Renault warrenty garage usless

bigjl

AdrianC wrote: »

The UN1 is long dead now - last vehicle to use it was the Lotus Esprit, which stopped production in 2004.

The OP hasn't even told us if theirs is a FWD or RWD Master, though. Both are available as 3.5t. FWD would mean lower load floor, of course, and have a higher payload.

To be honest I would always suspect a Master with gearbox issues will be a FWD version.

The Transit was available as a FWD or RWD, I don't know of any conversion that was done with a FWD version.

To me the gearbox can't be strong enough due to space constraints.

FWD is a more cost effective platform and probably has drivability advantages as far as handling goes. Call me old fashioned but a RWD gearbox not only benefits from being away from the heat of the engine bay but also the diff is not contained in the same casing. Unless things have changed recently.

Surely a nice strong axle and diff at the back has to be a better bet than a tiny FWD diff encased in the gearbox?

In all my years driving heavily laden vehicles often at speed I can't remember many failures concerning the axle/diff or even Autobox, a few of the Sprinters had torque Convertor problems I was told but the older LDVs were solid and reliable.

The Mercs also went through a fair few engines, the 2.7d was not to bad but the highly stressed 2.2d was a nightmare, hence the move back to a less stressed 3.0d.

Maybe I am old fashioned but when it comes to longevity bigger always seems to better.

I drove a 52 plate ex NWAS Transit with over 300k on it for a few weeks back in 2011 and it was by no means quiet, refined or fast (old 2.5tdi) but the actual running gear was fine, being a 52 plate it had the comedy long gearstick.

Same goes for an ex Wales 2.9d Sprinter we used to use for events, it was on an P or R plate and had well over 300k on it, was a nice vehicle to drive despite that, service history indicated it was on the original engine, gearbox etc.

The LEZ finished that one off.

Parts of it now live on in Ghana.

BykerSands

bigjl wrote: »

To be honest I would always suspect a Master with gearbox issues will be a FWD version.

The Transit was available as a FWD or RWD, I don't know of any conversion that was done with a FWD version.

To me the gearbox can't be strong enough due to space constraints.

FWD is a more cost effective platform and probably has drivability advantages as far as handling goes. Call me old fashioned but a RWD gearbox not only benefits from being away from the heat of the engine bay but also the diff is not contained in the same casing. Unless things have changed recently.

Surely a nice strong axle and diff at the back has to be a better bet than a tiny FWD diff encased in the gearbox?

In all my years driving heavily laden vehicles often at speed I can't remember many failures concerning the axle/diff or even Autobox, a few of the Sprinters had torque Convertor problems I was told but the older LDVs were solid and reliable.

The Mercs also went through a fair few engines, the 2.7d was not to bad but the highly stressed 2.2d was a nightmare, hence the move back to a less stressed 3.0d.

Maybe I am old fashioned but when it comes to longevity bigger always seems to better.

I drove a 52 plate ex NWAS Transit with over 300k on it for a few weeks back in 2011 and it was by no means quiet, refined or fast (old 2.5tdi) but the actual running gear was fine, being a 52 plate it had the comedy long gearstick.

Same goes for an ex Wales 2.9d Sprinter we used to use for events, it was on an P or R plate and had well over 300k on it, was a nice vehicle to drive despite that, service history indicated it was on the original engine, gearbox etc.

The LEZ finished that one off.

Parts of it now live on in Ghana.

A nice history of St Johns vehicles there and for that we thank you. :T:beer:

laidbackgjr

nuttyarab wrote: »

The vehicle is a year old so yes still under warranty by Renault hence why its gone back to renault.
We do also run another vehicle but that is fully booked, it would financial suicide to have a vehicle just sitting there in case on a rare opportunity this was to happen, it costs us £48 a day alone to run each vehicle with insurances etc, this is why every year we sell and by a new one to keep us on the road.
My issue is not with getting a replacement box its the fact that its sat there for over a week and only had photos taken of it!

In the same way that your business can not afford to have spare vehicles sat around just in case, Renault can not afford to have spare mechanics / technician / gearbox experts sat around just in case a customer comes in with an issue.

Tilt

straighttalker wrote: »

If the vehicle is still under the manufacturer's warranty, surely it would be better and easier to go straight to the manufacturer rather than the selling, presumably independent, dealer who will try to cobble together a repair rather than use OEM parts?

As far as statutory rights are concerned, isn't the contract of sale with the dealer who sold it? Surely the fault should be at least be reported to them?

bigjl

BykerSands wrote: »

A nice history of St Johns vehicles there and for that we thank you. :T:beer:

Whatever BS.

None of those vehicles was St Johns.

If you had any brains you would realise that people give advice based on their experiences in life.

You just troll forums.

You need a job

bigjl

Tilt wrote: »

As far as statutory rights are concerned, isn't the contract of sale with the dealer who sold it? Surely the fault should be at least be reported to them?

This was already mentioned previously

Why get the dealer you bought from to do a half baked bodge when it has a manufacturers warranty.

Let's not forget this was a Business to Business Sale.

s_b

i asked in post 3 what the log book classification is
the reason is this conversion was 1 year after registration this means conversion to horsebox fell outside the scope of a registered approved vehicle converter
OP you need to look and sit down when you look to see what it says

just saying like

pappa_golf

the vehicle was already converted to a horsebox within its first yr , I would imagine from new.


what differences show on a V5 between PSV and horsebox? is there a special class for horseboxes?

s_b

pappa_golf wrote: »

the vehicle was already converted to a horsebox within its first yr , I would imagine from new.


what differences show on a V5 between PSV and horsebox? is there a special class for horseboxes?

lets hear what OP has to say on this please:)

bigjl

When they convert the Sprinter Chassi cabs into Ambulances they arrive in the UK already painted RAL yellow, I have seen them some driving near Thurrock with Trade Plates on.

Whenever they were delivered to station the registrations dated them as being at least 6 months old in most cases.

I assumed they were registered as Ambulances prior to the conversion.

It will be interesting to here what the OP says regarding when the conversion was done, but I would suspect it makes little sense to convert a 1 yr old vehicle into a purpose built horse box.

As has already been pointed out it will likely have been supplied as a Chassi Cab with just the framework on the back and was therefore unlikely to be anything other than a basis for a vehicle conversion.

I can't see this being a problem as far as the warranty goes but that is just my opinion.