TR GOLD

[TR5tar]

Your idea and aim, Paul, is an admirable one, but as in any such venture the difficulties materialise in trying to drive it forward. Any scheme that helps us accurately determine good parts from bad has to be worthwhile, so if you can really achieve that on a consistent basis then good on you.

 

If nothing else, the scheme you outline is similar to the sort of "ploy" I use as a publisher to squeeze a few more advertising bucks out of clients. If a recognised body/authority, like the TRR, endorses an advertiser's product that indeed is worth the advertiser paying a premium for.

 

Darren

[Paul Harvey]

Darren,

 

Thanks for your comments.

IWE has been a huge opportunity for lots of direct feedback on the TR Gold concept from all potential user groups.

I am pleased to report that nobody thinks the scheme is a bad idea, and everyone agrees we need a solution for 'bad parts.'

 

The immediate refinements running through my mind relate to the 'certification process.'

I have recruited all the necessary member resource to certify individual parts from individual suppliers, but doubts remain over the supplier chain and the variations in stock quality from any of the major vendors.

Indeed, the vendors themselves accept they cannot always know when their own suppliers change specification over the course of time.

Accordingly, I now think TRR needs to physically see and hold stock of each proposed part before it can receive one of our 'badges.'

I am minded to ask each vendor to deliver one each of their chosen promotional parts in a single delivery to Didcot office (at least in the first year.)

They can then be photographed, catalogued and held as a reference in the event of any subsequent member doubts or complaints about any part purchased in the promotion.

The certification team can physically inspect the parts if they have any doubts and the process can be quick and painless for all concerned since the number of parts to begin with will be quite small (maybe 50 - 100 or so each month.)

 

There is no doubt that TRR will need to invest in IT support, development and ultimately staff to make sure the scheme cannot be abused either by accident or by omission.

Without the necessary commitment by both TRR and the Vendors the scheme cannot proceed.

 

The question I will be asking everyone is not about the cost of success, but about the cost of failure.

NOBODY in the classic car industry has dared to propose a scheme that works from the the end user back up through the chain.

EVERY scheme in existence starts at the top of the chain and cascades down.

 

EVERYBODY knows that poor quality parts are the scourge of every single TR sports car on the road today.

 

I continue to believe the TR Register is uniquely placed to make this work as a benchmark for other clubs and marques.

We are big enough, experienced enough, and respected enough to control the TR brand.

At least in the UK we are the ONLY united voice for our cars.

 

So if we don't dare to proceed with a scheme like TR GOLD, will we just continue to be held to ransom by idiots on E Bay and fly by nights seeking to cash in on the lucrative parts market for our beloved cars?

Edited July 18, 2016 by Paul Harvey

[Paul Harvey]

My overall recommendation to the board based on direct and passionate feedback to me will be as follows:

 

1. The quality of rogue parts will continue to fall as the value of our cars continues to rise.

2. The vendors are all making money, and possibly the bigger they are the harder they are finding it to simply keep up with demand.

3. The vendors have earned the right to be successful, and it is not their fault our members buy the wrong parts.

4. The TR Register has a moral obligation to guide and lead our members to the GOLD parts they want to buy, and if necessary the TR Register must be prepared to upset vendors to fulfill this obligation.

5. However small it starts, the TR Register MUST put a stake in the ground and say 'enough is enough.'

6. I have a small cadre of vendors who will lead with their wallets if they have to, to show the big boys how much they care about the quality of parts they are making in the belief that is the right thing to do.

7. If the TR Register had no other choice, it could immediately make a very small number of TR GOLD parts and our members would support us and buy them direct.

8. The window of opportunity is very small, and any delay will only make matters worse and the problem harder to solve.

9. In my personal opinion, TRR has nothing to lose and everything to gain by taking the next brave step.

Edited July 18, 2016 by Paul Harvey

[brian -r]

Paul do you ever sleep

It has been extremely interesting watching your ideas evolve on these pages. I am sure you have now perfected the basis for TR GOLD As with most new ideas it may need tweeking along the way and will take time to fully develop , it would be foolish for any of us to expect perfection st this stage.

Thanks for all your imense efforts and good luck with your presentation to the board. It needs to move to the next level an very soon.

 

Regards Brian

Edited July 18, 2016 by brian -r

[Marc R]

Paul, I sent you a PM.

 

Regards

[john.r.davies]

Paul,

Like all above, I support the idea of a quality assurance scheme, run by the TRR. But like Nigel and Mickey, I asked in the first place (post 10) how the scheme will be funded. You answer has been a panel of experienced TR owners and restorers, who no doubt will be glad to provide their opinions free of charge. But "quality" implies not only that an item looks OK and fits OK, it has to function OK and to go on doing so for a reasonable length of time.

 

I compared this idea with the Consumers Association and "Which?" magazine. The CA is as capable as any consumer to look at a product, see if it looks OK, and that it will fit into the household OK. But they recognise that look and fit are not the whole story, They spend an enormous amount of money employing testers, who devise, build and use testing rigs that simulate years of use, and show up the inferior products. How will the TR Gold test the function of the items it approves?

 

A particular example is that of rubber mounts. Modern copies look OK and fit OK, but in weeks the rubber tends to either fall apart, or become detached from the metal parts. How would TR Gold assure the quality of such items? Have the panel fit them to their cars, a test by real world use? Or by constructing rigs that will stress them as if in use, whilst heating them and applying water, oil and road dirt, in a workshop/laboratory. Perhaps you can illustrate the way that TR Gold would work, by answering that question?

 

John

Edited July 23, 2016 by john.r.davies

[Paul Harvey]

John,

 

Your comments are entirely valid and maybe you would be interested in joining the validation team?

All contact will be by email with an opportunity to view parts at Didcot any time.

Members of the validation team will know each other but the list will not be published and will not be known to vendors.

 

Validation will work on a veto system. Unless ALL the team raise no objection to a part proposed it will not be validated, simple as that.

If I believe a veto has been made spuriously or based on prejudice I will contact the objector and discuss their concerns.

If a vendor disagrees with a veto there will be a process by which they can contact me and put the case for a review.

 

ANY part that has not already proved to be successful in ACTUAL USE by members of the TR Register cannot be validated until the team are happy the part has proved itself.

There are plenty of profitable parts that will not be contentious that can be used to get the scheme established and prove the model.

 

It is beyond the resource and beyond the intention of TR GOLD and TR Register to physically test any parts by accepted engineering methods.

TR GOLD is not a certification process for new parts, it is a validation scheme for existing parts.

 

Even if TR GOLD did have the resource to physically test individual parts, the resulting certification would carry liabilities TRR should not take on,

All TR GOLD will do is allow members to instantly find the parts that vendors want to sell and are known to be TR GOLD.

 

I believe this would be a huge and immensely valuable step forward for TRR.

Edited July 23, 2016 by Paul Harvey

[Peter Cobbold]

What happens if there is no TR Gold validated part ? The Gold scheme has the potential to drive out duff items resulting in 'NLA' becoming more frequent in their catalogues.

NLA items can often be sourced from modern fitments. I'm thinking, for example, rubber boots, gaiters etc that will fit and are made from long-lived polymers to modern standards. Many owners have found such solutions to poor quality parts and I would like to see that information made available easily to all. So will there be a compendium of alternative fitments from non-TR suppliers?

Peter

[JohnG]

Peter

Starting a record of 'physically' compatible modern products is some thing that I have, for some time, felt we needed.

 

You mention gaiters, boots etc, I have brake shoes, pads drums and discs in mind.

 

A spread sheet would not be too difficult to run and maintain and I would be happy to give it a go.

 

Buying very expensive 'TR' parts, when the same thing is available under a different part number, for a much lower price, needs to be recorded and the information disseminated.

[Peter Cobbold]

Peter

Starting a record of 'physically' compatible modern products is some thing that I have, for some time, felt we needed.

 

You mention gaiters, boots etc, I have brake shoes, pads drums and discs in mind.

 

A spread sheet would not be too difficult to run and maintain and I would be happy to give it a go.

 

Buying very expensive 'TR' parts, when the same thing is available under a different part number, for a much lower price, needs to be recorded and the information disseminated.

John, I get your point. It would be a major task. So perhaps the Gold Validators could point TR Gold accredited suppliers to those sources ? I prefer to support TR specialists, though not if the items are sub-standard obviously. Its easier, quicker and in the long run keeps the more unique TR parts available. Peter

[john.r.davies]

Paul,

I am honoured by your invitation, but for the reasons I have given, I do not feel that the TRR or the panel has the ability to certify the quality of parts, under the scheme that you outline.

So I must respectfully, and with regret, decline.

 

But I fully support some way for the TRR to identify poor parts. As John (?) wjgco suggests, a record of reports of failure in use, poor fit or other inferiority, kept by the Register might be another way. Medical hardware has a very high level of quality, but inevitably fails sometimes. Reports of such failure appear as letters in the journals, usually with a response from the manufacturer, and the same might be done in TRaction .

 

John

[JohnG]

John, I get your point. It would be a major task. So perhaps the Gold Validators could point TR Gold accredited suppliers to those sources ? I prefer to support TR specialists, though not if the items are sub-standard obviously. Its easier, quicker and in the long run keeps the more unique TR parts available. Peter

 

Paul,

 

But I fully support some way for the TRR to identify poor parts. As John (?) wjgco suggests, a record of reports of failure in use, poor fit or other inferiority, kept by the Register might be another way. Medical hardware has a very high level of quality, but inevitably fails sometimes. Reports of such failure appear as letters in the journals, usually with a response from the manufacturer, and the same might be done in TRaction .

 

John

Gents

I guess my thoughts have been running along a similar, but simpler line to TR Gold.

I am looking for TR part 'A'

A TRR member has replaced part 'A' with part 'B' and is very happy with form, fit and function

A TRR member has replaced part 'A' with part 'C', form & fit were fine, but he was not happy with its function

 

If all this is transmitted to a central record, it can be available to everyone.

No warranty, just the experience of members.

 

I do NOT intend to suggest anything that is designed to usurpe the TR GOLD initiative, but, I think the development of a parts cross reference and TR GOLD are different animals

 

A usable parts cross reference, designed to offer modern (or at the worst, less ancient) parts that are good form, fit and function replacements, would be an asset.

 

I started the development of the cross reference related to this link

I know the objective here is different, but, the principle is the same

 

http://parkerhfde.com/parfit/

Edited July 23, 2016 by wjgco

[Alec Pringle]

We could all think of so many reasons why not . . . . . if there's one thing at which this Forum excels, it's racking up the risk aversion factor and digging in to resist change.

 

I can think of lots and lots of good reasons why Harv's initiatives might fall flat . . . . . and I can also think of at least a few good reasons why he might just succeed.

 

Unlike most of us, Harv has made himself a great deal of money in business by following his gut instincts and passions . . . . . ploughing ahead, where wiser heads feared to tread.

 

He's got the bloody ball, so let him run with it.

 

Unless of course the fear of possible failure is so intolerable . . . . in which case, try an MG ?

 

Cheers

 

Alec

[Paul Harvey]

Thanks for comments which I have been thinking about.

 

Neither the part nor the supplier have to be TR specialist to qualify for TR GOLD badges.

ANY part can be certified as TR GOLD if it does what it says on the tin for a TR car.

Usual rules about TR SILVER (not OE/Concours) and TR PLATIUNUM (better than OE) apply.

 

So we can encourage people selling any part you like to talk to the TR GOLD team about helping us find the best parts for our cars.

 

Once the scheme has become established, and the revenues are rolling in to pay for additional resources, ANYTHING is possible for TR GOLD.

 

I fully intend to keep lists of certified parts on the TR GOLD website and updated all the time, backed up by a single example of that part in stock for reference.

I fully intend to develop the concept and use funds to eliminate duff parts and encourage better and new ones where they are NLA.

I fully intend to expand the certification by all possible means within the resources of the scheme to certify as many parts as possible for the benefit of Members.

I would love to still be there to see a world in which every member of TRR has absolute confidence in every single part they spend their hard earned money fitting to their car.

 

But I also want to start small and grow strong, so I don't get snuffed out by cynicism, can't be done, been done before, and not invented here people who love to knock and fail to provide solutions.

 

I know it sounds complicated, because money needs to change hands for revenues to roll and EVERYBODY has to benefit from the scheme.

 

If a supplier only sells brilliant performance parts that can only be TR PLATINUM how can they benefit from a scheme that only allows OE GOLD parts?

If a supplier sells decent TR SILVER parts at a fair price that are not OE how can they benefit from a scheme that only allows OE?

If a member can't afford Gold why shouldn't they know about the equivalent TR SILVER part that will serve the car perfectly well?

 

And why should certification only be done by engineers who live in laboratories with brains larger than their right feet?

 

Because all I want to do is help the poor old sod who gets TR Action every month, has never heard of the Internet, who has never dared risk his life on the Forum, and wonders why he has no idea what parts to fit on the car he just wants to drive until he dies.

Edited July 24, 2016 by Paul Harvey

[ray gill]

Paul How many traders now are backing this?

Alex can you explain to me what you mean by paul has bulls,

Just wanted to understand your statement has bulls

Helen

[ray gill]

So 3 weeks ago moss went first. Have moss signed up And paid ?

And are they going forward ? And if not why?

Thanks helen

[Alec Pringle]

"Alex can you explain to me what you mean by paul has bulls,
Just wanted to understand your statement has bulls"

 

I said Paul had the ball, so let him run with it . . . . . as in rugger !

 

Cheers

 

Alec

[ray gill]

Alec for all you do and All you have done I Respect to you for your help you have given people here. For free.

But don't be a total prat now.

I do not get what your saying. And really I don't care to as I asked a question now

That's all.

I don't get any of this. The passion the loads of talk and frowning out there and I'm thinking

Just last 2 weeks ago every trader was signed up. Its all going big. Loads of money

Big time. And now we have bring any anyone one on board

No I'm sorry I don't get it any of it.

I get the consept. Who wouldn't.

But I don't get the realness ( it that a word)

It don't ring true with me none of it

[rhino_mac]

Ray, sorry I don't know you so I'm not sure from your post if English is your first language.

 

But for the benefit of doubt, what Alec was saying was Paul knows what he's doing, he has a plan so best we leave him to get on with it.

 

Alec isn't being a prat - he's showing support for the project. I think you might have misunderstood the turn of phrase.

[Paul Harvey]

Guys,

 

TR GOLD is an idea that has not happened, yet.

 

Moss have first refusal, and I shall be asking Moss whether they wish to exercise that option after I have presented considered solutions to the board of TRR on 2 August.

If the board wish to proceed after they have seem the full idea and consequential benefits, together with the full risks of failure, I shall make the best attempt I am capable of to persuade Moss to go ahead when they are ready.

 

By definition, nobody is legally 'signed up' to the scheme, but me and a few other idiots (who may be wearing TR GOLD badges) think it is a good idea.

 

One trader with an option has decided they do not think it will work but says they will reconsider if anybody 'big' goes ahead with it.

Moss are big, and will still go first if they want to, but all the other options will be placed ahead of the one who has decided it will not work.

Several traders now have options and will be treated with all respect if and when the scheme proceeds.

 

In case of doubt nobody has ever paid me anything without getting something more valuable in return and I prefer to work for free.

 

In this case it is really simple. Nobody has paid anything and nobody has signed anything.

So I am either stupid, or I am not.

And we shall find out quite quickly.

 

 

All discussions are confidential and I have no idea what will happen in the end.

[Nigel Triumph]

Paul,

 

Good luck for your presentation to the TRR board on 2nd August, and I'm keeping fingers crossed for a positive response from Moss (and other traders) in due course.

 

 

Nigel

[JohnG]

Paul,

 

Good luck for your presentation to the TRR board on 2nd August, and I'm keeping fingers crossed for a positive response from Moss (and other traders) in due course.

 

 

Nigel

+1

[mike3739]

+2

[RogerH]

Hi Folks,

Having read all the posts for this thread it is clear that the membership would like to see an improvement in the quality of some parts.

 

I would agree with that sentiment; but how can it be achieved?

 

The TR GOLD project is a Quality Assurance scheme (QA).

Before you can action QA you MUST have a robust Quality Control (QC) scheme in place.

 

Sadly none of the suppliers and probably the manufacturers have such a QC scheme.

They may well have a quick look at parts for what ever reason but QC it is not.

Remember the three rivet clutch plates,

the TR6 master cylinders

TR4/4A window regulator locking washer etc etc.

These were manufacture failures.

 

So my point is how will the TR GOLD QA scheme work if there is no QC?

In my mind it can’t.

It is an industry standard. You can have QC without QA but NOT the other way round.

 

Simply working by word of mouth and the ‘Fred supplies good stuff’ method isn’t QA.

 

If the TRR accept this scheme without any QC then who is liable for the issues that may/will follow?

 

I take quality seriously. To the extent that myself and Ian Brown operate the Parts Quality Initiative (PQI). This works in finding duff parts and correcting the situation with the supplier. It has had success for the parts forwarded but they have been few and far between.

 

Before you ask this it is not sour grapes. Any good scheme is a must but, it must be an accepted good industry process – otherwise it will fail.

 

Am I being negative? I don’t think so!

Valid concerns and issues need to be aired before decisions are taken not after.

 

Roger

[Paul Harvey]

Roger,

 

Thanks for your comments and personal opinions as a member of TRR.

I don't think you understand TR GOLD and would prefer you don't make statements about TR GOLD since you have not asked me about it or discussed it with me at all.

 

The board of TRR will discuss the scheme next week and I will inform Members in due course what has been decided.

The board of TRR is appointed annually to make decisions, lead initiatives and develop the TR Register offering for its members.

I believe the board of TRR is fully qualified, competent and authorised to make decisions about TR GOLD and we are fully aware that any liabilities and risks of any activity by TRR fall to us personally as directors of that company.

 

Your opinion about PQI is both acknowledged and respected by me but by your own admission it has had little support and very few successes.

It has done nothing whatsoever to change the game in the parts supply chain, and shows no likelihood of helping members buy parts they want and need.