Voiding warranty?

Dis86

Dis86

Dis86

Suspended
Joined
23 Dec 2011
Posts
33,209
Location
Northern England
So, this may some a little self explanatory but is still frustrating! Two small sections of brake line on my car have been flagged during an inspection as requiring replacement due to corrosion. This wouldn't have been a problem but they recently changed MOT requirements and now it's an auto fail.
Anyhow the parts are steel hence the corrosion and I'd like to replace with copper buuuuut Porsche warranty demands I use only porache parts (not even oem). So basically I'm stuck having to buy inferior quality parts to comply with their warranty. Anyone else had to deal with similarly daft rules?
 
Copper isn't the universal panacea it is made out to be.

It is popular with the trade because it is easy to work and is corrosion resistant and is just fine in almost all circumstances.

However, it is more flexible than steel and, pushed to the extreme, can result in brakes feeling slightly more spongy.

So I can understand why a high end sports car manufacturer like Porche might be a bit sniffy about it.

(Ideally brake lines should be inboard, but very few manufacturers have ever done that)
 
Orionaut said:
Copper isn't the universal panacea it is made out to be.

It is popular with the trade because it is easy to work and is corrosion resistant and is just fine in almost all circumstances.

However, it is more flexible than steel and, pushed to the extreme, can result in brakes feeling slightly more spongy.

So I can understand why a high end sports car manufacturer like Porche might be a bit sniffy about it.

(Ideally brake lines should be inboard, but very few manufacturers have ever done that)
Click to expand...

I agree it's not, but these lines are literally 3 inches long so you won't see the issues that would present with front to back lines for example.
 
Dis86 said:
I agree it's not, but these lines are literally 3 inches long so you won't see the issues that would present with front to back lines for example.
Click to expand...

Are they actually that expensive?

You could also smear them with grease/waxoyl if corrosion is the main concern.
 
Orionaut said:
Are they actually that expensive?

You could also smear them with grease/waxoyl if corrosion is the main concern.
Click to expand...

Pork want £300 for the pleasure! Not massively expensive but can get copper lines custom made to the exact same dimensions for...£40
 
Dis86 said:
Pork want £300 for the pleasure! Not massively expensive but can get copper lines custom made to the exact same dimensions for...£40
Click to expand...

Three inches long!

Unless there was a load of awkward dismantling involved I would supply and fit for that! :p

(Well, I would have done, but I am retiring now)

:)
 
@Orionaut yup. No awkwardness. They're the lines that connect the calipers to another small block which goes to the main chassis lines. It's nuts!
 
Dis86 said:
So, this may some a little self explanatory but is still frustrating! Two small sections of brake line on my car have been flagged during an inspection as requiring replacement due to corrosion. This wouldn't have been a problem but they recently changed MOT requirements and now it's an auto fail.
Anyhow the parts are steel hence the corrosion and I'd like to replace with copper buuuuut Porsche warranty demands I use only porache parts (not even oem). So basically I'm stuck having to buy inferior quality parts to comply with their warranty. Anyone else had to deal with similarly daft rules?
Click to expand...
I don't think the MOT requirements for brake lines have changed. Excessive corrosion has always been a failure.
 
Lopéz said:
I don't think the MOT requirements for brake lines have changed. Excessive corrosion has always been a failure.
Click to expand...

It's not excessive. Basically if there's now any corrosion it's a fail.

Worth noting that Porsche, an local specialist and Kwik fit have all said the same.
 
[TW]Fox said:
Ok but that's literally the government MOT testing manual. Read it for yourself if you want...
Click to expand...

I did. Which is why it's interesting! I'll get some photos of the pipes up later and let you see for yourself how little corrosion there is.
 
My suspicion is that since MOT's have gone all DVLA central database, Testers are now nervous about "Not" failing things so are becoming somewhat overcautious.

The rules on bodywork corrosion are mental. Strict interpretation can generate fails as a result of corrosion that is in no, way, shape or form structural.
 
Orionaut said:
My suspicion is that since MOT's have gone all DVLA central database, Testers are now nervous about "Not" failing things so are becoming somewhat overcautious.

The rules on bodywork corrosion are mental. Strict interpretation can generate fails as a result of corrosion that is in no, way, shape or form structural.
Click to expand...
MOTs have been computerised since 2005, so this should not really be anything new to people.

As Fox points out above, "any" corrosion is not an MOT failure, despite what three places might have told you.

VOSA guidelines, as they have been for many years, are "if in doubt, pass and advise". So marginal cases should be passed, not failed.
 
RsADk83.jpg
 
Quite hard to tell from the not particularly close-up blurry picture, but it doesn’t look “excessively” corroded unless of course up close there is some potential seepage or what looks to be deep pitting?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom