Do Not Sell My Personal Information Jump to content


tdiplc

Established Member
  • Posts

    3,096
  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Profiles

Forums

Events

Store

Gallery

Tutorials

Lexus Owners Club

Gold Membership Discounts

Lexus Owners Club Video

News & Articles

Everything posted by tdiplc

  1. I am surprised and saddened to hear about this, and I have to say that it does not sound right to me at all and suspect that there is more to this than meets the eye. I hope you will not mind helping me get to the bottom of this, so I will email you shortly with a request for information so that I can undertake an analysis. Thank you in advance I doubt whether I’ll be replying to any posts, so if anyone wants to ask me any questions about this or anything else, please email me. Thanks
  2. I am surprised and saddened to hear about this. This situation does not sound right to me at all and suspect that there is more to this than meets the eye, so I have prepared an analysis and a request for information which I will email to you today. I will also carbon copy the LOC management. I hope you review my communication objectively and reply personally to me as soon as possible. Thank you in advance. I doubt whether I’ll be replying to any posts, so if anyone wants to ask me any questions about this or anything else, please email me. Thank you.
  3. that is fair enough if the data is being input by hand in the first instance, but when the data is electronically gathered and stored then surely hand written notes would only be an inferior back up and totally subject to mistakes or falsities forgive me if I am wrong but mapping is normally done with a laptop through a program, with data being stored within or by removable disc dyno work is carried out through a computer with all readings on show, recordable and printable, I have yet to ever see a hand drawn dyno graph Please allow me to explain: The electronic data in question is gathered by the Rototest DATAQ aquisition system and integrates with the dyno. It is designed as a scientific quality machine and is a long way from being "user friendly". Some operators say that the compromise of it's depth of capabilities lies in it's quirky data capture and storage. In real terms this means that data storage is not an intuitive or one step process so can easily not be stored properly due to human error. There is also the PC reliability issue to be concerned with (we have already had one hard drive failure on the Rototest), therefore we choose to also retain a paper hard copy of the fundamental elements of the data as a fall back position. This record is kept in a file on each client along with the job card, dyno chart (where appropriate) all written communications, hand written notes of verbal communications and our inspection reports etc. All of our records conform to ISO9001 standards, which no other company in our industry can claim. I understand the point that hard copies can be falsified, and would agree that it may be possible or even likely in a "one man band" type of operation. In our circumstances, for our paper records to be falsified it would require the Operator or Technician, the Workshop Manager (who signs the work off), and a Senior Manager (me or Sam) to all be complicit in falsification. From a commercial perspective this would not make any sense because it would be far more cost effective to repair a mistake or refund money that it would be to impugn our integrity or reputation. As a company we are transparent (which is a rarity in our industry) and always recommend that our work is independantly validated, so any falsification would become clear quite quickly. ECU calibration (or "mapping") is done via a lap top. The calibration files are completely different to the dyno data logging files stored on the Rototest. The ECU calibration files are stored on a lap top and on the main server. These are user friendly and are automatically saved, so we choose to have only electronic copies (not paper copies). The dyno graphs are printed from the Rototest dyno at the time of the test. If the data is saved properly to the PC (subject to human error), it should be retrievable at any time. As I said previously, we do try and retain electronic recrods of everything, but time and experience has proven to us that paper records are more reliable. I will understand if some of you don't agree, but the way we do business seems to work for us. I hope this helps.
  4. Those are what we store and rely on. We find electronic media (or human operator) to be insuffuciently reliable. Our records conform to ISO9001 standards. We try to retain both electronic and paper records, but paper is the "fall back" position. Paper is "fall back" or paper is the main form as electronic is insufficient? make your mind up I have already made it clear: We try to retain both electronic and paper records, but paper is the "fall back" position. We have more problems with electronic data storage than paper storage.
  5. As you and TDi are likely to be in litigation, I am not prepared to potentially prejudice our position by making any further comments on yourself or your car. This thread is about Adies car.
  6. Think it would read something like Cho's lexus was running ok, dont worry about the lights on your dash, it will remind you of christmas time Ps, i would advise getting shares in BP or Shell, as you will be visiting these establishments more often than you think May I ask whether you have finished with your comments about Adies car?
  7. Our records conform to ISO9001 standards. We try to retain both electronic and paper records, but paper is the "fall back" position.
  8. There is a witness to the fact that you have. I think you may be confusing it with the electronic data you asked us for which we could not provide.
  9. No we did not blow Adies engine. The sub standard head gasket solution (two head gaskets and a non-conformable decompression plate) that was implemented by whoever built the engine, failed catastrophically. Upon inspection, other internal isses were discovered that would have significantly reduced the engine's life expectancy, even if the sub standard head gasket solution had prevailed. As with all situations where there may be a suspicion over the quality of our work, I recommended that Adie obtain an independant Engineers report. He did that, and I guess it's up to him whether he wants to share that with you but I can tell you that there was no fault found with our work. That's correct. The head gasket failure was the original symptom and cause of the failure. Upon engine strip down and inspection it was discovered that the piston skirts had seized in the bores and that there was a significant amount of dirt and debris inside the engine. Aparantly the engine had previously experienced a recent oil pump failure so I guess it is possible that the engine was not cleaned properly at the time of the build or subsequently after the oil pump failure (this is purely a logical speculation based on the discoverable evidence, and is no way intended to be pejoritive towards the engine builder). Of crucial significance is the fact that there was no damage to the piston crowns. If there was damage to the piston crowns this could have meant that our tuning proceedures were not correct and possibly the cause of the engine failure. A classic symptom of incorrectly calibrated fuel and/or ignition is what is known as "detonation marks". Detonation marks are demonstrated by clear and obvious severe erotion damage to the piston crowns and cylinder head. Adies pistons had no detonation damage whatsover as confirmed by the independant Engineer. The reason Adie had to change the pistons was due to the scuff marks left by the partial seizures, and not related in way shape or form to any tuning work that we had carried out. The head gasket failed during road testing, therefore no dyno data was being captured at that point. Chanjit was offered the hard copy of his calibration report. I am hopeful that you and your chums have a better understanding of the situation now, and now realise that you have been completely wrong for a long time which has resulted in a high degree of toxicity for LOC and TDI. I don't expect an apology, but I will request that you try to avoid jumping to conclusions in future. All you need to do is ask to find the correct answers. All the best :) Thanks for your side of the story (as you keep telling me, 2 sides to every story) and in this case both different :duh: No problem. To avoid making the same mistake again it's normally a good thing to ask questions first. I'm sorry, I really don't understand what you are asking. Please rephrase your question or point. Charnjit was shown and offered a copy of the calibration report. I am not sure what you are refering to (the only thing I recall is repeating a quote about you being the Prolex Minister for Propoganda) but I apologise to you if I have said anything that is not correct in the heat of dealing with you.
  10. Those are what we store and rely on. We find electronic media (or human operator) to be insuffuciently reliable.
  11. No we did not blow Adies engine. The sub standard head gasket solution (two head gaskets and a non-conformable decompression plate) that was implemented by whoever built the engine, failed catastrophically. Upon inspection, other internal isses were discovered that would have significantly reduced the engine's life expectancy, even if the sub standard head gasket solution had prevailed. As with all situations where there may be a suspicion over the quality of our work, I recommended that Adie obtain an independant Engineers report. He did that, and I guess it's up to him whether he wants to share that with you but I can tell you that there was no fault found with our work. That's correct. The head gasket failure was the original symptom and cause of the failure. Upon engine strip down and inspection it was discovered that the piston skirts had seized in the bores and that there was a significant amount of dirt and debris inside the engine. Aparantly the engine had previously experienced a recent oil pump failure so I guess it is possible that the engine was not cleaned properly at the time of the build or subsequently after the oil pump failure (this is purely a logical speculation based on the discoverable evidence, and is no way intended to be pejoritive towards the engine builder). Of crucial significance is the fact that there was no damage to the piston crowns. If there was damage to the piston crowns this could have meant that our tuning proceedures were not correct and possibly the cause of the engine failure. A classic symptom of incorrectly calibrated fuel and/or ignition is what is known as "detonation marks". Detonation marks are demonstrated by clear and obvious severe erotion damage to the piston crowns and cylinder head. Adies pistons had no detonation damage whatsover as confirmed by the independant Engineer. The reason Adie had to change the pistons was due to the scuff marks left by the partial seizures, and not related in way shape or form to any tuning work that we had carried out. The head gasket failed during road testing, therefore no dyno data was being captured at that point. Chanjit was offered the hard copy of his calibration report. I am hopeful that you and your chums have a better understanding of the situation now, and now realise that you have been completely wrong for a long time which has resulted in a high degree of toxicity for LOC and TDI. I don't expect an apology, but I will request that you try to avoid jumping to conclusions in future. All you need to do is ask to find the correct answers. All the best :)
  12. Gord confirmed that I was right. Please read his comments. Gord seems to have plenty to say about Adies problems, including blaming us for them. Perhaps those sitting on the fence may be interested in seeing his arguments put to the test in public.
  13. He is clearly blaming us for the problems with Adies car, and has possibly infected other people with irrationality too, so it is appropriate that I deal with this issue. He seems to have admitted that he doesn't have any factual data to rely on so I would like to know what he thinks we have done. Am I being unreasonable?
  14. That sounds like a very sweeping and possibly unfair statement to me. Obviously I don't know the answer but there may be very good reasons why RGS and Abbey have taken so long. Do you have any factual information to rely on? Why does that Statement mean you? it could have ment RGS or Abbey?! Guilty conscience? In post 758 Gord said "Thats intresting you should mention RGS & Abbey, when you was the one that blow the engine when it was being mapped, RGS & Abbey now sorting YOUR mess out, yet again" in answer to my post, which is clear proof that he was refering to TDI. I hope he can bring his concerns out into the open so that they can be dealt with.
  15. Abbey and RGS seem to be the only companies that have taken the long time (for which there may well be a very good explanation) that was refered to. However, as you clearly seem to have made your mind up that the problems with Adies car are all our fault, please provide the evidence you have relied upon to form that opinion. Thank you in advance. It was on my super duper Hard drive, that can take upto 2000bhp 4x4 to, all the best stuff, cost me a right bomb i can tell you. Woops, dam, only problem with this sort of system is, when things go wrong and the customer want some data out of it :duh: However..................i do have it on a post-it pad...............somewhere :winky: OK, if you don't have any factual data, please provide me with what you think we have done wrong. Thank you in advance. As you know full well.............YOU HAVE THE EVIDENCE THAT CAN CONVICT YOURSELF............And thats why your customer dont have it when he asked you for it :o I'm sorry, I have no idea what you are talking about. Whatever is on your mind, please bring it out into the open. I'm sure I can help you if you're prepared to listen.
  16. Abbey and RGS seem to be the only companies that have taken the long time (for which there may well be a very good explanation) that was refered to. However, as you clearly seem to have made your mind up that the problems with Adies car are all our fault, please provide the evidence you have relied upon to form that opinion. Thank you in advance. It was on my super duper Hard drive, that can take upto 2000bhp 4x4 to, all the best stuff, cost me a right bomb i can tell you. Woops, dam, only problem with this sort of system is, when things go wrong and the customer want some data out of it :duh: However..................i do have it on a post-it pad...............somewhere :winky: OK, if you don't have any factual data, please provide me with what you think we have done wrong. Thank you in advance.
  17. Abbey and RGS seem to be the only companies that have taken the long time (for which there may well be a very good explanation) that was refered to. However, as you clearly seem to have made your mind up that the problems with Adies car are all our fault, please provide the evidence you have relied upon to form that opinion. Thank you in advance.
  18. That what you get when you let someone work on your car, when thay think thay know what thay are doing, when in fact, thay dont :o That sounds like a very sweeping and possibly unfair statement to me. Obviously I don't know the answer but there may be very good reasons why RGS and Abbey have taken so long. Do you have any factual information to rely on?
  19. You have identified a very valid and topical point. The industry is getting a bad reputation as clients requirements become more demanding year on year and move beyond the technical capabilities of those involved. There is also a significant "professionalism" issue because the industry doesn't earn/pay enough to attract top quality managers. There is a professional association already in existence that deals with this. Unfortunately only three firms have signed up so far but I hope more will join next year (if there are any still in business - several have gone bust already this year). The association is useful to clients for the following reasons: 1. Robust barriers to entry deters people that shouldn't really be there. 2. Clearly defined code of conduct (being reviewed by the Office of Fair Trading). 3. Certified professional indemnity insurance and motor trade insurance. 4. Dispute resolution to deal with any problems prior to expensive litigation. 5. Member companies not conforming to the standards will be removed from the association. I think this is the only way forward for the industry to grow, and it should offer significant comfort to the public. This is something that I was involved in creating and is in the process of becoming independant. You'll probably see the magazine adverts next year.
  20. been at abbey for around 6 months or so. it started as a side deal to keep costs down. not had the car myself since january. lots of various excuses and a major headache not being given the f-con password code plus one of the terminals for the reader had been broken. have given a deadline to the other garage (rgs) this week of a couple of weeks. finished or not its beyond a joke for over 10months for what should be a days mapping. these two statements don't quite agree What do you mean by this statement please? Correct. Who made that implication please? I appreciate your attention on these matters. Thanks in advance.
  21. I am sorry to that this is still going on. As a point of priciple, we alway lock the FCU to prevent our work being tampered with and then being blamed for anything that subsequently goes wrong. We always unlock them upon request at which point our responsibility is absloved. Good luck with it Adie, and please let me know if you need any help.
  22. I have to admit that I am disappointed that this thread and this thread got closed over the weekend. I really feel that they were due to reach the proper conclusions shortly. I don't think it's fair to TDI or to the Lexus community that they have been closed without the facts being brought to light and accepted, so I'd like to bring this to it's natural conclusion and hopefully facilitate an epiphany for certain people. My understanding is that there are 3 outstanding issues: 1. Automatic transmission upgrade. 2. Crankshaft pulley. 3. Spark plugs/coil packs I'll deal with each issue in turn. 1. Automatic transmission upgrade. My claim that none of the work carried out by TDI had been unreliable, was challenged by a member who stated that the automatic transmission had been unreliable. TDI did not undertake any work on the transmission, and in any event our client was fully aware that the transmission was totally experimental. I was then acused of "basking in the glory" of something that we we did not build, although that doesn't really sound like our style at all. Crankshaft Pulley Two members put forward an assertion that a TDi Technician had advised Barrie that the crankshaft had broken. This is totally incorrect on two points. Firstly it was not a TDI Technician, it was our Sales Advisor, and secondly it was the (standard Lexus) crankshaft pulley harmonic damper that had sheared - not the crankshaft. You can read about this on the blog on our web site. I was present and part of the conversation at the time with Barrie & Janie, so I know exactly what was said, and am obviously party to the facts of the matter. I don't know how/who/why the story got twisted (that's a converation to be had among those who spread this rumour), but the discoverable and indesputable fact is that those who propogated and believed this story are completely wrong, and those who argued about it without verifying the facts seem to me to have degraded their own credibility. Spark Plugs/Coil packs A misfire event at the LOC day at TDI caused a member to believe the words of a TDI Tech upon initial inspection "looks like a spark plug or coil pack problem" to mean "definately is a spark or coil pack problem". What doesn't seem to have been considered properly is that very shortly afterwards, the TDI Tech knew for sure that it wasn't a spark plug or coil pack issue, but after a year or so later, certain people still seem to think it was a spark plug or coil pack issue and continued to argue about it. All that needed to happen was to ask us. Additionally, use of the words "come clean" insinuated that we were hiding something about this issue, which is also totally incorrect. Also thrown into the mix to justify a belief that validation proceedures had been conducted, was a reference to converations with 4 TDI customers who apparently were not happy with us. Firstly, for correct validation or due dilligence processes to have been conducted, at the very least "the other side of the story" should have been investigated, and preferably a correctly quailified independant inspection should have been sought. Without these all you have is an unqualified and one-sided opinion. Secondly, for the sake of demonstration lets say that there are 4 (or even 40) people who were genuinely unhappy with our work (and had good reason to be), that is a very small ratio considering the thousands of customers we have had. Most importantly, I am completely confident that if there is anyone with a legitimate issue with us we will deal with it swiftly and professionally, and will pay for any genuine mistakes that we have made. From the above it should become clear that some significant mistakes or misunderstandings have been made related to these issues, mostly derived from assumptions and the belief of incorrect rumours. I hope that these people will give more consideration to their thoughts, words and actions in future. I also hope that those guilty of propogating the false rumours and showing unfair negativity have sufficient decency to show some remorse to Dave Read and to the Lexus community who have been deprived of the story of one of the most highly developed is200's in the world.
  23. When your employee states "It looks like a Spark Plug/Coilpack issue." am I not the believe he is competant to make that judgement after he had examined the car and had access to the laptop that was connected to the car, and had drawn his own conclusions as to the problem with the evidence he had at his disposal at that time ? Please do not try to belittle me with the understanding of the difference. He was in a much better position to explain what was wrong after examining the data on the laptop than I was standing some 50 metres away and not being privvy to that data. I have fallen into no trap whatsoever as you put it. He did not say "actually after futher examination it might well be something else", as if he had of done, maybe I wouldn't have expected his conclusion to be the correct one. I think there's a lesson to be learned here: Be careful what you believe, because in this case you have got it totally wrong. Suspect what you like Mark, if you think I am careless as to not ask members at to why they wouldn't come back to you for more work, maybe in fact it is you that has come to the wrong conclusion. If you do not want to give me credit for being intelligent enough to ask a club member as to why they wouldn't come back to you for more work, again you have come to an incorrect conclusion/underestimated me. I'm glad that I validate things I am told, especially where you/TDi are concerned. Listening to someones opinion is not the same as conducting proper validation procedures. May I ask you this question please: When you heard the false rumour about Daves crankshaft being broken, did you believe it or did you undertake any validation procedures? Thanks in advance.
  24. I now see how you have made that jump to the wrong conclusion. "Looks like" is not the same as "definately is". Do you understand the difference and how you fell into the trap of coming to the wrong conclusion? I suspect there are people who would not use us again for various reasons. However, I also suspect that you believe whatever you are told without validating it.
  25. The parts are still available. We had a delivery this week.
×
×
  • Create New...