 |
| Author | Post |
|---|
big..E.
Trade Member
| Joined: | Wed Jan 30th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 330 |
| Mana: |    |
|
Posted: Wed Aug 13th, 2008 10:16 pm |
|
KevG wrote: I always Lube bonnet catches as part of a service.
Kev
As "we" all do Kev...The problem is that not "ALL" cars get serviced regularly..So when a problem like this occurs its easier to "KICK THE MANUFACTURER TO DEATH" than blame tight fisted "Joe public"....
As i posted i am now changing them "regularly" ...But "some" of the older ones are in better condition than "some" of the newer ones... Catch my drift???...
|
KevG
Super Moderator
|
Posted: Tue Aug 12th, 2008 05:49 pm |
|
I always Lube bonnet catches as part of a service.
Kev
|
Wesley
Trade Member
|
Posted: Mon Aug 11th, 2008 11:55 pm |
|
big..E. wrote: Wesley wrote: Yeah,
The secondary latch seizes up! and allows Bonnet to "Flip Up"!
From "New gained" exp...Having changed umpteen of these catches (not only Clio)..I would like to point out that The Catches only "stick" in extreeme cases...However Renault replace any corroded catches....Lack of "Genereal Mainteeenance".....Back in the "old days" if it moved,you would have Lubricated it..But nowadays if it moves it works....When it stops moving "CHANGE IT (ITS KNACKERED)....."....This applies to MOT testers also...So hey lads move with the times,or wind up being scrapped..lol
Also applies to the Misses lol.
|
big..E.
Trade Member
| Joined: | Wed Jan 30th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 330 |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Mon Aug 11th, 2008 11:29 pm |
|
Wesley wrote: Yeah,
The secondary latch seizes up! and allows Bonnet to "Flip Up"!
From "New gained" exp...Having changed umpteen of these catches (not only Clio)..I would like to point out that The Catches only "stick" in extreem cases...However Renault replace any corroded catches....Lack of "Genereal Mainteeenance".....Back in the "old days" if it moved,you would have Lubricated it..But nowadays if it moves it works....When it stops moving "CHANGE IT (ITS KNACKERED)....."....This applies to MOT testers also...So hey lads move with the times,or wind up being scrapped..lol
|
big..E.
Trade Member
| Joined: | Wed Jan 30th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 330 |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Mon Aug 11th, 2008 11:15 pm |
|
Wesley wrote: KevG wrote: Why cant i see the posts?
Your Computer says "NO" Lol
Or the missus as pulled a plug..????...........Have fun!!!...
|
Wesley
Trade Member
|
Posted: Mon Aug 11th, 2008 11:02 pm |
|
KevG wrote: Why cant i see the posts?
Your Computer says "NO" Lol
|
KevG
Super Moderator
|
Posted: Mon Aug 11th, 2008 10:59 pm |
|
| Why cant i see the posts?
|
KevG
Super Moderator
|
Posted: Mon Aug 11th, 2008 10:54 pm |
|
David
Both tests are correct.
My point was, like your handbrake pull, the weights can be different yet correct, you seem to have missed my point!
I am testing to the manual, that's the correct procedure.
I was trying to show that the test has many variables and they do not matter.
With due respect, do what it says in the book.
You are just complicating things by being too deep and trying to be clever.
No Offence intended
Kev
PS When you said "Check the spring Rates"(Headlamp Aim) You were joking were'nt you ?
Last edited on Mon Aug 11th, 2008 11:04 pm by KevG
|
David
Banned
| Joined: | Mon May 26th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 376 |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Mon Aug 11th, 2008 08:19 pm |
|
Hi Kev
No problem at all, simply carry out a decelerometer test to back up your roller brake test, if class I & II computerisation specifications will allow you to combine the readings, put both in, if not use the decelerometer readings and issue a VT32 explaining why.As for the headlamp aim, if a riders weight is so significant that the specifications for headlamp aim are out of tolerance, simply get the presenter to sit astride the machine when you check the aim, adjust as necessaary and issue a VT32, the presenter can be used as your assistant.
PS, check the suspension spring rates, if carrying large masses,they may becoming weak.
David
|
KevG
Super Moderator
|
Posted: Mon Aug 11th, 2008 07:18 pm |
|
David,
Heres one for you.
We test the Brake on a bike using an RBT with built in scales which measure the combined weght of the bike and the rider, who is the NT.
There is no VSI info at all for bikes . so this weight is input into the Device when we enter results by NT.
A bike can weigh from 100 kg upwards.
I weigh 100 kg so combined weight for a 100kg bike is 200 kg if I test it.
However I have a colleague who weighs 55kg. His combined weight for the same bike would be 165 KG, of course.
We could both test the same bike and it could fail on brake effeciency for me yet pass for my thin freind.
And then the owner and his obese wife ride it home,with a combined weight of say 300Kg.
(Same goes for headlamp aim. as weight can alter the aim)
So David. What are your thought on this one?
kev
|
Wesley
Trade Member
|
Posted: Sun Aug 10th, 2008 11:08 pm |
|
David wrote: Hi Wes,
I will try and explain it to you another way later this weekend, obviously it is my view and understanding of the manual, and I do try to think about what would happen if in the unlikely event of an appeal was carried out, would VOSA agree with me then?
Some years ago I had a similar experience to your view with a Rover 800 series, when speaking to the trainer at VI, he advised they had not had any reported problems of no reserve travel, which made me think about my understanding of what I deemed to be no reserve travel at that time, which if I may say I think was similar to your view.
David
Thanks ,
Please also take into consideration in Your reply,
Vehicle in for test and prior to RBT you have pulled the parking brake lever on as described and, In your opinion, It Has reached its Maximum Length of travel, Does it have No reserve?
Carrying out the RBT, when applying the parking brake lever on "This Vehicle", You Achieve Lockout on Both sides, No Reserve? Pass or Fail? or Pass and Advise?
Wes.
Last edited on Sun Aug 10th, 2008 11:25 pm by Wesley
|
David
Banned
| Joined: | Mon May 26th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 376 |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sat Aug 9th, 2008 09:34 pm |
|
Hi Wes,
I will try and explain it to you another way later this weekend, obviously it is my view and understanding of the manual, and I do try to think about what would happen if in the unlikely event of an appeal was carried out, would VOSA agree with me then?
Some years ago I had a similar experience to your view with a Rover 800 series, when speaking to the trainer at VI, he advised they had not had any reported problems of no reserve travel, which made me think about my understanding of what I deemed to be no reserve travel at that time, which if I may say I think was similar to your view.
David
|
David
Banned
| Joined: | Mon May 26th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 376 |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sat Aug 9th, 2008 09:29 pm |
|
You are right, but from a VOSA point of view they would be looking for the correct procedures and decisions to be made by the book, brake performance is different than the mechanical reserve travel, this is quite easy to understand I think because one does not test the park brake lever reserve travel in the rolling road.
David
|
kev1975
Trade Member
| Joined: | Wed Sep 5th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 324 |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sat Aug 9th, 2008 07:28 pm |
|
David wrote: Hi Wes
You said;
If the parking brake lever is applied gradually with button depressed and reaches its full travel with No Lockout, but only just passes the minimum required percentage, Does It, In Your Opinion, have No Reserve Travel?
My Comment;
If you are twice as strong as the next tester, and you can pull on the parking brake lever to make it reach the stop, but the next tester is not that strong, where is the national standard to define "No Reserve Travel" if it's down to a persons strength and opinion?
David
this is all sort of irrelevant really , if i have the strength to pull the lever to its limit & fail it on no reserve travel , but the readings are near , no lock on either wheel .
if someone smaller than me can only pull the lever half way up then it would probably end up failing on efficiency as the readings would be less , so either way results in a fail .
|
Wesley
Trade Member
|
Posted: Sat Aug 9th, 2008 01:22 am |
|
David wrote: Hi Wes
You said;
If the parking brake lever is applied gradually with button depressed and reaches its full travel with No Lockout, but only just passes the minimum required percentage, Does It, In Your Opinion, have No Reserve Travel?
My Comment;
If you are twice as strong as the next tester, and you can pull on the parking brake lever to make it reach the stop, but the next tester is not that strong, where is the national standard to define "No Reserve Travel" if it's down to a persons strength and opinion?
David
David,
I beleive, that no matter what build or strength a "Tester" Has, There is With No Doubt a Reason for Refusal?
If A 5`5" 8 Stone Guy can easily pull the lever to its limits, and then asks for a "Second Opinion"?, from a 15 Stone Guy, Built like a Brick s**thouse Door,
Then A "Gradual" Application of the parking brake lever, by "Both Testers", Results In the same "Ballpark"?
I really Dont` know Which Direction, or Tangent, You are Coming from, In Your Comments and Questioning?
Wes.
|
David
Banned
| Joined: | Mon May 26th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 376 |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Fri Aug 8th, 2008 05:57 pm |
|
Hi Wes
You said;
If the parking brake lever is applied gradually with button depressed and reaches its full travel with No Lockout, but only just passes the minimum required percentage, Does It, In Your Opinion, have No Reserve Travel?
My Comment;
If you are twice as strong as the next tester, and you can pull on the parking brake lever to make it reach the stop, but the next tester is not that strong, where is the national standard to define "No Reserve Travel" if it's down to a persons strength and opinion?
David
|
Wesley
Trade Member
|
Posted: Thu Aug 7th, 2008 11:42 pm |
|
Hi David,
"Dissing" is almost exactly as it says, "Dissrespectful" I`m sure we covered this previously?
sadly at this moment the messaging system won`t allow me to read your posting and comment on each item individually at the same time. So from memory,
If the parking brake lever is applied gradually with button depressed and reaches its full travel with No Lockout, but only just passes the minimum required percentage, Does It, In Your Opinion, have No Reserve Travel?
The "coefficient of restitution"? Please Tell Me More.
As for the monthly visits, if they are prepared for a bombardment of Questions about all the ever changing "Idiosyncracies" and are prepared to discuss them, without "Restitution"? Then They would be Welcomed.
ps; we already have good communication with our VE, and treat Him as a visitor, prior to his inspection.
Wes.
Last edited on Thu Aug 7th, 2008 11:57 pm by Wesley
|
removalizer
Trade Member
| Joined: | Tue Feb 12th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 104 |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Thu Aug 7th, 2008 08:04 am |
|
Us Northerners use the word Dissing as well, it means to have a go at someone verbally, I have two daughters, one of them 16 yr old so I am quite up to date with all the latest phrases.
Don't take take critisism on here too seriously, like the old saying you can't please all of the people all of the time, the lads on here are saints compared to other forums I talk on.
|
David
Banned
| Joined: | Mon May 26th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 376 |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Thu Aug 7th, 2008 12:08 am |
|
Hi Wes
Not sure about your choice of words, must have a different language down South, what does Dissing mean?
I may appear to come across like I am trying to catch you out, but where I originate from some of the testing scheme are not that good, this is based on evidence of previously tested vehicles passed from one station to another. I suppose I should blame VOSA's superiors for relaxing the standards of training and experience a tester requires before authorising to test?
I have spent my whole working life in the motor trade, my education and training are all down to me, nobody paid for it except me, and while there are some jobs that are deemed to be good jobs out there for graduates, they are not that well paid, and the working stresses you are under I can do without, there is more to life than just money?
I don't think I am any different than anybody else, and the reason I ask you guys so many questions is to see how you reproach them, some of you get your backs up and some of you give your views, primarily I am only looking to see who understands the manual, and who does not, so when I ask questions about vehicle systems, its not to catch you out, but to see if you take the job seriously or not?
So by example if somebody said their vehicle failed the MOT on the parking brake travel having "No Reserve", then when I ask how did it pass the performance test, I am not catching you out, but passing a comment to give an insight into a persons thinking when they test a component or system.
With respect to VOSA's latest idea with regards spending time at each VTS each month I think that it is a good idea, maybe they will share their knowledge with the scheme?
Now with respect to parking brake levers operation as an example, I could quite easily conclude how much energy a tester would need to apply to the parking brake lever to gain the recorded readings you get on your rollers, without being at your station from your brake test results. Most testers probably cannot see that side of thinking, just like one person on this forum previously commented on pedestrian accidents, saying that I would need videos to conclude the evidence when I said one method I could use was the coefficient of restitution method.
Training is very valuable, but some people don't take it seriously like some have said on this forum, and some think that when they have gained their experience, their opinions and decisions taken are correct, but if different testers are making decisions substancially different than others, then surely at some point a person must have gone off at a tangent, and this costs the customer unecessary money?
It is good to therefore pass ideas around and share knowledge, but without giving examples of problems or decisions testers have made, how can you reason on what the manual has to say, if you get your back up?
David
|
Wesley
Trade Member
|
Posted: Mon Aug 4th, 2008 12:29 am |
|
Spongebob wrote: Yes quite clearly the minimum standard is to meet the parameters specified within the manual and/or relevant emission data book (volume 14 I think now) depending which type of fuel you are testing and what type of vehicle.
For an MOT tester David you do spend an awful lot of time questioning what we do and why. Have you considered a career change if it irks you so much?
Yeah,
I`m pretty sure that If, I were a post graduate "Univesity Student" with Manufacturer Journals available to me, and All The Qualifications that I have just gained, including Induced spelling mistakes to try to catch Others Out?
"My Chosen Profession" would not be, Merely Examining Vehicles for "Joe Public" or Indeed even repairing them!
Maybe I Will txt My colleague "Sam" who started at Ford last year £30k "They" Ford paid an all expenses trip to Germany just to assess Horn Tones, ! Or maybe I will txt "Eddie", who Qualified some Six years ago and went straight into, Composite Carbon Fibre, F1?
Both these Guys Have gained Invaluable practical experiences on the shop floor. "I" Am Very Privileged to have had an aquaintance with them prior to "Their" Passing Out.
"They" are both Very Respectful, and carry on life without "Dissing" Anyone, or trying to catch Them Out "Just for a Laugh"
So David, "Where" Exactly Do "You" try to Strive to be? "Dissing" People?
Or Maybe, Just Maybe? You Might Just Consider, "The" Other Option of, Passing On "Your" Experiences in Life? To Others.
Regards, Wes.
|
Current time is 12:10 pm | Page: 1 2 3   |
|
|
|
|
