong....so they got very lucky, but they still got it wrong.

lets just imagine that the valves had the minimalist of contact, could it be feasible that the seats being recut is what actually compensated for the slight contact??????...recutting the seat will actually make the valve sit lower in the head....sounds far fetched, but its the only thing that makes any kind of sense to me

Think you may have a point about the recutting of the valve seat but wouldn't simply timing it up properly as Ford did, remove any contact between valve and piston ?

thats the confusing bit....i know that the clearance between piston and valve is tiny, which is why getting the timing wrong is normally fatal, but there are a few positions in the cams cycle that if the cams stop at (ie, snapped belt) then no damage occurs...but they have to stop dead on those points.

its one of those, the more you think about it the harder it is to get your head round, but if there is physical evidence of contact then at some point the engine was turned by key in order to cause that contact evidence...most likely scenario being that the crank pulley has slipped due to not being tightened correctly...i have no idea if its possible that valve can literaly just hit piston and not bend it, would expect some sign of damage on valve head too...maybe possible there is a very slight damage to head of valve but this is compensated by recut and reseat....????

now my head hurts

its a real tough one, but end of day, original garage cocked it up, so how can they expect to get away with charging £400 when it took another garage, at your expense, to get it right

just a thought....give Ford Technical a call and give them the rundown, they might come up with a solution..

should be able to get the number from the ford garage that sorted your car

if the job was incorrectly done and damage was found or the potential for damage then the original garage is at fault proving it is the hard part a full report from ford will help you may get somewhere threatening them with the small claims court if they refuse to budge you may have to go that way im afraid just emphasises my answer on another topic about paying a bit extra and having ford do this job 7 teeth out based on what the original marks the garage made to time it up did they use a locking kit at the first garage if so can they show it to you if the bolt was loose then that would have stopped the valves getting bent they had space to move upwards

if the job was incorrectly done and damage was found or the potential for damage then the original garage is at fault proving it is the hard part a full report from ford will help you may get somewhere threatening them with the small claims court if they refuse to budge you may have to go that way im afraid just emphasises my answer on another topic about paying a bit extra and having ford do this job 7 teeth out based on what the original marks the garage made to time it up did they use a locking kit at the first garage if so can they show it to you if the bolt was loose then that would have stopped the valves getting bent they had space to move upwards

Small claims court is indeed where this is going. I'm not with you about the bolt being loose would prevent damage ? The insufficiently tightened bolt would mean that the timing would go out such that there'd be no telling where the valves would be in relation to the pistons and hence a strong possibility of them being hit ? Or am I misunderstanding you ? The first garage certainly had a locking bar for the cams and a pin that goes in the crank case to determine No. 1 tdc, but whether they used it correctly is another matter. Even if they did use it correctly, the insufficiently tightened bolt would soon negate the correct setting is my understanding ?

The bit I can't get my head around is that what could have been the mechanical restriction encountered by Ford once it was timed it up correctly if it wasn't bent valves ? The mechanical restriction which went away when the head was reassembled with the original valves ?

Was original garage not ford main dealer ur suppose to replace crank bolt it's stretchy an they have be torque very high they probably used crappy air gun an re used crank bolt

Was original garage not ford main dealer ur suppose to replace crank bolt it's stretchy an they have be torque very high they probably used crappy air gun an re used crank bolt

No - original garage wasn't Ford dealer. Can't say if they re-used crank bolt - the original garage certainly didn't charge me for a new one as the Ford garage did, but they claimed it came as part of the Gates timing belt kit and that's why it didn't show up as a separate item on the invoice ? If someone can tell me the Gates kit doesn't come with a crank bolt that would be useful to know.

Even if they did use it correctly, the insufficiently tightened bolt

would soon negate the correct setting is my understanding ?

thats correct

gates kits would normally come with a bolt