Chassis - Replace or Repair
Discussion
My '98 Chimaera has major corrosion problems on the chassis outriggers. It's so bad (MOT failure) that the complete outrigger installations will need to be replaced... all this after have had the chassis fettled last summer.
The dealer who serviced the car (Dream Machines in East Sussex) have done a fantastic job and liaised with the TVR factory who have offered a completely new chassis, with current spec finish and coating, at a fixed discounted price. However, we're still talking a lot of money and relatively long waiting period before this can be done. In some ways it is a very good deal as anything that needs replacing, whether mounts, wishbones, carpets etc. is included in cost.
The second option is removal and replacement of the outriggers by a reputable company. This is not something the factory advise or will do (but they didn't give any particular technical problems why it couldn't be done).
In theory the new outriggers should be better than the original, the repair as strong and coating/finish much better than original. It is a cheaper option (about 1/4 of cost of full replacement) but with an underlying thought of how good is the rest of the chassis? Initial inspections look like the central, box sections are reasonably, sound so with future fettling and care should last for the life of the car.
My main concern is how will outrigger replacement be perceived if we want to sell the car sometime in the future (possibly in next 3 to 5 years)?
Has anyone had outriggers replaced? How did the job go and what was the end result?
Has anyone had difficulties selling a car with a similar repair?
What are your views on repair versus replacement?
Any help or advice greatly appreciated.
MC
The dealer who serviced the car (Dream Machines in East Sussex) have done a fantastic job and liaised with the TVR factory who have offered a completely new chassis, with current spec finish and coating, at a fixed discounted price. However, we're still talking a lot of money and relatively long waiting period before this can be done. In some ways it is a very good deal as anything that needs replacing, whether mounts, wishbones, carpets etc. is included in cost.
The second option is removal and replacement of the outriggers by a reputable company. This is not something the factory advise or will do (but they didn't give any particular technical problems why it couldn't be done).
In theory the new outriggers should be better than the original, the repair as strong and coating/finish much better than original. It is a cheaper option (about 1/4 of cost of full replacement) but with an underlying thought of how good is the rest of the chassis? Initial inspections look like the central, box sections are reasonably, sound so with future fettling and care should last for the life of the car.
My main concern is how will outrigger replacement be perceived if we want to sell the car sometime in the future (possibly in next 3 to 5 years)?
Has anyone had outriggers replaced? How did the job go and what was the end result?
Has anyone had difficulties selling a car with a similar repair?
What are your views on repair versus replacement?
Any help or advice greatly appreciated.
MC
Surely having the outriggers replaced is a positive point to any prospective purchaser. Show them before and after shots. Then when they go and look at other cars they will realise how nice yours is underneath. Anyone who knows anything about these cars knows to check the chassis.
Personally I'd be more inclined to ask questions about a car with a completely replaced chassis.
Personally I'd be more inclined to ask questions about a car with a completely replaced chassis.
Thanks for the quick comments. They pretty much cover all the thoughts that I had had too and why the decision is quite a difficult one to make.
As I do have a number of pictures (I don't think the one I included in my original post linked properly to Fotango) to show the state of the chassis before hand. On that basis and correspondance with dealer and factory I could show that replacement was a sensible option, especially with everything else that will be included. In effect it gives the running chassis a clean bill of health at year 6.
I could use a similar argument for repair option but it will always have that niggle whether it is as good as an original chassis and whether the rest of the chassis will need any major work in the future.
It does comes down a lot to cost and we're talking a difference of thousands.... and a major proportion of the car's value (something like 1/3) to replace the chassis (therefore about 1/9th of value for the repair option).
MC
As I do have a number of pictures (I don't think the one I included in my original post linked properly to Fotango) to show the state of the chassis before hand. On that basis and correspondance with dealer and factory I could show that replacement was a sensible option, especially with everything else that will be included. In effect it gives the running chassis a clean bill of health at year 6.
I could use a similar argument for repair option but it will always have that niggle whether it is as good as an original chassis and whether the rest of the chassis will need any major work in the future.
It does comes down a lot to cost and we're talking a difference of thousands.... and a major proportion of the car's value (something like 1/3) to replace the chassis (therefore about 1/9th of value for the repair option).
MC
I think what should be worth considering with the repair option, is the 'new' welding.
About 12 months ago I was on the verge of buying a Cat C Chim with a small amount of chassis damage, (nothing that couldnt be repaired/welded to make safe BTW), but what was pointed out to me, was the fact that a complete weld around the entire joint(s) where outriggers etc meet the main chassis were not going to be possible....(underbody fibreglass - floor pans) were going to restrict this and the only 'proper' way would be removal of body from chassis!....I think for this reason, the factory do not endorse such repairs.
About 12 months ago I was on the verge of buying a Cat C Chim with a small amount of chassis damage, (nothing that couldnt be repaired/welded to make safe BTW), but what was pointed out to me, was the fact that a complete weld around the entire joint(s) where outriggers etc meet the main chassis were not going to be possible....(underbody fibreglass - floor pans) were going to restrict this and the only 'proper' way would be removal of body from chassis!....I think for this reason, the factory do not endorse such repairs.
satman said:Both companies I've talked to would jack up the body (whilst not removing it completely) to afford access to welding. I certainly wouldn't want them to skimp on the welding!
I think what should be worth considering with the repair option, is the 'new' welding.
About 12 months ago I was on the verge of buying a Cat C Chim with a small amount of chassis damage, (nothing that couldnt be repaired/welded to make safe BTW), but what was pointed out to me, was the fact that a complete weld around the entire joint(s) where outriggers etc meet the main chassis were not going to be possible....(underbody fibreglass - floor pans) were going to restrict this and the only 'proper' way would be removal of body from chassis!....I think for this reason, the factory do not endorse such repairs.
MC
Thanks fo your comment Steve. I'll speak to them and get their thoughts.
Before i have any sleepless nights worrying about my underside. What is the approx cost of a full factory chassis replacement.
From what you have described it sounds like a very good way to refresh an ageing car, and with new bushes etc, it should handle like new again.
I wouldn't be put off looking to buy a car with a new chassis, especially if the corrosion protection is now improved. TVR chassis rust, and this is why people pay a premium on older (M and pre M) cars advertised with 'body off rebuild'.
From what you have described it sounds like a very good way to refresh an ageing car, and with new bushes etc, it should handle like new again.
I wouldn't be put off looking to buy a car with a new chassis, especially if the corrosion protection is now improved. TVR chassis rust, and this is why people pay a premium on older (M and pre M) cars advertised with 'body off rebuild'.
Is that the worst of it? Is it even perforated? I've seen worse than in the photo with a clean MOT! All chassis have surface rust unless properly treated.
A couple of people on the Griff forum have had outriggers replaced - it generally does require at least partial body lifting. There's some sleeving technique which may not require any lifting at all, but I don't see how unless you're only replacing the 'accessible' portions of the outrigger.
As for new chassis vs replacement outriggers, I'm afraid either may carry a stigma, but at the end of the day a new chassis is IMHO a better bet than a repair job.
eg Who did it? Is it straight? Is it to original spec (tubes, welds, geometry)...
A couple of people on the Griff forum have had outriggers replaced - it generally does require at least partial body lifting. There's some sleeving technique which may not require any lifting at all, but I don't see how unless you're only replacing the 'accessible' portions of the outrigger.
As for new chassis vs replacement outriggers, I'm afraid either may carry a stigma, but at the end of the day a new chassis is IMHO a better bet than a repair job.
eg Who did it? Is it straight? Is it to original spec (tubes, welds, geometry)...
griffter said:If you look closely at the photo, near where the brace joins the outrigger, you can see a patch of reflected light. This is where the MOT inspector has been 'tapping' and the tube is so thin that it has deformed. So, no, not perforated... but pretty much getting there.
Is that the worst of it? Is it even perforated? I've seen worse than in the photo with a clean MOT! All chassis have surface rust unless properly treated.
Same thing on NSF outrigger. Longitudinal sections have pretty much lost all their coating. Rear outriggers in better condition, but the talks I have had to date would replace all of outriggers back to central, box section chassis.
MC
Hi,
I nearly bought a Chim with rotten outriggers for £3k. One niggle for me was that as the car had been "neglected" to the point that the outriggers had basically collapsed on themselves (you could put your fingers into the outer tubes) what sort of attention had the rest of the car received (the engine was very rattly too, and this car had FTVRSH).
If I was buying a car with known replaced outriggers it would make me have a VERY hard look at the rest of the car, as if something (and I don't mean to sound critical or harsh) like a bit of waxoyl or paint had not been done to lead to the outriggers rusting away then what else had been missed out too on the rest of the car. (*note: I now realise you had this done)
To answer the question directly, if the rot is confined to the outer areas of the outriggers so that an effective sleeve join in the tubes that run at 90 degrees to the main chassis spine can be achieved then I'd go for that option. If the rot is up against the main spine so welding would need to be done there, then I would get a new chassis.
Bad luck,
Matt.
Edited to add.. having looked at the photo again with note to the point below I think that sleeving isn't really an option. How solid is the actual box secion..?
Edited Again to add..*having read your profile, this chassis was cleaned and Waxoyled in August last year !!!
who by..?
>> Edited by M@H on Thursday 25th November 14:09
I nearly bought a Chim with rotten outriggers for £3k. One niggle for me was that as the car had been "neglected" to the point that the outriggers had basically collapsed on themselves (you could put your fingers into the outer tubes) what sort of attention had the rest of the car received (the engine was very rattly too, and this car had FTVRSH).
If I was buying a car with known replaced outriggers it would make me have a VERY hard look at the rest of the car, as if something (and I don't mean to sound critical or harsh) like a bit of waxoyl or paint had not been done to lead to the outriggers rusting away then what else had been missed out too on the rest of the car. (*note: I now realise you had this done)
To answer the question directly, if the rot is confined to the outer areas of the outriggers so that an effective sleeve join in the tubes that run at 90 degrees to the main chassis spine can be achieved then I'd go for that option. If the rot is up against the main spine so welding would need to be done there, then I would get a new chassis.
Bad luck,
Matt.
Edited to add.. having looked at the photo again with note to the point below I think that sleeving isn't really an option. How solid is the actual box secion..?
Edited Again to add..*having read your profile, this chassis was cleaned and Waxoyled in August last year !!!
who by..? >> Edited by M@H on Thursday 25th November 14:09
M@H said:Cheers M@H... with PetrolTed's view on naming and shaming in mind I prefer not to say (and they are not the dealer I previously mentioned who I have nothing but praise for). But I will be taking it up with them and, if not satisfied, then with TVR.
Edited Again to add..*having read your profile, this chassis was cleaned and Waxoyled in August last year !!!
Sleeving is definitely out. Main box section is pretty sound apart from section in photo where outrigger joins, which appears mainly to be superfical.
Car is regularly serviced by one of several dealers. Is of low mileage, generally not taken out on winter roads (i.e. salted roads).
Must admit I'm hedging towards the full replacement option as being more attractive. If it were a 12 year old car we were talking about it might be that repair was more reasonable (although probably more difficult)... but 6 years old... we're going to have it in our possession for a while longer!
MC
targarama said:
Surely having the outriggers replaced is a positive point to any prospective purchaser. Show them before and after shots. Then when they go and look at other cars they will realise how nice yours is underneath. Anyone who knows anything about these cars knows to check the chassis.
Personally I'd be more inclined to ask questions about a car with a completely replaced chassis.
Why? I can't see how replacing a major component should be cause for concern, as long as the history is accurate. Even following an accident chassis replacement will show that it was economocally viable to do so there shouldn't be any other worries
they are pictures that give owners nightmares. When I was looking at Chims I was looking at 97 - 98 cars and was shocked at the condition of the chassis of some of these cars considering that they were (in my eyes) a relatively new car. It was on that basis that I bought my 93, purely cos the chassis condition (and overall condition) was A1 and it was the first I had seen in as good a condition. Another example of condition before age and/or mileage.
I think it is shocking that a modern car, 6 years old (and I assume fairly low miles compared to repmobiles) is in need of a new chassis. This is after consideration has been given to waxoyle on the owners part too. Having heard from someone in the know where the metals are kept to make the chassis its little surprise they are doomed before they are even manufactured. Hopefully that will now change with the new factory...
good luck with getting it sorted.
I think it is shocking that a modern car, 6 years old (and I assume fairly low miles compared to repmobiles) is in need of a new chassis. This is after consideration has been given to waxoyle on the owners part too. Having heard from someone in the know where the metals are kept to make the chassis its little surprise they are doomed before they are even manufactured. Hopefully that will now change with the new factory...
good luck with getting it sorted.
tvron said:To galvanise would require lots of vent holes to be drilled through the chassis walls to release any vapour. These are potential sources of water ingress and internal corrosion, although potentially could be sealed but at greater cost. Flame sprayed galvanising is one possibility and is a technique that has become more advanced recently.
It seems appalling to me that a 6yr old car needs any sort of chassis repair.Can someone pls tell me why
TVR do not galvanise chassis thus making Tivs a longlasting car
Both techniques involve heat and this can relieve stresses in the chassis welds unevenly resulting in the chassis twisting. Flame spray heats the surface less and only in a relatively small area. Welding galvanised steel is not without its problems either but you could weld sections of pre-galvanised tubing (obviously removing zinc coating where you are welding) and then spray galvanising the welds. Would probably add a bit to the cost of the car (and a little weight)!
However, I don't know whether either have been tried and I would have thought the galvanising companies could offer TVR some pretty good advice. I seriously have considered contacting these companies to see what was involved for a one off.
MC
Gassing Station | Chimaera | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff