Whoops!

Author
Discussion

mickrick

Original Poster:

3,705 posts

180 months

BertBert

19,681 posts

218 months

Wednesday 6th July 2011
quotequote all
ahh, that'll be Bert's law of aftermarket ste then!

mickrick

Original Poster:

3,705 posts

180 months

Wednesday 6th July 2011
quotequote all
It's nice stuff actualy, but a re-think on the washer is necesary as this will put some bending stress into the rod.

BDA

37 posts

178 months

Thursday 7th July 2011
quotequote all
Who is is liable for repair or cost of a failure and the accident that may cause?

downsman

1,099 posts

163 months

Thursday 7th July 2011
quotequote all
Having looked at the pictures, it is hard to see how this can be rectified in other way other than limiting the suspension travel frown

DCL

1,224 posts

186 months

Friday 8th July 2011
quotequote all
It looks like the outer socket has be been tightened slightly out of 'square' with the ball. It may not be a problem if it was rotated slightly - but it's still looks like a bit of a fussy design.

Noger

7,117 posts

256 months

Friday 8th July 2011
quotequote all
Seems to be "sorted" now.

My Chinese car jack has never worked smile

mickrick

Original Poster:

3,705 posts

180 months

Friday 8th July 2011
quotequote all
Received an e-mail from "7bits" with a solution.
Although I don't have a problem with mine, as I don't have dampers yet. smile
But at least I'll know to keep an eye on it when measuring the open and closed lengths I require.
I may have to go back to the balljoints anyway, as I think the bolt will foul my rims.
I'll know for sure when they arrive in a few weeks.
Anyone who bought the balljoint kit did sign a disclaimer, which is fair enough considering Arnie is an individual rather than a company.
I still think it's nice gear, and well done for addressing the issue wink

BDA

37 posts

178 months

Friday 8th July 2011
quotequote all
Disclaimers count for nothing if some one gets hurt.
I've no idea who manufactured them but if money changed hands then they should take some responsibilty regardless if they are a business or not.

How much R&D went into them?

mickrick

Original Poster:

3,705 posts

180 months

Friday 8th July 2011
quotequote all
As posted above, apparently everyone's been contacted, and a solution found.
If you buy aftermarket products, you have to make your own mind up if they're suitable of not.
My post was meant as a heads up.

BertBert

19,681 posts

218 months

Friday 8th July 2011
quotequote all
mickrick said:
If you buy aftermarket products, you have to make your own mind up if they're suitable of not.
Surely that depends on how they are sold. If they are sold as "direct replacements for the caterham upper balljoint", then the product seller has a duty of care with that statement.

If it's part of a bulk buy then it's a bit more grey where the liability lies.

Bert

mickrick

Original Poster:

3,705 posts

180 months

Friday 8th July 2011
quotequote all
BertBert said:
mickrick said:
If you buy aftermarket products, you have to make your own mind up if they're suitable of not.
Surely that depends on how they are sold. If they are sold as "direct replacements for the caterham upper balljoint", then the product seller has a duty of care with that statement.

If it's part of a bulk buy then it's a bit more grey where the liability lies.

Bert
If you bought some, you will have read the disclaimer. If not, don't worry about it.
Also if you read the link you'll see it was a bulk buy.

Cheers,
Mick.smile

Supra Chewie

19 posts

164 months

Friday 8th July 2011
quotequote all
Why would it being a bulk buy make the vendor exempt from liability? Also your're suggesting if something can be poorly designed and unfit for purpose, a vendor can stick in a disclaimer and wash his hands of all responsibility. Well I'm sure the guy selling these has nothing to worry about and will sleep very well.

damdy-cash

65 posts

193 months

Saturday 9th July 2011
quotequote all
AFAIK this was a non profit bulk buy managed by a private guy, may that clearify the situation of liability a bit?

Cheers Volker

Noger

7,117 posts

256 months

Saturday 9th July 2011
quotequote all
Absolutely. We all knew what we were letting ourselves into, this wasn't a predesigned and tested product. It was an idea and some drawings. And quite a few potential buyers had input into the design IIRC.


Supra Chewie

19 posts

164 months

Saturday 9th July 2011
quotequote all
Noger said:
this wasn't a predesigned and tested product. It was an idea and some drawings.
Well that just about says it all. I'd remove this comment or edit it as it does no favours for either vendor or buyer's confidence.

Noger

7,117 posts

256 months

Saturday 9th July 2011
quotequote all
Why ? It is a Rose joint, not the Space Shuttle. Similar things exist. This isn't something knocked up in a shed. The parts conform to the relevant standards.

They are very well made, the spec is knocking around on BC. There just seems to be a fouling problem given a very specific set of criteria. If I do have a problem, then I will fix it.

I have both the top link and the steering arm. I made a choice to use them, they are just another "bespoke" bit on my car.

Why should you be bothered ? They aren't about to fall to bits.

Edited by Noger on Saturday 9th July 13:26

Supra Chewie

19 posts

164 months

Saturday 9th July 2011
quotequote all
Just playing Devils Advocate. Please don't take it personally. At worst I'd say the biggest claim from any customer would be fitting time but somebody else may get quite irate with your comment that there was little development and testing. I'm a Chartered Engineer and MIMechE. I work in NPI (New Product Introduction) and product design. I conduct FMEA (Failure Mode Effects Analyses) from early schematic stage right through to finish product launch. We look at all the ways it can fail and mitigate the circumstances with further redesign, development, testing, calcs etc. Everything is meticulously recorded and incase there's a claim I can confidently stand up in a court of law and say that I did everything to ensure the design was good for form, fit and function and met the product spec. Whereas you've stated and strongly stand by your comment of doing the minimum. Quite risky.

Noger

7,117 posts

256 months

Saturday 9th July 2011
quotequote all
Did you get lost somewhere ?

You should visit the Kit Car forum, I think you may very well explode with self-righteous engineering indignation smile

I am sure more than enough testing and design went into the product given the application it is designed for.

Although the smart money would be on you being an alias for one of the usual crowd smile Seems odd to register a PH account just to reply to this topic wink


Edited by Noger on Saturday 9th July 21:56

BDA

37 posts

178 months

Sunday 10th July 2011
quotequote all
Why do people get all personal when knowledgeable people point out pit falls that we may fall into and that could cost time, money and at worst injury.
I do not understand why people cannot take information as given and let everyone else make there own mind up instead casting insinuations.

Cheers
Chris