A day in the life of wim
A day in the life of wim
........................................
Dear Tony
Thanks for the taking the time to look at the reports and forward your comments. I have asked the dealers about the fact that all the reports have different Castor Angles values and they have failed to explain why that is. The German dealership visited on the 5th June 2009 suggested that the report done by another garage on the 4th June 2009 must be incorrect. Based on the fact that the report given to me on the 4th is dated the 27th May 2009 and does not have my car registration I agreed with him that his colleague could have mistakenly given me the wrong sheet.
However the values used by Germany Opel report dates the 5th June 2009 appears to be the values that should be used for my make and model vehicle. Vauxhall is still to confirm that as being the case. Assuming that is correct, the maximum Castor of 2.35 and minimum of 0.35 on the UK reports date the 11.5.09 and the 10.6.09 (1st and 2nd) have been suggested to be incorrect bu both the dealership and Vauxhall. I provided them with the Germany report when I dropped the car off on the 10.6.09 along with the values sheet given to me by the Germans which had the higher values for caster of 3.55 + or - .45. I had includes the values on the sheet named Wheel alignment sheet for Corsa D.
Both the dealership and Vauxhall are using these figures to insisting that the car is in specifications. In fact that has been the only reply I have been able to get from the dealership and Vauxhall. I have raised the questions of whether the car has been measured with the correct loads i.e. fuel, weights. They both seem to be assuming that the measurement given on the German report confirms that the car is in specification. I have asked whether the car can be in specification yet still have issue and have had not reply. In your opinion can this be the case? do you understand the German report and does it suggest anything?
The reading at the top are for the rear of the car. I believe
Nachlauf is the word for Caster,
Spreizung is SAI, Spur is Toe,
Spurdifferenwinkel is Toe out on Turns,
Sturz is Camber,
Radversatz is Setback
When I asked the mechanic who carried out both the test name 1st and 2nd, he did confirm that the test was only carried out with one weight. He offered the suggestion that this was because there was not enough fuel in the tank. Which does not make any sense to me and I pointed out to him that the car did have slightly over half a tank of fuel when I dropped it off. Nothing I have been told adds up as the car fuel gauge read half a tank when I collect it. Even if the car had slightly more than half a tank it does not seem enough to make up for not using two 70kg weight. I have suggested to the dealership that the reports were all taken incorrectly. To date their has been no response and the mechanic offered the answer that he took the reading with the Vauxhall representative Mr Jessup present.
With regard to the Inclusive Angles, I assumed even thought the report does not state clearly, that the .59 for the Camber Angles must be a negative value to get the 7.41 figure. Even so, from what I have been reading it is suggest that the Inclusive Angles should be equal on both sides of the vehicle, even if their are differences in Camber. Is this correct and does the difference in both the angle suggest what could be wrong with the car. I have noted that the reading on the 1st report for the Inclusive Angle appears to be much closer from side to side, 12.10 left and 12.51 right. Is there any explanation as to why the figures have changed so much on the second report. Would the movement of the rear Axel of 0.04 result in the change in the figures? The Mechanic suggested that the Rear Axel movement is the reason for the change in the Cater Angles, does this make sense?
Would you be happy for me to forward your comments to the dealership and Vauxhall?Please confirm what you would suggest as the route to proceed if you were to carryout an independent inspection of the vehicle. Both the dealership and Vauxhall have confirmed to me on several occasions that I need to get an independent report and I take into account what you stated about been seen as an interested party if I were to pay you for an inspection. Both Vauxhall and the dealership have stopped responding to my email and continue to repeat whenever I call that I need to get an independent inspection carried out to prove that the car has a manufacturing defect. Which is why I have become increasingly suspicious that they will be attempting to try and blame the issues on someone else. Based on what you have said, I am also concerned that any reports gained will be dismissed by both on the basis that the person carrying out the inspection is and interested party. Both he AA and RAC have confirmed that the car need a 4 wheel geometry test and they do not provide the service. Vauxhall suggested I used both and I confirmed back to them that this is not possible, but have had no alternatives offered.
Thank again for taking the time to respond.
Your sincerely
wheels-inmotion
29-05-2016, 01:00 PM #1The descending email is from a lady in real distress, it's a typical email we deal with on a daily bases for free.... I'll let you consume the initial contact before i display my reply.
........................................
Dear Tony
Thanks for the taking the time to look at the reports and forward your comments. I have asked the dealers about the fact that all the reports have different Castor Angles values and they have failed to explain why that is. The German dealership visited on the 5th June 2009 suggested that the report done by another garage on the 4th June 2009 must be incorrect. Based on the fact that the report given to me on the 4th is dated the 27th May 2009 and does not have my car registration I agreed with him that his colleague could have mistakenly given me the wrong sheet.
However the values used by Germany Opel report dates the 5th June 2009 appears to be the values that should be used for my make and model vehicle. Vauxhall is still to confirm that as being the case. Assuming that is correct, the maximum Castor of 2.35 and minimum of 0.35 on the UK reports date the 11.5.09 and the 10.6.09 (1st and 2nd) have been suggested to be incorrect bu both the dealership and Vauxhall. I provided them with the Germany report when I dropped the car off on the 10.6.09 along with the values sheet given to me by the Germans which had the higher values for caster of 3.55 + or - .45. I had includes the values on the sheet named Wheel alignment sheet for Corsa D.
Both the dealership and Vauxhall are using these figures to insisting that the car is in specifications. In fact that has been the only reply I have been able to get from the dealership and Vauxhall. I have raised the questions of whether the car has been measured with the correct loads i.e. fuel, weights. They both seem to be assuming that the measurement given on the German report confirms that the car is in specification. I have asked whether the car can be in specification yet still have issue and have had not reply. In your opinion can this be the case? do you understand the German report and does it suggest anything?
The reading at the top are for the rear of the car. I believe
Nachlauf is the word for Caster,
Spreizung is SAI, Spur is Toe,
Spurdifferenwinkel is Toe out on Turns,
Sturz is Camber,
Radversatz is Setback
When I asked the mechanic who carried out both the test name 1st and 2nd, he did confirm that the test was only carried out with one weight. He offered the suggestion that this was because there was not enough fuel in the tank. Which does not make any sense to me and I pointed out to him that the car did have slightly over half a tank of fuel when I dropped it off. Nothing I have been told adds up as the car fuel gauge read half a tank when I collect it. Even if the car had slightly more than half a tank it does not seem enough to make up for not using two 70kg weight. I have suggested to the dealership that the reports were all taken incorrectly. To date their has been no response and the mechanic offered the answer that he took the reading with the Vauxhall representative Mr Jessup present.
With regard to the Inclusive Angles, I assumed even thought the report does not state clearly, that the .59 for the Camber Angles must be a negative value to get the 7.41 figure. Even so, from what I have been reading it is suggest that the Inclusive Angles should be equal on both sides of the vehicle, even if their are differences in Camber. Is this correct and does the difference in both the angle suggest what could be wrong with the car. I have noted that the reading on the 1st report for the Inclusive Angle appears to be much closer from side to side, 12.10 left and 12.51 right. Is there any explanation as to why the figures have changed so much on the second report. Would the movement of the rear Axel of 0.04 result in the change in the figures? The Mechanic suggested that the Rear Axel movement is the reason for the change in the Cater Angles, does this make sense?
Would you be happy for me to forward your comments to the dealership and Vauxhall?Please confirm what you would suggest as the route to proceed if you were to carryout an independent inspection of the vehicle. Both the dealership and Vauxhall have confirmed to me on several occasions that I need to get an independent report and I take into account what you stated about been seen as an interested party if I were to pay you for an inspection. Both Vauxhall and the dealership have stopped responding to my email and continue to repeat whenever I call that I need to get an independent inspection carried out to prove that the car has a manufacturing defect. Which is why I have become increasingly suspicious that they will be attempting to try and blame the issues on someone else. Based on what you have said, I am also concerned that any reports gained will be dismissed by both on the basis that the person carrying out the inspection is and interested party. Both he AA and RAC have confirmed that the car need a 4 wheel geometry test and they do not provide the service. Vauxhall suggested I used both and I confirmed back to them that this is not possible, but have had no alternatives offered.
Thank again for taking the time to respond.
Your sincerely
Marsdendean what did you say back tony?
My reply>
..............................................
Hello *
On initial inspection of the Geometry reports I have found astounding inconsistency's that invalidate their credibility. I have to assume in all cases Vauxhall's requirement that sufficient fuel load and the addition of weight to the cabin was honored in all cases.
In view of the following inconsistency's I'm unable to offer a final solution to your complaint from the reports you have forwarded to me.
Inconsistency's
Report marked 11/05/09
Both castor angles are to high
SAI was not measured
I/A was not measured
Set-Back was measured at 6 degrees 37'. If this were the case then the car would be un-drivable.
Report marked 05/06/09
Has different target values for the castor
Report marked 1st
Both castor angles are to high
Report marked 2nd
This report is Geometrically and mathematically incorrect, it displays values of..
OSF
Camber +0 59'
SAI 8 degrees 40'
I/A 7 degrees 41'
The camber position is added to the SAI when positive and deducted from when negative to deduce the Included Angle, +59 to 8 degrees 40' does not come to a I/A of 7 degrees 41. In addition the castor angles are to high.
There is sufficient evidence from the reports and my initial findings that your complaint has not been analyzed correctly by the dealer. The discrepancy's I highlight from the reports if the data were deemed as true should require immediate attention from the dealer. I do however feel that the discrepancy's are due to.
* Incorrectly manufactured chassis
* Operator error
* Incorrectly calibrated machinery
* Incorrectly leveled ramp
* Incorrect vehicle identity
I hope the dealer will act on the issues raised and I advise you to only use us as a final resort since once money has exchanged hands our opinion could be read as an interested party and complicate your resolution.
I hope this helps
Regards
Tony@ wim
wheels-inmotion
08-06-2016, 12:06 PM #2Marsdendean what did you say back tony?
My reply>
..............................................
Hello *
On initial inspection of the Geometry reports I have found astounding inconsistency's that invalidate their credibility. I have to assume in all cases Vauxhall's requirement that sufficient fuel load and the addition of weight to the cabin was honored in all cases.
In view of the following inconsistency's I'm unable to offer a final solution to your complaint from the reports you have forwarded to me.
Inconsistency's
Report marked 11/05/09
Both castor angles are to high
SAI was not measured
I/A was not measured
Set-Back was measured at 6 degrees 37'. If this were the case then the car would be un-drivable.
Report marked 05/06/09
Has different target values for the castor
Report marked 1st
Both castor angles are to high
Report marked 2nd
This report is Geometrically and mathematically incorrect, it displays values of..
OSF
Camber +0 59'
SAI 8 degrees 40'
I/A 7 degrees 41'
The camber position is added to the SAI when positive and deducted from when negative to deduce the Included Angle, +59 to 8 degrees 40' does not come to a I/A of 7 degrees 41. In addition the castor angles are to high.
There is sufficient evidence from the reports and my initial findings that your complaint has not been analyzed correctly by the dealer. The discrepancy's I highlight from the reports if the data were deemed as true should require immediate attention from the dealer. I do however feel that the discrepancy's are due to.
* Incorrectly manufactured chassis
* Operator error
* Incorrectly calibrated machinery
* Incorrectly leveled ramp
* Incorrect vehicle identity
I hope the dealer will act on the issues raised and I advise you to only use us as a final resort since once money has exchanged hands our opinion could be read as an interested party and complicate your resolution.
I hope this helps
Regards
Tony@ wim
What was the outcome, has there been one yet ?
Major kudos to you, as ever, for trying to help sort out other garage's mess-ups for free ! :thumbup1:
![[Image: Sig-enginebay.jpg]](http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y179/SteveHammatt/Sig-enginebay.jpg)
IS200 Turbo project now just about complete ! See my thread here and leave your comments.
Now running standalone Syvecs ECU and no stock ECU !
steviewevie
09-06-2016, 12:38 AM #3What was the reason for the original letter Tony ? Was it tyre wear issues, or poor handling, or both ?
What was the outcome, has there been one yet ?
Major kudos to you, as ever, for trying to help sort out other garage's mess-ups for free ! :thumbup1:
IS200 Turbo project now just about complete ! See my thread here and leave your comments.
Now running standalone Syvecs ECU and no stock ECU !
cared:
Lexus IS200 Sport Navigator (Now being stripped again) :blink:
Now Don't Forget The REP!!!
After reading some of Tony's horror of the week topics there doesn't seem to be much dealer service left? the last one on the mx5 suspension is just amazing? as they left the bolts out of the shocks and sent the driver on there way like it!! cared:
Lexus IS200 Sport Navigator (Now being stripped again) :blink:
Now Don't Forget The REP!!!
steviewevie What was the reason for the original letter Tony ? Was it tyre wear issues, or poor handling, or both ?
What was the outcome, has there been one yet ?
Major kudos to you, as ever, for trying to help sort out other garage's mess-ups for free ! :thumbup1:
Issue is handling, the cars had five Geometry's two of which were done by Vauxhall in Germany and the handling's still bad.
wheels-inmotion
09-06-2016, 02:55 AM #6steviewevie What was the reason for the original letter Tony ? Was it tyre wear issues, or poor handling, or both ?
What was the outcome, has there been one yet ?
Major kudos to you, as ever, for trying to help sort out other garage's mess-ups for free ! :thumbup1:
Issue is handling, the cars had five Geometry's two of which were done by Vauxhall in Germany and the handling's still bad.
Marsdendean thats outstanding. Have they asked you to sort the geo?
A specialist from Vauxhall UK/ Germany and the owner are coming to wim next week for us to measure the chassis independently and without prejudice.
I am not in the position to comment on the findings or dispute any work carried out on this car by Vauxhall UK/Germany.
I can however volunteer my opinion if requested by the owner but this would be unrecorded.
wheels-inmotion
09-06-2016, 01:01 PM #7Marsdendean thats outstanding. Have they asked you to sort the geo?
A specialist from Vauxhall UK/ Germany and the owner are coming to wim next week for us to measure the chassis independently and without prejudice.
I am not in the position to comment on the findings or dispute any work carried out on this car by Vauxhall UK/Germany.
I can however volunteer my opinion if requested by the owner but this would be unrecorded.
Lexusboy What is in this for you to train there own tech's (Vauxhall):wink:Tony
Total reward to me for this entire job is £30+ vat. Seems like a pants deal but i will get to see how Vauxhall have dealt with this car and i get to hear their explanation to the owner first hand, so there is value connected to the time spent.
wheels-inmotion
10-06-2016, 12:21 PM #9Lexusboy What is in this for you to train there own tech's (Vauxhall):wink:Tony
Total reward to me for this entire job is £30+ vat. Seems like a pants deal but i will get to see how Vauxhall have dealt with this car and i get to hear their explanation to the owner first hand, so there is value connected to the time spent.
2 Guest(s)
2 Guest(s)
Views 1,498
Last Post by
Views 645
Last Post by