• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

whats worse than having to recall ~800k cars?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Z

Zargon

Lifer
having to do it twice for the same problem 😵

http://editorial.autos.msn.com/blogs/post--recall-781000-toyota-lexus-models-for-suspension-failure

Recall: 781,000 Toyota, Lexus models for suspension failure


This is a duplicate recall to fix problems that were not properly fixed 13 months earlier.

By Exhaust Notes 20 hours ago


Toyota is recalling nearly 781,000 cars to fix suspension components that can break loose, according to filings with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

This is the second time that the same 780,584 cars have been recalled in the United States -- the 2006-2011 Toyota RAV4 and the 2010 Lexus HS 250h -- for loose nuts that attach the rear suspension arm to the wheels.
Click to expand...
 
The Chrysler story you posted is old. You should post the latest on that issue, which is resolved and a done deal.
 
http://www.allpar.com/news/index.php/2013/06/jeep-recall-clarified

In their official response, Chrysler noted that most crashes identified by NHTSA were “extremely severe,” and “in excess of any reasonable expectation for fuel tank performance.” They pointed out that their peers would have also had fuel leakage, and that the crashes brought up by NHTSA were “far in excess” of even the stricter 2008 standards. What’s more, Jeep’s internal standard for fuel leakage following Federal tests is zero, while the test allows up to 25 ounces of leakage over 25 minutes after the test. Their response also noted that NHTSA itself had decided not to pursue a 2002 investigation into Ford cars which had a similar “problem.”

http://www.allpar.com/news/index.php/2013/06/updatechrysler-caves-to-nhtsa-raves
 
BEST recall thread ever. I learned from the 'geniuses' who posted here the following:

(1) Chrysler is REALLY the news leader here with an old story
(2) It doesn't matter what you sell, as long as you sell a LOT of them
(3) Apologists and damage-control spring-up instantly here on AT Garage
(4) AdamK47 was RIGHT on the money. 😀
 
Zargon said:
LOL

some people jeez
Click to expand...

Totally!

Interesting article OP. I am sure Toyota is not pleased to do another recall for the same issue. This is why recalls are tricky business. You want to do them quickly, but not too quickly that you don't get a chance to correctly identify a fix for the real issue.
 
exar333 said:
Totally!

Interesting article OP. I am sure Toyota is not pleased to do another recall for the same issue. This is why recalls are tricky business. You want to do them quickly, but not too quickly that you don't get a chance to correctly identify a fix for the real issue.
Click to expand...


yep

The earlier recall was "not adequate" and "portions of the repair procedure may not have been performed correctly," according to Toyota. The latest recall will require dealers to replace the rear lower suspension arms and seal them with epoxy, effectively making the alignment permanent. Toyota's first fix involved tightening the bolts and attaching labels to the suspension components to alert technicians to the proper tightening procedure. The company says repair shops are to blame and that all bolts were properly tightened at the factory.
Click to expand...

my thoughts on this are pretty straight forward

if no one can seem to do an alignment on the vehicle without causing failures, its probably a design problem, and epoxying the bolts in place screams 'we cant realyl fix it any other way'

its a rav4, not a corvette, viper, 911, or some other high end sports car with exotic suspension that should be confusing repair techs

you probably did something silly to save costs and its biting you in the ass now

and I would have posted this even it was chrsyler ford or gm, but man jaedaliu seems to have a huge hard on for chrysler!
 
Zargon said:
yep



my thoughts on this are pretty straight forward

if no one can seem to do an alignment on the vehicle without causing failures, its probably a design problem, and epoxying the bolts in place screams 'we cant realyl fix it any other way'

its a rav4, not a corvette, viper, 911, or some other high end sports car with exotic suspension that should be confusing repair techs

you probably did something silly to save costs and its biting you in the ass now

and I would have posted this even it was chrsyler ford or gm, but man jaedaliu seems to have a huge hard on for chrysler!
Click to expand...

/shrug to me your thread title asked a public perception question, and I posted my initial reaction. I didn't even know it was chrysler that refused to issue the recall until I searched for "NHTSA recall refuse"
 
Curious, I looked up the procedure in the recall documents and cross-checked it against the service manual.

It's identical, same pictures, same torque values. Only difference is several more "NOTICE" and ALL CAPS sections.

Basically, to tighten the lock nuts on the suspension, you need to use a special lock-nut wrench. However, you have to hold the toe-adjuster tube with a regular wrench to stop it spinning.

Essentially, the main difference in the recall document is to put put a bunch of caps into the instructions:

The wrench applied to the adjuster MUST NOT be turned at this step. HOLD the wrench while applying force to the lock-nut with the torque wrench.

This type of adjuster isn't one I've seen before, but I rarely go under cars. I've only ever seen a cam type (if the car has adjustable rear suspension at all).

Essentially, the toe adjuster is a tube with a lock-nut on each end. You release, the lock nuts, turn the tube to shorten/lengthen the rod, then tighten up the lock-nuts.

It sounds like a lot of techs couldn't cope with this design of adjuster, and weren't doing up the lock nuts.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top