Flood damage to car engines

Congratulations, your stupidity has killed a car. Replace it with something cheaper until you learn your lesson...

Water does not compress. You can put it under pressure, but you can't compress it. What has happened to your engine is a result of attempting to do so. At least you have now had the opportunity to learn this.

Take any science classes in school?

You're giving poeple WAY too much credit. Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large numbers...

The older cars suffered from cracked exhaust manifold and sometimes even engine blocks as the hot CAST IRON parts were cooled rapidly by cold water.

You're lucky they're paying anything...

So it's all one big conspiracy? Are you kidding? If it were really that big of a problem, don't you think there would be a public outcry or something? Not in thier best interest? If the cars they built were widely known to have major faults, do you think they'd be selling many of them?

See the text inserted above and maybe you'll get a grip on what happened. If not, I'm not sure what to tell you other than to buy a bicycle. They'll go through as much water as you want to pedal through (although you might want to repack the bearings afterwards to avoid having to point the finger at the bicycle manufacturer later down the road). In case you are wondering why, the bearings will eventually rust due to the excess moisture trapped in the bearing cavity. I doubt you're going to find anyone that is going to side with you on this. Good luck however...

Well, on an older motor, or at least a motor with yesteryear technology.

I dont know if most of you taking this seriously in the write context. I have worked on engines since I was a boy and my Dad has been an Engineer within the car industry for 40 years and this problem can be prevented by sensors that can cause engine shut down. The fact you are talking as if this was done on purpose? In England floods are an every month occurance and I have been through hundreds of floods in my time some a lot deeper than this one was. So the manufactures have a responsability to point out the dangers in their handbook but they dont why?

Just how do you shut down a rotating engine instantly? You could, I suppose, fit a valve on the intake to prevent water ingress as they do on some severe off road vehicles, but you've got a car, haven't you?

Since you and your dad appear to be such experts, why didn't you notice the position of the air intake?

The manufacturer has no responsibility to tell you that you are stupid, then protect you from yourself.

The problem can be prevented by being smarter than a rock.

PS Its "right context," not write.

A John Lennon fan then?

Then you have been very lucky. Every year all around the world news reports show cars that have drowned trying to cross flooded areas. I guess BMW thinks its clientelle is sufficiently intelligent to know that the car is not designed for fording creeks and floods like Land Rovers and Jeeps. IIRC, the BMW manual also does not mention the inadvisability of running the car in a closed, unventilated garage. Perhaps they should be told?

Like the warning label on electric heaters "Do not use in the shower" or on the dessicant packages that come packed with electronics "Do Not Eat!"?

I am absolutely amazed at how stupidity gets so much play these days. I remember when someone would just say "dumbass" and the subject was dropped. This thread has taken on a life of it's own. Almost "troll-like".

Bill in Omaha '86 535i

"Jeff Strickland" wrote

This guy impresses me as being as smart as the guys that go

FloydR

So why does Smith & Wesson put a warning notice on their gun boxes and instruction saying "Guns can Kill do not point a loaded weapon at anything you do not wish to be destroyed." (or something very similar as I haven't seen one for about 10 years now)

Reminds me when there was a local flooding and several idiots drove right through the water and stalled their cars. I parked and watched for about half an hour, both for amusement and to estimate whether or not I could make it through in my '92 535. Knowing where the intake is I decided against it. I noticed that it was almost only European cars that had problems, among them a couple of BMW's...

Ulf

I think it was Smith's idea. He was a dumbass. Or maybe it was Wesson?

BINGO!!

Hehe.

Because a judge made them do it. You can be sure that they know guns can kill, and they expect their customers to know that. But, they are warning against the dangers of a gun, not the dangers of taking a car swimming when swimming is not something that cars are built and bred to do.

Gun makers are not protecting you from yourself, they are protecting me from you.

No they are not Jeff. they are protecting themselves from me and you from filing a law suit for not telling us it was dangerous to point a loaded weapon at something you didn't want destroyed. I think it was exactly this type of class action that made them and Colt do it.

However, back to our guy in the UK. It is not unusual to encounter a public road with a FORD (a stream crossing not the car although mistakes do happen and there is often a loud crunch!)

Many motoring book and magazines used to give out information regularly regarding "hazardous" driving situations in the summer but mainly for the winter months and driving through flood water or streams was always - "Select the lowest gear you can and proceed very slowly keeping the revs as high as possible by (if the car has one) slipping the clutch"

This advice has always stuck in my mind from an early age and I would guess that the OP had been given such advice in the past - maybe by a driving instructor - I may be mistaken but if I remember correctly at one time this advice was also given in the UK "Highway Code" which is almost the UK driving bible although it may not be in the current version which is being withdrawn due to the fact that the wording instructs cyclists to use the cycle tracks if provided instead of advising them - Bikes should be banned from the roads!!!!!!!!!!

BTW apparently cyclists are not subject to speed limits as there is no requirement to have a speedo' fitted but are liable to be "done" for reckless riding.

Ultimately that is precisely what they are doing. But they aren't worried that you are going to harm yourself and then sue, they are worried that you are going to harm me, then I will sue because they did not caution you to not harm me.

No matter what, or whom, the gun makers are protecting against, the idea behind what they are doing is much different than what the OP is wanting. I'd like to see the OP go after the car cmpany because they did not tell him that the car was not intended to be a boat ...

If he does, (no matter the outcome) we'll see new BMW stickers saying "WARNING: Do Not Drive in the River", and the product liability lawyers will pocket their fee.

Tom K.

Good God! And I bought a convertible thinking that half the time I could use it as a boat!

You may wish to purchase an X3 which BMW specs as having a 19.7" "Fording Capability". Since they make no such claims for their sedans (saloons), this SUV may be more suitable for your driving habits.

Tom K.