When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I am NOT going to give the name of the company that did this service...becasue all I am trying to express is that you should NEVER assume anything...regardless on who it comes form...and you will shorty read why this is true.
These are FACTS and not my opinion on this matter and unless a person chooses not to acknowledge GM's service information...then I guess that person will want to debate this.
First off...read this out of the GM Corvette service manual.
it CLEARLY states that when a rotor is being turned down...it CAN NOT be surfaced thinner that 1.230". So,,,turning it to 1.228" is not good or any thickness under the 1.230"
I customer of mine sent his two trailing arms out for rebuilding at this company because the costs were cheaper than if I did it. There was an extra charge for indexing the rotors to the spindles and I told him I DID NOT want the rotors riveted back on due to it is not required.
The company that he sent them to, who I know should do a good job due to being in business a very long time. When the trailing arms came in the trailing arms looked very good. And the rear wheel bearings were also done correctly.\
But here is where the problem begins. The rotors were machined BELOW the minimum of 1.230 when completed.
These two photos show what they measured at.
1.219"
1.218"
Not that this was bad enough...that these rotors are now about .003" to .004" of an inch from discarding them....because if you remember...in rotor information above...it clearly states that discard is at 1.215".
The sad thing about this is that the rotors that were sent with the trailing arms where at 1.247" and 1.245" respectively. If I still had them at the shop I could have saved them and not needed to cut them down as badly as they had. I assumed they knew what they were doing... a big error on my account for assuming that.
Also it is a crying shame that this company has not figured out how to use the shims that are available ...even if they rivet the rotor back on so they do not have to machine off so much metal....OR...realize that they are turning rotors down too far.
Thank goodness I did not have the rotors riveted back on because when I went in and installed brand new rotors and indexed them by using shim material as needed. I also noticed that the adjuster on one trailing arm was not installed correctly and it needed to be corrected. because its position is critical in order to follow GM's outline on how to tighten up the parking brake shoes for adjustment. IF these rotors were riveted back on..it would have been a waste of time and money.
Correct procedure to using the screwdriver on the adjuster.
Clearly stated in the fifth paragraph. Your hand raises up when tightening the park brake shoes. One trailing arm was backwards and I had to go down with the screwdriver. Something that should NOT have been overlooked if they were paying attention....or trying to do so much for so little money.
Lastly here is the written text that states the rotors do not need to be riveted back on. People can do as they wish in this area...but I prefer not to for making it easier on some service operations.
So...just because your trailing arms come in looking great may still make them not right.
Yeah - its a little tricky. The result seems to be we'll have to send off our stuff to a company we think is good and wait until it comes back to measure things and find a defect ?
That sucks.
Maybe a call to the company would make them change their methods -- maybe not; I prefer to give 'em the benefit of the doubt that they want to improve...
It does not matter if the rotors where the EXACTLY same ones that where sent to them . They were delivered back UNDER the MINIMUM thickness AFTER being machined as outlined in the GM manual. Simply put....they are WRONG...if people care to observe what is written in the GM manual.
Therason I am not sat=yignwho did this is due teu backlash would last for a decade or even longer. look at ewhat happened to Corvette Image adnb STILL ther ar people that bring up[ a issue they ahd withtheior product. I feel it would nto be fair.
Think of it like how the highway patrol officer who had me 'dead to rights' speeding on the way to Florida when I was going there to bury my Father. He saw the carp that I had already gone though with the rental car company taking so long to get me my car and I left Charlotte MUCH later than I needed to and I had to get to Orlando. THEN if that was not bad enough..I got hit in the rental car in Columbia SC and had to wait for ANOTHER rental car....so...when the highway patrol offer caught me speeding on south I-95...and I showed him an accident report where the guy that hit me in Columbia ran away from the scene...he let me go and GAVE ME THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT.....event though he could have wrote me a ticket.
I am just trying to 'pay it forward' ,...and let them do their own thing and if they change their procedure...fine...if not...oh well.
St. Jude Donor '09-'10-'11-'12-'13-'14-'15-'16-'17-'18-‘19-'20-'21-'22-'23-'24
Well, you have given us part of the story. What did the company do/say when your customer called and said they had machined from 1.247 down to 1.218? Did they at least make an adjustment in the charge? Splitting the cost of new rotors would be an appropriate thing to do IMHO.
DUB's point on taking nothing for granted is valid - "Trust, but verify". The vendor clearly messed up but that can happen. The real measure of that company is how they handle their mistakes once they are made aware of them.
NOT one word was mentioned to my customer about what they did to the rotors that were darn near brand new in regards to thickness. New rotors are 1.250" thick.
All I do know is that my customer did mention that they called and they had to replace BOTH spindles.
NO cost adjustment due to THEY feel what they did is CORRECT...when CLEARLY it is not due to the text in the manual I posted. NO price adjustment was given...they sent out two rotors that I wrote were badly pitted so I put a pair of new rotors on myself and indexed them in.
Are they the only company that can do this work? I guess you get what you pay for. I would call them out on it or post who it was. Why worry about backlash if they don't machine things properly or do poor work? It's not really a buyer beware, since we don't know who we would be buying from.
If you send a carb out to be rebuilt, do you take it apart to see if it was rebuilt correctly when you get it back? If you send your master cylinder out to be restored and resleeved, do you take it apart when you get it back to check their work? My point is, people don't have special tools or equipment to check things after you send them out for rebuilding. You have to assume everything is working properly.
Don't take this as being argumentative, but why post about a company that did poor work, but not tell us who it was.
Like you said, you're posting facts, not opinion. Can't see why the company would be mad at you for writing factual information about what they did incorrectly.
If I sent my fuel pump out for a rebuild and it was leaking like a sieve when I put it back into service, I would be contacting that company and asking for another rebuild since they didn't do it correctly and if they said no, sorry, well you can be damn sure I would be posting about their shoddy work and who it was so other people can be informed and make a decision on whether to use them or not.
Are they the only company that can do this work? I guess you get what you pay for. I would call them out on it or post who it was. Why worry about backlash if they don't machine things properly or do poor work? It's not really a buyer beware, since we don't know who we would be buying from.
If you send a carb out to be rebuilt, do you take it apart to see if it was rebuilt correctly when you get it back? If you send your master cylinder out to be restored and resleeved, do you take it apart when you get it back to check their work? My point is, people don't have special tools or equipment to check things after you send them out for rebuilding. You have to assume everything is working properly.
Don't take this as being argumentative, but why post about a company that did poor work, but not tell us who it was.
Like you said, you're posting facts, not opinion. Can't see why the company would be mad at you for writing factual information about what they did incorrectly.
If I sent my fuel pump out for a rebuild and it was leaking like a sieve when I put it back into service, I would be contacting that company and asking for another rebuild since they didn't do it correctly and if they said no, sorry, well you can be damn sure I would be posting about their shoddy work and who it was so other people can be informed and make a decision on whether to use them or not.
I agree with BlueStreak 63. No offense DUB, But when it says" buyer beware ", it's not very helpful when we don't know who to beware of.
FWIW this is literally hair splitting. I turned my rears down to + - 1.20
8 years and 14,000 miles ago.
Rotors are still on their original rivets from 1966 so we didnt want to give up on them and turned them right on the car..
Of course the mfr has to give parameters. There are plenty other examples of GM specs commonly ignored and no I have not had any issues with the brakes.
Having said all that if this was my 15K miles per year daily driver I would have replaced them.
Quality control issue or simply an inexperienced machinist. "Trust but Verify", as mentioned earlier, really applies to these cars. I always, always, always, check machine work when I get an engine back, etc. If it can be inspected or measured, I do it. Once went to a torque converter shop to get a converter for a transmission I was building, and every single one of their converters had the end-play out of spec. Their equipment was out of calibration. Checked 50-60 new converters, and every one was junk. It can happen. A lot easier to measure and check as DUB did before it goes on the car and the problem is found later on, that's for sure. Great post, DUB!
Well, you have given us part of the story. What did the company do/say when your customer called and said they had machined from 1.247 down to 1.218? Did they at least make an adjustment in the charge?
I called them because when the customer was shown that the rotors were screwed up and cut to thin....The customer said "Go ahead and put them in"l...BUT I know better...because I AM THE PROFESSIONAL and I made the call. Just because a customer wants something done does not make it right. And this is because I am liable for the work.
No price adjustment.,..they sent me two used rotors that were pitted badly...but were right at the same thickness as what was initially sent in. so I put two new ones on myself and got them indexed.
None of this matters...it is the fact that a company that has been in business for longer than I have SHOULD KNOW about how far they can cut rotors....that is what amazed me. Which is why I called and talked with the owner of that business and then the heated debate began when I was talking with guy who did the work.
AS stated..it is hard to dispute the facts that I posted and showing what the rotor thickness is. It has nothing to do with how they handled it...it is the FACT that it happened by this company and that is why I THOUGHT I was doing a good thing and let the owner know what was wrong.
Just curious why you won't say who it was? Are you worried about backlash from them? Are they a corvette forum vendor?
Originally Posted by Frankie the Fink
Hopefully its not Bair's or Van Steel, I've had good luck with both...
Originally Posted by tuxnharley
Maybe Dub could tell us who it wasn't, and then let us draw our own conclusions.
Right now there is doubt about all of them. It would be nice to clear that up......
And here's one of the reasons these "look out for" threads that don't tell you who to look out for become problematic... they all evolve into the guessing game.
I think DUB has made his point about "trust but verify" , specifically about the parts discussed here, but I believe continuing to rehash who it might be is not productive. If DUB wants to inform members which company to avoid based on his experience, he's welcome to start a Transaction Feedback thread that all members would have access to and benefit by.
05-11-2017, 06:44 PM
***warning***buyer beware*** warning***
Maybe Dub could tell us who it wasn't, and then let us draw our own conclusions.
