|
|
|
Failed inspection for something questionalble
|
|
|
| |
|
|
bkeyser68
User
Jul 11, 2012, 5:35 PM
Post #1 of 7
(2520 views)
|
|
Failed inspection for something questionalble
|
Sign In
|
|
My sons 1998 ford Taurus failed a NC state inspection because the mechanic claims the Lower Balljoints, and inner tie rods need to be replace. The car has only 161,000 miles on it, and is in immaculate shape. The state poster listing on inspections is not very clear on specifics. I asked the mechanic to show me the issue. He put in on the lift and shook the tires and said see, it moves. I asked him to do it again cause it moved so slightly that I could not tell. I questioned what the standard was for allowable movement, he said absolutely none. I said I have a problem believing this as no 14 year old car is without movment. He said it does not matter what I think, it fails unless I pay to have them replaced. My question is... is this correct, there can be no movement at all, and if not, what is the specified amount, or degree of allowable movement while still being safe. I think I am being taken for a ride on my on wheels!!!
|
|
| |
|
|
Discretesignals
Ultimate Carjunky
/ Moderator
Jul 11, 2012, 5:48 PM
Post #2 of 7
(2500 views)
|
|
Re: Failed inspection for something questionalble
|
Sign In
|
|
According to the manufacture there should be no radial movement what so ever.
Usually what happens is the dust boots disintegrate and water and road dirt washes the grease out the joints. The joint prematurely wears. 161 K miles is a long long time on the original ball joints. The originals usually don't last 70 K miles before the boots fall apart and the joints need replaced. You don't want to play games with ball joints because if they happen to pop apart while your driving down the highway, your going to be in a world of Sh!t.
Since we volunteer our time and knowledge, we ask for you to please follow up when a problem is resolved.
(This post was edited by Discretesignals on Jul 11, 2012, 5:51 PM)
|
|
| |
|
|
bkeyser68
User
Jul 11, 2012, 5:50 PM
Post #4 of 7
(2493 views)
|
|
Re: Failed inspection for something questionalble
|
Sign In
|
|
Thank you for your input.
|
|
| |
|
|
nickwarner
Veteran
/ Moderator
Jul 11, 2012, 5:53 PM
Post #5 of 7
(2488 views)
|
|
Re: Failed inspection for something questionalble
|
Sign In
|
|
It is correct, and with "only" 161,000 miles you could've easily gone though two sets of those by now. No 14 year old car is without movement if it hasn't had worn parts repaired. In this case that man is right and you will need to perform the work. He isn't taking you for a ride, he's actually saving you the money of buying a new car if you live through the accident caused when those parts are completely shot and seperate in the middle of a turn. He's also saving you from having to replace tires more often due to accelerated wear.
|
|
| |
|
|
bkeyser68
User
Jul 11, 2012, 5:55 PM
Post #6 of 7
(2486 views)
|
|
Re: Failed inspection for something questionalble
|
Sign In
|
|
Thank you for your reply. I will get it fixed. have a nice day!
|
|
| |
|
|
bkeyser68
User
Jul 11, 2012, 5:56 PM
Post #7 of 7
(2478 views)
|
|
Re: Failed inspection for something questionalble
|
Sign In
|
|
Thank you! I appreciate your reply.
|
|
| |
|
Auto Repair Home
SEARCH
WHO'S 
LOG 
1989 toyota pickup 3.0 crank no start
Strut spring orientation and strut mount tension nut
