reusable oil pan seal

What initially looked like a water pump leak turned into a timing cover
seal problem diagnosed by a local mechanic on my 2000 Town & Country
van with 97,000 miles. Since he had never done this job, I decided to
take it to the Chrysler dealer, who has done repairs for this car in
the past. (I was initially hoping to save money with the local
mechanic.) I approved a repair of the timing cover seal and water pump
(first mechanic advised that this may need to be done also) for $600.
Late in the day, they called to say the car had an oil leak because
they put back the "reusable" oil pan seal. Now they need to replace the
seal to stop the leak and plan to charge me an extra $100 to do that.
Is a gasket really reusable at 97,000 miles? Why wouldn't they just
replace it while they were doing the first job? If it is reusable, how
do I know they didn't damage it or reinstall it improperly?

 

That doesn't sound right. The only *resuable* seal that I have heard
of, is the new one that Chrysler offers for transmissions. I have
always understood that gaskets must be replaced anytime they are
separated from the mating surface(s).

-Kirk Matheson

 

Not much you can do. They may be giving you a song and dance, but how
would you prove anything - that's the risk of any car repair. One of
those decisions with some risk, and on this one, they lost - except the
risk (and loss) was yours since DC says the gasket is re-usable and you
didn't tell them to replace it anyway to eliminate the risk. For that
reason, when I replaced the oil pan on my Concorde a year or so ago
(stripped drain plug hole threads) that has the same type of "re-usable"
gasket, for the extra $20 that a new OEM gasket cost, I replaced the
gasket with no regrets. Live and learn.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

 

Nope - it's the metal with raised rubber edging (very much like the
recessed o-ring oil drain plug that I described a couple of weeks ago as
the ideal plug). - actually pretty ideal because since it's guranteed
that the rubber will not be over-compressed (i.e., mashed thru/cold
formed) *AND* that a minimum of bolt torque will compress the rubber to
that exact same point, the range of torque that will give a good seal is
as wide as you can possibly get (meaning it is not dependent on the
skill and smarts of the mechanic nearly as much as traditional either
all-compressible material or all-metal gaskets. I looked in the LH car
FSM (not same engine, but same type of gasket), and, in the oil pan R&R
section, on the "Installation" section, it says to inspect the gasket
and re-use if in good shape. No doubt the T&C FSM says the same thing.
Two possibilities: They are lying, or the gasket was marginal and the
bad part wasn't visibly obvious - not easy to prove either way - life's
too short.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')