I have nothing but respect for Sam. I think the post above pretty much explains why.

 

It would appear very one sided IN THIS thread if you hadn't researched and read all of the previous. As much as I should stay 100% professional, I feel like I was "stabbed in the back" day 1, when Sam lied to me and filled JoeDirtPharmD with presumptions to convince him to have GTM do all the future work at their shop.

If you would, go back and read some of the initial threads and you'll get a better idea of how this has escelated to the current state of affairs. Either way, our analysis is purely factual and objective, "slinging the mud" was the human side taking over, tough to resist.

 

This whole thing is pointless, both sides are going to find something to help their case. Todd is offering to rebuild the motor, has proof thatthe damage was not from his work, what else can be done?

 

I've been reading this drama since day one, so I know the history. My advice to both sides (speaking about the vendors) is stick to reporting data and leave the personal side out of this. Honest men can disagree about the conclusion to findings and is not evidence in itself that someone is lying.

-Mark

 

I still wonder then why this is BZM vs GTM.. If it is not BZM's fault, then it is Don's... If you believe the theory of being pushed too hard, then it happened before going to GTM.

GTM seems to be the focus here since they diagnosed the problem, but what BZM must really be saying is their findings show that Don abused the car.

Todd, is that what you are saying?

-Mark

 

GTM blamed BZM first, then they talked the vehicle owner into letting them(GTM) diagnose and strip the engine(for alot of money and effectively voiding BZM warranty.

 

I know. So a customer comes to you and says they have babied this new engine, but it doesn't make any power. You diagnose it and find obvious problems with the engine. Your conclusion?

Frankly, both shops "facts" are convincing at face value. Without the step of an additional 3rd party to look over the engine, the true true true cause may never be known.

-Mark

 

so gtm is claiming that 6 defective pistons were installed?so gtm is claiming that a whole set of piston rings were defective?so gtm is claiming the money paid for this diagnosis was not sufficient to post all of the findings the first time?so gtm is claiming that with 100 years of experience no one checked those rings?100 years of what... obd trouble codes and oil changes? slimey people like you are the reason more engine builder startups are not available and the trickle down effect is less domestic development for the platform.

 

+1

 

+1 Thank you. The guy paid top dollar to have GTM void his warranty . Now they want to waive all fees because they know that was shady business ethics.

 

I missed the part where GTM tied up Don and made him do the work...

Again, lets be rational here. The engine builder is out of town and did not install the engine. Don should have got Todd on the phone right then to get the tear down authorized (and maybe even paid for). But come on, GTM is doing what the customer asked them to do. I think their prices are high also, but cost of doing business in the L.A. market can't be cheap.

-Mark

 

They might have led him to believe that BZM would have to pay for the work if the engine was found to be faulty, either way I think he has made out ok by bringing his problems to the forum. Did you see that bill, he could have bought three engines for all that money and you honestly think BZM would pay that when it would be much cheaper to just send another engine.

 

I feel like a cheerleader here trying to make sense of the situation...

The last thing we need is more speculation. Don has not said that, so why even speculate?

I saw the bill, looks really high.. Don signed off on the work, so what's the point? It is standard in the industry to NOT pay for 3rd party labor as part of a warranty on parts, so why would GTM or Don expect otherwise. If you go back to the original thread Don posted, he said specifically he was asking for a refund on the engine and not the labor - he was eating that.

-Mark

 

You keep claiming to have read the posts from previous threads, but you keep bringing up old questions. BZM claims that Sam@GTM told him he was going to do everything in his power to keep Don at his shop and that he did not want Don sending the engine back to Todd becasue Sam had vested interest in the transaction. What GTM KNOWINGLY DID was tear down an engine that was NOT theirs to tear down after being asked by Todd to have the engine sent back to him. If you feel this is proper work ethic then you have a very flawed logic. The bottom line is that none of this would have happened if Don had originally sent his motor to Todd as Todd had requested. What Sam convinced Don to do was essentially void his warranty and fall into a very expensive tear-down/rebuild. Once GTM pointed the finger at BZM, BZM now not only was faced with having to tell their side of the story, but also to respond to claims about an engine that they had never been able to take apart. Once Todd got the engine back it was his turn to make his set of findings. Even after this, GTM still withheld extra information which changes or adds on to the reasons this engine failed? After a customer had seen the bill of over 13,000 dollars you would assume they would give you more than just stopping at the piston vs. head battle. So, after all of this, Sam comes out with MORE information that he failed to come forth with initially? Why the magic tricks? Do you see the picture this is painting?

 

Ok, this strikes me as funny because I thought Don owned the engine? As the owner of the engine, Don authorized GTM to do the work.

And remember you are basing this off Todd's version of the conversation.

I realize this community has been rocked by the likes of VRT and I'd hate to see either of these vendors ran off. I just don't see the grand conspiracy that many of you are claiming.

-Mark

 

So let me get this straight, GTM disassembled and then reassembled the heads before sending the motor to Todd? New pictures that we haven't seen before of the heads and valves supplied by GTM AFTER Todd's findings?? Seems VERY fishy.

 

either that or they just didnt present it further since previous thread got ot remmeber....a lot of the posts here about the dislike that i share with you guys on gtm on their pricing, or the ethics or about accepting teardown on the engine dont really apply to the fact on whats wrong with ...the engine?..which, yes, it had problems from day 1 and up to dynocomp i know nothing about overreving or any of that crap took place.

 

Don had every right to allow GTM to do the work, but when he did this he forwent Todd's suggestion and thus voided his warranty. Once Don made that decision he should have NEVER gone back to Todd with his hand out expecting a single dime. If he wanted to truly understand what went wrong or what WAS wrong he should have sent the motor back to Todd to begin with. If you cannot agree that letting a 3rd shop do the disassembly of a warrantied first shops motor and then asking the first shop for a refund is completely flawed logic then you have no hope. I am just trying to help you understand that both Todd and Sam agree that Todd did ask for the motor back before the HUGE repair bill even happened. Todd wanted to disassemble the motor himself, and rightfully so! If you truly read the last thread, you would see this, too.

 

Oh and one more thing as a response to Sam claiming it was an engine problem from Day 1. If I recall, day 1 consisted of Don installing the motor. Starting the motor up. Finding a track to which he proceeded to (and admittedly) WOT the UNTUNED engine. Once he saw the car stumble he brought it in to the tuner. I do not have the extensive knowledge of engine building that either Sam nor Todd has, but couldn't this alone have done what Todd and Sam both found wrong with this motor? Maybe not all at once, but once the piston collapsed couldn't the rest of these problems occurred soon after?

 

Are you serious??? And you claim to be neutral in this matter. Laughable. GTM had all the opportunity in the world to present ALL the evidence when they posted their analysis the first time. Please explain why they only posted some of the evidence at that time? Hmm? Have you heard the phrase "withholding evidence"?