locostv8 Posted August 20, 2006 Share Posted August 20, 2006 This is not my car, I have no connection to the builder or seller, this is only offered as information. Southampton SVA fails Robin Hood Lightweight for structural design. This morning I received the failure sheet through the post. I must stress there ARE some other failure points of my own silly doing - none major, and certainly nothing that a leisurely weekend pottering in the garage wouldn't rectify. Listed below are the structural failures. Copied exactly off the failure sheet with examiners notes in brackets FAILURE SECTION 5 A seat belt anchorage or the surrounding vehicle structure is of inadequate strength and likely to fail. (No box section in areas of seat belt mountings or associated component attachments, no triangulation or bracing of thin panels, pop rivets used near seat belt anchorage strengths.) FAILURE SECTION 15.1 When driven, the safe control of the vehicle is or is likely to be impaired due to design or construction feature or characteristic (Monocoque has absence of structural box section in construction) FAILURE SECTION 15.1 The vehicle structure is of inadequate strength and likely to fail prematurely. (vehicle construction not considered to withstand forces and vibration to which it is likely to be subjected to.) FAILURE SECTION 15.1 A suspension unit anchor, shackle or attachment bracket of inadequate strength and likely to fail prematurely. (All suspension components in box sections bonded and fixed with pop rivets and self tapping screws to main panels.) So there we have it. A chassis built to the letter following RHSC build DVD's, with this as a result. Trev. > http://locostusa.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=7815#7815 >http://community.rhocar.org/index.php?showtopic=12786&st=15 >http://www.locostbuilders.co.uk/viewthread.php?tid=50113&page=1 >http://www.robinhoodsportscars.com/kitrange.php >http://www.coveland.com/motorsports/index.cfm?ID=61 locostv82006-08-20 16:38:12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slngsht Posted August 20, 2006 Share Posted August 20, 2006 I'm not familiar with Robin hoods - certainly no first hand experience, nor have I ever seen one... What's the material thickness used? Images: http://www.robinhoodengineering.co.uk/images/LW5B.jpg http://www.robinhoodengineering.co.uk/images/LW6B.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
locostv8 Posted August 20, 2006 Author Share Posted August 20, 2006 I don't have any technical knowledge but after reading an 11 page thread I thought a heads up might be in order since RH LW is sold in the US by Coveland. Also this might help the vendor to do the right thing by thier customer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slngsht Posted August 20, 2006 Share Posted August 20, 2006 I read the thread on the RH forum as well. I'd be pretty PO'ed if I had just finished a brand new car and had that as a the inspection result. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al N. Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 Well, hmm. How about this...I bought my car from an Authorized Cat USA Dealer and still failed in NJ for a number of what seem to be less crucial reasons. And I still love my builder/dealer. My point is that I don't see how a kit car builder can get that bent out of shape given that every state has different regs. And from what I understand, the Robin Hoods are not even American in origin (so what would the mfg know?). That said, I think it does fall to the US distributor to address and help remedy for this particular owner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slngsht Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 I think none of this was in the US. If the inspector says the basic design is unsafe, that'll be hard to correct by the distributor. This should involve the manufacturer, based on the little I know about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
locostv8 Posted August 21, 2006 Author Share Posted August 21, 2006 All of this occured in the UK. The RH light weight is being marketed in the US by Coveland so this posting is intended as a heads up. A structural defect would be just as much a problem in the US as in the UK. To my way of thinking at least the seat belt mount http://community.rhocar.org/index.php?showtopic=12786&st=120 item 123 is a defect. Items like rubber boots to cover bolt threads and edge covr to cover the louvers are the property of the builder but when basic structural design is failed it is time for the Manufacturer to step up though so far it seems they have been rather unavailable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slngsht Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 The manufacturer is in a really tough place. Their only course of action is to challenge the inspector's findings. The problem is how does the inspector arrive at the conclusion that the chassis is weak? Chances are that neither side has data to disprove the other. I think a crash test is in order. http://www.usa7s.com/aspnetforum/images/emoticons/wink5.gif Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
locostv8 Posted August 21, 2006 Author Share Posted August 21, 2006 > http://community.rhocar.org/index.php?act=Attach&type=post&id=6118 >http://community.rhocar.org/index.php?act=Attach&type=post&id=6119 locostv82006-08-21 18:02:28 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slngsht Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 if the results of their load test (with appropriate safety factors to give adequate fatigue life) are good, they should have no trouble with challenging the findings of the inspection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
locostv8 Posted August 21, 2006 Author Share Posted August 21, 2006 That is my thought. The problem seems that they have not been forthcoming. My further thought is that the US disstributor might be able to exert a bit more pressure than 1 customer. locostv82006-08-21 18:05:32 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al N. Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 The clarifications help me better see the context, and cause for alarm. If the mfg can't make a product that passes in its home country, that's pretty bad. It does underscore one universal issue though — that some inspection centers are more lenient than others, even within a coutry or state. Obviously the RH folks must have gotten quite a few of their products passed at some SVA station at some point, right? This reminds me of what I went through in NJ last summer right about this time. Where other folks had passed inspection easily at other insepction stations (only a few are approved "kit car" inspection station) while I got tripped up on a few technicalities at the one closest to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
covelandmotorsp Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 I would like to reply to the posts about the Lightweight. I am the Distributor of RH products in the USA as well as manufacturing our own frames and pieces. We stock parts and kits to suit people working on their own frame to checkbook builders looking for a quicker build, and factory finished look. The Lightweight is a new and very unique product in that it is a TRUE aluminum monocoque. This product is not for everyone. I see the primary markets to be those looking for the lightest autocrosser, bike engine builder, even electric powered cars. The daily driver still is best suited to a full frame car. In our own build with the lightweight, we saw some areas to reinforce. We have added steel to the differential and suspension section, added box sections and have bonded several layers of aluminum in others. The added weight is minimal. Our feeling is that most builders make changes to kits, upgrade components on their own. In RH defense, many kit car companies have come and gone, RH is still there. They have come up with many good ideas and make kits with good quality pieces at very reasonable prices. If quality was upgraded at the kit level, the pricing would dramatically go up. This would knock out many people from getting involved in a very enjoyable hobby. Coveland STOCKS parts that we have found to be of good quality from the UK that make sense to OUR market and our builds. Yes, dealing with UK companies can be difficult, and customer service is lacking by our standards. That's where we come to the rescue with a combination of UK sourcing and our own manufacturing. We will be communicating with RH about the issues, and be sure our products are well suited to our market. jim chamberlain Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
covelandmotorsp Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 Sorry, contact info... Jim Chamberlain COVELAND MOTORSPORTS, INC www.coveland.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al N. Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 Jim- Welcome to the forum. I think you deserve serious props (that's a good thing!) for addressing this issue directly. Well done. Additionally, your post made me click through to the Coveland site, where I was able to learn that you offer parts for the more traditionally framed LSiS cars. Perhaps you'd be interested in joining the merry band assembling next July in North Carolina? Best, Al N.Al Navarro2006-08-22 13:07:18 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slngsht Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 Jim, welcome to the forum and thanks for the info. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
locostv8 Posted August 22, 2006 Author Share Posted August 22, 2006 [quote="locostv8" http://locostusa.com/forums/posting.php?mode=quote&p=7927 ]I just had a phone conversation with Jim Chamberlain at COVELAND MOTORSPORTS, INC. and reinterated that the posts weren't directed at his organization rather at Robin Hood. The sole intent is a heads up to a POSSIBLE problem that Robin Hood needs to address. If they have the data they need to provide it to Trev and if they don't they need to get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al N. Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 V8- From what I can read, it looks like Jim C. took things in the the spirit intended and addressed things properly. You were very good about framing the situation, BTW. -Al Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now