Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4


3819 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

  #941365 26-Nov-2013 22:50
Send private message

johnr:
Technofreak:
johnr: Take the pads into the WOF testing station and ask them why?


The warrant was done by a testing station. After they have issued the warrant I will be asking how they make their judgment and show them the old pads and explain I am most unhappy with their assessment and intend going elsewhere next time.


Also check what the car manufacture advises before doing this,


I've managed to track down the manufacturers limits for the disk pads.  The limit is 1mm, my pads were well over three times thicker than the minimum!!!!!!




Sony Xperia X running Sailfish OS. https://sailfishos.org The true independent open source mobile OS 
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3
Nokia N1
Dell Inspiron 14z i5


19282 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user


  #941370 26-Nov-2013 23:00
Send private message

I thought 3.5mm was plenty

 
 
 
 


2200 posts

Uber Geek


  #941375 26-Nov-2013 23:04
Send private message

Technofreak:
andrewNZ: Here's the thing. If those pads fail before the next warrant and cause an accident, he is potentially personally liable.


I think you're wrong.  Take tyres for example. They only have to meet minimum tread depth at warrant time, not have enough tread to last to the next warrant.  The inspector cannot be held liable for what happens post warrant.

Corrected, Thank you John R


I have worked with a warrant certified mechanic (I am not one myself). Assuming nothing has changed in the @5 years since I worked with him: If the inspector passes a vehicle which isn't up to warrant of fitness standards, he and/or his company can be made to fix the problem at their own cost. If there is an accident, and it is proven that the pads weren't worthy of a warrant at the time, he and/or his company may be liable. The general consensus amongst mechanics is, the fee for providing a warrant of fitness is not sufficient for the level risk involved.

If you're not happy, get a second opinion (you can probably ask a mechanic for no charge), don't just challenge them based on your opinion or opposition to their decision. There are professions (mine included) where peoples lives,  your entire carrier and livelihood rest on every single decision you make. There is nothing more insulting than someone asking your professional opinion and then challenging it because they don't like it.




Location: Dunedin

 


19282 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user


  #941377 26-Nov-2013 23:22
Send private message

Andrew the testing station would advise at the time of issuing the WOF the brake pads meet the requirements as per the car manufacturer

It's like brake disc thickness as long as it meets the manufacturers requirements / specs then the testing station can't say the discs are too thin please get a new set

15133 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Subscriber

  #941414 27-Nov-2013 06:50
Send private message

johnr: Andrew the testing station would advise at the time of issuing the WOF the brake pads meet the requirements as per the car manufacturer

It's like brake disc thickness as long as it meets the manufacturers requirements / specs then the testing station can't say the discs are too thin please get a new set


Vehicle manufacturers do not make or enforce the road safety regulations.




Mike
Change Management Consultant
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

He waka eke noa


19282 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user


  #941416 27-Nov-2013 07:02
Send private message

KiwiNZ:
johnr: Andrew the testing station would advise at the time of issuing the WOF the brake pads meet the requirements as per the car manufacturer

It's like brake disc thickness as long as it meets the manufacturers requirements / specs then the testing station can't say the discs are too thin please get a new set


Vehicle manufacturers do not make or enforce the road safety regulations.


Correct but they do design and make cars including the brakes on the cars!

15133 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Subscriber

  #941421 27-Nov-2013 07:19
Send private message

johnr:
KiwiNZ:
johnr: Andrew the testing station would advise at the time of issuing the WOF the brake pads meet the requirements as per the car manufacturer

It's like brake disc thickness as long as it meets the manufacturers requirements / specs then the testing station can't say the discs are too thin please get a new set


Vehicle manufacturers do not make or enforce the road safety regulations.


Correct but they do design and make cars including the brakes on the cars!


That is true, they also design and build cars that can travel in excess of 160kmh but that of course cannot be done on the public roads. Manufacturers must meet vehicle statutes as a minimum, they are free to exceed those minimum requirements but their specifications are not statutory. If anyone wants to know the statutory requirement I would suggest contacting the authority the organisation empowered to do so the NZTA.




Mike
Change Management Consultant
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

He waka eke noa


 
 
 
 


3252 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

  #941626 27-Nov-2013 11:16
Send private message

KiwiNZ:Vehicle manufacturers do not make or enforce the road safety regulations.


Safety Regulations are usually about "desirable outcomes" not specific design detail.

In the current example the regulations (Land Transport Rule: Light-vehicle Brakes 2002) state

"2.2 (3) The friction surfaces of a brake must be within safe tolerance of their state when manufactured and must not be scored,damaged or weakened to the extent that the safety performance of the brake is adversely affected."

then
"2.2 (11) In assessing whether 2.2, 2.3or 2.4are complied with, a person in section 4 may take into account:
(a) evidence that the brake is within the vehicle or brake manufacturer's operating limits; and
(b) if the vehicle is a low volume vehicle, evidence that the brake complies with the requirements of the  Low Volume
Vehicle Code that are applicable to the date of certification or recertification of the vehicle as a low volume vehicle;
and
(c) a measurement calculated from a brake test made with a device approved under  4.6(1), and subject to any condition placed on the use of the device"

Unlike tyre tread depth where the minimum is regulated the only material limit I can find in these regulations is the minimum thickness of disc brake rotors is 90% of the original thickness if the manufacturer's limits aren't known.

gzt

11328 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

  #941668 27-Nov-2013 12:16
Send private message

Technofreak: I can't help feeling I have been the victim of a zealous inspector.

More like an inspector that does not know the rules [edit: or made an error of visual judgement]. The station will be happy to gain knowledge of that and act accordingly. Talk to a manager instead of having a pointless argument with someone that does not know the rules.

IME there is no requirement anyway that brake material lasts until the next warrant. It must pass the roller test and that is all. Last warrant I passed the inspector pointed out there was almost nothing left on the front brake pads and they needed immediate attention. He specifically said it was not a fail.

3252 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

  #941676 27-Nov-2013 12:31
Send private message

gzt:  Last warrant I passed the inspector pointed out there was almost nothing left on the front brake pads and they needed immediate attention. He specifically said it was not a fail.


If there really was almost nothing left it should have been a fail. I'm surprised that apparently Technofreak's car has a limit as low as 1mm

310 posts

Ultimate Geek


  #941763 27-Nov-2013 14:22
Send private message

I am a mechanic and I can tell you that it is generally considered that if the pads are any less than 3mm then they should replaced, however that has nothing to do with a WOF inspection as far as I know if it passes the brake test it is of WOF standard and should pass.
The reason that you cannot make pad thickness a regulation is that some cars it is hard to see clearly
what thickness they are so would require removal of the pads for proper measurement this would be totally unreasonable.

It is up to the owner to keep the car in safe WOF condition and the inspector can only access it at the time, having said that a lot of the rules are open to interpretation and the inspector is personally liable for it and signs on the dotted line but a warning in this case would have covered the inspectors
behind.

Cheers



3819 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

  #941882 27-Nov-2013 19:18
Send private message

andrewNZ: 
If you're not happy, get a second opinion (you can probably ask a mechanic for no charge), don't just challenge them based on your opinion or opposition to their decision. There are professions (mine included) where peoples lives,  your entire carrier and livelihood rest on every single decision you make. There is nothing more insulting than someone asking your professional opinion and then challenging it because they don't like it.


I didn't challenge them based on opinion it was based on fact.  They claimed 3mm none of my pads were under 3mm, plus the workshop manual specs say 1mm minimum.  The was even a wear indicator on the old pads which showed the 1mm mark.

Just because they are professionals it doesn't mean they don't make mistakes.  Are you telling me that if a professional gave you advice you knew to be incorrect, you would willingly accept that advice and wouldn't challenge it? That's even more likely to put lives at risk.

If anyone gets insulted because their opinion has been questioned when they are in the wrong, then I would suggest they need to take a close look at themselves.  They might well be embarrassed, but insulted??????






Sony Xperia X running Sailfish OS. https://sailfishos.org The true independent open source mobile OS 
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3
Nokia N1
Dell Inspiron 14z i5


3252 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

  #941893 27-Nov-2013 20:12
Send private message

techmeister: I am a mechanic and I can tell you that it is generally considered that if the pads are any less than 3mm then they should replaced, however that has nothing to do with a WOF inspection as far as I know if it passes the brake test it is of WOF standard and should pass.


Even though the warrant inspection only covers what is visible, condition can be a reason for rejection as well as performance. This is covered in the inspection manual http://vehicleinspection.nzta.govt.nz/virms/in-service-wof/general/brakes/service-brake-and-parking-brake



1976 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

  #941908 27-Nov-2013 21:16
Send private message

So what was the brake test results from the check sheet then?
I.e. Service brake, and front and brake balance etc?



3819 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

  #941916 27-Nov-2013 21:33
Send private message

Goosey: So what was the brake test results from the check sheet then?
I.e. Service brake, and front and brake balance etc?


B1 Brake service performance:  200 on all four wheels, Pass
B2 Service brake balance: Pass
B3 ABS self test: Pass
B4 Parking brake performance: Pass




Sony Xperia X running Sailfish OS. https://sailfishos.org The true independent open source mobile OS 
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3
Nokia N1
Dell Inspiron 14z i5


1 | 2 | 3 | 4
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic



Twitter and LinkedIn »



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:





News »

Sony introduces the digital camera ZV-1 for content creators
Posted 27-May-2020 12:47


Samsung Announces 2020 QLED TV Range
Posted 20-May-2020 16:29


D-Link A/NZ launches AI-Powered body temperature measuring system
Posted 20-May-2020 16:22


NortonLifeLock Online Banking Protection now available for New Zealand banks
Posted 20-May-2020 16:14


SD Express delivers new gigabyte speeds for SD memory cards
Posted 20-May-2020 15:00


D-Link A/NZ launches Nuclias cloud managed network solution hosted in Australia
Posted 11-May-2020 17:53


Logitech introduces new video streaming solution for home studios
Posted 11-May-2020 17:48


Next generation Volvo cars to be powered by Luminar LiDAR technology
Posted 7-May-2020 13:56


D-Link A/NZ launches Wi-Fi Certified EasyMesh system
Posted 7-May-2020 13:51


Spark teams up with Microsoft to bring Xbox All Access to New Zealand
Posted 7-May-2020 13:01


Microsoft plans to establish its first datacenter region in New Zealand
Posted 6-May-2020 11:35


Genesis School-gen has joined forces with Mind Lab Kids
Posted 1-May-2020 12:53


Malwarebytes expands into privacy with fast, frictionless VPN
Posted 30-Apr-2020 16:06


Kordia to donate TV airtime on Channel 200 to community groups
Posted 30-Apr-2020 16:00


OPPO A91 is a high specs mid-range smartphone
Posted 23-Apr-2020 16:44



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.


Support Geekzone »

Our community of supporters help make Geekzone possible. Click the button below to join them.

Support Geezone on PressPatron



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.