|
Post by shpauly on Sept 30, 2010 20:47:41 GMT
just wondering on fellew testers views on old transits and the rearmost lower panel which is welded onto chassis legs and has lights attached to it,very often they are excessivley corroded and within 30cm of rear springs,this panel not load bearing according to fig in manuall,is this panel supportive?i used to be under impression that if it was welded on then it was.last vosa who came in to test us on class 5 said that was not case.i passed and advised one today,advising that rear panel excessivley corroded but load bearing or supportive to suspension,i have also failed them 2. ::)whats your opinions?
|
|
alex
Nominated Tester
Posts: 305
|
Post by alex on Sept 30, 2010 21:02:26 GMT
what year transit are you reffering too,this to me can be a grey area dosent it say somewhere in the manual something about support panelling or have i got the wrong end of the stick also where a metal brake pipe is clipped to the floorpan say for example would you say that its a prescribed area ???had a few debates on this one.
|
|
|
Post by shpauly on Oct 1, 2010 7:06:23 GMT
what year transit are you reffering too,this to me can be a grey area dosent it say somewhere in the manual something about support panelling or have i got the wrong end of the stick also where a metal brake pipe is clipped to the floorpan say for example would you say that its a prescribed area ???had a few debates on this one. it was an L reg one,ipersonally wouldnt include b/pclips as prescribed area but i know what you mean
|
|
Daveg
NT & VTS Council member
I believe I am perfect, but others may differ in opinion?
Posts: 1,549
|
Post by Daveg on Oct 1, 2010 19:09:37 GMT
Are you referring to the rear lower skirt?
Some panels even though they are welded onto the vehicle structure if removed would have no effect on the vehicle strength at all.
Try to imagine what would happen to the parts of the load bearing sections if that panel were removed?
The type of vehicle structure must be considered when asking oneself about supportive panelling, if the construction is a main chassis type with panels welded to it, would the panel have an effect on the strength of the chassis if removed?
Dave
|
|
|
Post by shpauly on Oct 1, 2010 21:48:30 GMT
Are you referring to the rear lower skirt? Some panels even though they are welded onto the vehicle structure if removed would have no effect on the vehicle strength at all. Try to imagine what would happen to the parts of the load bearing sections if that panel were removed? The type of vehicle structure must be considered when asking oneself about supportive panelling, if the construction is a main chassis type with panels welded to it, would the panel have an effect on the strength of the chassis if removed? Dave cheers dave!thats how i look at it!some people though just get 30mm tape out and fail anything within regardless!
|
|
Daveg
NT & VTS Council member
I believe I am perfect, but others may differ in opinion?
Posts: 1,549
|
Post by Daveg on Oct 2, 2010 17:12:05 GMT
Are you referring to the rear lower skirt? Some panels even though they are welded onto the vehicle structure if removed would have no effect on the vehicle strength at all. Try to imagine what would happen to the parts of the load bearing sections if that panel were removed? The type of vehicle structure must be considered when asking oneself about supportive panelling, if the construction is a main chassis type with panels welded to it, would the panel have an effect on the strength of the chassis if removed? Dave cheers dave!thats how i look at it!some people though just get 30mm tape out and fail anything within regardless! Your completely right there, take the recent van I purchased, the mot tester failed the steering inner track rods and outer track rods for excessive free play, yet only advised slight steering free play at the steering wheel , then he failed the van for lambda out of specification on the VT30, but on the exhaust emissions printout, the CO had failed the test only , however I have checked the lambda operation of both bank 1 and bank 2, this means front and rear lambda operation and both are switching when cold, then when hot the bank 1 switches and bank 2 does not, also the gasses out of the CAT record lean indicating that it could have passed the test if the NT had done the job proper! If you read my other thread regarding the van you would have read about the offside front brake hose and the 30% failure on brake balance, the NT completely missed the incorrectly routed, stretched dangerous brake hose Dave
|
|
|
Post by shpauly on Oct 2, 2010 22:20:18 GMT
cheers dave!thats how i look at it!some people though just get 30mm tape out and fail anything within regardless! Your completely right there, take the recent van I purchased, the mot tester failed the steering inner track rods and outer track rods for excessive free play, yet only advised slight steering free play at the steering wheel , then he failed the van for lambda out of specification on the VT30, but on the exhaust emissions printout, the CO had failed the test only , however I have checked the lambda operation of both bank 1 and bank 2, this means front and rear lambda operation and both are switching when cold, then when hot the bank 1 switches and bank 2 does not, also the gasses out of the CAT record lean indicating that it could have passed the test if the NT had done the job proper! If you read my other thread regarding the van you would have read about the offside front brake hose and the 30% failure on brake balance, the NT completely missed the incorrectly routed, stretched dangerous brake hose Dave i had similar case to that with a bm,had failed on lambda,sailed through test with me,failed on restricted free movement of mechanical brake at offside front????wheels spun free for me and had no brake imbalance,only thing i found was two front flexi hoses which were excessivley deteriorated,without touching them you could se csnvas,they were passed by garage who previously tested,i say passed,reallly should say missed!
|
|