hanswuk
New Member
How is Donna going to drive Beaker if he's a puppet????? There must be a car connection! :eusa-think:
Peugeot RCZ Forum
Register a free account today to become a member. It's free! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, connect with other members through your own private inbox and take part in competitions!
A
Anonymous
Guest
All will be revealed in time boys, have patience........
A
Anonymous
Guest
It's Donna's new car...you'll see why he's being called Beaker in due time...
A
Anonymous
Guest
Am I close :lol:
A
Anonymous
Guest
:lol: :lol: 
A
Anonymous
Guest
Figo said:
This image was taken from the Gillanders service-desk CCTV when Rizz picked up his car after they (didn't) service it...... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
A
Anonymous
Guest
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: That's pretty much the exact shirt I was wearing at the time too!!
A
Anonymous
Guest
mrizzle said::lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: That's pretty much the exact shirt I was wearing at the time too!!
well.... that explains why Ashley never called you back.
There are enough muppets in Peterheid as it it
:law-policered: :beer:
A
Anonymous
Guest
Figo said:mrizzle said::lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: That's pretty much the exact shirt I was wearing at the time too!!
well.... that explains why Ashley never called you back.
There are enough muppets in Peterheid as it it
:law-policered: :beer:
Sometimes I wish you could *like* things more than once....this forum needs a *love* button ha ha
A
Anonymous
Guest
Well that would help explain why I STILL haven't heard anything!!! :thumbdown:
:thumbdown:
A
Anonymous
Guest
C'mon Gillanders
A
Anonymous
Guest
ding dong? or same old song?
A
Anonymous
Guest
Same old song. ANOTHER day passes with no communication from them!! :thumbdown:
the big blue
Member
Hi mrizzle, :greetings-wavingblue: ...as I was reading through your unfortunate AND ongoing post as you continue your what must now be referred to as a HOLY CRUSADE with the Peugeot Dealership and there HQ motherland. Rest assured you are supported by a mass of (Braveheart) Forum members standing side by side with you! :beer:
Being relatively new to the Forum (Band Of Brothers ,,& Sisters) and actively reading the many interesting posts i've become aware of certain common type issues that Z' owners have encountered. I accept that your Zunsport exhaust issue is slightly aside albeit it was still a Peugeot option/semi factory fitment at the time ,,and your mirror issues are unfathomable!! :brickwall:
The inherent issues that pop up in Posts from time to time that Peugeot Dealership's and HQ strangely AND conveniently appear to not know about and then treat them in isolation as if they are a one off which we Forum members know they are not!!
I read a post recently about a component not being covered under a 'third party' Warranty and costing the owner £270 having only owned the used Z' 6 months when in fact the component fault is a well documented and had HQ been made aware of it rather than the just the Dealer the repair cost MAY have been different??
Issues including the clonking drivers seat (I have one of them :thumbup: ), cam chain tensioner, creaking mirrors, engine temperature sensor, water ingress in the boot opening electrics causing it to open etc. Then theres the strange rationale brake fluid replacement at 2 years. To me the latter appears to be ludicrous as it either needs to be replaced OR it does not! Therefore it should not be a "recommended" issue which to me indicates that it does not need replacing every 2 years for the sake of future warranty coverage. The working of the brakes is a fundamental SAFETY matter and a manufacturer would not just recommend such a thing, it would stipulate it as the litigation would be tremendous if by their omission of NOT making it a requirement vehicles braking systems were to became unsafe/ severely compromised after just 2 years! It seems very convenient that it is not included in the two year service price but is a hidden 'add on' extra. (Just the .big blue's opinion) !!
MAYBE as a forum we could create a schedule of the most common issues and collectively submit them to Peugeot HQ and ask for their comments AS at least then they can't deny certain issues stating they are unaware of the fault which is what I have read happens! That way when the issues arise the Z' owner will have the confidence to tell the dealer that Peugeot HQ are aware of such issues and hopefully the matter will then be dealt with appropriately. This (international) Forum working in conjunction with Peugeot HQ and opening up a two way passing of information for Z' issues.
Hopefully mrizzle will get his call back today as it appears that the dealership is messing with his future car buying decisions
!!!!!!
.the big blue (..and to think that I thought my clonking drivers seat was simply peculiar to to my beloved Z' ! :roll: )
PS: ...& still feeling your pain mrizzle on this side of the border!
Being relatively new to the Forum (Band Of Brothers ,,& Sisters) and actively reading the many interesting posts i've become aware of certain common type issues that Z' owners have encountered. I accept that your Zunsport exhaust issue is slightly aside albeit it was still a Peugeot option/semi factory fitment at the time ,,and your mirror issues are unfathomable!! :brickwall:
The inherent issues that pop up in Posts from time to time that Peugeot Dealership's and HQ strangely AND conveniently appear to not know about and then treat them in isolation as if they are a one off which we Forum members know they are not!!
I read a post recently about a component not being covered under a 'third party' Warranty and costing the owner £270 having only owned the used Z' 6 months when in fact the component fault is a well documented and had HQ been made aware of it rather than the just the Dealer the repair cost MAY have been different??
Issues including the clonking drivers seat (I have one of them :thumbup: ), cam chain tensioner, creaking mirrors, engine temperature sensor, water ingress in the boot opening electrics causing it to open etc. Then theres the strange rationale brake fluid replacement at 2 years. To me the latter appears to be ludicrous as it either needs to be replaced OR it does not! Therefore it should not be a "recommended" issue which to me indicates that it does not need replacing every 2 years for the sake of future warranty coverage. The working of the brakes is a fundamental SAFETY matter and a manufacturer would not just recommend such a thing, it would stipulate it as the litigation would be tremendous if by their omission of NOT making it a requirement vehicles braking systems were to became unsafe/ severely compromised after just 2 years! It seems very convenient that it is not included in the two year service price but is a hidden 'add on' extra. (Just the .big blue's opinion) !!
MAYBE as a forum we could create a schedule of the most common issues and collectively submit them to Peugeot HQ and ask for their comments AS at least then they can't deny certain issues stating they are unaware of the fault which is what I have read happens! That way when the issues arise the Z' owner will have the confidence to tell the dealer that Peugeot HQ are aware of such issues and hopefully the matter will then be dealt with appropriately. This (international) Forum working in conjunction with Peugeot HQ and opening up a two way passing of information for Z' issues.
Hopefully mrizzle will get his call back today as it appears that the dealership is messing with his future car buying decisions
!!!!!!
.the big blue (..and to think that I thought my clonking drivers seat was simply peculiar to to my beloved Z' ! :roll: )
PS: ...& still feeling your pain mrizzle on this side of the border!
hanswuk
New Member
TRW is an original equipment brake system supplier and they say:
The importance of brake fluid exchange
TRW recommends that brake fluid is changed every 2 years for DOT 4 and DOT 5.1 to maintain maximum braking performance and safety.
Water contamination or debris can shorten the life time of the braking system. Brake fluid absorbs moisture via the brake hoses – the older the hoses, the higher the penetration of moisture.
As brakes are used, the brake fluid will heat up. Over time, the boiling point of all brake fluids will begin to lower as moisture from the air is absorbed. If the brake fluid boils, ‘vapour lock’ will occur resulting in brake failure for the driver.
If brake fluid is not changed regularly, the master cylinder rubber parts will corrode - visible as black coloured brake fluid. Very dark to black brake fluid is a sign of contamination.
If you detect dirty fluid, this needs to be exchanged immediately, otherwise it will do harm to systems like ABS and Vehicle Stability Control (VSC).
The importance of brake fluid exchange
TRW recommends that brake fluid is changed every 2 years for DOT 4 and DOT 5.1 to maintain maximum braking performance and safety.
Water contamination or debris can shorten the life time of the braking system. Brake fluid absorbs moisture via the brake hoses – the older the hoses, the higher the penetration of moisture.
As brakes are used, the brake fluid will heat up. Over time, the boiling point of all brake fluids will begin to lower as moisture from the air is absorbed. If the brake fluid boils, ‘vapour lock’ will occur resulting in brake failure for the driver.
If brake fluid is not changed regularly, the master cylinder rubber parts will corrode - visible as black coloured brake fluid. Very dark to black brake fluid is a sign of contamination.
If you detect dirty fluid, this needs to be exchanged immediately, otherwise it will do harm to systems like ABS and Vehicle Stability Control (VSC).
A
Anonymous
Guest
the big blue
Member
Hi' :greetings-wavingblue: hanswuk, please don't get me wrong i'm in agreement with what you state about brake fluid and contamination ,,what I'm saying is if Peugeot themselves thought it to be the case then they would state is as more than just a "recommendation" and it would be "replace". By merely quoting 'recommendation' owners in my humble opinion rightly question its true validity.
They do not state 'engine oil' as a 'recommendation' and that I believe is changed at every service, the latter likewise suffers in the same way with contamination and would lead to possible serious component degradation if not changed and so they do not sit on the fence with that one. What I was wondering is, if Peugeot genuinely believed in the changing of brake fluid at 2 years they would not sit on the fence on the matter and it would be treated in the same way as engine oil and would without question simply be part of a two year "replace" item of that service and with its cost factored in.
I can't see any manufacturer missing the chance of taking in extra cash as part of a routine service which by stating 'replace' they naturally would not. If the owner then Did Not have the brake fluid replaced then any degradation of the brakes could not be levied against Peugeot themselves due to the owner deliberately going against & thus opting out of a 'must' aspect of the 2 year service and therefore there could be no come back/ litigation against Peugeot.
I don't mean to go on BUT to me it seems like its just grasping at our hard earned cash otherwise it would simply be automatically factored in to the two year service ,,OR a minimum the much used "check and adjust/ replace if necessary".
.the big blue (..and there i was finking that I had come up with a good idea BUT alas Figo :wave: was already on the ball !)
They do not state 'engine oil' as a 'recommendation' and that I believe is changed at every service, the latter likewise suffers in the same way with contamination and would lead to possible serious component degradation if not changed and so they do not sit on the fence with that one. What I was wondering is, if Peugeot genuinely believed in the changing of brake fluid at 2 years they would not sit on the fence on the matter and it would be treated in the same way as engine oil and would without question simply be part of a two year "replace" item of that service and with its cost factored in.
I can't see any manufacturer missing the chance of taking in extra cash as part of a routine service which by stating 'replace' they naturally would not. If the owner then Did Not have the brake fluid replaced then any degradation of the brakes could not be levied against Peugeot themselves due to the owner deliberately going against & thus opting out of a 'must' aspect of the 2 year service and therefore there could be no come back/ litigation against Peugeot.
I don't mean to go on BUT to me it seems like its just grasping at our hard earned cash otherwise it would simply be automatically factored in to the two year service ,,OR a minimum the much used "check and adjust/ replace if necessary".
.the big blue (..and there i was finking that I had come up with a good idea BUT alas Figo :wave: was already on the ball !)
A
Anonymous
Guest
to be fair BB I finished typing the first post after you posted so you were in there first
the big blue
Member
...so Figo, does that mean that this Back Bencher actually managed to come up with a good idea worthy of further consideration by the Chamber ,,a 2nd reading by the Forum Moderators OR even elevated straight to the Lords for a vote?? :dance:
.the big blue (,,a right honourable 'back bencher' now awaiting invitation to the Dispatch Box) :clap:
.the big blue (,,a right honourable 'back bencher' now awaiting invitation to the Dispatch Box) :clap:
A
Anonymous
Guest
the big blue said:
Indeed it means we aint going to force you to sell your RCZ and buy an Audi :eusa-whistle: :lol: