Comp Cams Lies to Better Business Bureau

[FFRCobraMike]

The saga continues. I filed a complaint with the Better Business Bureau against Comp Cams for not stepping up to pay for my engine repair. As you all know the story of the engine failure, i will not repeat it again. Anyway, in their written response to the BBB they say that it was the distributor gear that failed and not their camshaft. The Vice President who responded had not only been given pictures of the failed camshaft and the perfect distributor gear, but i physically sent both components to him for inspection. The fact that they have to lie about the facts to shirk their responsibility, is just more proof of what an unscrupulous company Comp Cams is. I mean they know a certified mechanic was the one who determined what failed and they physically saw the parts which i still have. Did they think that just because they are a big company that lying about what happened would change the facts? Well it is just more proof to a judge how poorly they run their business. To have to stoop to lying. I mean how pathetic can you get!

Mike

[wrench87]

i think comp cams should supply a new distributor gear with every camshaft order, this would take care of any problems?. just a thought.

[Ron61]

Wrench,

Would that really solve anything if you had a problem. If they are acting like this, then they would most likely say that you installed the gear they supplied wrong. Seems to me they would gain far more if their cam messed up by saying it did and paying for the engine than they will by what they are seemingly doing. One act like this can cost them a lot in the future and if they had admitted their product was at fault and made it right, they would have gained a lot.

Ron

[Jerry Clayton]

I've mostly only heard of Comp Cams having these problems---we used to use a lot of there stuff but after a couple of Dist gear problems I noticed that there gear cutting on the cam didn't look right--wrong pitch line,angle, rough burry ends and edges, etc

Jerry

[FFRCobraMike]

You know guys. Between this forum and the others i have posted the original thread on, over 12,000 people have read about this story. Now on average, each person will tell three others. That's 49,000 people getting bad press about Comp Cams. I wonder what they would have to pay in advertizing to reach that many people. The sad fact is, besides the immediate loss of business which has certainly cost far above my engine repair. The bad press will cost them for years to come. It seems like they could have had that much good press for a very cheap price, but like many large companies, they figure they are too big to be affected by bad press. I am just glad i don't own stock in their company.

[Excaliber]

I don't know, it's a complex story and it will leave many, like myself, wondering what happened. I've been following it, but to tell you the truth, there is insuffucient data for me to make an informed decision as to what should have been done, who was at fault, etc. After all, we've barely heard one side of the story.

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing, just telling you my take on the whole mess. I would bet a large percentage of those viewing these various threads/posts feel the same way. Me? I'll order my cam and matching distributor (or gear as the case may be) from a BUILDER not directly from the cam manufacturer. I simply have more faith in independant engine builders to know what really works, like Gessford, KC, Southern Automotive, etc.

[FFRCobraMike]

Excaliber
I understand that you are only hearing my side of the story. I would post the pictures of the camshaft and dizzy gear, but everytime i try to post a pic, the forum say's it is too large and won't allow it. The pics are pretty self explanitory. The cam gear is shreadded and the dizzy gear shows no wear. If the parts were compatable as Comp insists they were, then regardless of what caused the failure, both components should have been equally damaged. Even Comp could not explain why only the cam was damaged. If you want to send me your direct e-mail, I am happy to forward the pictures of both components to you so you can judge the evidence yourself. Unlike Comp, I have absolutely nothing to hide and will submit both componets to any testing. So that in itself should tell you something. If you look on the SAAC forum or the FFcobra forum, you can view two pictures of the cam. I think the picture shows very clearly that it was the cam that failed. So why is Comps response to the BBB that the dizzy gear failed? But judge for yourself. I am fully willing to supply any documentation and components for independent review.

Mike

[Excaliber]

I don't need any pics, I'm sure your description is accurate and I'm sorry your having this trouble. Just giving you some insight how others may view the saga.

Refresh my memory, did Comp Cam replace the camshaft? Are they contractually obligated to provide anything beyond replacement of the cam? I to run a Comp Cam, as do many others. The key here is: What is their failure rate percentage? All manufacturers are going to have some problems if they stay in business long enough. Weird loosing the cam gear and not the dist gear, I think this is the first time I've heard of it happening that way.

[fsstnotch]

Ernie, if I remember correctly, Mike specifically called and asked which gear to run with his cam. A steel gear or a cast gear. they told him to run the steel gear and because the steel gear was stronger than the cast cam, the dist gear won.

I agree with Ernie's point of view mostly. Where I think that things come into play... Yes they should be held with some liability if they said you should use a gear that you shouldn't. But I also think some of this falls on the builders shoulders. Any true builder would have likely suggested a bronze gear or at a minimum, a gear that is softer than the cam. For the home builder... you are just kinda screwed. There is going to be 100's of variables that could be the fault of a home builder and parts manufacturers can't be held liable for that. This is by no means is anything against you Mike. It is just my opinion of what I know of the situation based on what you have posted. If all of these companies were held liable everytime something like this happened, they would all be out of business. Where your situation is defferent from others is that the DIRECTIONS for the cam say to use the hard steel gear. This is where I would find them liable.

[Excaliber]

I'm a 'home builder of my engine. I decided, with my build, that I would seek the best advice I could. Of course that meant starting on Club Cobra, then eventually branching out to Gessford Machine. George, at Gessford, supplied me with the parts AND more critically, the advice! Now I would compare prices, Gessfords price vs buying direct from a manufacturer or discount outlet. Well of course I could save money by buying a part here and a part there, but I would loose the great advice!

In the end, I bought everything I could through Gessford, and was glad to pay a little extra for it. Maybe KC would do that, maybe not, maybe some other engine builder, maybe they haven't got time to simply 'sell parts and talk story'. Perhaps I got lucky, right time and the right place. But 'sole sourcing' your parts along with good advice on the install is a pretty good game plan for a 'home builder', if you can find someone to play ball with.

By the way, putting those dist gears on is not always easy, it can be downright madening and things can go horribly wrong with clearance issues. I bought the cam 'package' as well as the matching dist, only way to be sure...

[FFRCobraMike]

Just to clarify the situation. I did not build the engine or install the gear on the dizzy. The engine was built by a professional engine builder. He specified the distributor to use in the paperwork I received. Unfortuately, as i found out after the fact is that the reason he spifically specified the model distributor was that it had the proper cast gear on it. There was no direct discussion on the actual dizzy gear as he assumed i would just drop the dizzy in and not read the instructions. Which is usually what i would have done. The fact that the engine was so expensive and the dizzy having that big red warning tag is what prompted me to call Comp as that is what the warning tag said to do. If I would have called the builder instead of Comp, I would have installed the dizzy with the gear it came with and never had this problem. So to be fair, if I would have ignored the instructions on the dizzy and called the builder instead of the cam maker, the mistake would never had been made. However, the cam maker is supposed to know more about what works with their product then anyone else, so why are they saying the wrong thing? The dizzy gear was installed by a machine shop that does it all the time. The only thing I actually installed was the dizzy itself. Both times. So again, even if I might have by some small chance of installed the dizzy wrong the first time, then why is the dizzy gear undamaged? Anyway, i just wanted to be clear that i did not build the engine at home. The builder builds hundreds of engines a year and has built this exact same engine many times before. He always specified the same dizzy which has a cast gear on it. The only time there has been a failure was mine. So all the other engines with a cast gear have run fine for thousands of miles. Mine only made it 150 miles. The damage to the rest of the engine was caused by the metal filings from the cam. No other causal damage was found and it was rebuilt by the same builder and has well over 1000 miles since it was fixed and is running fine.

Mike

[Silverback51]

One comment and one question.

It is very possible to destroy one side of a gear and the other to be fine, as happened in your situation. It's all a matter of the alloys that compose the gears.

What kind of cam and gear did you end up with? I believe you had a steel gear, but what was the cam? Was it a roller, or a flat tappet?

[tcrist]

"everytime i try to post a pic, the forum say's it is too large and won't allow it"

FFRCobraMike,
I dont know what operating system you are running on but on XP Home you can go to your picture thru windows explorer or my computer, right click on the picture and it should come up with options to resize the picture. Resize it to the smallest size and then put it in your photo album on CC. That works for me anyway. Just a thought.

Terry

[fsstnotch]

Pics of Mikes cam carnage can be found in my gallery

[fsstnotch]

cam was a retro roller

[RICK LAKE]

FFRCobraMike Mike looking at the cam and distributor gears, I have acouple of questions. Is it possible that the end play on the cam was not checked? If this was a retro roller kit, Some need a cam plate with a roller bearing to hold the cams in location. Some have a front thrust bearing that pushes the cam back to hold in location. Some motors, FE aftermarket had the distributor hole not machined correctly and caused the same problem. If you have the money, send the cam and gear out for testing and see if the rockwell is correct. I worked in a Caddie store in 88-93. The 4.1 motor had soft camshaft cores and would wear out both parts just like yours. Some cars had 100K some had 30K. How is the oil pump? is it a HVHP? Extra drag could cause this problem. I have not looked at a windsor motor, where is the oil coming from to lube this location? (between the gears) You may want to look into the composite gear for your distributor. I now run one with my roller and HVHP oil pump. This may fix the problem. Rick L.

[FFRCobraMike]

I really can not say anything about the end play on the cam. The same builder put it in both times and it is working fine now. It does have a HV oil pump and still does. The only difference between the two builds is the dizzy gear used. everything else was done exactly the same by the same person. At the time of the first build, the poly gears were not available yet. They were available when the engine was repaired, and i asked both the builder and Comp if that is what should be used and neither at the time recommended it. The builder because it was so new and he had little experience with the plastic gear, and Comp just wouldn't commit after the first failure. I know that regular hyd. roller cams use a steel gear with no problem. However this is a "Retro Fit" roller cam and for some reason, they are different. As I have mentioned before, there is even a difference in the Comp Cams catalog. The regular roller cams have a note beside the listing specifying a steel dizzy gear. The Retro Fit rollers do not have this note. So even in the Comp Cams own catalog, there is a discrepency between the two types of roller cams. The only parts i installed were the dizzy, the carb and the alternator. The rest of the engine was built by the builder. And to clarify about him recommending a cast gear, that was only on the engines that were built with the same cam as mine. He of course does not recommend a cast gear for all applications. He has built over a dozen engines that have the exact same components as mine. I was only saying he recommended a cast gear in those applications. And again all the other engines that are exactly like mine have not had a problem using a cast gear. Oh and Comp told the BBB that the cam is not what wore out. They told them the dizzy gear failed and the cam is fine. I think you can clearly see from the pic that was a lie.

Hope that clarifies things

Mike

[RICK LAKE]

FFRCobraMike Thanks for the info. I guess a bronze gears was a safe bet. IMO If there is an alignment problem the steel gear on the cam eats this gear up quick. The shavings will still endup in the motor on the way to the oil pan. If lucky, the filter catches the particles. I would have thought that Comp would have a recomended gear for each application. Someone said they should sell the correct gear with the retro kit. I have only run the car twice last year so I am not 100% sure that the composite gears is going to work. I do have extra oil going to this location to lube the contact spot of the two gears. This doesn't help you. Hope everything is OK with the motor now. The BBB is a waste of time and tax payers money. They don't do anything here in NJ except get paided. Fly by night construction companies with 3-4 different names. All they need is a PO box and answering machine. NJ is finally maken changes and forcing them to register with the state. Only the Illegals are complaining about this. Go Figure. Rick L.

[Silverback51]

Just did a quick search on the Comp Cams site to see if they refer to the cam material and hardness in their spec pages. Could not find anything.

By the picture it's easy to see that it's a billet material cam. Did any of the information they sent with the cam include the material specs?

It would be real interesting to have the hardness tested. I would do it on the shaft area between the distributor gear and the first cam lobe. Then I would test it on the cam lobe surface also.

It could be a heat treat issue. If so, it would not have mattered what gear was used, it would fail regardless.

[Excaliber]

I wouldn't say the engine builder 'always' specifies the same gear all the time. The choice of the dist gear lies entirely with the choice of camshaft design. Roller cam requires a different dist gear than a flat tappet cam, for instance.