Brake rotors and State Inspection

WobblyHand

WobblyHand

H-M Supporter - Diamond Member
H-M Lifetime Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2019
Messages
7,385
Another year, another failed NH motor vehicle inspection. This time is was for one wiper blade that had a 5mm, I kid you not, tear in the rubber at the end of the blade. It was raining on the way to the inspection, the darned wipers were working fine. Strike one. Kind of felt that was a low blow, but not a difficult fix. The second strike was for my front brakes. Now that is a safety issue, if true.

Can't tell exactly what the fail is for though. They provided a classic craigslist photo, you know some sort of blurry thing that somehow means something to the photographer and no one else. I think the fail is for an "elevated ridge" at the very outer edge of the rotor. At least on the outside edges, the ridge is minimal, like 1mm wide and not very high, which is (in my opinion) not a big deal. I'll pull the wheels tomorrow and take a look. Maybe the insides of the rotors aren't good.

What I can't find is an actual rule on the state DMV site that gives a standard for this. All that I could find was https://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rules/state_agencies/saf-c3200.html There's no mention of ridges, nor minimum acceptable swept area. They do refer to the manufacturers specifications. In the service manual for my car, in the brake inspection section, they only call out run out and rotor thickness. Neither were called out for failure. And the rotor thickness is measured 10mm away from the edge, which to me seems to allow for a ridge. Assuming the micrometer has a 6mm contact diameter, then that would allow for up to a 7mm ridge. That's larger than I'd like, but the service manual is silent on the matter. Don't see any other specifications to measure.

Yeah I'm venting. Tomorrow I will have pictures and measurements. Maybe I'll find something that I need to repair, but inspection from the exterior, nothing looks wrong. (Actually they looked really good, which is why I was so surprised.) Yeah, they wanted about $700 for the front brake job. Declined their kind offer. I will do it for less. Supposedly I get a free inspection, if done within 30 days. If the weather holds out, and I am lucky it might be done tomorrow.

Last year they got me for cloudy headlights. (To me that is a manufacturing defect.) I fixed that "safety issue" in two minutes with some plastic polish. At least this year, I remembered to re-polish them. If I could find some decent, affordable UV protectant, I'd coat them. Otherwise I'll just polish them every six months. Way cheaper than spending > $800 for plastic headlights that will fade again, or some ridiculous rejuvenation service for over $300.

Getting tired of maintaining this nine year old car. We've fallen out of love. Too boring, not fun, poor mileage in the city, too many stupid issues. Want to stop putting money into it. It's my only vehicle, so I have to keep it running or get something else. In the meantime, I need to fix it and pass inspection.
 
I had forgotten how much of a pain that inspections are. Had inspections in ME and CA. In CA, if you failed emissions, you had to spend at least $xx to try to fix it, then you could get an exemption. In ME, it was always the rust-throughs that got me since my cars there were pretty old. Lots of bondo and primer...

Moved to rural WA. No more emissions, no more inspections. I'm trusted to take care of my own cars here.
 
I'm of a mind that (in general) a safety inspection is a good thing. The specifics, well that's where it can be murky. Brakes - yeah, they need to work. Guess I was flabbergasted about the stupid wiper, that was over the top, in my opinion. I'll check the brakes when I pull the wheels. If they are bad, I will replace them.

But maybe my gripe is with the quality of the report - it was low on details that I could use and learn from. It seems they want to keep us all in the dark, with no numbers. I need the numbers, so I can measure and confirm them, and so I know what to look for in the future.

At least in my state, there's no separation between the inspection and a dealership/mechanics. So there's actually a financial incentive to fail more vehicles, because they make money doing the repairs. The state sort of wins, because the bias is towards fewer safety issues. But the consumer tends to lose, due to an increase in unnecessary repairs. Some states have independent inspection stations, not in NH. So, I'm not taking at face value what the dealer says. These guys used to be pretty good - they never did me wrong. But the new ownership, umm, it seems they are more prone to saying stuff is wrong, when it isn't. Like when they said I needed new wheel bearings. I challenged them on that. I said, what specifically is wrong, why doesn't the vehicle behave with classic wheel bearing issues. They said their young mechanic heard something, implying I didn't or couldn't hear. I said what did you measure or hear and when did it occur. They backed down, as they were BS'ing me. 9 months later, there's still no evidence of wheel bearing issues. They simply saw grey hair and thought they could fool me. Now if they had said I needed tires because of tire wear noise, that I would have believed. (Because it is true in this case. The tires are making noise, and it is dependent on the local pavement.) This dealership tried to do something similar to my wife too. My wife knows to call me about this kind of thing. So do my kids, and my son in law. If it sounds real expensive and out of the blue, it's worth a call for a second opinion. I've saved them quite a bit of money from unnecessary repairs. But it's not just my dealership, it's in many places and in many states.

My daughter called me about some service that her dealer said was required. It was well over $1500. Out of all of that, only $20 was necessary. They saw a young woman, figured she knew nothing and they could financially gain from her by claiming unnecessary services were needed. They were wrong. They only got $20 for the part and my daughter replaced the part herself. My daughter learned a couple of things that day.
 
In CA, the land of smog inspections, we have test only stations for this specific reason.

They cannot do repairs, so no incentive.

Plus ODBII is almost all automatic with computer, just a few things that get visual check.

The automotive consumer protection board is very aggressive at going after the bad places too.

Ask for a written document explaining in clear terms why it failed, then, ask for them to show you the regulation indicating failure.

This falls under a human measurement or visual judgment area, but the inspection point should have clear language.

If it passes the manufacturer instructions then something not correct.

If they cannot show you the document that shows the indication they claim is a fail. Then it is not a fail.

It is an "upsell"...

Report them to your consumer protection department!

Sent from my SM-G781V using Tapatalk
 
No mandated inspections where I live. Two weeks ago, I had my tires replaced and paid for a brake inspection. They posted a warning that my front brakes were approaching the end of their service life but the the rear brake pads and rotors required replacing. I ordered new pads and rotors and a week ago, I replaced them. One side was perfectly fine but the other side was definitely worn. The wear pattern indicated that the inside pad was cocked causing the pad to wear unevenly and subsequently result in uneven wear of the rotor. Total cost was just over $100. I had to make a special tool to retract the caliper piston but that's why we have machines. The most difficult part of the repair was removing the first rotor. It was stuck well and good and no amount of pounding was going to release it. Adjourning to the internet and searching for suck rotors, I found a procedure that worked and what had amounted to a couple of hours of heating, WD40, and pounding was reduced to about five minutes. Yhe second side was completed in under 1/2 hr, start to finish.

Regarding the raised area on the perimeter of the rotor, that is found on every rotor that has seen some miles. The pads are designed so they do not extend to the outside of the rotor and, as a result, the bare cast iron rusts. The iron oxide occupies a greater volume resulting in the raised area. This is of no consequence other than sometimes making it difficult to remove the caliper.. The end of service life of a rotor is determined by the minimum thickness specification or the presence of rough corrosion patches on the rotor's working surfaces.
 
Be thankful you do not have the M.O.T test as we do in the UK. You would be spitting blood at the amount of "advisories" and "fails" that are listed for certain areas.


I actually prefer to know a vehicle is safe to be on the road and well maintained and an M.O.T proves that. No M.O.T, no insurance. or if the M.O.T runs out whilst you have insurance, the insurance becomes invalidated until you DO have an M.O.T.
 
RJSakowski said:
No mandated inspections where I live. Two weeks ago, I had my tires replaced and paid for a brake inspection. They posted a warning that my front brakes were approaching the end of their service life but the the rear brake pads and rotors required replacing. I ordered new pads and rotors and a week ago, I replaced them. One side was perfectly fine but the other side was definitely worn. The wear pattern indicated that the inside pad was cocked causing the pad to wear unevenly and subsequently result in uneven wear of the rotor. Total cost was just over $100. I had to make a special tool to retract the caliper piston but that's why we have machines. The most difficult part of the repair was removing the first rotor. It was stuck well and good and no amount of pounding was going to release it. Adjourning to the internet and searching for suck rotors, I found a procedure that worked and what had amounted to a couple of hours of heating, WD40, and pounding was reduced to about five minutes. Yhe second side was completed in under 1/2 hr, start to finish.

Regarding the raised area on the perimeter of the rotor, that is found on every rotor that has seen some miles. The pads are designed so they do not extend to the outside of the rotor and, as a result, the bare cast iron rusts. The iron oxide occupies a greater volume resulting in the raised area. This is of no consequence other than sometimes making it difficult to remove the caliper.. The end of service life of a rotor is determined by the minimum thickness specification or the presence of rough corrosion patches on the rotor's working surfaces.
Click to expand...
Your last paragraph, matches my thinking. All rotors are made this way and the pads never hang off the end. Therefore they all will generate a lip. The swept area of the pads is really nice looking. Only thing I can think of is the back side isn't good. I'll find out soon.

If it's out of spec, I have no problem replacing it. Just don't want to be taken advantage of. If they're right, I'll tell them so. If not I'll ask for a written statement describing the issue and relevant regulations.

Maybe I was having an off day yesterday. We'll see what I find.
 
tq60 said:
In CA, the land of smog inspections, we have test only stations for this specific reason.

They cannot do repairs, so no incentive.

Plus ODBII is almost all automatic with computer, just a few things that get visual check.

The automotive consumer protection board is very aggressive at going after the bad places too.

Ask for a written document explaining in clear terms why it failed, then, ask for them to show you the regulation indicating failure.

This falls under a human measurement or visual judgment area, but the inspection point should have clear language.

If it passes the manufacturer instructions then something not correct.

If they cannot show you the document that shows the indication they claim is a fail. Then it is not a fail.

It is an "upsell"...

Report them to your consumer protection department!

Sent from my SM-G781V using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
I think independent inspection is a good idea. Wish we had it here, unfortunately that's not the case in NH.

I'll inspect the rotors and pads myself this morning. If they're good, I will call the DMV. If they're bad, I'll call the dealership and let them know. I'm not out to get anyone, I only want to be ensured of the integrity of the process. I believe in having safe vehicles on the road, including mine. Seen some pretty bizarre stuff out on the road and have wondered if inspection might have caught it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top