Daveg
NT & VTS Council member
I believe I am perfect, but others may differ in opinion?
Posts: 1,549
|
Post by Daveg on Jul 26, 2012 19:01:31 GMT
OK what would you do with this one? Daveg Attachments:
|
|
kjb
Full Member
Posts: 59
|
Post by kjb on Jul 26, 2012 20:06:31 GMT
P&A
|
|
nitros44
Nominated Tester
esto es un negocio serio
Posts: 741
|
Post by nitros44 on Jul 26, 2012 20:19:16 GMT
It would depend Daveg on weather its had dirt in it in the past,its got dirt in it now or maybe and its a big maybe if it gets dirt in it in the future. ;D It may have had dirt in it then it rained,may be the rain water washed the dirt out. I will have to get a crystal ball out lol ;D We are off to a good start with one pass/advise lol
|
|
Daveg
NT & VTS Council member
I believe I am perfect, but others may differ in opinion?
Posts: 1,549
|
Post by Daveg on Jul 26, 2012 20:23:43 GMT
The most important decisions to be made on this thread are Jock and Dave ;D, I will wait until they reply to the thread ;D Daveg
|
|
alex
Nominated Tester
Posts: 305
|
Post by alex on Jul 26, 2012 21:08:27 GMT
Looking at that dave I would p&a providing thre was,nt any excess play in the joint or that seal did,nt open right up when on lock
|
|
Daveg
NT & VTS Council member
I believe I am perfect, but others may differ in opinion?
Posts: 1,549
|
Post by Daveg on Jul 26, 2012 21:20:26 GMT
Looking at that dave I would p&a providing thre was,nt any excess play in the joint or that seal did,nt open right up when on lock Interestingly section 2.2D using the steering lock to lock check will not allow you to use your methods of inspection for dust covers there, so even if you thought the dust cover would open wide on full lock, you can't fail it by assessing the steering system You can only assess it using section 2.4G.2, and there is actually no method of inspection for dust covers, and although I have given some good examples of damaged, deteriorated dust covers by opening them up, that is not part of the test, but would be at the discretion of the NT by assessing security, but strictly speaking it might be that we should just look at them as in the above example. Dave
|
|
|
Post by aylesburyjock on Jul 27, 2012 5:27:29 GMT
Very difficult to tell from that photo, because the crucial area is a bit out of focus(don't tell me that's my eyes ). It looks like a gap there, in which case I would say fail, but I'm open to argument, because it might not be a gap, in which case P+A
|
|
|
Post by David on Jul 27, 2012 14:31:58 GMT
..need a better pic to answer but same criteria for all boots
|
|
Daveg
NT & VTS Council member
I believe I am perfect, but others may differ in opinion?
Posts: 1,549
|
Post by Daveg on Jul 27, 2012 20:24:54 GMT
OK look at the first picture, then look at this one, its the opposite end of the same linkage, look at the dust cover there and advise what decision you would make! Daveg Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by aylesburyjock on Jul 27, 2012 23:55:34 GMT
Looks like a P+A. Again it's difficult from the photo
|
|
|
Post by David on Jul 28, 2012 9:32:10 GMT
pass & advise is possible.... VOSA have always said a fail is a fail and you'll know straight away, if you have to think about your decision P&A....
|
|
Daveg
NT & VTS Council member
I believe I am perfect, but others may differ in opinion?
Posts: 1,549
|
Post by Daveg on Jul 28, 2012 13:12:48 GMT
In the original thread with the linkage ball joint dust cover pulled right back, before I pulled it right back, it looked just like the one you are looking at here, which beyond doubt I can advise that around the securing ring area, the boot is deteriorated and detached, but as you can see is completely covering the ball pin and shank, which makes it difficult for dirt etc to get inside, even in a deteriorated condition. Dave
|
|
|
Post by David on Jul 30, 2012 10:34:20 GMT
if water can get in it's a fail simples, fail criteria is dirt etc
|
|
|
Post by baz657 on Jul 30, 2012 14:46:04 GMT
It's not just a visual inspection. I always touch and feel any cover to check for splits. You can't always see from photos or just looking. For me, if there is a split it's a fail. Dirty water can get in - it's not clean distilled water in road spray.
A roof seals against rain. If it's broken or split it will leak.
|
|
|
Post by David on Jul 30, 2012 15:27:31 GMT
for daveg
Baz has confirmed too:
Gentlemen trust me.....it's the first step in what could be a complete change to MOT Testing.
These are European Regs not VOSA regs.
Council members will confirm that what Europe actually wanted to introduce to the MOT would have meant huge expense to test stations for equipment, MOT testing similar to service level and an MOT test time taking nearly half a day.
VOSA put the proposals to the Councils we all worked through them and eventually what was introduced in Jan and what will be introduced fairly soon was the cheapest and easiest to include in the test.
Nitros it is a preventative introduction to the MOT test and more will sadly follow if Europe has it's way. The wording is key to the failure, a boot was a cv boot but it now means any rubber boot, steering or rear steering, ball joints and the likes all with the same fail criteria. I'm not trying to re-write anything...Europe is though!
Sometimes it's better to have big ears and to listen and learn than to comment without knowledge....I did that's how I know
Daveg.....pfffft your comments are typical
Nitros..I haven't suggest any tester do anything I said what the 2012 manual says and that is:
if it looks like it won't prevent not is preventing, the ingress of dirt etc it's a fail.
No need to examine the ins and outs of a cats arse as daveg would, just use common sense and professional judgement to assess what you see, if you think it can prevent dirt etc pass and advise, if you think it won't fail......
the pic used is a fail...
....I'll do a special daveg just for you nitros:
pre•vent/priˈvent/ Verb: Keep (something) from happening or arising: "action must be taken to prevent further accidents".
I don't forget much nitros, I do listen and learn when I have to though
|
|