Guest ntc Posted August 21, 2016 Report Share Posted August 21, 2016 Put it another way, hypothetically I really, really hope, brake cylinder fails on the road, fatalities or life changing injuries involved. What do you think the stance of the victims would be? I am out of this and I hope your hope does not come true, I am starting to loose the faith. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
barkerwilliams Posted August 21, 2016 Report Share Posted August 21, 2016 Neil, You are mistaken.Please don't pervert what I have written for your own purposes. Alan Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest ntc Posted August 21, 2016 Report Share Posted August 21, 2016 Neil, You are mistaken.Please don't pervert what I have written for your own purposes. Alan And my gain would be what? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Peter Cobbold Posted August 21, 2016 Report Share Posted August 21, 2016 (edited) Peter, Doesn't the TR Register also have a legal duty of care to protect it's members, and the public who may be involved, in the failing of known sub-standard critical parts? I hope the club carries good insurance..... ........but better if it was never needed. Alan Alan, 'Legal' I doubt, but I'm not a lawyer.** 'Moral duty', yes I think so. I can see a keen lawyer seeking compo for a deceased TR driver using forum postings to gather evidence, and maybe witnesses. In that process TRR itself will not come out exactly smelling of roses if it has been inert. If we as a club have evidence of persistent failures of a critical part we should act. Not because we have to but because we should. I do think the supplier(s) is breaking the law in supplying critical parts that are not fit for purpose. Sadly it will take a death or life-changing injury to expose them to the full force of the law. The argument that we as a club dont rock the boat as the supplier might stop supplying does not hold water. One big injury claim and they'll be finished supplying anything. Only a fraction of TRR members ever post on here. So TR6 brake m/c failures are likely to be a multiple - 4 maybe 5 - times as frequent as the forum reports. Only a matter of time before someone gets hurt....... A call for members to supply evidence of m/c failures published in TRAction would be a reasonable initial stance by TRR. Gather the evidence, then legal advice, Trading Standards etc.** And if when a serious injury/fatality happens, the club can say 'at least we tried'. Peter ** Just seen Alan's post #21. Perhaps the TRR as host of this forum cannot be said not to have evidence of failure? And is required to act ?? Edited August 21, 2016 by Peter Cobbold Quote Link to post Share on other sites
oldtuckunder Posted August 21, 2016 Report Share Posted August 21, 2016 How can the club broadcast to the world that a component is rubbish - we do not have professional expertise to do so. Which is I think the nub of the TR GOLD problem. At best I believe the Register/Forum would be a good place for "individuals" to register good or bad experience with a part, others can then choose to act or not on that information. Rather like eBay feedback, eBay aren't liable or responsible for individual feedback, but at consumers we can take what heed we like of it! There are some individuals in/on the Register/Forum who's opinion on a part I would value ten times more than an official Register endorsement (which I'm still struggling to see how it would work in practice) and IMHO would open the Register up to liability if a safety critical item failed. Of course if GOLD is only about is endorsing nice bits of bling, that's a different matter. Alan Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Alec Pringle Posted August 21, 2016 Report Share Posted August 21, 2016 There should be no difficulty in the TRR advising, if necessary, the DVSA of a perceived problem in respect of an individual aftermarket component. Twenty years or more ago as a motor factor manager I came across a couple of similar problems, an individual component of a sub-assembly wearing prematurely. In both instances we became aware of a perceived problem by virtue of trade customers (service garages) reporting apparent premature wear. Words round the grapevine with local competitors confirmed that the problem was not isolated. My MD contacted the manufacturers and whichever bit of the DoT looked after such matters back then . . . . . Both instances were Monday mornings, back in the days of phone and fax (pre-email and internet!), and in both instances by Thursday morning we had replacement stock being delivered to our trade customers for fitment to their customers' vehicles. The actual problem turned out in each case to be a particular seal, of which there were two all but identical versions for different variants of an almost identical sub-assembly - the seals varied by a few thousandths of an inch, they had become inadvertently transposed during production of one batch . . . . human error, it happens. The official system worked remarkably well, nobody cried over spilt milk, and as far as I could ascertain there were no unpleasant consequences as the faulty items had been caught at the premature wear stage, ie before failure occurred. If club members perceive a potential safety problem with a particular component as supplied, and choose to advise their marque club accordingly, it seems perfectly reasonable to me that the club should take the precaution of alerting DVSA to a possible problems as reported by members. It won't take the DVSA long to investigate (in my historical experience, hours rather than days!), and I'm damn sure that if it does turn out to be a false alarm there'll be no recriminations. If there is a real problem, then we'll all have been done a service by those conscientious enough to have followed the proper procedures . . . . . Cheers Alec Quote Link to post Share on other sites
RogerH Posted August 22, 2016 Report Share Posted August 22, 2016 Hi Alan, the point that I was making in your quote of my post is that unless the member produces all the information for the TRR to act on it may act erroneously. The PQI system allows the member to forward all the info that is needed to start the dialogue with supplier and upwards. Indeed anybody can inform the DVSA (have you or all the other posters) but it is always wise to work on facts. When this problem appeared two or three years ago it was understood that it had been sorted. It took some time. Nothing surfaced in those interim years - now this. Is it part of the original dodgy batch or have standards dropped again. The PQI may be able to clarify what is going on. Roger Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TRseks Posted August 22, 2016 Report Share Posted August 22, 2016 Soooo, I have also had this problem, bought at MC about two years ago which leaked as soon as it was connected, got a replacement from the seller and that one didn't leak, until now.... As this is over two years ago I cannot remember the name of the supplier, probably wouldn't get a replacement anyway. The question is; which supplier is the best to go for to be "guaranteed" to get a MC that will not leak for at least 10 years?? (hopefully longer) Magnus Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Peter Cobbold Posted August 22, 2016 Report Share Posted August 22, 2016 (edited) Soooo, I have also had this problem, bought at MC about two years ago which leaked as soon as it was connected, got a replacement from the seller and that one didn't leak, until now.... As this is over two years ago I cannot remember the name of the supplier, probably wouldn't get a replacement anyway. The question is; which supplier is the best to go for to be "guaranteed" to get a MC that will not leak for at least 10 years?? (hopefully longer) Magnus Magnus, 'Guaranteed'.....I have no idea. And we are now dealing not with 'mere' leaks but brake failure while driving. I took advice from a source I trust on here a year ago and fitted one from TR Shop. If I had bought a faulty m/c from a supplier, no way would I accept a replacement. Refund only. And PQI too. Same for any safety critical part. Peter Edited August 22, 2016 by Peter Cobbold Quote Link to post Share on other sites
oldtuckunder Posted August 22, 2016 Report Share Posted August 22, 2016 The question is; which supplier is the best to go for to be "guaranteed" to get a MC that will not leak for at least 10 years?? (hopefully longer) The problem with that is that when original and brand new and fitted to a car at best it would have been warranted (not guaranteed) for 12 months. I suspect even on most new cars today the average warranty is around 2 years and at best 5. An additional problem is that from experience we have an "expectation" that they may last for decades So the question has to be what would be a reasonable warranty to expect on a repro part? that for maybe 300 of the 365 days a year maybe sits unused, as opposed to the original that may have been in daily use I have no idea what the answer is, all I know is that if I was selling such a part I would struggle to put a figure on it, especially on a low volume part where I suspect (but don't know) that the percentage warranty returns sustainable on a high volume part would make it un-viable. Not trying to make excuses for shoddy parts, but it is one of those areas where feedback from other customers is one of the most useful things, but also one of the hardest things to ascertain. Alan Quote Link to post Share on other sites
astontr6 Posted August 22, 2016 Report Share Posted August 22, 2016 I have to agree with Peter that the club members should do more to flag up these problems of poor quality, it has been festering for over 20 years. Many other culbs do not seem suffer from the large volume of sub standard part that TRs seem to! I complained to the register 20 years ago and it wasn't until I pushed the point that I got satisfaction from one of the owners of Moss. Alec, if you have porous castings send them to ISL in Aston under Lyme and they will vacuum seal them. A time proven process as used by the Aerospace and Automotive Industries. As I said don't bin them! Bruce. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TRseks Posted August 22, 2016 Report Share Posted August 22, 2016 During my over 35 years of motoring with cars and motorbikes I think I have only experienced a leak in MC cylinders four times, three of those have been on the TR6 during the last three years. And I have had some horrible old cars in my time. Magnus Quote Link to post Share on other sites
barkerwilliams Posted August 22, 2016 Report Share Posted August 22, 2016 Roger, Both I, and I believe you, have background’s in industries where safety is everyone’s primary responsibility, and I don’t suppose there is much more of a safety critical component in a car than the brake master cylinder. So I feel it’s a high priority issue, whilst others on this forum seem to think it is only the concern of the suppliers. Others and you have commented that this problem has been around for about three’ish years and yet it has not yet been fully resolved. I do not suppose that there is any supplier out there that wishes to supply second rate, nay dangerous items, so there is goodwill out there from all parties. But, and it is a big but, faulty, dangerous items remain out there and are being sold and fitted three years later. Probably none of us has the expertise nor opportunity to examine a representative sample of these items to determine “quality” and as Peter Cobbold commented an item that fails out of the box it better from a safety point of view than one that fails a few weeks later. How many TR’s, and MG’s(?) and whatever else they fit have a master cylinder either fitted or on the shelf, bought over the last few years that is a ticking time bomb in their garage? I have been very pleased to read of previous efforts that have resulted in improved parts quality but I do not recall one that has resulted in a recall of items, nor even a description, or image that would allow a TR owner to identify and replace a potentially hazardous item already fitted to their car. Perhaps instead of seeking a solution up the supply chain for potentially faulty items and seeking a manufacturing solution TR Gold could be used to identify a “quality” Brake Master cylinder that I for one, could buy and replace with confidence the unknown under my bonnet. Surely speed is of the essence before there is an accident. Alan Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TR NIALL Posted August 22, 2016 Report Share Posted August 22, 2016 Hi Alan,is the problem at the moment that there is only one Manafacturer of this Component and that being TRW? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
RogerH Posted August 22, 2016 Report Share Posted August 22, 2016 Hi Alan, the problem three or so years ago was that the MC was leaking. I believe it still functioned. The problem was chased around the houses and eventually the problem was resolved. The manufacturer, TRW, didn't say what was wrong but replacements appeared to be OK. We now have another failed MC - we do NOT know the nature of the failure. Did the brakes fail to operate or was it leaking as per three years ago. Unless the PQI are informed of the nature of the failure then we are powerless to help. Simply tells us what is wrong by filling out the form and get the ball rolling. As for getting another MC without the TRW logo is a mystery. I thought TRW supplied the world. Roger Quote Link to post Share on other sites
astontr6 Posted August 22, 2016 Report Share Posted August 22, 2016 Roger, You have to be careful saying its a TRW Product as some of these brand names are not what they appear to be. Key British Automotive Component Suppliers of the 1950s to 1980s were bought up, when BL went to the wall. Then some of these Brand names have either been sold off or licenced for other people to use! Lucas and Borg & Beck are good examples. I fell into this trap with my BSA Motor Bike when I thought that I was buying Hepolite Pistons, the name had been licenced to a third party to use. He used to trade these pistons under another name and they were NBG. Bruce. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
RogerH Posted August 22, 2016 Report Share Posted August 22, 2016 Hi Bruce, the problem three years ago was a TRW part. The OP of this thread stated his was a TRW item. I don;t know of other makers of this part. Roger Quote Link to post Share on other sites
astontr6 Posted August 23, 2016 Report Share Posted August 23, 2016 Roger, I probably did not express myself well. In my case the Hepolite packaging looked exactly the same as 20 t0 30 years ago i.e. yellow & black & Hepolite name etc. but the contents were not of Hepolite manufacture! I even compared the packaging with a genuine Hepolite Box and it was exactly the same. What I got in my view, was a pattern part in a look a like Hepolite box. I even took this up with the office of fair trading / trading standards, but automotive parts are not covered by EU Rules , for this sort of practice! So the point I am making, the part my have been in a TRW box? but was it manufactured by them? Bruce. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
RogerH Posted August 23, 2016 Report Share Posted August 23, 2016 Hi Bruce, good point. Haven't a clue. Roger Quote Link to post Share on other sites
pinky Posted August 23, 2016 Report Share Posted August 23, 2016 As me about past parts,I have had real problems, I am not going into it yet however I will when the story concludes could you explain to me the exact symptoms, as what one believes is the tipping valve ends up to be the servo pink Quote Link to post Share on other sites
duncanhyams Posted August 25, 2016 Author Report Share Posted August 25, 2016 Hi All I do appologise for not naming the supplier in the past, It was TRGB and they have shown me the greatest concern as to why I have had 2 cylinders fail, the first leaked profusely from the joint to the servo unit while bleeding the brakes, They sent me another that had been tested prior to delivery and was delivered in a TRW box as was the first one but this had a Moss sticker on the packaging so I assumed they had tested it, Two weeks later it failed on a Sunday morning with not a lot of traffic about. TRGB have informed me that they have stopped supplying these parts from now. Having worked in valve production in the past using castings we had enormous problems with porosity within these castings from our Chinese supplier. I have been informed that the TRW parts with the LUCAS logo on were supplied by a Chinese company who brought the business and kept the name, Both these cylinders leaked from the same point though which would point to the seals and bore figment being faulty. The one I have now has no Lucas name on it, I have bled the brakes and will try them out this weekend.I am paranoid now and will stop and check while driving again I do apologise for not giving the full info and will fill in the form tonight Regards Duncan, Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Peter Cobbold Posted August 25, 2016 Report Share Posted August 25, 2016 Duncan, Good to know you have set the PQI ball rolling. Might I ask, how did the cylinder fail - did it leak fluid until it pumped air, or did the seals fail with a fluid-filled cylinder? I ask because , if they fail by leaking the fluid, we could all fit a fluid level warning light as first line of defence. Peter Quote Link to post Share on other sites
duncanhyams Posted August 25, 2016 Author Report Share Posted August 25, 2016 Peter, They both failed with fluid in the cylinder, At first I did not spot as I got fluid to the rear wheels and after taking an age to do the front I noticed the leak from the same spot. The second was a large amount from the joint again, The one I have now is from David Manners group and I was given some sales figures from them that the TRW part sales had dropped off and the part I had ordered had increased over the last two years. He had no feed back from customers as to any failures on these parts, The chap there was Jack Weston if you require any more information, 01215444444 Regards Quote Link to post Share on other sites
astontr6 Posted August 25, 2016 Report Share Posted August 25, 2016 If I am reading Duncan's thread correctly? This proves my point that Joe Public is being deceived into thinking that they are buying an OEM Part but it's a pattern part in a look alike OEM Box! The same way, as I was deceived with a Hepolite Box. Bruce. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Peter Cobbold Posted August 25, 2016 Report Share Posted August 25, 2016 (edited) Peter, They both failed with fluid in the cylinder, At first I did not spot as I got fluid to the rear wheels and after taking an age to do the front I noticed the leak from the same spot. The second was a large amount from the joint again, The one I have now is from David Manners group and I was given some sales figures from them that the TRW part sales had dropped off and the part I had ordered had increased over the last two years. He had no feed back from customers as to any failures on these parts, The chap there was Jack Weston if you require any more information, 01215444444 Regards Duncan, Many thanks. I'll leave RogerH to do the 'phoning. I hadn't realised 'porous' means leaking from the bore to the outside through the wall. Which joint are you describing ? Peter Edited August 25, 2016 by Peter Cobbold Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.