When is a leaky shock safe?

[Mike748]

Ok now if you went for your first WOF in a 12 month old vehicle (talking cage here, sorry) and it failed because of an oil leak on a front shock what would you expect?
Well I expected it to be replaced as a pair under warranty.

Toyota however think otherwise after they went back to their supplier who said that it is normal seepage and therefore safe, unless the oil leak has reached the bottom plate. WTF!:bash:

Apparently they have been refusing to replace many of these shocks under warranty and there seems to be a large number of them failing.:spanking:

Now this is a work vehicle so not my money involved but I didn't agree and refused to accept their reasoning as,
-how would you know how much fluid has escaped?
-the shock could cease to function effectively before the next WOF.
-It's a new vehicle and I expect it to last a few years before needing repairs like this.
So they eventually caved and now I wait 2-3 weeks as they can't source parts. :oi-grr:

Rant over

[skidMark]

It sounds like so many failed that they went well we can't replace them all so fukit we will make a bullshit excuse until we can get some.

Unbelivable really.

[Rhino]

"Normal seepage"??

That's the biggest load of bollocks I've heard from a manufacturer in along time. As you said, they have no idea how much fluid has leaked out. It could quite easily fail before the next warrant is due.

Normal procedure is to replace shock absorbers, springs etc in pairs. Even thought the vehicle is less than 12 months old, the remaining "good shock" will have deteriorated a certain amount, so both should be replaced.

[Pussy]

There is no "safe" leaky shock. Period

[JMemonic]

Simple it has failed the requirement for usage on New Zealand road therefore is not fit for purpose, and I am sure they knew the purpose before they sold the vehicle. Would be interested in what the vehicle is as we have 2 toyota vans at work that have not yet come up for their first WOF.

[Headbanger]

I hope its not a Hilux.....

[Mike748]

Said vehicle is a Hilux 4x4 ute, plain jane model without the extras, does some heavy towing (2-2.5T) and some light off road work.
Only 22,000 Km on the clock.
Nothing that I would consider worthy of a worn shock.
Appart from the shock issue, these are awesome tow vehicles and the handling and ride is great for a 4x4.

[Katman]

Interestingly the vehicle inspection manual says to fail a shock if it has "excessive" leakage. Is a very subjective issue.

(I tend to take the view that any leakage is excessive).

[Grub]

Since the vehicle has failed a Warrant, Toyota NZ don't have a leg to stand on. They MUST replace the shock, no questions.

If they don't, I'm sure MotoSafe (or whatever they're called now), the AA and LTNZ would be very interested in the story - and the evidence.

(The Grub used to work for two NZ vehicle manufacturers)

[McDuck]

Hmmmm one of techs new toyota vans has had to have a fair amount of engine work done after very noisy tappets then not starting. All this after 1200kms traveled. Not holding up to well it seems.

[Skyryder]

Never.


Skyryder

[barty5]

We had a customer come in with a ford explorer leaking shock failed wof he was gutted went back to ford they replaced it same day bought it back passed sweet as. A leak is a leak and a leak is a fail.

[Motu]

As Katman points out,the wording is ''excessive leak''.More important is the operation of the shock - is it still functioning correctly?.The oil leak wording is only a guide line...if enough fluid has leaked out to effect the working of the shock then it's a fail.A small weep is not detrimental to the safe operation of the damper,so long as there is no fresh fluid around I would consider it a pass.Also on a Hi Ace the shock is not a part of the suspension system,and under the old rules a totaly fucked shock was still a pass....only if it effected the braking performance could it be failed.If Toyota consider it safe,I'd go by their word.Often a manufacturer gives technical information on their vehicles for LTNZ - the amount of play (6mm) allowed in Nissan Primera top links for example.

[Livvy]

Mike - ever watched Fight Club? With the equation about whether or not taking a car in is worth the cost? Yeah. It may not be completely true (though it may be as well, I don't know), but I'd keep it in mind.

I don't own a car nor know terribly much about them, but I would take it in to a mechanic, pay a bit extra and have them check it out with their opinion - if they say it needs fixing, get them to write it up, and go hound the Toyota people with it.

Sorry if someone already said it btw.

[Trouser]

Kind of like 04 honda jazz r/h rear wheel bearings. I know of 5 that have failed and mine wore out after the warrenty expired. I took it in expecting a bit of c.g.a biffo but they said they had never heard of one failing and that honda nz had covered it under a an 'extended warrenty'. Yeah right.

[Dak]

Take it back to your dealer and tell them to replace it, don't take no for an answer. They know about this and it's a known fault. Oh, and demand the pair be replaced, they should always be replaced as a pair.

[madandy]

O have some mates with these vehicles. 2 have done over 100,000kms carrying some quite hefty loads. Other 2 are Greenkeepers work vehicles and not really working hard at all.
No issues yet for all 4.
My 2.4D has done 250,000kms now & apart from servicing and two front shock has so far been typically Hilux dependable.
Maybe Toymota are losing their edge. Its not like they charge as little as the competition for the Hilux so quality shouldn't be suffering!

[Mike748]

Yeah have been joking that some departing Toyota engineer was looking to take the toyota image down a peg or two before he left for the opposition.:Pokey:

Personally the ute is fine to drive and I believe in it's current state quite safe, the problem is in the detail.

Should something happen before they replace the shocks, eg I get stopped at a checkpoint or involved in an accident (touch wood :shutup:) the vehicle is legally classed as unfit for the road.:Police:

I have heard somewhere that if you are in an accident without a current WOF that it will only be an issue if the vehicle is of an unsafe standard in a way that has contributed to the accident.
Anyone know if this is true?

The replacement shocks have supposedly been ordered from Aussie as there are none available here, they won't use aftermarket as it's a warranty issue.

I hope the replacements are to a higher standard!:bash:

[Sollyboy]

Interestingly the vehicle inspection manual says to fail a shock if it has "excessive" leakage. Is a very subjective issue.

(I tend to take the view that any leakage is excessive).

Werent some shocks designed so there was always going to be leakage , I think they called it a wet leg design or something