Service rip off

[EMS]

I used silicon brake fluid in my old sports car, it is not hydroscopic so does not need to be changed. Military vehicles have used this fluid for many years. It was more expensive than standard fluid but in the long run much safer and cheaper. No degradation was evident with the brake seals or pipes.
I do not understand why it is not used today, apart from the loss that marketing/servicing suppliers and garages would lose!

 

[Hettie's Crew]

I used silicon

Silicon (Dot5)
http://collision.alldata.com/online...rake_fluid_be_used_instead_of_dot_3_or_41.htm

 

[Richard n Ann]

I was going to let this slide but possibly for the benefit of some that like to be proactive on there maintenance,
It’s not the antifreeze that will deteriorate over time it’s the corrosion inhibitors that reduce the corrosion between the normally aluminium
Cylinders heads and iron blocks of the modern engine,
I have scrapped hundreds of heads over the years were the aluminium waterways have crumbled back from the head gasket causing at least a breakdown and replacement head or worse a blown engine,
All this for the want of £10 of long life antifreeze every 5 years,
I just can’t get my head around it, some have paid £75000 on there M/H
Then penny pinch on something as trivial as this,

I often had customers who hadn’t open there bonnet from one year to the next, and got away with it, but also had a good number that hadn’t,
Small leak from a Hose/radiator/water pump will go undetected until the level drops below the top hose then your problems start,
I have had youngsters come in for a mot with a obviously very noisy water pump near to failure, their solution! Turn up the Radio,
but think nothing of spending a lot of money on new shoes or holidays,

Might as well change that then while i'm at it. Van is 4.5 years old.
You lot are costing me a fortune
Ann will pay half mind

 

[GPW]

I do not understand why it is not used today, apart from the loss that marketing/servicing suppliers and garages would lose!

Silicone fluid is slightly spongey so brake feel is not so good (also see ABS note above). The hydrophobic nature is also only of benefit if you don't get water in the system: if/when you do the water sits there and has nothing to do except eat the metal pipes.

Also I suspect there's an element of disposability, military love expensive stuff but are also huge polluters. The military don't just cover countries like Yugoslavia, Libya, Iraq etc with depleted uranium dust while they pulverize people and buildings for freedom and democracy, they also pollute the ground in quite a serious way: https://www.ecowatch.com/military-largest-polluter-2408760609.html

so perhaps silicone brake fluids would also present a disposal issue?

 

[nicholsong]

Service Charges

• Motorhome Habitation service: £198.00 (including VAT plus any parts required)
• Mechanical service: £198.00 (including VAT plus any parts required)

But don't think this is all we can do! At Johns Cross we can supply and fit many different accessories at very competitive rates.

Labour Charges

Motorhome hourly rate: £60.00 (plus VAT)

Mechanical hourly rate: £60.00 (plus VAT)

we also have a full rolling road for brake testing

Peter

Peter

I am not saying those rates are not reasonable in UK, but thank goodness we are in Poland and a very reputable and trustworthy commercial garage charges about £35 p.h., but only does the mechanical side.

Even when I describe in English what I want done, I can see from his eyes and body-language that he understands the vehicle and the job needed - just like my Italian BMW-trained guy in London with his own lock-up in Potobello Road, but with a BMW-authorised stamp - no pr*t with a clipboard, just the 'spanner' with the parts in his hand. B*stard retired - had to sell the BMW.

Just like the guy who has done the major jobs on my boat for 20 years - mechanical(he was RAF trained, then John Surtees team, ran his own boat repair in Palma) could do GRP and woodwork etc.

His reward? Of course I paid him what he asked, and then last year I gave him the boat, knowing it was going to a caring home, and which would have been his in my Will anyway. He and his family have over those years become personal friends of ours and we always visit when in UK.

All these people are worth their weight in gold.

Geoff

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[ivorantony]

I used silicon brake fluid in my old sports car, it is not hydroscopic so does not need to be changed. Military vehicles have used this fluid for many years. It was more expensive than standard fluid but in the long run much safer and cheaper. No degradation was evident with the brake seals or pipes.
I do not understand why it is not used today, apart from the loss that marketing/servicing suppliers and garages would lose!

If only it was that easy, DOT5 silicone doesn’t absorb water so that a good thing , But any water getting into the system will slowly migrate
To the lowest part of the system displacing the silicone as it goes,
End result callipers only having water in them as the worst scenario,
Remedy....... Bleed a small amount via the caliper every 6 months,
I have used DOT 5 silicone and as been stated even with a perfectly bled
System it still will feel slightly spongy, Remedy.......replace your rubber flexible hose pipes with the armoured type, But when all said and done
IMO it far cheaper overall to bleed out your Glycol based DOT5.1 every
Two or three years, £20 quid for the fluid and a little labour,

 

[Barclaybasher]

Whilst not doubting all that has been said about the need or advice to change brake fluid I just wonder how often it is actually done.

Have accident reports ever blamed brake fluid as a cause or contributor?

Are vehicles so safe now that they encourage poor driving - increased speed with vehicles tail-gating and shorter reaction times............

Driver error is by far the biggest cause of accidents, mechanical failure of any sort is very rare...........

Just saying

 

[Richard n Ann]

I ordered the cheap one anyway it gets excellent reviews so I'll see how it goes... Hell it was only 4 quid

It's come today, the van is 0% (14reg) and the car is 1% (64reg) works great, and uses a normal battery.

 

[skylinersi]

I've a self bleeder but works on same principle only you don't need a wife

Doesn't need a wife? Are there any other gadgets which work so.....

 

[skylinersi]

Probably wouldn't though.

Actually.... on page 3 of the fiat manual........

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[tonyidle]

If only it was that easy, DOT5 silicone doesn’t absorb water so that a good thing , But any water getting into the system will slowly migrate
To the lowest part of the system displacing the silicone as it goes,
End result callipers only having water in them as the worst scenario,
Remedy....... Bleed a small amount via the caliper every 6 months,
I have used DOT 5 silicone and as been stated even with a perfectly bled
System it still will feel slightly spongy, Remedy.......replace your rubber flexible hose pipes with the armoured type, But when all said and done
IMO it far cheaper overall to bleed out your Glycol based DOT5.1 every
Two or three years, £20 quid for the fluid and a little labour,

And if every brake part isn't being changed you won't have to wait for water to get in - it's already there mixed with brake fluid. It's impossible to completely flush it out using silicone fluid so, as @ivorantony says, it ends up in the calipers. Conventional fluid is dirt cheap & gives the whole system a good flush out when changed. I still have a litre or two of silicone fluid sitting on a shelf.

 

[Lanerboy]

It's come today, the van is 0% (14reg) and the car is 1% (64reg) works great, and uses a normal battery.

Richard I'm not having a go at you but I doubt very much that little pen is accurate I am not far from you if your ever passing Burton message me and call in my garage I will check it for you properly with a pro machine all free of charge of course

 

[Deneb]

Whilst not doubting all that has been said about the need or advice to change brake fluid I just wonder how often it is actually done.

Have accident reports ever blamed brake fluid as a cause or contributor?

I would say categorically that they haven't, but the reason for that is because the accident statistics are completed by the police officer recording the collision almost immediately after they have dealt with the scene. Only obvious vehicle defects are going to be apparent at that time.

If there is any question as to the roadworthiness of a vehicle involved, or as a matter of routine in serious or fatal collisions, the vehicles will be subsequently examined by a specialist vehicle examiner. Any defects found at that time aren't fed into the causation statistics because they have already been submitted by the initial reporting officer and fed into the local authority database before the true condition of the vehicle is known.

As someone who used to examine vehicles involved in collisions, in my experience brake failure is a very common driver allegation, invariably made as what the driver sees as an attempt to excuse or mitigate his or her poor driving. In the majority of cases where drivers allege brake failure as a contributory factor at the scene, no defects are found. I once spoke to such a driver who had turned up at the garage to retrieve some property from his car whilst I was examining it. He had to wait until I had finished my exam. I told him that I had not found any evidence of a brake defect, to which he replied, "I fell asleep, but didn't want to admit it".

Having said all that, I examined a lot of vehicles which were found to have brake defects, some quite horrendous. If in any doubt we would test brake fluid with a workshop tester and if there was any indication that its condition was questionable, would send it to a laboratory for a full analysis. Whilst not common, there were occasions where I or my colleagues found the condition of brake fluid to be wanting.

Bear in mind that if involved in a serious collision, even if not apparently "your fault" but the condition of your vehicle, such as the ability of the brake fluid to perform as intended, was found to be a contributory factor i9n that the collision might have been avoided or the results mitigated had it been serviceable, you might be open to a charge of causing serious injury or death by dangerous driving.