hmmm interesting.. so instead of poor craftsmanship, its just poor design from the american assembly plants. maybe if mistubishi still had more involvement then the motors would have stayed the same and less crank walk.
I don't think I agree with poor design from the american assembly idea. There are similar cases for engine to fail when manufacture changes/redesign lubrication system. You probably heard about RX7 twin turbo rotary 13B Rev. What could be more hell than boosted motor running complex three dimensional seals? Still reliability was pretty good with those motors. So when the latest beast RX8 (Renesis) came on board, Mazda dropped turbos and claimed this NA motor will do 200,000 miles before rebuild. BTW only few "minor" changes in lubrication system.
![[Linked Image]](http://i282.photobucket.com/albums/kk252/universal556/RotaryOilNozzle.jpg)
And look what I did to RX8
![[Linked Image]](http://i282.photobucket.com/albums/kk252/universal556/RX8Chart.jpg)
Failure reasons? APEX seal running dry, compression lost. Starting 2008 and up they added third oil nozzle (between the two as in 13B Rev) and all problems went away.
How many crankwalk cases are outthere for mitsu? 20 - 30%? Almost every engine failed in early RX8.
As Rob stated above,
All it takes is a starvation of oil to the trust
Our engine didn't crankwalk because MITSU forgot to feed oil to thrust bearing. I would call it "design failure" if they did.
If Magnus is right than all takes is dirty/old engine oil to clog oil squirter and when they do they'll eat away all need oil pressure to feed thrust bearing at idle. Engine failure due to excess use of dirty oil is not design failure to me.
Still everyone talks about crankwalk like all Mitsu motors failed, that upsets me the most!
