Saz - I’d like to know how you came to this conclusion.
You infer that imports (i.e. Roadsters) are more likely to suffer this failure. What evidence is there? Why just Roadster imports?
I’ve always been told that brake fluid is massvely more flamable than fuel. Petrol has a much higher flash point and needs to get pretty hot before it’ll go up. Brake fluid on the other hand is supposedly very easy to ignite under the engine bag. Are there are any brake lines around that area that could have melted and started the fire? Certainly got me worried - Mines an S-Special with 125k miles on it. Will definitely be out there checking the pipes.
If you read the rest of my reply, you’ll see that its NOT a conclusion.
I don’t infer that at all, I provide some speculation. It is one possibility amongst others that I listed (i.e. points 1 & 2). If you want me to construe a mechanism why an import might be more prone to leaks (hint; “might” not definetely), one could surmise a hardening process of aged rubbers associated with the shipping process (well known for Japanese tyres); not affecting new cars due to the use of elastomers in the rubber, which gradually gas off with age. IF such a mechanism existed, as you see, I point out this would most likely affect other imports. I did not single out Roadsters. I am reminded of the big scandal that hit pretty much any Japanese car built before 1988, whereby seat buckles spontaneously disintegrated due to a mixture of UV damage, and damage caused by cleaning products (huge worldwide recall of Japanese cars of any age). Sea salt is particularly harsh on unprotected materials; used imports can spend upto 6 months being shuttled around various portside yards and on ships before they get to a UK owner.
Most likely, based on anecdotal evidence, it is probably going to be a one off problem, related to damage to the fuel system. These cars generally don’t catch fire. However, I wouldn’t rule out nother possibilities.
Well after speaking to the emergency services today they attribute the blame to a ruptured fuel hose. I asked if the engine temp could cause ignition of the fuel as I read last night it is appears to be difficult to ignite fuel with heat. They state that a mixture of fuel, fuel vapour in enclosed space combined with high engine temp and a steady flow of oxygen did cause the fuel to ignite. It could be that the brake fluid made the fire worse but was not the initial cause in this case. How the hose failed will need further investigation and I hope that albeit this is a import, Mazda UK will get involved. Through reports from insurance enginners, police, fire and hopefully Mazda UK we will find an answer to why this hose failed resulting in what is left of my car.
However saz does raise some good points, and we can see by other posts that some vehicles have had fuel filters missing and fuel lines tampered with before coming to the UK. Time will tell us and I will keep you posted.
Shocking to see what happened to your car, and I’m glad you’re both OK. (You’ve encouraged me to go out and examine my own as carefully as possible.)
It sounds as if the leaking fuel was alight for some miles before the explosion you reported. It may well be that it was the brake fluid or clutch fluid cylinder which went bang, as they’re near the back of the engine on the fuel rail side. Since I gather you lost the brakes instantly, that implies the brake system was damaged by the explosion, as braking wouldn’t normally be lost as soon as the engine stops.
I spat coffee all over my laptop after reading the first post of this thread!
Thank god your ok mate and as a result of your post i will now regularly check my fuel lines. I will also be passing your story onto every other roadster owner not using the forum.
G’day ccflyguy, so glad that you and your son walked away from this one! I’ve put a link to this post onto the Australian forum, as a heads up to owners of older '5s over here. Hope you get the insurance sorted asap, and that the insurers don’t play hardball
I was reading this bit of your post:-
"Because this is so an unusual occurence, I can only conclude that:
1. This was an unlucky, one-off occurence
2. This is an age-related failure. This does seem unlikely though. Yours is not the oldest MX5 around by any means.
3. This is a problem peculiar to Roadster imports. Roadsters use
identical fuel system parts to UK cars, and very similar materials to
most Japanese cars. Therefore, possibly a deteriotation in seals during
shipping. This not only a concern to owners, Mazda, but also VOSA, who
regulate the importation of non-EU cars."
- hence my questions… [*-)]
Wow! That is nuts. Glad you and your son walked away from it mate.
Out of interest, where abouts in Tyne and Wear did it happen?
Hi Noddy
It happen A19 southbound just before A690. There is a SOS lay-by and managed to free wheel it into there off main carrageway.
Thanks for the kind words from you all.
I am glad you got out of this
unscathed.
It is quite shocking that other people
were concerned enough to call the emergency services, but they did
not try and flag you down themselves.
Hi ccflyguy,
So pleased to hear you and your son escaped unharmed, that’s the main thing.
Hope you get back soft topping again soon and please keep us updated as to the ongoing investigations.
Take care,
Ben
Hello all
Thanks for the good wishes. Quick update, I have spoke to Mazda UK and the safety team at VOSA regarding this fire. Mazda UK were not interested in the problem as the vehicle is a import and “nothing to do with them” The told me to go to www.mazda.com and contact Japan. Got the same old script that the car is completely different to the EU models and parts on the JDM vehicles do not fit EU vehicles and vice versa. Nice to know they have our safety in mind eh?
However the VOSA safety team are looking at the report filed and if they are concerned and think there could be an issue Mazda UK will have to comply with them. The insurance engineer is inspecting the vehicle tomorrow. (lets see what they can find not to pay out on the claim!) Cynical I know but think you know what I mean.
Will have photographs tomorrow and have asked the recovery agent to remove the damaged lines once insurance have finished. Will get as much info as I can.
Hi all
As promised here are some updated photographs.
http://i701.photobucket.com/albums/ww18/ccflyguy/fuel%20line/fuelline.jpg
http://i701.photobucket.com/albums/ww18/ccflyguy/fuel%20line/engine.jpg
In the first picture the hole looks as if it’s been chaffed by the clip to the right, or deliberately cut[:O]
Hi geoff,
Well I thought the same as you regarding the chaffing as there is nothing in that area that could cause chaffing other than the clip. However if it had been rubbing on the clip you would expect the failure to be to the righthand side of the hose (as we look at it) next to the clip and not on the top where the hole well aware from the clip area. One would think the metal fuel lines would keep these 2 hoses apart anyway.
The fire service have had a good look at this section of the hose and have ruled out deliberate cutting or any other foul play, I did point out my concerns regarding the reinforced outer hose but was assured that it showed typical signs of a fuel line failure they quoted the blowtorch effect. ie the escape of fuel would have looked like a blowtorch, with the fuel nearer the source not being ignited. A few mm above the line would have only scorched not burned as the fuel was being forced out under pressure. This would have continued until the engine cut out shutting the fuel supply off. They go on to say the rupture at the point where the fuel has escaped is not a clean cut but more of a tear. But in my opinion the outer reinforced skin still looks like its been worn! …but by what??? nothing in this area to wear it away.
Just to confuse us even more on removing items from the boot I came across a folder jammed under spare wheel. in there were lots of receipts for the vehicle. Lots of these were for high octain fuel additive, 3-4 bottles at a time. If someone is using this stuff could it cause a failure of this type?
Answers on a postcard please.
Any signs of any previous mods? - i.e. s/charger maybe?
nothing goof, engine is bog standard no drill holes or mods all standard OEM equipment
I had issue with misfire when I first got it, was damaged wire to the coil pack that had not been repaired properly. This was made worse as the garage I bought it from jet washed the engine! I have had the CAS changed and a temp sensor and thats it, its been fantastic to drive ever since.
Lots of petrol receipts for shell V power which is slightly alarming given that the former keeper has used V power petrol and high octain additive together! Got service history from local garage (since imported in 2003) near to where I bought it in the midlands, got loads of recipts for Auto Glym and other care care products. Other than that been really well cared for vehicle.
Hose looks bulged and typically softened. Usually due to age (but fuel hoses last a long time), but also can be damaged by solvents. Brake fluid can attack and soften rubber, as can certain rubber dressing products which shouldn’t be used under the bonnet. Octane booster; depends which sort. Some claim to be safe with fuel hoses, which suggests some others are not. Ethanol is used a lot to boost the octane rating of fuel like Vmax, but only if it is in very high concentrations, such as in race fuel, would it corrode fuel lines.
As for Mazda UK’s attitude; will sum up as “not helpful”. While I can understand to an extent a reticence to be involved in an older car, nevertheless, they should not discriminate on safety related matters. This is the view of Mazda Europe, who will have no hesitation in tracking down owners in the UK, if mazda Japan issued a safety recall. Many years ago, Mitsubishi UK had to handle a recall concerning yawl-control in Japan-only Evo Lancers.
Octane boosters should nonly be used sparingly in the MX5; other than providing a good means to clean the system out, they’re a waste of money in the MX5. I have used Silkolene Pro-Boost once in a while (like every 50k miles). Using it as a regular additive sounds like you’re cossetting the engine, but I suspect its doing precisely the opposite.
Looking at the first picture it appears definite that the hose has been badly abraded. If there’s nothing there that could have caused the wear at the present time it seems evident that there must have been in the past. Can you contact any previous owners ( since the car was imported only I guess) and find out if there were any modifications in it’s past.
Having said that it seems unlikely that anyone would have missed a piece of hose so badly worn during normal underbonnet inspections, unless there was something in the vicinity that might have made it more difficult to see. Do you have any pictures taken of the underbonnet area before the fire that might give any clues?