| Author | Message | |||
     Brian Vogel Grand Master Username: guyslp Post Number: 1048 Registered: 6-2009 |
As is so often the case when I am strongly challenged I don't just sit back and trust my opinions but I do further research. In this case it's original research, and certainly not scientific, but I'm satisfied that my sample is randomized enough to give an accurate picture. The vast majority of my respondents live in the United States. Two are from Canada and another two from other countries. I believe that all of the respondents are at least 40 years old. If any are not then those few are in their 30s. I intentionally chose individuals who have "been around the block more than once" and have owned multiple cars over time. The survey results are what they are. The attached PDF gives the details. I leave it as an exercise to its readers to draw whatever conclusions they wish.
Brian | |||
| Geoff Wootton Grand Master Username: dounraey Post Number: 471 Registered: 5-2012 |
Brian First thoughts are you have used a skewed sample. The 15 RR owners you surveyed are going to be car enthusiasts who are much more likely to change the brake fluid on their day cars. This is borne out in your overall results where the 7(24%) that do change their brake fluid are all RR owners. My guess is the "Never change brake fluid" category for the motoring public as a whole is much higher than 69% specified in your survey. Geoff | |||
| Brian Vogel Grand Master Username: guyslp Post Number: 1049 Registered: 6-2009 |
Geoff, I absolutely agree with you. But, even with the skew, it matches what I'd thought just based upon my life experience and observation. I'd be willing to bet that the folks in the small "I Don't Know" category have actually never had it changed, either. Their responses were such that it was uncertain, though. It is exceedingly rare for brake fluid to be changed as a routine service item in the United States, which is utterly unsurprising to me. Brian | |||
| Bob uk Unregistered guest Posted From: 94.197.122.74 |
It is much the same in the UK my sister would have no idea if the fluid on her VW is changed. A fluid change is on a VW service schedule which means the garage she uses would change it. It is not whether or not it is changed that I argue. It is that it should be changed that I argue. I have no control over how other people service their cars. But I do have control over my cars. Most car shops in the UK have posters in the reception advertising their services and brake fluid changing is often one of them. They offer a free dot check using a machine to test the dot and then advise the customer that the dot is no good thus making some money. I find it strange that USA mechanics are missing out on a money making quick service. (Message approved by david_gore) | |||
| Brian Vogel Grand Master Username: guyslp Post Number: 1050 Registered: 6-2009 |
Bob, Some further observations . . . I can tell you that unless you're going to a dealership in the United States for all your service on a car it is highly unlikely that a random independent mechanic will know the individual service schedules for any given car. They tend to follow their own "garage protocol" unless the customer expressly requests something. This was how I always got the brake fluid changed on my Jag every two years. With the sole exception of the Jaguar, just like the one person I quoted in the previously posted document said, I have never requested a brake fluid change nor been asked if I wanted/needed one. I'm now in my early 50s and have owned a lot of cars serviced at a lot of different facilities. Regardless of what you think of my choices, this speaks volumes about conventional practice in my part of the world and that said practice does not appear to be resulting in accidents in any number that would trigger attention from regulators. My position is that, regardless of what "should" be done based on either a car manufacturer or product manufacturer states, the "acid test" of whether it's essential is determined by what people actually do in practice and the issues, or lack thereof, that ensue. I've known several people, including my father, who were intimately involved with fleet maintenance for many vehicles. To a person they all reported that their organizations modified recommended service schedules based on what they learned through observation over time. One example I specifically remember was that the USPS stopped rotating tires on front wheel drive cars after they learned that they could go through multiple sets of front tires before needing a new set of rear tires if they did not rotate. Whether anyone really wishes to believe it or not, I am not trying to tell anyone what they should or should not do with regard to regular maintenance of their cars. What I resent are the utterly apocryphal declarations of the horrors of, for instance, not changing DOT brake fluid that simply do not materialize. Cars would be suffering brake failure by the millions and careening off the roads in the USA were failure to change brake fluid a "mission critical" service. Clearly, it isn't and we aren't seeing anything unusual in terms of rates of brake failure. There seems to be a lot of belief about many things that has no direct connection to either what people are actually doing (as opposed to what they're told they should do) or that's based upon a lot of "friend of a friend" data that is directly contradicted by what hard data and/or certifying bodies say. I operate on a combination of what I've observed to work just fine all my adult life and, when there are questions I don't know about, relying more upon hard data or adherence to specific specifications than I do on anything that somebody said that's been repeated, ad nauseum, without any supporting data of even a consistent anecdotal variety. Each person needs to make his or her own informed decisions. Condemning discussion about what's actually done, and the results of same, does nothing to further making informed decisions. Brian | |||
| Bob uk Unregistered guest Posted From: 94.197.122.86 |
Service schedules are developed from main dealer feedback and in the UK by the mot system from an empirical point of view and government legislation and advice. Rotating tyres is one of those practices that is more tradition than necessary because I don't bother. I never seen the benefit. And it could wear the tyres quicker depends on design of car, tyre and usage. Braking systems on the quiet a marvel of engineering design because with even abuse and misinformed maintenance they hold together. however not changing fluid removes a layer of safety, and in the long run will damage the system. We all know the importance of dot in SY cars because the danger of expensive damage. Lesser vehicles suffer the same fate only it takes much longer. I have seen countless weapy bits and I can't say it's down to the fluid but it certainly didn't help. Some wheels cylinders I have seen are leaking due to rust coloured water/dot. Obviously then I must say the bad dot ruined the wheel cylinder. Most times though the owner has been topping up with dot so by the time I get to see it the dot has been changed by default sort of. In the UK if a car has abs that doesn't work then it fails the MOT. The abs cannot be removed because the car will fail. With the older cheaper stuff the bits were cheap but abs damaged by rust is expensive and on a 10 year old car maybe a write off. I know that cars are not flying off into the trees wholesale in the USA but how many are meeting an early demise due to dot damage to abs systems. Of course one could take the bulb out and ignore it. But modern systems are jigged with the abs in mind and one may find that in an emergency the system won't modulate manually or footily. My jeep is so over servoed that it would be impossible for me to stop it from slithering along the road in an emergency. A 1993 Cherokee is worth about £750 but a broken abs and no mot and it's £150 spares or repair with luck. That's why I change Dot. Most drivers don't drive cars with brakes that aren't working. What happens is overnight while parked a leak will develop because of rust has damaged a seal while under pressure the cups seal but leak at rest. In the morning the driver fkinds he has no dot so he puts some in to find air in the system so takes the car to the brake shop. Hence no accidents. A small survey such as your one has some indication of dotty habits. Most like my sister if told by VW that dot should be changed then they do it. She sometimes asks me about stuff she is checking to make sure it really does need doing like pollen filters which she had never heard of. As you say each to his own. But if I was running a shop state side I would be promoting dot changes with posters in reception wwith photos of rusty dot carnage with save money on brake jobs moral, because I can easily justify the righteous deed. (Message approved by david_gore) | |||
| Richard Treacy Grand Master Username: richard_treacy Post Number: 3081 Registered: 4-2003 |
As they say in Switzerland, Bob, it varies from Canton to Canton. However, I have a feeling that the UK (or is it now the UK and Scotland ?) and Australia are pretty similar in respect of brake fluid standards, and I have never before heard any challenge to the industry practice here of changing DOT3/4 fluids at least every 24 months regardless of make or model. Interesting is that Crewe extended the fluid change interval for mineral oil to 6 years. The experience out there is mostly that mineral oil systems leak more often, unrelated to fluid degradation, while RR363 systems seize up more often. Old, dirty and moisture-damaged DOT-based fluids certainly will cause corrosion and seizure. Hence the shorter change periods specified for replacing the DOT3/4-based fluids. Certainly, I have had hydraulic leaks in my LHM Crewe cars, but none on the RR363 car. RT. | |||
| David Gore Moderator Username: david_gore Post Number: 1471 Registered: 4-2003 |
I suspect the US practice of not changing brake fluid might have a lot to do with the fact that most cars [especially in the Northern states] rust away before the fluid is due to be changed  . | |||
| Bob uk Unregistered guest Posted From: 94.197.122.81 |
I visited a cousin who lives near Dublin, a few years back and he works in a all makes quick fit place and his boss always talks the customers into dot changes. It's a little money spinner, money for old rope he calls it. Trading Standards wouldn't dare to question it because his boss will blind them proven science and of course the AA and RAC and the Irish MOT will back him up. So in general Europe follows UK practice, the Swiss are very dotty as is Germany. The BMW forums are very dot aware, but mainly because of performance issues to do with viscosity they like the LV stuff. I believe the Germans test dot on their MOT system. Can't have dodgy dot going fast on an autobann. (Message approved by david_gore) | |||
| Randy Roberson Grand Master Username: wascator Post Number: 307 Registered: 5-2009 |
Most car owners in the US I think don't worry about it once it's paid for; they trade it in or sell it. If you are keeping an old car going, the brake fluid gets "changed" because you spill most of it when you either change a faulty master cylinder or caliper. If you never or hardly ever "call on" your brakes as in high-performance or mountain driving, you never know the difference as the brake fluid doesn't get hot anyway. Sort of "iffy" maintenance to get disposable cars a little farther down the road until they are not wanted any more, then to the breakers' yard. I see cars there frequently with the ads still written in the windows, because they don't sell at the lot and the owners sell them to be broken for parts. Most amazing brakes to me are on the prewar Rolls-Royces: entirely mechanical and very rugged. Sweet. | |||
| Brian Vogel Grand Master Username: guyslp Post Number: 1051 Registered: 6-2009 |
Randy, I believe your first sentence is correct, but not your second. I have yet to own a new car, and all of the cars I've owned I've owned for years, many for a decade or more. I have never replaced a master cylinder or caliper on any of them, though I have had occasion to replace some hoses. I know this to be the case for my immediate family and their cars as well. None of us engages in "high performance" driving, that's for sure. If mountain driving is only for "real mountains" (read: the Rockies and others in the American west) then we don't do that, either. I've always lived in the eastern mountains, though, and it's where most of my driving has been and still is done. This whole go round made me decide, for the hell of it, to check and change the brake fluid in my Cadillac (or at least what was in the reservoir). It was darkened, but not "rusty darkened." It had more of a tourmaline green color to it when held up to the light, but was still quite clear, not cloudy. I had a hell of a time getting the reservoir cap (plastic, not metal, so corrosion was not a factor) off and even the lid seal stayed on the reservoir. I then came to appreciate what was said in the wikipedia article on the Citroën hydropneumatic suspension: Most hydraulic brake systems are sealed from the outside air by a rubber diaphragm in the reservoir filler cap, but the Citroën system had to be vented to allow the fluid level in the reservoir to rise and fall, thus it was not hermetically sealed. Consequently, each time the suspension would rise, the fluid level in the reservoir dropped, drawing in fresh moisture-laden air. The large surface of the fluid in the reservoir readily absorbed moisture. Since the system recirculates fluid continually through the reservoir, all the fluid was repeatedly exposed to the air and its moisture content. The same is true of the system in the SY series cars. The systems in the GM cars that make up the rest of my current fleet are all of the "hermetically sealed" setup, with the only variance being the type of reservoir cover. I had often wondered why brake fluid in the SYs is so much more prone to darkening, particularly to a deep tea color from rust in the worst cases, and the above quoted material sheds light on precisely why that is. I would still love to know what creates the stuff that looks for all the world like algae in the reservoirs of SY cars that have been immobile for extended periods of time. I may get inspired to see if the fluid in the Buick or the older of the two GMCs (it's a 2001, maybe 2002) looks the same as in the Cadillac. The Buick shares the same sort of reservoir setup as the Cadillac but the GMC has a screw-top reservoir. It's impossible to tell much of anything from the outside. Even once the sides of the Cadillac's reservoir were wiped down and the new pale straw colored DOT3 put in, it still looks precisely the same through the translucent reservoir "sight glasses" once the reservoir gasket and cover are put back into place. Brian | |||
| Patrick Lockyer. Grand Master Username: pat_lockyer Post Number: 903 Registered: 9-2004 |
"I had often wondered why brake fluid in the SYs is so much more prone to darkening," You need to wonder no more. Just get your butt and change your fluid, then every two years and all will be clear, well apart from your clapped out brakes! | |||
| Brian Vogel Grand Master Username: guyslp Post Number: 1052 Registered: 6-2009 |
I have always changed my fluid every other year on my Rolls-Royce motorcars since I have witnessed the necessity of doing so. I've been crystal clear about that since the outset. It's fascinating to see the huge difference in reservoir condition between an SY car that's not had its RR363 changed "in some time" and other cars that have not. It's stark, and the SY reservoir looks like a cesspool by comparison. Brian | |||
| Bob uk Unregistered guest Posted From: 94.197.122.88 |
Dark colour is an indication of the additives doing their job and the sludge is the dead bodies. However it is not a reliable way of testing brake fluid. Every dirty test sample I have tested has been bad and about 1/2 of the clear samples. My RR363 is 21 months old and is clear. My conclusion is that if it's dark then it's bad if it's clear then 50/50 it's bad. (Message approved by david_gore) | |||
| Brian Vogel Grand Master Username: guyslp Post Number: 1053 Registered: 6-2009 |
Bob, This is not intended to be snarky, but please define "bad." How is brake fluid tested and, what defines "no good" in the results? Just as important, since I'm making the assumption that this testing is MOT related, what is the stated rationale for declaring the fluid "bad" in their documentation? I have just come in from changing the fluid (that I believe to have been original in all cases) from a 1996 Buick and 2007 GMC 2500HD. The fluid in these looked substantially like what I had removed from the Cadillac, clear but a dark tourmaline-like color, which is almost certainly the result of the reaction of the fluid with the hoses. All reservoirs had (or have, in the case of the newer one you can't access for cleaning) a very thin layer of "wet dust" that's almost certainly got to be trace amounts of hose that settle out. I cannot wrap my head around the declaration, "bad," when none of these cars has ever had any, and I do mean any, issues with or repair to their braking systems beyond replacement of pads. (The Cadillac might be an exception, but I doubt it. I've only owned it since January). Bad has to have some sort of functional degradation of significance to typical driving conditions. For me, "bad" means, "almost guaranteed to cause problems." Years to decades of experience show me that these do not occur. Thus, not bad. Brian, who's just as agnostic as when I started with regard to the need to change DOT3 in most cars | |||
| David Gore Moderator Username: david_gore Post Number: 1473 Registered: 4-2003 |
This discussion is becoming repetitious and the only conclusions that can be drawn are: 1. Certain US makes used sealed hydraulic systems which appear to have longer DOT fluid life than systems exposed to the atmosphere which pick up moisture and slowly degrade. My personal experience with open systems has been corrosion of ferrous master/slave cylinder bores and pistons from brake fluid that has not been regularly bled from the system to be replaced by fresh fluid from a new sealed container. I have never owned a car with a sealed hydraulic system. 2. The Shadow RR363 hydraulic system is not sealed and degradation of the fluid over time due to moisture absorption is a known problem leading to the formation of a "jelly" which collects in the reservoir and eventually clogs the intake filters if the system is not serviced correctly. Corrosion of caliper bores and/or pistons has also been encountered however this may be due to moisture in the fluid and/or external moisture from road splash. This problem does not occur in the later mineral oil system although external corrosion from road splash may be present. I suggest this is time for the protagonists to "agree to disagree", take whatever action they deem appropriate and accept responsibility for the success or otherwise of their choice. | |||
| Bob uk Unregistered guest Posted From: 94.197.122.78 |
Bad is 3% water, ph on the acid side of neutral, copper content and suspended solids. Garages use a meter which says pass or fail. These measure ohms. It is calibrated using new dot. The plod use these in service and repair. I used to record the pass or fail in the records, and when the dot is changed a nice pretty sticker next to the master. And for accidents a laboratory. Incidentally private customers like the stickers for dot cambelts oil and filter and antifreeze. It makes them confident. I always wrote neatly on them because not neat writing could reflect a not neat job. The stickers are available from motor factors. Use chinograph pen. Also in the UK we are about to do away with a road tax disc, and some are feeling not happy at not having a sticker to prove to all and sundry that their car is taxed. Back to dot, I wouldn't worry about dot going bad, just get cheapo dot from Wal-Mart. My Cherokee handbook UK edition days Dot3 or 4 and Haines after market repair manual USA version with UK supplement says dot 3 or 4 change every two years. New Turkey baster squeezy thing will suck a reservoir. Antifreeze tester? Bellows are good but the size of the SY tank and temperature range make them impractical. The heat of the fluid does drive of moisture which escapes from the vent holes. When the dot cools down it will suck air back in hopefully less moisture is drawn in than was expelled. I think that the dot cools before a big lump of engine so maybe the vents suck in warm dry air first. And it's got a nice cozy blanket almost sitting on the vents. My car had a bit of gloop in the tank when I got the car but since then every two year changes no gloop and my sight glasses were clean when I got the car so I assume it had had regular dot changes which is borne out by the only slight problems I have had in 25 years. (Message approved by david_gore) | |||
| Brian Vogel Grand Master Username: guyslp Post Number: 1054 Registered: 6-2009 |
Thanks Bob. I've been using a bulb baster as my suctioning device for brake fluid "forever." Your comment re: the tax sticker is interesting. We have what's called Personal Property Tax on automobiles here in VA. There used to be a sticker that you received annually after you'd paid your taxes that you had to affix to the windshield yourself (and remove the old one). We all rejoiced when they did away with those stickers (but not the tax itself). They were a PITA to remove and were all too often put aside when received, usually several months before the prior year's expired and in the dead of winter, and you'd end up being pulled over by the local constabulary because you'd forgotten to change the sticker even when you'd paid your tax. Brian | |||
| Richard Treacy Grand Master Username: richard_treacy Post Number: 3085 Registered: 4-2003 |
Tax discs, or rectangular rego stickers as they are called here in Oz, are dinosaurs now too. At least they were easy to peel off. Here are the last ones from my cars. The June 2014 sticker was one the last issued ever in the ACT. They were easy to apply and easy to remove. Of course, the equivalents in the USA must have been superior as always. If you ignore your mail and email and forget to pay the rego or road insurance, the first police car that you pass will pick you up by numberplate recognition and chase you. A rogue OBD-II etc. reset will not fix that even if the dashboard Service warning is extinguished.  | |||
| Bob uk Unregistered guest Posted From: 94.197.122.74 |
The UK version is round 3" diameter. They are paper and not adhesive so I used to use blue tack. The disc are collectible and prewar 2 ones fetch £50 wild guess. I have my old ones in the cars file. Which adds to the cars provenance and thus value. I think you can go to the UK tax site and print a tax disc out if you want to have a physical one. (Message approved by david_gore) | |||
| Bob Reynolds Prolific User Username: bobreynolds Post Number: 162 Registered: 8-2012 |
Just for the record, the DVLA have already stopped issuing tax discs; even though they are supposed to finish on 1st October. I just renewed my tax and I got the blunt message: "You no longer need to display a tax disc so we will not send you one"! I was thinking I might get one of the last ones. So I guess we can all take our tax discs out now and throw them away. Reproduction tax discs are available for any year, and many people display one with the car's original registration month. | |||
| Richard Treacy Grand Master Username: richard_treacy Post Number: 3086 Registered: 4-2003 |
There are quite a few UK R-R/B cars here in Australia with UK tax discs still proudly attached to their windscreens. Some owners think it a status symbol, incredible, while in fact those in the know spurn secondhand imports from the UK in favour of Australian-delivered cars every time. There is generally a very substantial difference in market value between those variant too. Specifications differ and the UK imports are somewhat lighter due to FeO2 loss and a lower level of features. | |||
| Bob UK Unregistered guest Posted From: 94.197.122.85 |
Tax disc collectors are called velogists and a genuine 1923 tax disc is worth £1000. My car gets lighter every year so to keep the car heavy I add grease. (Message approved by david_gore) | |||
| Richard Treacy Grand Master Username: richard_treacy Post Number: 3088 Registered: 4-2003 |
Of course I forgot my chemistry as David Gore will no doubt point out. Rust is mainly Fe2O3 with other nasty derivatives of Fe/O and water to make it the hydrated mess that it is. Nice stuff if it turns up in the system due to hydrated brake fluid. | |||
| Bob uk Unregistered guest Posted From: 94.197.122.82 |
Which Mr Treacy brings us full circle, change the dot or sign up for Fe2O3. Which isn't a cable tv station. (Message approved by david_gore) |
Brake Fluid Changing Habits Survey Results