A Mechanic's Life - Tales From Under the Hood

jp10558

I think I understand the issue a bit as I work in IT. Before this thread, I always thought that mechanics could always go off and start a shop and make all the hourly rate, but never realized how expensive the tools etc were that a mechanic needed, at least on an ongoing basis needing new ones.

I had figured once you had wrenches for instance, they would be potentially good forever, but now I see that isn't true.

I expect once you get past the tools, the problems are similar - many tasks don't necessarily need a lot of skill, but the ones that do - and they always eventually come up for everyone - would require a lot of expertise to pull them off correctly. And that assumes that it's actually possible for a given piece of hardware or car. And people balk at paying what that sort of skill and experience costs.

In IT it's a bit worse if you want to be a retail sort of establishment as most anyone can buy a replacement computer for what a few hours of repair time costs, but even for cars, it doesn't take many hours at $105 an hour (going rate where I live) to start getting where people ask if it is cost effective - as that's aside from parts. Of course, cars are multi thousand dollar beasts, but I see many posts on car forums asking if the $5000 quote for a repair on an old car is worth it, so it's driving mechanics as well.

And mechanics have the same problem - how does a non mechanic find a good one, and there can't be many left at the sub $20 an hour rate - and it's not even that much by how the "flat rate" seems to work as described here.

It makes me sad that it's very likely that "barely skilled" labor is likely working on my $30,000 car - but I can't not use a dealership for warranty work, and after that, there may be computer things that require a dealer. After that, I prefer my local shop - they do good work, but man are they expensive compared to chain alternatives. Then again, they managed to stop a heat shield from rattling on my old car when a chain shop and the dealer failed.

isellhondas

The chains are cheap for a reason. They are also great at "upselling" unneeded work.

As soon as they get in over their heads they are lost and that usually doesn't take long.

Most chains only do the "gravy" work and leve the rough stuff to guys like cardoc.

thecardoc3

Most chains only do the "gravy" work and leve the rough stuff to guys like cardoc.

The chains are not alone with that practice, many independents and dealers as well can be proven to be guilty of stopping short of where they should be with training and equipment.

There is a cost to be paid for by trying to be too cheap.

Being small I can change my shops direction at any time. I could stop getting training and simply sit on the tools that I presently own and pretty much work to my last day and likely make a comfortable living. I could even drop prices some within the next year as some things are going to get paid off, and that by most peoples perspectives would serve to make me busier. Cheaper (supposedly) would see more estimates approved, and more traffic through my door. But there is a trap to that kind of business planning, and it's the very same one that is plaguing most of the supporters of R2R. In my shop I would quickly start seeing more things that I would not have the training and equipment to properly contend with.

Now I would have two choices at that point. The right one is to send that vehicle to someone who is making the investment to be service ready for it. The other would be to suggest that we try a few of the easy things "to see if that fixes it" make some money off of it, and then send that customer down the road if that doesn't fix the problem.

Let's say it has a misfire. We could simply replace the plugs and the wires, or coils. We could try flushing the injectors, and do a fuel system service. Now "I" know that might not fix it, but if I do it cheaper than the next guy that makes it a fair price and that's all that counts, right?

How many times do you think the above scenario is going to happen TODAY?

Are the people who will do this being dishonest, or are they in fact simply behaving exactly as the pressures of the trade, both from inside and outside of it have conditioned them to?

Mr_Shiftright

I know a number of very honest shops and it seems to me that how they deal with this moral vs. market dilemma is to do the repair in such a way that it fixes the problem but also covers the shop's butt---no one wants a comeback. So jury-rigging, old used parts, using cheap parts, etc are usually a no-no. In some cases, where a creative repair that has merit on its own (like machining a part or re-tapping a critical thread), and avoids a monstrous repair bill for the customer---well these shops might do that, but without warranty. In other words, it's the customers decision but also has the shop's approval as a "plausible" repair with some, but not enormous, risk.

thecardoc3

well these shops might do that, but without warranty. In other words, it's the customers decision but also has the shop's approval as a "plausible" repair with some, but not enormous, risk.

Research "Implied Warranty".

It even comes into play when a customer supplies a part and a shop installs it. Nobody cares if the repair works, but if it doesn't the shop doesn't have a legal leg to stand on, no matter what anyone signed.

Mr_Shiftright

Implied warranties are voided by written disclaimers such as "As Is", etc. Shop owners should know all this.

thecardoc3

Implied warranties are voided by written disclaimers such as "As Is", etc. Shop owners should know all this

Yea, we do. Judges have made it abundantly clear, that a signed waiver is written proof that the shop failed to repair the car correctly.

You should have known that.......

Mr_Shiftright

Never heard of such a thing. AS IS or a disclaimer signed by the customer, holds up very nicely in court. If you don't think so, try to beat it someday.

Case in point---I can sell a car to someone without a smog certificate, even though the law says I must provide one, if the buyer waives his right to one. He cannot then come back and ask me to smog the car because it failed smog.

stever

Good example, be "fun" to play it out.

The BAR site says "the seller is legally responsible for making sure that the vehicle's emission (smog) control equipment complies with state requirements. There is no provision in the law allowing a seller to sell a vehicle "as is."

The exceptions listed at the CA DMV are for newer models (less than 4 years old) and transfers to family members.

Skimming the net, it sounds like DMV really only cares that the car gets smogged and they won't chase after a seller in any event, waiver or not. Other people say you can only sell a car for parts that way. What the judge says probably depends on what she had for breakfast. :P

Maybe you could contact BAR and see if they know of any cases?

thecardoc3

Selling cars has its own quirks and perils.

Start your search with topics such as not using O.E. approved coolants, and universal transmission fluid. Here we have a manufacturer saying their fluid can be used in any make or model, a problem arrises, and the shop loses simply because they used that product instead of one that meets the O.E. spec. Meanwhile the manufacturer turns on the shop stating that somewhere on the bottle it also says (in much smaller print) be sure to check vehicle specs.

I'll have to get permission to post specific cases that I am aware of where the signed waiver was turned into written proof that the shop knew the car wasn't repaired correctly. It's cost several of them thousands of dollars.

Even now, as you get to see the details of these someone would say the shop was dumb for trying to do something that way, even tough it was all about trying to save the customer money.

isellhondas

Back when I was very young and ran a very busy shop I quickly learned tha hard way that trying to save a customer money ALWAYS backfired.

It took a couple of painful lessons but I finally did learn.

Mr_Shiftright

It's not that simple.

"As Is" contracts are legally binding as long as there is no misrepresentation as long as the defects noted could be known and seen by both parties---this is my understanding of it.

The same applies to signed waivers. The problems arise when unseen and unknown problems intervene into the equation. If say you replace a used timing belt and make the customer sign a waiver, and the belt breaks and lunches the engine, I think the court would uphold the waiver. If you strip the bolts on the timing belt tensioner during re-install, and this causes a failure, then you may have problems.

As for the smog cert, yep, that's what DMV 'says', but if you sell the car as a "parts car" under a waiver, I don't see how anyone is going to be able to get at you for not providing a smog cert.

Look ANYONE can see ANYONE for ANYTHING...just because there was a court case doesn't mean the law isn't a good one.

In the final analysis, good shops DO often try to save a client money if they've had a long working relationship with them. To offer this out of hand to strangers is generally a bad idea.

thecardoc3

In the final analysis, good shops DO often try to save a client money if they've had a long working relationship with them. To offer this out of hand to strangers is generally a bad idea.

We do everything that can to save our customers from unreasonable expenses. We do that by getting training, and investing in the correct tools and information.

Mr_Shiftright

Yeah but that's helping YOU. I mean situations where you have a very good customer, and they NEED to install a used part, or they NEED for you to put new brake pads on slightly scored rotors (still in spec otherwise) or they NEED for you to clean up an expensive battery cable rather than replace it---things like that.

thecardoc3

We do everything that can to save our customers from unreasonable expenses. We do that by getting training, and investing in the correct tools and information.

Yeah but that's helping YOU.

I could take this in so many different directions right now. If you really think that investing in training, equipment, and information in order to be ready to do the best job one possibly can is done for anybody other than the customers, then why are you trying to give them advice? You're really not qualified to do so. JMHO :mad:

I mean situations where you have a very good customer, and they NEED to install a used part, or they NEED for you to put new brake pads on slightly scored rotors (still in spec otherwise) or they NEED for you to clean up an expensive battery cable rather than replace it---things like that.

Now your right back to having a signed document that proves that the shop knew they weren't repairing the car correctly. :sick:

Waffling back and forth between ideas that support a professional approach and other ideas that do not may sit well with people who don't really know any better.

Mr_Shiftright

But you own a shop so you aren't impartial about this. I don't own one, so I see your investment in tools and training as normal, justifiable self-interest, not a humanitarian gesture :P

You're a business, not a favor-granting charity.

isellhondas

Alll of your tools, equipment and experience have nothing to do with cutting a corner in order to save a customer money.

A guy who is out of work and trying to find a job while supporting his family blows his clutch.

The customer is in a tough situation and he asks you if there is ANYTHING you can do to save him some money.

So, you look at the throwout bering and it looks and feels just fine. You inspect the flywheel and it too looks fine.

You then call the customer and tell him..." Normally we replace throwout bearings and resurface the flywheel when we do clutch jobs and I reccommend that we do this on your car as well...but...I think we can get by with just replacing the disc and pressure plate and save you a few bucks"

The grateful customer agrees to this and when he picks up his car, clearly written on the R.O. is..." Reccommend replacement of the throwout bearing and resurfacing of the flywheel....customer declined at this time.

Have the customer initial that part.

Three months later, the throwout bearing starts making noise.

Chances are, the customer will write it off as just plain bad luck but IF he decides to take you to Small Claims Court you will win the case UNLESS you get some idiot of a judge which can happen.

To Mr. Shiftrights point, knowing your customer will make a big difference on what you should decide to do.

thecardoc3

Three months later, the throwout bearing starts making noise

A few posts ago you mentioned that it took you a long time to learn the lesson about trying to save someone money. Three months later, you'll be pulling this apart and installing the throw-out bearing on your own dime, fully accomplishing the goal of saving them money. You'll still be considered a rip-off for letting them get into that position in the first place.

OR

You can simply give them all of their money back for the clutch job that you failed to repair correctly, again accomplishing the goal of saving them money.

OR

You get to pay their bill from another shop who went in and repaired the vehicle correctly when they sue you, or call the BBB on you. Remember today that initialed waiver statement is documented proof that you failed to repair the car correctly. You will get to hear statements like, "You knew that bearing wasn't going to last so you left it in just to get to make more money off of them when it had to be taken back apart".

If you have no intention of repairing the car correctly, then don't do it at all. Take a twenty out of your pocket, hand it to them and tell them your sorry about their luck. You'll both be better off by doing instead of attempting to cut corners and do some kind of a hack job.

thecardoc3

Any (new) readers get this far? How fitting it is that this thread has reached this point. This is a good picture of just what it's like day after day for a tech like myself inside a shop. It's 3:15 am, and this will take me about ten minutes to write, then I'll be onto studying the multiplexed rear door (tailgate) controls for a 1999 Toyota 4 Runner. Toyota's diagnostics include lines like substitute known good part. Does anyone have a spare tailgate module, or body control module to try? I sure don't. Had Toyota been as advanced as american cars that multiplexed circuit would have been accessable with a scan tool. Now an aftermarket tool typically would not support a system like that, but the O.E. tools for domestic cars usually do. I have the Toyota factory scan tool for that car and it doesn't have access to that system, Toyota didn't think to do that for the technicians. Contrary to Shiftrights opnion, owning that tool isn't about me or my shop, it's about doing everything that we are supposed to do for our customers, in spite of the pressures to do otherwise that are clearly demonstrated in some of the responses here.

In one post a couple weeks back you see a technician called a moron for over tightening a drain plug, then when the suggestion to use a torque wrench to tighten the plug was posted the tech was alleged to be incompetent once again. That kind of inconsistency causes the problems that you experience when a repair goes arwy. I wonder if you (the reader) can picture just what its like being a young technician and getting shamed for making a mistake, and then again for taking the necessary steps to never repeat that same mistake. Here in the last couple of posts you see pressure that amounts to being shamed for repairing someone's car completely and right the first time, and you can darn well be sure the tech would be shamed if the attempt to cut a corner failed.

Now do you really wonder why it's hard to find good technicians? We are out here, you just don't know where to look because of flawed "expert" advice.

Well that's my ten minutes, I need to research and study so I can figure out my customers rear window and wiper problem on that Toyota. I own the O.E. tool because it makes me more efficient and better at my job, for my customers benefit and this time it can't help me at all.

kyfdx

Lots of new readers...

Probably 50-100 for every person that posts in the discussion....

Very interesting... thanks!

isellhondas

None of those "OR's" would have happened to me because I would have made it VERY clear to my customer that not replacing that T.O. bearing would be taking a chance. A small chance, but nevertheless a chance.

Not replacing a perfectly good T.O. bearing is not repairing a car "incorrectly"

Maybe that was a bad example but knowing your customer would be paramount in a situation like this. For a new customer or one that I remotely suspected could be trouble, I wouldn't do this.

thecardoc3

Maybe that was a bad example but knowing your customer would be paramount in a situation like this. For a new customer or one that I remotely suspected could be trouble, I wouldn't do this

It's really a fine example of the pressures we face. Someone wants to claim we are wrong if we replace the T.O. bearing, and of course we are wrong if (when) it fails if we don't. Along with "fair" always being a two way street, there has to be a correct answer for every repair, each time, up front. Creating a situation that has us get to be wrong both ways is self serving from your perspective and a set of conditions that we can't live with and nobody shoiuld have to. For us the choice actually becomes, take the risk and if we get lucky, no-one remembers while if we lose everyone finds out we did shoddy work and it's now our problem regardless of what someone signed. The worst part is the losses incurred by doing the job incorrectly the first time actually have to be passed onto the other customers. That means that it is not in our customers best interest to take such risks.

Furthermore:
You cannot judge the condition of a T.O. bearing accurately. It's either bad right now, or you have no idea if it will last a day, a week or a year. For the forty bucks one typically costs, why would anyone risk $400-$600 in labor?
The same thing goes for resurfacing the pressure plate. It's inexperience that is suggesting that it's OK to simply replace the clutch disc and pressure plate.

Again there is nothing wrong with the choice of example, choose a different repair and you'll simply create a different case of trying to make us be wrong both ways.

stever

I have one. :shades:

Older sedan, I think it's a Chrysler Sebring, 2002 or 2003. AC dies, dealer says ~$2,000 to replace (i.e., fix it "right"). The car is worth maybe $3,500.

Owner is moving to Alaska. Seems like the "right" fix here is just to cut that system out of the loop. Cheap and the cooling won't be missed (not every car out there uses an AC to "condition" the air for defrosting purposes, but that's about the only scenario I can come up as a layman with that would indicate the need to fix the problem "right").

Mr_Shiftright

Well presuming that they don't cut the car's cooling fans out of the loop as well ! :surprise:

also if the car has automatic climate control, that could be a problem.

But sure, a 2002 Chrysler Sebring is practically worthless. Refitting the entire AC system makes more dollars than sense :P

RE: Throw-Out Bearing Scenario --- aw, this wasn't the best example, since a throw-out bearing is so freakin' cheap I can't imagine anyone trying to save money that way. That would be like replacing the windshield and insisting on using the old seal----c'mon!

thecardoc3

In your example, the solution is a clear "Do not fix it" and has no suggestion associated to it that the car will operate fully, or correctly.

So "what If" instead of fixing it correctly, you get a used compressor that "has a good pulley" and swap that in without connecting the AC lines. Half way to Alaska, that pulley bearing fails just like the original one did.
How did your fix do?

Mr_Shiftright

well that's tough luck for the owner. He made his bet and took his chances. Is he really going to tow his car 2,000 miles back home and file a Small Claims court suit for $400? with his own signed waiver staring him in the face?

Doubt it.

stever

the solution is a clear "Do not fix it"

If I'm understanding you correctly, you're saying the correct fix is to junk the car?

We've been telling her that for three years now, lol.

srs_49

...there has to be a correct answer for every repair, each time, up front.

Unfortunately, that's not going to happen because you and even your customer doesn't have or make available to you all the info needed to arrive at the correct answer. You are never going to have (none of us ever do) ALL the information needed to make the correct call, ALL of the time. Even if you think you have all the info, there is probably stuff out there you are not aware of that might influence your decision. It's the unknown-unknowns that get ya. So you do the best you can with the limited information available and use your judgment to fill in the gaps. That's the best any of us can ever do.

Back to the clutch/TO bearing/flywheel resurfacing example. If you have a car that you'd like to keep for just a while longer (say a year or so), and it needs a clutch, then I might tell you to put in the TO bearing for a couple of more bucks but forget about resurfacing the flywheel. I'm not looking for five years out of this repair, only one more.

You use the example of the owner not wanting to spend the $40 for the TO bearing, then it goes out and needs to be replaced several moths later. Fair enough.

But, the other side of that coin would be how many owners make the same choice about not replacing the TO bearing, or resurfacing the flywheel, have just the clutch replaced and they get the year or two or more life out of the vehicle they were looking for???

I agree that the TO bearing is probably not the best example because it's such a low cost relative to the total cost of the job.

But the AC example would be a no brainer - leave it be or just take it out of the system. I did that with my 87 '325 that I paid $2500 for back in 1999 (I think). No way was I going to pay half the price of the car to repair a nice-to-have-20-days-out-of-the-year option. Even here in the Mid Atlantic!

Mr_Shiftright

If a shop insists on replacing my two front rotors to the tune of $450 because of a few tiny grooves on an otherwise meaty disc, I'm going to go elsewhere.

I find perfectionist mechanics a bit too rich for my tastes sometimes. I'd like to think that I know the difference between being thrifty and being stupid.

Brake shoes -- $450
Brake socks -- $350
New horns -- $300
New clarinets $400

:P

isellhondas

OK, I agree my T.O. bearing was a bad example but there are a lot of other, better examples.

I know shops that insist on replacing calipers everytime they do a brake job. I can honestly say I have NEVER had a caliper leak or hang up. Yes, it CAN happen and if it does hang up six months after a brake job is done, there will be sme customers who will ask..." You just put new brakes on my car...do you expect me to pay more now"?

Sometimes a shop just can't win! I know that, cardoc from personal experience.

You can't replace EVERYTHING while you are "in there" so you try to replace the things you think could fail in a reasnoble time.

Mr_Shiftright

I don't want a shop to be merely "covering their butt" with my wallet. I like diligence, I like a high degree of competence, but I don't like "shotgun" repairs.

isellhondas

Exactly my point.

A shop can't protect themselves against every possible thing that CAN go wrong unless they wring a customer's wallet dry.

And most reasnoble customers know this.

stickguy

I had to go through this recently, with my odyssey.

Need brakes, as the pads were pretty well done. No other issues though.

so, the tire/brake shop I used a few times checks it out, and writes up the quote. Including new rotors (over 1/2 the cost right there).

after some discussion, and looking at them with the writer, they were within spec (but not where they probably should be cut, though they still would have just been within). Overall pretty good shape. Minor rust, a few marks but no grooves. And straight, since I had no shimmy.

now, of course they recommend to replace them as the best course. and warned that it is a common reason to have a return (just doing pads).

but, from my standpoint, it was better to just do pads, since the risk/reward was on my side (it really would not have cost much more total to do the rotors later on by themselves, and if I never needed them, I was $300 tot he good).

Not really a hard call to me, since I knew that I was selling it soon, but I still wanted to have it in good shape. So I put pads on, the brakes worked fine, and that was it.

Now, if I was to keep the van another 5 years, I probably would have said to heck with it and thrown on rotors too, but never know.

but bottom line, it did not "need" rotors, but the shop certainly had incentive to recommend them (extra $ of course, but as cardoc said, less chance of a return or unhappy customer). So is it always the right thing, or in the customers best interest, or safest (CYA) for the shop?

stever

Click and Clack talked about this on their show years ago. The shops started replacing rotors as a normal practice because they were losing money on the call backs. Most owners aren't as savvy as you and got irritated at brake noise as new pads got broken in to the grooves (or worse) on existing pads. So they would go back to the shop and complain, and often the shop had to eat some costs on labor.

Mr_Shiftright

a perfect opportunity for the shop to write on the R.O:

"without new rotors, brakes may squeak. Owner understands and agrees"

(sign here).

Done! :P

thecardoc3

but, from my standpoint, it was better to just do pads, since the risk/reward was on my side (it really would not have cost much more total to do the rotors later on by themselves, and if I never needed them, I was $300 tot he good).

OK so you have never been to training on brakes and learned just how they really work. The first time the brake pads hit the rotor (used, machined, or new) material transfers from the pads to the surface of the rotor, and other materials transfer from the surface of the rotor to the pads. You get one shot at this, and foreign material on either component and you have brake pads that are contaminated and now whether they make a noise or not is totally random.

When we install a set of pads and rotors, or if we have machined the rotors, (which is getting to be quite rare) we have to make sure that they are completely clean. If the rotors are new, we use a brake cleaner to remove any corrosion protection, and then they get washed down with a dish washing solution to make sure there are no petroleum products left behind from the brake cleaner. Machined rotors simply need washed down with the dish washing liquid and rinsed.

One installed the first road test includes a routine that burnishes in the brakes. The first few applications actually require much more pedal effort to achieve a particular rate of deceleration as compared to the last few. Essentially what is happenig is brake pad material is melting off of the pads and being applied to the surface of the rotor. Brake pad material, squeezed against a steel rotor doesn't have as much friction as brake pad material against brake pad material.

In the case of non machined rotors, micro-cracking in the rotors surface, and old pad material bonded onto it make for very unpredictable results, of which noise is only one possibility. You can get pulls to one side or the other that can vary with brake temperature. You can (and usually do) end up with pulsations that occur at some brake temperatures but not under low demand situations. You quite often get low speed groans (slip/stick noise) when first starting out after the car sat overnight.

As far as customers wanting it repaired for free they say, "It never did it before you put those brakes on". Now just what would a disclaimer have to look like to prevent a free brake job? Your going to have to mention the brakes are not guaranteed for squeels, growls, pulls, pulsations, vibrations, wheel dust, odors,,,,, Ah heck, you might as well say the list will be long enough that I don't know why anyone would purchase your "brake job".

So why don't we machine rotors like we used to anymore? It has to do with the cooling passages which once they start corroding cause different parts of the rotor to expand at different rates from the heat from braking. We can machine the two surfaces parrallel in the shop and get a great finish. The brakes work fine for five to eight thousand miles, but then the driver starts to notice that the brakes pulsate when going down a hill, or stopping on interstate exit ramp. At first the system tolerates the uneven surfaces caused by parts of the rotor getting hotter. But those hot spots move around as corrosion grows, and flakes off. The end result is known as rotor surface variation and it's not just a wapred rotor like what you can picture an old vinal record looking like, some parts of the rotor have simply now worn to be thicker than others. The kicker is it only takes .001" of thickness variation to create a sensation that the driver can feel. If it was possible to clean the cooling vanes when we machine the rotors then we could get more serviceable life out of them. However between poor casting habits from offshore suppliers, and lots of rotor designs that have odd patterns that create spaces that we could never reach we cannot ensure proper cooling and that makes replacement the only plausible choice.

Now if you believe that you can do brakes, and be honest, this little essay about rotor cooling caught you by surprise you just got proof that there is a lot more to doing brakes than pushing the pistons back and slapping on a set of pads.

Anyone can do brakes,,,,, INCORRECTLY

You know people make a living writing one article a week with the kind of information I just shared.......

thecardoc3

But sure, a 2002 Chrysler Sebring is practically worthless. Refitting the entire AC system makes more dollars than sense

Spoken as from the perspective of a dealer who makes a living selling that person another car. The truth is we don't really know the serviceable life of that car right now. While $2000 to do an AC repair sounds kind of high at the moment, lets run with it.

$2000, that's half the depreciation that the new car owner realizes the moment they pull their new car off of the dealers parking lot.
It's darn near the sales tax, and likely only 1/3rd of the interest on the loan.

At $500 a month payment for the new car, it's four months payments which then the owner has a chance to try and bank the other eight months for that year. Now sure, other parts will fail and need replaced. But who really believes that $20,000-$25,000 in repairs will be required during the next five years? Meanwhile if they buy the new car, at $500 a month, that's $6000 a year that they are guaranteed to pay out and of course five years later that's $30,000, and then they still have a "used" car that someone else will try to tell them isn't worth fixing.

If they keep their present car, and keep it properlly repaired. It will go twenty years, and 200K-300K miles (and do everything the new one would have). If they pretend that they bought a new car, and make that payment to a savings account, when the day finally comes that they truly need a new car they will have cash for it and still have a sizeable chunk left over. Now if they continue making that car payment to their savings, and have compounded interest working for them instead of against them by the time they truly need another new car, they will have saved themselves a fortune. You know, maybe that's why techs are always under attack. Manufacturers and dealers want that money, and if people let us we could get the customers to be able to keep a lot more of their money. But if we aren't out here, or if they can keep people mistrusting us,,,,,,

srs_49

OK so you have never been to training on brakes and learned just how they really work. The first time the brake pads hit the rotor (used, machined, or new) material transfers from the pads to the surface of the rotor, and other materials transfer from the surface of the rotor to the pads. You get one shot at this, ...

I thought that for the pad material transfer to occur, you have to get the brake system up to temperature (hot), which usually means several, in quick succession, near panic stops from highway speeds? If these temperatures are not reached, then material transfer does not occur, and the the braking function is just pad against steel/iron.

I also read that the bedding process can be repeated, as needed.

stever

Fixing the old Sebring lets you keep driving a car that you know. With the same $2,000, you can buy another Sebring with a working AC.

So I find one and bring it to you for a pre-purchase inspection. What are my odds? :-)

Mr_Shiftright

You're overcomplicating it I think. You can put brake pads on rotors that haven't been machined, and if they have slight grooves in them, they'll work fine. I've done this so many times with no issues whatsoever.

Most car owners don't even know about your level of perfection, nor do they care. Car stops? Pedal is hard? We're done.

You know, let's face it. You're working on a 6 year old Chevy Malibu, not a Boeing 747. Not even a Porsche 911 Turbo (in which case I would install new calipers).

As long as safety isn't compromised, I don't personally see the justification for applying too high a standard to an old used car.

Sure--agreed 100%--- you never duct-tape brake pads to the calipers. :P

marsha7

easy for a shop to put their recommendations on a work order, and the customer signs the order and tells the shop what they want done, so it is the customer who is choosing whether they want the full repair or the patch job...

If I was selling my car in 3 months, and the brakes were squealing, I could replace the pads but not resurface/replace the rotors (as long as it was within safety limits) because I do not want to put that much $$$ into the car...if the rotors have a problem, then the customer must pay the extra, because they chose to do less than what the shop recommended...

Why is this such a problem???...the customer wants the right to determine how they spend their money, and when they make the cheap choice and it backfires on them, why is the shop responsible???...the thing citizens forget is when they want the right to choose, with that right comes (gasp!!!) RESPONSIBILITY!!!!!

thecardoc3

I've done this so many times with no issues whatsoever.

Back when we used to have organic pads? Yea, you probably did. Today you'd have more than half of your brake jobs coming back with complaints.

As long as safety isn't compromised, I don't personally see the justification for applying too high a standard to an old used car.

There is fixing them right which means making them work like they did when the car was new, and then there is doing half of the job and making yourself and the rest of the trade look bad in the process.

Most car owners don't even know about your level of perfection, nor do they care. Car stops? Pedal is hard? We're done.

You need to get a job in a shop. You'll learn who "Everette Sinchoo" is.

Mr_Shiftright

"There is fixing them right which means making them work like they did when the car was new..."


that probably means they'll squeal. :P

thecardoc3

While were at it...

http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/hwtr/betterbrakes.html

Mr_Shiftright

That's a good thing--it will compel the imagination and skill of the brake pad manufacturers.

Regulation has certainly improved the modern automobile in the past. Perhaps not the styling of them, or the cost, but it pushed automakers to do better.

stickguy

actually, it was a Honda, so it probably means they would grind, rotors would warp, and the pads would wear out prematurely (take your pick of any/all, since my Accord and Odyssey both had inherent issues with 2 of those common to the model problems!)

stever

Why is this such a problem???...

Because someone will get irritated that they paid all that money for a brake job and their brakes squeal. So they'll go to the neighborhood shyster lawyer who will write a demand letter for $500. And the shop will pay it to avoid having to pay the same amount to their own lawyer to reply to you the shyster denying everything.

Better just to turn down the work in the first place.

Then when the owner leaves the shop with bad brakes to cruise over to Midas and they get run over trying to stop for a red light, they sue the first shop anyway for letting them drive an unsafe vehicle off the lot. Queue the lawyer. :shades:

Mr_Shiftright

Hopefully not---- they should contact their "errors and omissions" insurance company, and tell the customer to stuff it, while waving the waiver in their face. Small Claims court would kick the shyster out on his butt I think.

A good shop can smell trouble, or a troublesome client. This is part of the skill of doing business.

stever

I've heard that just phoning the insurance company with a "hypothetical", much less a real incident, can cause your rates to climb. Or they could cancel you if you do make a "minor" claim for $500.

lemko

That's a great strategy for somebody who has the will power and/or really, really likes his current car. Most folks I meet think a car payment is something that should be a constant expense like the electric bill.