|
Post by wizard49 on Aug 5, 2010 23:04:32 GMT
What is the criteria for an MoT fail on a CV gator? Now I am a PSV mechanic and been on a VOSA course recently for PSV MoT inspections etc. If the gator is NOT leaking at all and is generally in good condition :-/but has a small sign of a split near the small clip on the shaft after very close inspection would this be a failure?javascript:add("%20:-/")
|
|
|
Post by shpauly on Aug 26, 2010 21:36:50 GMT
an outer cv gaitor split is a fail
|
|
alex
Nominated Tester
Posts: 305
|
Post by alex on Aug 27, 2010 20:15:37 GMT
outer gaiter is a fail split/insecure common one small clip comes loose and grease starts to leak slightly onto driveshaft.
|
|
Daveg
NT & VTS Council member
I believe I am perfect, but others may differ in opinion?
Posts: 1,549
|
Post by Daveg on Aug 27, 2010 20:37:54 GMT
The way I read the method of inspection and the reason for rejection, the rejection only refers to an outer CV Joint gaiter at (1a), and this to me specifically refers to the gaiter being secured to the CV Joint, and not the SMALL END of the driveshaft. While a split/insecure CV gaiter on the CV Joint would fail, should the small end at the drive shaft being loose not be a 'pass and advise'? Dave
|
|
scoot
Nominated Tester
Posts: 305
|
Post by scoot on Aug 28, 2010 19:36:59 GMT
i would fail that and have ,might be wrong,the way i read it its the cv gaiter split/ insecure.if its the driveshaft end its still the same gaitor ?
|
|
Daveg
NT & VTS Council member
I believe I am perfect, but others may differ in opinion?
Posts: 1,549
|
Post by Daveg on Aug 29, 2010 9:51:37 GMT
I agree it's the same gaiter, and yes for being split or insecurely mounted to its housing would fail, but having read it again, to me it still reads a constant velocity joint gaiter insecurely mounted to it's housing, i.e. Constant Velocity Joint, not the drive shaft?
looking into the word 'Insecure' and it's meaning, someone at VOSA if I remember rightly said that a CV Gaiter insecure was dangerous?
Now the word 'Insecure' can have a word dangerous attached to it, because there are some components that if they were insecure would be considered dangerous, i.e. A road wheel insecure. But a CV Joint gaiter in itself to me would not be dangerous, but the ingress of foreign matter into the CV joint could fracture the mechanism and affect the steering of the vehicle, which would be dangerous.
In conclusion for me, the small end of a outer CV Joint gaiter being loose on the driveshaft is not insecure, it is still protecting the CV Joint and cannot detach itself from the driveshaft, I therefore would 'Pass and Advise' this type of defect unless of course it was 'Split'.
Not wishing to upset anyone, just my understanding of the English language.
Dave
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 29, 2010 16:05:54 GMT
What if a CV gaiter was 'incomplete' ?
ie Three quarters of the gaiter is present. It is securely attached to the CV joint, but the smallest pleat & the end that is supposed to be attached to the Driveshaft is missing...
No splits present in the the remainder of the gaiter.
Is this a Pass & Advise ?
|
|
scoot
Nominated Tester
Posts: 305
|
Post by scoot on Aug 29, 2010 16:08:35 GMT
i would fail it.
|
|
Daveg
NT & VTS Council member
I believe I am perfect, but others may differ in opinion?
Posts: 1,549
|
Post by Daveg on Aug 29, 2010 16:57:05 GMT
What if a CV gaiter was 'incomplete' ? ie Three quarters of the gaiter is present. It is securely attached to the CV joint, but the smallest pleat & the end that is supposed to be attached to the Driveshaft is missing... No splits present in the the remainder of the gaiter. Is this a Pass & Advise ? Hi Admin, We are all duty bound to follow the methods of inspection and the relevant reason for rejection to that method of inspection. Some testers have been known to select a reason for rejection from a section of the manual which is not related to the item under discussion, i.e. a defect in the manual rack and pinion steering mechanism, but testers chose to use a none rack and pinion steering system component as a failure point, this method clearly being wrong. With regards your point, i.e. a steering gaiter incomplete, then the reason for rejection for that is; A drive shaft flexible rubber or fabric coupling unti severally cracked or breaking up would cover your point nicely I think Dave
|
|
|
Post by shpauly on Aug 30, 2010 0:30:32 GMT
I agree it's the same gaiter, and yes for being split or insecurely mounted to its housing would fail, but having read it again, to me it still reads a constant velocity joint gaiter insecurely mounted to it's housing, i.e. Constant Velocity Joint, not the drive shaft? looking into the word 'Insecure' and it's meaning, someone at VOSA if I remember rightly said that a CV Gaiter insecure was dangerous? Now the word 'Insecure' can have a word dangerous attached to it, because there are some components that if they were insecure would be considered dangerous, i.e. A road wheel insecure. But a CV Joint gaiter in itself to me would not be dangerous, but the ingress of foreign matter into the CV joint could fracture the mechanism and affect the steering of the vehicle, which would be dangerous. In conclusion for me, the small end of a outer CV Joint gaiter being loose on the driveshaft is not insecure, it is still protecting the CV Joint and cannot detach itself from the driveshaft, I therefore would 'Pass and Advise' this type of defect unless of course it was 'Split'. Not wishing to upset anyone, just my understanding of the English language. Dave thats what i do!
|
|
Daveg
NT & VTS Council member
I believe I am perfect, but others may differ in opinion?
Posts: 1,549
|
Post by Daveg on Aug 30, 2010 7:37:30 GMT
I agree it's the same gaiter, and yes for being split or insecurely mounted to its housing would fail, but having read it again, to me it still reads a constant velocity joint gaiter insecurely mounted to it's housing, i.e. Constant Velocity Joint, not the drive shaft? looking into the word 'Insecure' and it's meaning, someone at VOSA if I remember rightly said that a CV Gaiter insecure was dangerous? Now the word 'Insecure' can have a word dangerous attached to it, because there are some components that if they were insecure would be considered dangerous, i.e. A road wheel insecure. But a CV Joint gaiter in itself to me would not be dangerous, but the ingress of foreign matter into the CV joint could fracture the mechanism and affect the steering of the vehicle, which would be dangerous. In conclusion for me, the small end of a outer CV Joint gaiter being loose on the driveshaft is not insecure, it is still protecting the CV Joint and cannot detach itself from the driveshaft, I therefore would 'Pass and Advise' this type of defect unless of course it was 'Split'. Not wishing to upset anyone, just my understanding of the English language. Dave thats what i do! Which one LOL ;D A/ = a defect in the manual rack and pinion steering mechanism, but testers chose to use a none rack or; B/ = A pinion steering system component as a failure point, or C/ = A drive shaft flexible rubber or fabric coupling unit severally cracked or breaking up Dave
|
|
|
Post by shpauly on Aug 31, 2010 21:22:55 GMT
advise on inner clip of outer cv boot missing/insecure
|
|
|
Post by flashgordon1 on Oct 13, 2010 18:51:25 GMT
Fail it................
|
|
|
Post by aylesburyjock on Nov 17, 2010 23:39:44 GMT
What if a CV gaiter was 'incomplete' ? ie Three quarters of the gaiter is present. It is securely attached to the CV joint, but the smallest pleat & the end that is supposed to be attached to the Driveshaft is missing... No splits present in the the remainder of the gaiter. Is this a Pass & Advise ? Hi Admin, We are all duty bound to follow the methods of inspection and the relevant reason for rejection to that method of inspection. Some testers have been known to select a reason for rejection from a section of the manual which is not related to the item under discussion, i.e. a defect in the manual rack and pinion steering mechanism, but testers chose to use a none rack and pinion steering system component as a failure point, this method clearly being wrong. With regards your point, i.e. a steering gaiter incomplete, then the reason for rejection for that is; A drive shaft flexible rubber or fabric coupling unti severally cracked or breaking up would cover your point nicely I think ; Dave Hi Dave, I think you need to rethink your failure on this one. Since when has a CV gaiter been a rubber or fabric coupling? it's only a cover.
|
|
Daveg
NT & VTS Council member
I believe I am perfect, but others may differ in opinion?
Posts: 1,549
|
Post by Daveg on Nov 18, 2010 22:21:23 GMT
Hi Admin, We are all duty bound to follow the methods of inspection and the relevant reason for rejection to that method of inspection. Some testers have been known to select a reason for rejection from a section of the manual which is not related to the item under discussion, i.e. a defect in the manual rack and pinion steering mechanism, but testers chose to use a none rack and pinion steering system component as a failure point, this method clearly being wrong. With regards your point, i.e. a steering gaiter incomplete, then the reason for rejection for that is; A drive shaft flexible rubber or fabric coupling unti severally cracked or breaking up would cover your point nicely I think ; Dave Hi Dave, I think you need to rethink your failure on this one. Since when has a CV gaiter been a rubber or fabric coupling? it's only a cover. What material is it manufactured from then Dave
|
|
hayden
Nominated Tester
VTS AEDM, SM & QC
Posts: 828
|
Post by hayden on Nov 19, 2010 8:39:44 GMT
have to agree with aylesburyjock on this one, a rubber coupling on a drive shaft is not a rubber cv boot which i believe is what we are talking about. RFR 1a not RFR 1d www.motinfo.gov.uk/htdocs/m4s02000506.htm
|
|
|
Post by aylesburyjock on Nov 27, 2010 16:19:13 GMT
Hi Dave, I think you need to rethink your failure on this one. Since when has a CV gaiter been a rubber or fabric coupling? it's only a cover. What material is it manufactured from then Dave Not disputing material of manufacture, it's definately rubber me old son, I was disputing it's purpose in life. A gaiter is only a cover, it is neither a joint nor a coupling
|
|
Daveg
NT & VTS Council member
I believe I am perfect, but others may differ in opinion?
Posts: 1,549
|
Post by Daveg on Nov 27, 2010 16:39:10 GMT
What material is it manufactured from then Dave Not disputing material of manufacture, it's definately rubber me old son, I was disputing it's purpose in life. A gaiter is only a cover, it is neither a joint nor a coupling I never disputed the manufacture of the material, although thinking about it, some are a type of plastic material, however hayden said;- have to agree with aylesburyjock on this one, a rubber coupling on a drive shaft is not a rubber cv boot which i believe is what we are talking about. RFR 1a not RFR 1d www.motinfo.gov.uk/htdocs/m4s02000506.htm [/b] A science investigation would decide the outcome in the light of a dispute ;D, who is coughing up the funds for it??? ;D Dave
|
|
hayden
Nominated Tester
VTS AEDM, SM & QC
Posts: 828
|
Post by hayden on Nov 27, 2010 22:59:22 GMT
|
|
|
Post by aylesburyjock on Nov 28, 2010 12:49:35 GMT
Thanks for the clarification there. It seems to be a blind spot for a lot of testers I think, from looking over the forum, that when they find something they are sure should fail, but can't find an exact reason in the manual for it they call it by a different name.(the main one springing to mind being the ball joint on the inner end of the track rod.).If you need to do this you are WRONG.It's not there because it's not a fail. Don't mean to nag or preach, but that is what I see going on here. Dave, scientific investigation? Really?
|
|