911 returnd from dealer with molegrips in suspension spring

[Trev450]

chrisABP said:

With these feet said:

I'd not be happy at all.
Apart from the fact they didn't road test the car after they replaced the springs - if they had they would have noticed the noise, the mole grips are there to prevent the damper rod rotating when doing the top nut up. Probably means they've spun the damper rod, couldn't do the nut up, one lad fits the grips and holds them, the other does up the nut. One assumes the other removed the grips afterwards.... Its a fairly common thing to use the grips to do this, otherwise you can damage the damper spinning it repeatedly. That's not to say they didn't do that before using them.

^ If the grips were indeed used on the shock absorber piston rod then you need to have the shocks replaced as under NO circumstances should the piston rod be gripped in this way. Once the piston rod is gripped it no longer provides a perfect seal when passing through the shock-absorber and this will result in the shock absorber leaking.

Really bad practice and if I were the OP I would be mighty p****d off.

Absolutely. The usual method for tightening the top mount nut is to use an impact wrench.

[NJH]

There is no good reason for a pair of grips to be in there, I would look carefully to see if the grips were tight on the damper rod and if yes then reject the damper as its now scrap. Changing front struts is pretty easy actually, I did the pair on our old 968 and have stripped em down twice on the race car. I also don't agree with the note about use of windy guns, there is no good reason other than expediency to ever use an air gun to tighten nuts. One will note for example that the good tyre shops will only use them to get nuts up to finger tight then torque the nuts properly with a torque wrench.

[LordOfTheManor]

This guy is right, what part of the country was the OPC

NJH said:

There is no good reason for a pair of grips to be in there, I would look carefully to see if the grips were tight on the damper rod and if yes then reject the damper as its now scrap. Changing front struts is pretty easy actually, I did the pair on our old 968 and have stripped em down twice on the race car. I also don't agree with the note about use of windy guns, there is no good reason other than expediency to ever use an air gun to tighten nuts. One will note for example that the good tyre shops will only use them to get nuts up to finger tight then torque the nuts properly with a torque wrench.

[keep it lit]

[LordOfTheManor]

I'm the one without the RS, I mean chair

[richardrsc]

LordOfTheManor said:

I think I'm probably not supposed to say with the name and shame thing, but will msg you. I have no doubt they will put it right, but its concerning that something like this could have caused damage which may not have become apparent for some time.

Not what we pay silly hourly rates for.

[bearman68]

NJH said:

There is no good reason for a pair of grips to be in there, I would look carefully to see if the grips were tight on the damper rod and if yes then reject the damper as its now scrap. Changing front struts is pretty easy actually, I did the pair on our old 968 and have stripped em down twice on the race car. I also don't agree with the note about use of windy guns, there is no good reason other than expediency to ever use an air gun to tighten nuts. One will note for example that the good tyre shops will only use them to get nuts up to finger tight then torque the nuts properly with a torque wrench.

No, not right. Windy gun is excellent for tightening the top nut, as the impact turns the nut and not the damper shaft. This makes it much, much easier to tighten the nut to the home position, rather than holding the damper with the poxy T40, and trying to get a spanner around it. I personally would then check with a torque wrench once the nut is home. Windy guns are good on all sorts of suspension bushes for the same reason. (Superb on cylinder head bolts too - Oh, no, hang on.....)
Agree with the rest of the comment though.

[IREvans]

With these feet said:

I'd not be happy at all.
Apart from the fact they didn't road test the car after they replaced the springs - if they had they would have noticed the noise, the mole grips are there to prevent the damper rod rotating when doing the top nut up. Probably means they've spun the damper rod, couldn't do the nut up, one lad fits the grips and holds them, the other does up the nut. One assumes the other removed the grips afterwards.... Its a fairly common thing to use the grips to do this, otherwise you can damage the damper spinning it repeatedly. That's not to say they didn't do that before using them.

Sorry, but you should never grip the damper rod to tighten up the top mount. Its a polished surface which passes through a seal, and any marking on it will lead to damper failure.

[5517]

This OPC needs naming now!!!!

Holy Sh17!!!!!!!!!!!

Cowboy central.

[Guybrush]

5517 said:

This OPC needs naming now!!!!

Holy Sh17!!!!!!!!!!!

Cowboy central.

Yes, name please.

[Slippydiff]

keep it lit said:

Not ideal finding a set of Molegrips holding onto your damper rod for grim death
I can't see a problem with using Molegrips IF they're located at the very top of the damper rod in an area where the damper rod seal won't run. Bearing in mind the damper will be running a standard bumpstop that even when fully compressed will probably be 20mm thick, that leaves plenty of room for the grips (if carefully positioned.......)
Added to which the damper rod is hard chromed, careful selection of the Molegrips used should ensure that the teeth on the jaws don't damage the surface.
The above's not to suggest that this practice is recommended, Porsche do after all have a very specific tool for undertaking the removal of the top mount securing nut ........

[HorneyMX5]

If you really do have to use grips then putting some silicon tubing in the jaws gives plenty of grip but nothing to damage the shaft.

er.... matron.

[domster]

Guybrush said:

Yes, name please.

No naming and shaming allowed, or a useful thread will die an unseemly death thanks to the Haymarket legal team Locke & De Leat.

[richardrsc]

"Hi Mr RichardRSC, Just calling to let you know your car is all ready - the technician has removed his tool and has checked it out and says it's all OK"

I'm not even paraphrasing.... I've asked for a report in writing, cos I'm buggered if I'm paying for new suspension if it craps out in a few months time.

[Silent1]

richardrsc said:

"Hi Mr RichardRSC, Just calling to let you know your car is all ready - the technician has removed his tool and has checked it out and says it's all OK"

I'm not even paraphrasing.... I've asked for a report in writing, cos I'm buggered if I'm paying for new suspension if it craps out in a few months time.

Of course they'll say it's ok as they don't want to pay to fix it, if it was me I'd be pouting out that using mole grips on the damper isn't the correct way to undo the top nut and is likely to have damaged your damper and as you never change them alone you need to change them in pairs.

[richardrsc]

domster said:

No naming and shaming allowed, or a useful thread will die an unseemly death thanks to the Haymarket legal team Locke & De Leat.

How does that work anyway, I don't have any intention of publically naming them, but if it's entirely truthful, what's the problem in saying it? Or do PH just remove a thread on the slightest threat?

[With these feet]

IREvans said:

With these feet said:

I'd not be happy at all.
Apart from the fact they didn't road test the car after they replaced the springs - if they had they would have noticed the noise, the mole grips are there to prevent the damper rod rotating when doing the top nut up. Probably means they've spun the damper rod, couldn't do the nut up, one lad fits the grips and holds them, the other does up the nut. One assumes the other removed the grips afterwards.... Its a fairly common thing to use the grips to do this, otherwise you can damage the damper spinning it repeatedly. That's not to say they didn't do that before using them.

Sorry, but you should never grip the damper rod to tighten up the top mount. Its a polished surface which passes through a seal, and any marking on it will lead to damper failure.

I'm not condoning the practice, but where the grips are located is above maximum bump travel. IE if it were to compress that much the spring would have to have snapped for it to pass the oil seal. Far worse would be spinning the shaft with an impact wrench. A slight mark on the chrome plating - which is probably covered by either a bump rubber or the dust cover, would be of no concern, as long as it is directly under the top mount and not the other end!

[sleep envy]

richardrsc said:

"Hi Mr RichardRSC, Just calling to let you know your car is all ready - the technician has removed his tool and has checked it out and says it's all OK"

I'm not even paraphrasing.... I've asked for a report in writing, cos I'm buggered if I'm paying for new suspension if it craps out in a few months time.

[domster]

richardrsc said:

How does that work anyway, I don't have any intention of publically naming them, but if it's entirely truthful, what's the problem in saying it? Or do PH just remove a thread on the slightest threat?

The problem is the burden of proof. Proof wins legal cases, not truth. You are correct that truth is an absolute defence to libel but PH can't get embroiled in the nitty gritty of legal warfare so has to remove all threads of this nature if naming and shaming occurs. For example, say the OPC had a very expensive hot shot lawyer who managed to persuade a judge that you had a grievance with the dealership and suggested that you had put the molegrips in yourself (when you didn't!) and they found against you and Pistonheads, it could be very expensive for all involved. The law isn't always just, right and fair.

If people want to find out the OPC there are common sense ways they can find out, without dragging PH into it, or exposing you (as the OP) to legal action.

Whilst this appears quite clearcut and there appears to be some 'public interest', many other instances of naming and shaming are muddier and a blanket approach to moderation is the only way a busy forum can sensibly operate. Not ideal, not fair, but practical and efficient. It's Haymarket's train set and they call the shots whether I, you or Russell Brand agree with how it works.

[richardrsc]

domster said:

The problem is the burden of proof. Proof wins legal cases, not truth. You are correct that truth is an absolute defence to libel but PH can't get embroiled in the nitty gritty of legal warfare so has to remove all threads of this nature if naming and shaming occurs. For example, say the OPC had a very expensive hot shot lawyer who managed to persuade a judge that you had a grievance with the dealership and suggested that you had put the molegrips in yourself (when you didn't!) and they found against you and Pistonheads, it could be very expensive for all involved. The law isn't always just, right and fair.

If people want to find out the OPC there are common sense ways they can find out, without dragging PH into it, or exposing you (as the OP) to legal action.

Whilst this appears quite clearcut and there appears to be some 'public interest', many other instances of naming and shaming are muddier and a blanket approach to moderation is the only way a busy forum can sensibly operate. Not ideal, not fair, but practical and efficient. It's Haymarket's train set and they call the shots whether I, you or Russell Brand agree with how it works.

Yeh sounds reasonable. Probably why my report in writing seems to be taking a little while!