Daveg
NT & VTS Council member
I believe I am perfect, but others may differ in opinion?
Posts: 1,549
|
Post by Daveg on Aug 1, 2012 20:00:52 GMT
Just so we are absolutely clear beyond all possible doubt that VOSA in conjunction with Europe got this reason for rejection absolutely correct, take a last look at this PERFECT example of a CV Gaiter. METHOD OF INSPECTION(2.5C.1) With the vehicle in neutral gear, rotate the wheels when they are on each lock in turn, and check visually the gaiters of the constant velocity joints while the pleats are expanded. REASON FOR REJECTIONA constant velocity joint gaiter missing, or excessively damaged, deteriorated or insecure to the extent that it would no longer prevent the ingress of dirt etc. Having examined this vehicle myself I went out of my way to find the inclusion of dirt etc internally, which I think is about the best example of a CV Gaiter one can get to examine in regards to this reason for rejection. Look up close at the susension strut, look at the density of dirt present and look in detail at the inside of the CV joint, show me the dirt internally? Physics Jock , there are forces at work which are not even recognised as being in existance never mind being understood their effects , what more can one say All I can say is that in my opinion the CV Gaiter is excessively damaged and would be a fail in its own right for that. Daveg Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by aylesburyjock on Aug 1, 2012 21:24:11 GMT
A simple glance will tell any tester that's a fail. Can you explain what all the rest of that post is about?The density of dirt outside and in is irrelevant. The physics? yes there are such forces - irrelevant. At least you are with everybody else that it fails. Are we done now on all the split boots, gaiters, and dust covers? Or can we drag this new thread out to five pages, and a slanging match with you and Dave? Just wondering.
|
|
phaetonott
Nominated Tester
I may not be right but at least I am trying!
Posts: 376
|
Post by phaetonott on Aug 1, 2012 22:23:04 GMT
I think I need to find out where Daveg works and send all my sales cars up there
As far as I'm concerned it's the gaiter's job to keep the joint clean. The manual doesn't ask us to consider forces we can't see
If that vehicle went down the drive to my lockup it would fill with grot. A reasonable condition gaiter would prevent that.
|
|
Daveg
NT & VTS Council member
I believe I am perfect, but others may differ in opinion?
Posts: 1,549
|
Post by Daveg on Aug 1, 2012 23:01:14 GMT
I think I need to find out where Daveg works and send all my sales cars up there As far as I'm concerned it's the gaiter's job to keep the joint clean. The manual doesn't ask us to consider forces we can't see If that vehicle went down the drive to my lockup it would fill with grot. A reasonable condition gaiter would prevent that. Not a problem lol because I fail them all, it doesn't matter whether I agree or not, they are not my rules , but as a human being like anyone I do have an opinion Daveg
|
|
Daveg
NT & VTS Council member
I believe I am perfect, but others may differ in opinion?
Posts: 1,549
|
Post by Daveg on Aug 1, 2012 23:04:38 GMT
A simple glance will tell any tester that's a fail. Can you explain what all the rest of that post is about?The density of dirt outside and in is irrelevant. The physics? yes there are such forces - irrelevant. At least you are with everybody else that it fails. Are we done now on all the split boots, gaiters, and dust covers? Or can we drag this new thread out to five pages, and a slanging match with you and Dave? Just wondering. I did fail it Jock, and yes I do fully agree its a fail, but look close at the inside of the joint, show me the dirt like on the suspension next to it, where you will find none inside the gaiter area, which the grease would hold inside. All I am saying at the end of the day is that really VOSA and the powers that be should have left the old wording in place, at least we all knew when to fail and pass and advise easily. ;D Daveg
|
|
nitros44
Nominated Tester
esto es un negocio serio
Posts: 741
|
Post by nitros44 on Aug 1, 2012 23:33:54 GMT
Taking to a VE yesterday; even he said its been made complicated
|
|
|
Post by David on Aug 2, 2012 9:03:25 GMT
it's just a fail simples, think i seen a teeny weeny speck of dirt too....oops no it's on my screen
|
|
|
Post by baz657 on Aug 2, 2012 9:19:49 GMT
There are lots of things on the test I don't agree with but in order to keep my testing and AE status I test items as laid out (not always clearly as other topics have proved) in the manual.
I may personally disagree with the method of testing or fail criteria but if it's a fail as laid out in the manual a VT30 gets issued. We all have experience, knowledge and common sense but a lot of that gets thrown out when we become testers. All I do when a vehicle fails on (for example) split gaitors - some of which passed last year - is to sympathise with the customer, blame Europe, etc, quote on the repairs and get on with the next one. I'll leave the how's and why's to whatever government jobsworth is making the decisions today.
|
|
|
Post by David on Aug 2, 2012 9:26:30 GMT
Well said Baz, we have to apply VOSA's regs (including Europe's additions) to test. No complications, no "well I think", no personal interpretations and certainly no microscopic examinations
|
|
|
Post by EcoTrans (Leicester) on Aug 3, 2012 15:46:11 GMT
There are lots of things on the test I don't agree with but in order to keep my testing and AE status I test items as laid out (not always clearly as other topics have proved) in the manual. I may personally disagree with the method of testing or fail criteria but if it's a fail as laid out in the manual a VT30 gets issued. We all have experience, knowledge and common sense but a lot of that gets thrown out when we become testers. All I do when a vehicle fails on (for example) split gaitors - some of which passed last year - is to sympathise with the customer, blame Europe, etc, quote on the repairs and get on with the next one. I'll leave the how's and why's to whatever government jobsworth is making the decisions today. baz657, sounds like you're a man with experience, which in my book, is (arguably) more important than knowledge the difference being one can be bought & the other can not. Definition? Well, 'knowledge' is knowing that tomato is a fruit; 'experience' is not putting it in a trifle. Keep taking the cash!
|
|
Daveg
NT & VTS Council member
I believe I am perfect, but others may differ in opinion?
Posts: 1,549
|
Post by Daveg on Aug 3, 2012 17:45:31 GMT
Knowledge is wisdom and without that how can one have experience A baby has no knowledge, wisdom or experience, so which comes first? The knowledge must be first? Can your feet walk before your brain sends the signal, or does your feet send the signal to your brain to walk Knowledge having information, wisdon is knowing what to do with it and experience is the learning curve applying it surely Dave
|
|
|
Post by David on Aug 4, 2012 10:28:23 GMT
Baz is a top man eco
|
|
|
Post by aylesburyjock on Aug 4, 2012 14:57:19 GMT
There are lots of things on the test I don't agree with but in order to keep my testing and AE status I test items as laid out (not always clearly as other topics have proved) in the manual. I may personally disagree with the method of testing or fail criteria but if it's a fail as laid out in the manual a VT30 gets issued. We all have experience, knowledge and common sense but a lot of that gets thrown out when we become testers. All I do when a vehicle fails on (for example) split gaitors - some of which passed last year - is to sympathise with the customer, blame Europe, etc, quote on the repairs and get on with the next one. I'll leave the how's and why's to whatever government jobsworth is making the decisions today. baz657, sounds like you're a man with experience, which in my book, is (arguably) more important than knowledge the difference being one can be bought & the other can not. Definition? Well, 'knowledge' is knowing that tomato is a fruit; 'experience' is not putting it in a trifle. Keep taking the cash! Epic definition
|
|