Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 20:12:50 +1100 From: Peter Wilkins <wilkinspnopsamnet.au> Subject: Re: Saab 9-5 suspension snaps
On Thu, 16 Dec 1999 21:28:52 GMT, carrutnnopsameja.com wrote : >Thanks for the reply, > >apparently the part is made from cast iron, as you say. Hi Neil, I didn't know it was cast iron - I had assumed any modern suspension component would be steel, but thought the fracture looked like a fracture in cast iron. Hence my comment that it had suffered incorrect heat treatment. I am surprised any suspension components are made out of cast iron. It is very brittle and easy to break. > >Saab replaced it under warranty, but I had the car examined beforehand >by a Structural Engineer, and his comments were very worrying, so I >asked saab to do a metallurgical analysis. (with x-rays, microscopes >etc). They weren't keen, thought it over-the-top. > >They have done this now, (weeks later) , and say that the report shows >that the car has suffered a heavy blow to the rear wheel, in the same >plane of motion as the car, and that blow has caused the arm to twist, >buckle and snap. They say they will let me have a copy so I can see for >myself. Examination of a broken cast iron member showed that the rear wheel had suffered a heavy blow? How could they tell that? A blow strong enough to break a strong iron suspension member which didn't buckle or damage the much less strong allow wheel??? In polite terms, that is quite unbelievable, and in less polite terms, absolute bullshit. They are having you on, and trying to shift the blame. Don't let them. > >I told them that it happened while reversing out of my driveway, at 4 >miles per hour, and nothing was hit. But it seems I'm not believed. > >They reckon that maybe somebody in a fork-lift truck ran into the back >of the car, wrecking the suspension, but nothing else ! > >They also say that there is a problem with the component and that it is >not to spec. and would be more brittle than it should be, but that has >nothing at all to do with the fracture. And that is more bullshit. If there is a problem with the component, that is their responsibility. If it is more brittle than it should be, then even blind Freddie can see that it will be more susceptible to a shock fracture. Talk to higher management, not the local apologist. > >I'm interested in your comments about the seeming brittle fracture. If >you have some knowledge of this area that you could share with me I'd be >delighted. I need all the help I can get ! I'm an electronic engineer, not a mechanical one, but I do remember some of the gunk they fed us at uni on strength of materials. That photo was a textbook clean fracture of a brittle component stressed beyond its limit. How it could be done by any sort of bump caused by outlandish driving or a severe impact which damaged nothing else is beyond belief. > >(ps they say that because I have obviously damaged the car, I will have >to get my insurance company to pay !) Don't. Threaten them politely with the advice that you will publicise their obvious lies and lame excuses and take them to the consumer affairs organisation in your country. Perhaps you could enlist the aid of your insurance company too- they will not want to pay, so may put some pressure on Saab as well. But I thought they had fixed it under warranty? Are they now seeking re-imbursement from you? > I find this all very surprising - I have had several problems with Saab covering up known defects and not telling customers, but when i have shown that a defect exists, they have come clean and replaced the faulty part under warranty with no further problems. Don't let them fool you. Stick to your guns! -- Regards, Peter Wilkins (wilkinspnopsamnet.au)
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
