austin man
|
| posted on 23/10/08 at 09:25 PM |
|
|
Personally I would be contacting Trading Standards I think that this would come under the sale of goods acts which covers workmanship, goods being fit
for purpose. Ther doesnit appear to be an impact damage so ther should be no failure in an unbroken tube possible . I would also agree about the
comment regarding the break they look very clean hav ethe factory looked to save money and jointed 2 pieces ??
Worth calling Trading standards, I wouldnt think tha small ussage on a few tracks could possibly generate the stressed required to break fracture the
tube If so never race a westie
|
|
|
|
|
stuart_g
|
| posted on 23/10/08 at 09:30 PM |
|
|
If I was that bloke I would have taken it back and demanded either a complete refund and then gone out and bought something else or a complete turn
key car built to my spec.
It is shocking the level of after sales from a so called major manufacturer. I certainly wouldn't put up with that crap service from anyone.
|
|
|
mookaloid
|
| posted on 23/10/08 at 09:36 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by JoelP
That bodge repair looks like something i would've done!
Surely you could have done it with just cable ties Joel 
Cheers
Mark
"That thing you're thinking - it wont be that."
|
|
|
Liam
|
| posted on 23/10/08 at 10:07 PM |
|
|
Bl**dy hell! Blame the steel, or excessive road use on an 18-guage race chassis, but those failures were put in on the drawing board. Seriously poor
design!
I suspect that 'diff-box' has no triangulation at all, so those gussets just give a floppy box stiff corners. This then puts massive
bending load on the unsupported tubes between the gussets with nasty stress concentrations at the ends of the gussets. No surprise, then, that as
well as the failed tube there are cracks clearly visible (2nd photo) at all three other stress concentration points!
The engine bay is a similar disaster. As if the all-too-common shortened 'R-tubes' aren't bad enough, they've tried the same
trick on the engine bay sides too. Removing the single diagonal and putting two corner braces in (effectively big gussets) with a length of
unsupported tube between! Again, absolutely no surprise that there are failures and cracks exactly where you'd expect them! There are no
'mysterious clean breaks in continuous tubes' - each crack and failure is at a stress concentration and totally predictable.
This sort of sloppy design, and the 'wont make any difference if i move that diagonal halfway down a tube' attitude is all too common in
kit car designs, but normally gotten away with. But in this case, likely compounded by a material quality issue and possibly improper use, the
results are catastrophic. Could easily have been fatal.
And this from such a long established and reputed company! Remind me never to buy a Westfield
Hmmm - don't think I've used enough of these yet:
Liam
[Edited on 23/10/08 by Liam]
|
|
|
Mr Whippy
|
| posted on 24/10/08 at 08:23 AM |
|
|
have to agree with the above, some very poor design there with the webs, thats only fit for barbeque construction
[Edited on 24/10/08 by Mr Whippy]
Fame is when your old car is plastered all over the internet
|
|
|
l0rd
|
| posted on 24/10/08 at 08:39 AM |
|
|
I am confused.
How come Westfield sell race chassis which is lighter, obviously thinner steel and on the warranty they say that you cannot use the car for trackdays
as it will void the warranty?
So, where about are you supposed to race it? On the road?
[Edited on 24/10/08 by l0rd]
|
|
|
Mr Whippy
|
| posted on 24/10/08 at 08:48 AM |
|
|
Chassis is scrap after only 2 years what a lemon, bet an Allegro would have lasted longer! Some race chassis that is!
At least the carbon floor would have held the middle together and I’m sure it will make a really good sledge for the snow once all the dodgy bits have
been cut off 
Fame is when your old car is plastered all over the internet
|
|
|
theconrodkid
|
| posted on 24/10/08 at 08:49 AM |
|
|
from a metallurgist i know....I can see both classic iron oxide rust and what looks like the surface specs of white aluminium hydroxide.
From welded square section tube?
It's unfortunate that the resolution of the photo is not better, for what I really need to see is the detail of the fracture surface. The
possible modes of failure are:
ductile overload, ( unlikely)
fast fracture, ( caused by massive overload of a possibly embrittled material)
fatigue, ( most likely)
or, given the corrosion products, stress corrosion cracking
or even corrosion fatigue.
Looks like the weld was the initiation site, which would lead me to suspect several things – but I would really need to know more about the material.
Of course this is also the most loaded point and sharpest change of section.
I notice that the other side has a partial crack, which will be caused at least in part by it’s being overloaded after the first side failed. However,
because this side has not failed completely suggests that this crack at least is likely to be fatigue, again associated with the weld area.
who cares who wins
pass the pork pies
|
|
|
Mr Whippy
|
| posted on 24/10/08 at 08:53 AM |
|
|
I was thinking, maybe his girlfriend is really into pies and that over loaded the chassis??
Fame is when your old car is plastered all over the internet
|
|
|
twybrow
|
| posted on 24/10/08 at 09:13 AM |
|
|
I wondered if by doing the 'repair' on the back end, whether the additional stiffness along with the prior flexing of the chassis, has
moved the weak point from read tot he front of the car.... Or is the concensus that the front and back failed simultaneously? What a pants design, and
a reapir not even worthy of a Indian roadside repair!
|
|
|
Dusty
|
| posted on 24/10/08 at 10:22 AM |
|
|
Thread no longer available. WSCC have closed the lid on this can of worms.
|
|
|
MikeRJ
|
| posted on 24/10/08 at 10:29 AM |
|
|
Damn, did anyone save the web page?
|
|
|
Mr Whippy
|
| posted on 24/10/08 at 10:49 AM |
|
|
all very suspicious doing that, hiding a serious safety problem on the cars, is it the company that run that site I wonder?? Certainly such a cover up
would not happen here
Fame is when your old car is plastered all over the internet
|
|
|
DarrenW
|
| posted on 24/10/08 at 10:55 AM |
|
|
i dont believe the WSCC forum is factory run, but im sure they have a major say in what is publicised.
I havent read it. However id suggest it is fair and correct to allow the factory to carry out extensive research and rectify the issue as a private
matter in the short term. Forums unfortunately have the capacity to blow issues out of proportion. The problem does sound serious, and it does sound
as if the treatment the customer has recieved is a little lacking, however no-one outside of the immediate communication chain can know the full
extent of what is going on.Maybe the customer had a particular style of complaining that gave the factory reason to suspect there is more to the
failure than first meets the eye. Once they determine the full extent im sure they will do the right thing. However offering betterment in the first
instance is perhaps a step few manufacturers would undertake.
|
|
|
DarrenW
|
| posted on 24/10/08 at 11:01 AM |
|
|
I was just thinking - this type of failure does make you realise that even the bigger factories arent really that big in terms of researching the
design of the cars. It is these very issues thay Syd is so vocal about for the right reasons. Its just a shame that the costs of full testwork is
beyond most of us.
i work in the automotive industry and understand a little about what the big OE's have to go through to gain type approval etc. It always amazes
me that we are able to build high performance sportscars without this extensive testing. Iam pleased in one way as id never have been able to
experience our amazing hobby, but most people enter into it knowing that there are risks.
Lets hope WF get to the bottom of it quickly and are able to learn. The cars they make are in the main very good and worthy of their reputation.
|
|
|
.jpg)
