dozracing
|
| posted on 21/10/04 at 08:51 AM |
|
|
Ron copied a Westfield, there is nothing intelligent about the book, or Ron. The Westfield is a well proven product.
In the race series i have spoken to some guys who have had these wishbone problems (as well as other component problems) and they have tried beefing
things up, and ended up causing themselves grief, because stress can increase. They actually found better results by reducing the stiffness of the
certain parts of the wishbones, obviously reducing the stresses at the problem weld areas.
Des and Al in the racing section will probably be able to explain the modifications they have made and had more success with.
I think its obvious that MK have react as you have requested Syd. You asked them to make design changes when a problem is spotted and that is exactly
what they have done. They realised the weakness of the book style wishbones and when the Indy was released the wishbones were radically different.
Insurance matters not a jot in the case that you are able to prove negligence. From your comments you are obviously trying to assert the opinion that
Martin at MK has been negligent.
What you must try to understand everyone is that the kit industry does what it can, and like i stated above, Martin has revised the design when he
realised there was a problem. The industry is not big enough to take people throwing their weight around especially if you are talking about legal
matters, the UK kit industry will be a thing of the past if US style litigation take off.
As a kit manufacturer and i'm sure MK and MNR will back me up on this, we use our considerable experience to design and make components with the
best intentions always. We are enthusiasts like you, we don't live in big houses and make a fortune, we do it because we like tinkering with
cars and want to do it for a living.
If we spot a problem (see Tiger's recall back in the summer) we make the best judgement we can and redesign etc. I personally have a small
enough customer base and i'm in regular contact with most of them, that i could easily alert customers to any problems i have discovered.
What i really dislike about Syd's comments are that i think the underlying expression is to make people think that MK are at serious fault and
deserve to have their knuckles wrapped. Do this by all means but be prepared to see the kit manufacturers all disappear.
You should check your cars regularly, i dispute the claim that anyone actually gets a straight edge out every 100 miles to measure the wishbones for
bending.
Have the good grace to accept that these incidents are rare, the nature of a home built car is such that quality is hard to control in all aspects,
and the car has been SVA'd and is MOT yearly. If anything was obviously fundamentally flawed these checks would point it out. The car must be
roadworthy to pass and if the authorities thought there was a serious problem then you can bet they would highlight it.
If a car has been used sensibly for 3000 miles and then fails under normal driving conditions, only one of two things can have occured. Either it has
fatigued (run out of life) or the wishbone has been subjected to a load higher than it has seen in the previous 3000 miles. If it has fatigued then MK
would not be expected to have alerted all its previous customers to the problem, because obviously it has only just come to their attention. If the
wishbone has seen an increased load, then it suggests Syd was wrong in saying that it hasn't been kerbed etc. Obviously something about the
driving conditions on that day increased the load.
At the end of the day it is obvious that over time the book style design is a bit marginal.
Remember also that many factors about the cars specification can have implications on the suspension load. Weight, dampers, springs, brakes, tyres and
wheels will all have an effect on the loading in the wishbone. It is for you the builder to determine whether the parts are suitable for you
application, and if you do not feel qualified to make this judgement you should consult an independent expert.
For me the end user must take responsibility for deciding whether the parts are fit for their purpose. There is no point complaining once the parts
have failed and injurred you, then saying i was worried enough to measure them every 100 miles. This to me says thay you are looking for something to
complain about. If you are concerned enough to measure them very regularly you should have removed them and replaced them with something that allows
you to sleep at night.
MK have acted exactly as you could reasonably expect under the circumstances. The issue is now well and truely in the public domain, everyone should
now be aware of any dangers, and i'm sure if you approach MK with good grace that Martin will bend over backwards to accommodate your needs.
|
PLEASE NOTE: This user is a trader who has not signed up for the LocostBuilders registration scheme. If this post is advertising a commercial product or service, please report it by clicking here.
|
|
|
ned
|
| posted on 21/10/04 at 10:26 AM |
|
|
I have held of replying to this thread to see how it has developed, but now feel it is time to voice my support to Darren, MK, MNR and the like.
I do not wish to dispute what has been said or further the arguement.
The only point I wish to add that hasn't been said already is what about the state of our roads?!!
I have heard stories of people that go and have new tyres put on a road car, have the tracking done then a few thousand miles later the tyres have
scrubbed out. You go back to the garage and they won't do anything as there is no way to prove they didn't set the tracking properly.
Normally this is blamed on hitting a pothole and putting the tracking out. If a pothole can put out a cars tracking, presumably the loading involved
could put extra stresses onto a cars bottom wishbone?!
The driver may be as careful as they come, but pushing on a bit, enjoying your car, come round a corner and hit a pothole, who knows or can measure
the shock loading on a bottom wishbone? I would imagine (though cannot quantify this) that this could contribute to fatigue or premiture failure of
such a part. Perhaps this is something that we can't very easily predict or see from vehicle checks, but is a possibilty we should be aware of
nonetheless.
Ned.
beware, I've got yellow skin
|
|
|
MikeRJ
|
| posted on 21/10/04 at 12:10 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by stephen_gusterson
on the other hand....... how many ford escorts, astras blah de blah regularly trash wishbones hitting bumps.
Probably more often than you'd think!
|
|
|
timf
|
| posted on 21/10/04 at 12:35 PM |
|
|
here's just a few ford/opel recalls for you to ponder
|
|
|
Mark Allanson
|
| posted on 21/10/04 at 06:22 PM |
|
|
In the mid 90's, Vauxhall had a major problem with front lower wishbones, especially Mk2 Astra's and Mk3 cavaliers. They were prone to
cracking, Vauxhall put this down to cars being jacked up on them, but we knew different.....
If you can keep you head, whilst all others around you are losing theirs, you are not fully aware of the situation
|
|
|
Peteff
|
| posted on 21/10/04 at 06:56 PM |
|
|
Bro in law had one.
It looked like they had economised on spot welds on the one he had and the two parts had seperated. The aftermarket one was better made.
yours, Pete
I went into the RSPCA office the other day. It was so small you could hardly swing a cat in there.
|
|
|
phil2
|
| posted on 21/10/04 at 08:39 PM |
|
|
wishbones
hi i have not yey posted on this thread and i myself am very involed with the mk side of the industry and i have sat and read all this thread and my
conclusion is that this SID BLOKE SHOULD STOP TALKING BO**OX NO WAY IS THIS AN MK FAULT
SO I RECOMEND THAT SID SHOULD JUST KEEP HIS MOUTH SHUT AS IT SEEMS QUITE CLEAR THAT NOBODY ON HEAR LIKES HIM
MY CONCLUSION ON THIS BLOKE IS 1 WORD !!!!!PRICK!!!!
|
|
|
phelpsa
|
| posted on 21/10/04 at 08:48 PM |
|
|
As my dad has a subaru, we are also members of the Scoobynet forum.
There they have a special section called 'Super Muppets' for people who talk out of their
 . Maybe we should have one of those.
Adam
|
|
|
gazza285
|
| posted on 21/10/04 at 09:02 PM |
|
|
Careful though, it might get you.
|
|
|
phelpsa
|
| posted on 22/10/04 at 07:00 AM |
|
|
Basicly, anything that gets moved to there is no longer a serious matter.
|
|
|
Syd Bridge
|
| posted on 22/10/04 at 08:18 AM |
|
|
Sticks and stones...la la la...
If it was YOUR car with the bent bones, and YOU who came close to his maker, I'd bet the story would be very different!!! You'd be beating
a path to those lawyers advertising on TV!!
What you make and put on your own car is up to you, your problem.
As soon as you sell them as a commercial product, you have particular obligations in law. All becomes very different.
As Darren pointed out, the kit industry is mainly enthusiastic individuals. Unfortunately, most forget the business side of things in their
enthusiasm.
I built kits for a few years in the late 80's, so I AM talking from experience.
My main concern, is that a problem has been known for some time, and not made public.
That MK realised the problem and rectified it in further items is expected. To allow many hundreds(if not thousands?) of potentially dangerous items
to remain at large, is .......????????????
This is, more than likely, not just an MK problem. Every manufacturer with a faulty item at large, likely to cause injury or worse, has a duty to
recall the items and rectify the problem.
Be safe, keep an eye on your front lower wishbones. And oh, by the way, pray a lot if you're one of those who thinks I'm talking out of my
rear. (Then again, you'd be one of the people doesn't believe in God.)
Cheers,
Syd.
|
|
|
Hugh Jarce
|
| posted on 22/10/04 at 08:35 AM |
|
|
I was just reading that post of Syd's, and I was picturing him with bright orange hair, coke bottle, black rimmed glasses, and ink stains on his
shirt pocket. 
Sorry Syd, what was that again? 
The pay isn't very good , but the work's hard.
|
|
|
phelpsa
|
| posted on 22/10/04 at 08:43 AM |
|
|
I am just saying that this post has gone past seriousness. When I was reading it I was laughing at how irate some people got.
So lets just let this post drop to the bottom, and let everyone think what thry want to think.
[Edited on 22/10/04 by phelpsa]
|
|
|
blueshift
|
| posted on 22/10/04 at 11:23 AM |
|
|
I think by now any regular forum visitors will have seen the weight of popular opinion and the strength of arguments involved, and know to take
syd's opinions with a generous pinch of salt.
|
|
|
Jumpy Guy
|
| posted on 22/10/04 at 12:22 PM |
|
|
is it just me, or is this forum getting less tollerant every month?
We know the MK Mafia will defend Martin and his merry band until the cows come home. I've come to expect this, and the brand loyalty makes me
smile.
however, i dont think that WRITING POST IN CAPITALS which call other posters dicks, pricks, arses etc etc. are really needed.
And who brought up expelling folk from the forum? get a grip. This is a discussion forum. Ocassionally, people will say things you dont agree with.
Thats life.
MK, Darren, Luego etc. are all big enough and ugly enough to defend themselves.
As for the original post, Syd makes a point. It, by everyones admission, is valid. (Darren, MK, Luego have all modified to suit)
Surely, thats it???
|
|
|
Jumpy Guy
|
| posted on 22/10/04 at 12:47 PM |
|
|
Steve,
my point exactly ! whats wrong with pointing out a failure?
Most companies, mine included, go to great expense and effort to find out the faults of the goods they produce.
we have a system that checks with customers for complaints and failures....
Better to find the faults now, and deal with them, than after a crash fatality.
As Steve says, we're not criticising a fellow amateur. Darren, MK, Luego etc all make money out of us. Its a business.
It's not unreasonable to expect the stuff to be fit for purpose.
|
|
|
Alan B
|
| posted on 22/10/04 at 01:13 PM |
|
|
Nice one Jumpy...I was waiting for a post that was close my view...this is that post.........
quote:
Originally posted by Jumpy Guy
is it just me, or is this forum getting less tollerant every month?
We know the MK Mafia will defend Martin and his merry band until the cows come home. I've come to expect this, and the brand loyalty makes me
smile.
however, i dont think that WRITING POST IN CAPITALS which call other posters dicks, pricks, arses etc etc. are really needed.
And who brought up expelling folk from the forum? get a grip. This is a discussion forum. Ocassionally, people will say things you dont agree with.
Thats life.
MK, Darren, Luego etc. are all big enough and ugly enough to defend themselves.
As for the original post, Syd makes a point. It, by everyones admission, is valid. (Darren, MK, Luego have all modified to suit)
Surely, thats it???
|
|
|
timf
|
| posted on 22/10/04 at 02:26 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by stephen_gusterson
especially when the block caps and abuse are coming from an MK employee!
i was under the impression it was Phil, martins brother who took over mk sportscars so he would now be the owner.
|
|
|
David Jenkins
|
| posted on 22/10/04 at 02:43 PM |
|
|
Surely the main point is all that these home-built 7-style cars are not mass-production vehicles and as such require far more routine inspection and
maintenance. This holds whether we are talking about MK, Luego, ST, GTS, Westfield or Caterham.
My Toyota has 10000-mile service intervals, and I feel no need to take wheels off to inspect the suspension. We should not expect such reliability in
cars made from parts of donors that originally had 3000-mile service intervals - in my case, Cortina Mk IV and Escort Mk II. I intend to inspect
major components on my car every 1000 miles, probably more often.
Regarding the current wave of intolerance - when TOL was all-powerful we used to get seasonal flame wars on topics such as this: eventually they
killed it dead. At least on this forum people can ignore an annoying topic (as I have been with this one, up 'til now). Have you noticed that
it's less than a dozen people out of several hundred active posters that are getting out of their pram about this? - everyone else is keeping
out of it.
<rant over, now to get back behind the parapet>
rgds,
David
|
|
|
David Jenkins
|
| posted on 22/10/04 at 03:12 PM |
|
|
I thought it came FROM you - according to some of the posters!
(joking, of course... )
David
|
|
|
chrisg
|
| posted on 22/10/04 at 06:45 PM |
|
|
I think the basic point of checking your wishbones periodically is a good one.
It shouldn't, however, been made out to be the fault of one manufacturer.
Cheers
Chris
Note to all: I really don't know when to leave well alone. I tried to get clever with the mods, then when they gave me a lifeline to see the
error of my ways, I tried to incite more trouble via u2u. So now I'm banned, never to return again. They should have done it years ago!
|
|
|
David Jenkins
|
| posted on 22/10/04 at 07:27 PM |
|
|
I would also doubt whether a case for damages could be made against any kit wishbone manufacturer, unless it was plainly their fault (e.g. bad
welding, wrong materials). Almost no-one uses the same shocks, springs and wheels for every car, every builder will assemble the components using
different torque settings etc, and no-one could prove that the parts had not received damage through normal road wear and tear.
No - I stick with my original statement, that it's an owner's responsibility for ensuring that the whole car gets regular, thorough checks
and servicing. After all, as far as the DVLA is concerned, the kit builder is the manufacturer.
rgds,
David
|
|
|
Syd Bridge
|
| posted on 22/10/04 at 08:33 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by stephen_gusterson
if the cars are slightly dodgy by definition, cos they are home built, thats an argument for Aussie type rules. Or ballistic insurance.
atb
steve
I'd make bets that the insurance companies catch on a lot quicker than the VI! But the VI are not unaware of this situation.
The Aussie Rules situation may be a lot closer than anyone might think. 
Cheers,
Syd.
And yes, I know, Aussie Rules is an antipodean football game. Smartarse.
|
|
|
Syd Bridge
|
| posted on 22/10/04 at 08:44 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by David Jenkins
I would also doubt whether a case for damages could be made against any kit wishbone manufacturer, unless it was plainly their fault (e.g. bad
welding, wrong materials). Almost no-one uses the same shocks, springs and wheels for every car, every builder will assemble the components using
different torque settings etc, and no-one could prove that the parts had not received damage through normal road wear and tear.
No - I stick with my original statement, that it's an owner's responsibility for ensuring that the whole car gets regular, thorough checks
and servicing. After all, as far as the DVLA is concerned, the kit builder is the manufacturer.
rgds,
David
Lets say you bought all brand new parts from Ford, and fitted them to your self made Locost chassis, along with your wishbones bought from ABC
Supercars.....
You get your SVA and romp off down the road.....a front TCA breaks and you veer off onto the footpath and kill two people at a bus stop,....and your
passenger.
Must be your fault for sure, after all, you built the car and fitted the parts!!!!
I think not. You'd be running after the TV lawyers along with everyone else.
Cheers,
Syd.
Edit Axle changed to TCA, for those who cannot understand that a bought part has to confom, and perform, to certain standards. Just imagine that you
are using TCA's instead of a conventional wishbone.
[Edited on 22/10/04 by Syd Bridge]
|
|
|
David Jenkins
|
| posted on 22/10/04 at 09:02 PM |
|
|
You appear to be confusing wishbones with axles...
Sometimes I think that you are perpetuating this topic for the sake of it - or do I have a suspicious mind?
Anyway - I'm bored with this topic...
DJ
|
|
|
