Safe Speed Forums

_________________
The world runs on oil, period. No other substance can compete when it comes to energy density, flexibility, ease of handling, ease of transportation. If oil didn’t exist we would have to invent it.”

56 years after it was decided it was needed, the Bedford Bypass is nearing completion. The last single carriageway length of it.We have the most photogenic mayor though, always being photographed doing nothing

Now that is a very worrying thing. Especially for the owners of old and classic cars who often have a favourite mechanic who really understands the vehicle. I am also worried that at some stage they will try to ban DIY servicing and repair because that would get the enthusiastic backing of the safety police.

And when Ford, Chrysler amd GM go belly up who is going to service their cars.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

It wont actually affect "classic" cars so much (or the people who specialise in them)

What it could affect is the ability for the independent trade to perform "Warrenty" sensitive repairs (ie routine servicing within the warrenty period) on newer cars, access to non-oem service and repair parts and essential service information (electronic fault code data and so on)




More to the point, the treasury.

The government hates "DIY" and other examples of self reliance that fall outside the scope of the taxable economy. (What do you think the last 40 years of "Getting more women into work" is really all about)

_________________
"The road to a police state is paved with public safety legislation"

One thing that site doesn't say is what exactly is changing that will make independent repair harder/impossible/illegal? Is there some new legislation due or something?

Current EU legislation obliges manufacturers to provide technical information (including those all-important ECU login codes) to independent repairers. This legislation is apparently due to expire and the Neo Communists in Brussells are not planning to renew it. This means that manufacturers will be allowed to withold information necessary for independent mechanics to service their vehicles, granting themselves and their franchised dealers an effective monopoly.

_________________
“For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.” - H. L. Mencken

To an extent I can understand the manufacturer's issues with warranty sensitive repairs being carried out by 'unknown' mechanics/technicians.

I would say a reasonable middle ground would be for the manufacturer to offer courses at acceptable costs to independents to allow them to perform repairs and servicing to a standard acceptable by the manufacturer. Plumbers for instance go on manufacturer courses for boilers etc. which means the customer gets a manufacturer backed warranty. The acceptable costs would no doubt be a sticking point, however this would provide a middle ground.

_________________
Driving fast is for a particular time and place, I can do it I just only do it occasionally because I am a gentleman.
- James May

If the block exemption isn't renewed then manufacturers will have to conform with normal competition law which might make witholding information illegal anyway. The block exemption enshrines some rights for consumers while still allowing manufacturers to ignore some aspects of competition.

I thought the DTI had ruled that preventing a customer claiming on a warranty if they did not take the vehicle to a franchised dealer was illegal anyway and providing the vehicle had been serviced in line with manufacturer guidelines and with their spares/technical equivalents the manufacturer couldn't deny the warranty claim. I also think that may have applied to the dealer back warranty as being an unfair contract term.

We wouldn't tolerate consumer electronics that had to be constantly checked at great expense by only a few dealers so why do we put up with having to take new cars to generally inferior and usually incredibly expensive franchised dealers?

What needs to be done is to prevent manufacturers tying particular parts to particular cars and also the competition law should be applied so that all technical information is available free to anyone that wants it. Thus franchised dealers will have to compete on service levels not just because they tie you in. This might also stop m/fs demanding ridiculous glass showrooms at massive costs when clearly punters just want a good job done for a reasonable price not all the expense of paying for dolly birds to greet them, blokes to get them coffee and all the other rubbish that has appeared.

That would be uneconomic for most small garages, given the variety of cars they service, and not really necessary given the fundamentally similar principles of most motor cars. A good, experienced mechanic is worth far more than a monkey with a certificate.

Franchise dealers largely have themselves to blame people don't want to take their cars to them, gone are the days when the franchise were the "experts" on their own brand, I've heard so many stories of shoddy service and the expectation they can replace multiple parts in the hope of finding the fault at customers expense, and rely on custom because they're the franchise. (There are of course good franchises too)

Independents on the other hand, have to compete by providing value and good service.

Despite the exemption the dealers still have a trick up their sleeve- paint warranties. My van has (I think) a 6 year paint warranty, on condition it's inspected annually by mercs. My van is due it's first annual service right now so I'm in the position of having to decide my good, local indy (five mins from my house) or going halfway across london to the merc dealer. The indy means I save time and money, the franchise means the van retains residual value. Thoughts?

_________________
Fear is a weapon of mass distraction

Our current culture is very much paper trail based, just look at the ISO 9000 certifications. Any manufacturer certification should only deal with the specific technology/engineering that is critical to their product and should not be there to teach someone how to be a mechanic. They should also be aimed to cover the same technology used across it's model range.

When it comes down to it you have a choice whether to buy a new vehicle from a particular manufacturer, if buyers decide they do not think the manufacturer offers the right product or value for money then the company will not sell their product.

The manufacturer makes a huge investment into developing a vehicle and contained technologies, they expect to make a return. Not being an economist I would take a guess that if they lose the income stream from servicing and parts then the purchase price would have to increase.

Governments getting involved could well throw a spanner in the works, particularly where they legislate for the benefit of their contributors rather than the people that elected them, that is a different discussion though.

Consider maintaining the paint warranty as a form of insurance that you are free to take up or not. Think of it this way, if you had the option of pre-paying for the paint inspections at the time of purchase would you have done so? I cannot speak for paint finishes, however electronic systems either seem to fail early in their lifetime due to a gross manufacturing fault or towards the end of their lifetime due cumulative use or ageing (thermal cycling, mechanical shock, insulation breakdown, etc.). By making maintaining the paint warranty an ongoing expense the manufacturer has spread the cost and you only have to pay for it while you own the vehicle. You have to decide if you want to cover the initial lifetime, all of it or play the odds that no fault will occur.

Some paint inspections also include renewing the underseal iirc.

_________________
Driving fast is for a particular time and place, I can do it I just only do it occasionally because I am a gentleman.
- James May

If thats so, it's a gamble they take, in the same way supermarkets advertise loss leaders in the hope you'll be enticed in but fill a trolley with other stuff. Actually it's more than that; it's like the supermarket, once you're inside, demanding you fill a trolley with other stuff.

Or, an electronics retailer that advertises "price match", then once you're in the store point out it's actually the price of their TV+5 yr extended warranty vs. the competitors TV+ 5 yr wnty. (hello, richer sounds!)

What I want is a clear price with no hidden strings. If you want to list 2 prices, and you pay more if you don't want a service contract, thats fine. I'll consider both and make a choice.



Oh, it's more that it's just another insidious piece of small print not mentioned in the "6 year paint warranty!!!" advert, a lever to get you back in the dealership for servicing rather than make two trips, something they can use to "sting" the people who didn't go back to MB for servicing, rather than let you buy a product and decide what you want to do with it.

_________________
Fear is a weapon of mass distraction

I agree, marketing ploys are really annoying at times. Look at the bright side, their efforts make lots of people buy stuff they do not really need, this helps reduce the prices due to mass production and competition, so when you want to buy your carefully selected item it is cheaper.



I thought the paint warranty inspection was common knowledge, my Subaru had the same sort of clause and it is a 1999 car for instance. I bought it at 3 years old and never bothered with the second inspection, no rust yet though. The dealers exist to extract the maximum amount of money from you they can, why are you surprised when they try to do this? I think some of them do genuinely try to do this by offering an excellent service, mind you the independents can do the same for less. Your ultimate sanction is not to buy the product in the first place or, in the case where you feel you did not have full information, never buy from them again. If you think the warranty requirements were not clearly outlined to you when you purchased the van you could try complaining to the dealer or MB, at worst you will get nowhere at best you might get the paint inspection for free.

Life is not perfect, enjoy the pleasures small and large it does bring and do not let anything other than the serious spoil your day.

_________________
Driving fast is for a particular time and place, I can do it I just only do it occasionally because I am a gentleman.
- James May

Some idle speculation for the New Year.

The European car manufacturers are talking to the EU bureaucrats:

EU: We want you to reduce average emissions to 130g/Km
Manufacturers: It will cost us a fortune and, in any event, badly maintaned old cars emit more junk than new ones.
EU: OK, if you agree to 130g we will force everyone to get their cars serviced by your networks to give you more control.
Manufacturers: OK, but don't tell anyone about this agreement.

Just speculation...

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.

Less than one year into use, new cars emissions are significantly higher than when they were first driven on the roads.I would be interested to hear the figures for first-mot vehicles (those over 3 years old), regarding emissions.

_________________
The world runs on oil, period. No other substance can compete when it comes to energy density, flexibility, ease of handling, ease of transportation. If oil didn’t exist we would have to invent it.”

56 years after it was decided it was needed, the Bedford Bypass is nearing completion. The last single carriageway length of it.We have the most photogenic mayor though, always being photographed doing nothing

The current MOT test (and the tesing equipment used) is nowhere near sensitive enough to detect these diferences.

Interestingly enough. I understand that, though emissions testing is taken seriously in the US, that in most states if an older car fails the emission test (but is otherwise sound) and the cost of compliance will exceed the value of the vehicle then the test can be waived by the test centre!

Quite sensible actually!

_________________
"The road to a police state is paved with public safety legislation"

It probably is the case that they are worse but I doubt it would be as bad as you might think.

In the EU, the emissions test that has to be done for type approval is VASTLY tougher than the MOT test. At MOT, the emissions aren't checked with the engine under any load. Even then, the limits are less stringent and fewer pollutants are measured in any case. They only look for CO and unburned hydrocarbons. I tend to buy cars that are 5 years old and run them until they are about 10 years old and I have only ever had one fail an MOT emissions test.

In the type approval test, it's possible to fail without even starting the engine! Even the solvents evaporating out of the upholstery and other plastic parts can have a significant effect! The test is done on a rolling road so that the engine is actually doing some (but not much) work and they also look for oxides of nitrogen as well as the other two pollutants. On top of that, the manufacturer needs to apply a "deterioration factor" to his results to simulate 80,000km of use and still meet the requirements. Now I'm quite prepared to admit that there will be plenty of cars which, after 50,000 miles, wouldn't be able to pass the type approval emissions test, so that suggests the deterioration factors aren't representative, but I don't think they're as far off as one might think.

Both of these changes together are most likely going to make new cars look less and less attractive to a large segment of the population anyway. Expect to see a lot more cars getting engine swaps to older more well known and proven designs as modern cars become too anaemic and reliant on electronics and "driver aids" to control your emissions and speed. It seems that the Chevrolet LS series and the Nissan SR20 get swaped into every vehicle under the sun already and the government's continuing desire to make cars into dull automatons will only encourage this. (I want to see Top Gear put that V8 into a Prius)

Are there any figures for private new car sales at the moment. I would guess that the only ones selling well are the tiny grotty little econoboxes to people who think that the cost of a new car is less than how much they're going to save from an extra 10mpg and the big premium SUVs and supercars to people who are rich enough not to care about the mpg. Anyone sensible will be buying second hand.

Anyone sensible has always bought second hand; and for cash. Investment rule number one: never borrow money to buy a depreciating asset.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

Buying a car is never an investment, at least not purely in the financial returns sort of sense.

My point is that more people will be buying second hand.. doesn't help the prices of sports models which are plummeting but the small diesels are getting very hard to get hold of. I'm currently looking for a pre-2001 estate car that's either <1.5l petrol or <1.7 diesel, and an automatic and it's just impossible to get them unless they're either tiny or knackered.

Your "affordable" sports cars like your Focus ST and suchlike don't seem to be selling well new either. I guess this is good for manufacturers struggling to meet 130g/km though.

I wonder how long before we start seeing emissions scams like the Subaru WR1 (sold with the same setup as the STI for tax purposes, then at the 1000K service they swap out parts such as the exhaust and chip the ECU) from the more mainstream manufacturers. The Japanese manufacturers have been doing this for ages with the 280bhp limit. I wonder when you'll be able to buy a 2 litre turbocharged petrol Golf that does 56bhp and has hardly any emissions, but has an easily removable restrictor and easy to reflash ECU.

I have always been puzzled by rechipping and other performance mods. How legal are they? Doesn't it take the car out of its type approval? And presumably the insurers are not enthusiastic.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

Your insurance goes up because statistically a modified car is more likely to be involved in an accident. If this practice ever reaches the "everybody does it" stage then the insurance probably wont be quite so bad, same as is now the situation with speeding tickets.

As an example, on a car I'll be driving soon my best quote was with Direct Line at £518. Direct Line are reputed to be comparatively unfavourable towards modifications. I asked for the same quote but with uprated brakes, air filter and exhaust. They wanted to know how much extra bhp each of those modifications added (yes they specifically asked how much extra bhp my new brakes would add). I said the whole kit would probably add 25bhp and that put the price up to £698.25 and also added £400 to my excess. Other insurers didn't rate the mods so harshly but were giving quotes of £1200 for the unmodified car.

There are specialist insurers that collect more accurate statistics for modifications and may do things such as, (purely made up example) a chip and an exhaust adds £200 to the policy but a chip + exhaust + brakes only adds £125 since that shows a sensible build wheras the former would be just [clarkson]more powahhh[/clarkson]


As far as I'm aware performance mods are perfectly legal and always have been. So long as your car still complies with Construction and Use, Emissions etc. then you're fine.

It's an ideal solution really. Tax and the manufacturer average figures are both based on the emissions of the car as sold. Once sold it's your property and you can change it if you want.