Mile High
Lone Tree, CO
Senior Member
Joined: 02/05/2008
View Profile
|
In some cases "design" is EXACTLY the problem, which is why the "design" gets changed to correct it. I assure you the "quality" didn't change a bit. i.e. Keystone significantly shortened the length of the nose to correct early frame problems, and Keystone increased frame size to 10" from 8" in 2002 to correct some flex issues. Those are not "quality" problems. Those are closer to "blunders" in retrospect.
Nobody expects the warranty to offer blanket permission to modify as they please, but Lippert's response could be closer to Montana's policy they stated to me when I called about installing an electric awning. They simply said that the awning installation is of course not covered by their warranty, and any damage to the unit as a result of the installation would not be warranted. They didn't hand my head back to me and tell me the warranty was null and void because I took a drill to it.
|
laknox
Arizona
Full Member
Joined: 01/06/2008
View Profile
 Offline
|
My question would be, if I install a couple Class 1 or 2 receivers under the frame rails to hold a cargo rack, using a plate welded to the tube and clamped around the frame using u-bolts, does this count as a "frame modification"? No welding or drilling, only some added weight to the tail end.
Lyle
2002 GMC Sierra 2500 HD Duramax Crew Cab 4x4
Banks Bullet Tuner and Monster Exhaust
B&W Turnover Ball with 5th Wheel Companion
2004 Komfort 25FSG Fifth Wheel
1936 John Deere Model A
International Flying Farmers 50 Year Member
|
laknox
Arizona
Full Member
Joined: 01/06/2008
View Profile
Offline
|
Vulcaneer wrote:The design is at fault? I don't think so. There may be some quality control problems. But generally the design is adequate. Lets not confuse design issues with quality control issues.
Most of what I hear of frame problems are from a quality stand point. And most of those are related to weld issues. Other quality issues, might relate to the tires that are provided. Regardless that the design might call for E-rated tires. You get inferior tires, that are E-rated. So would that be a design problem or a quality problem?
A company could engineer an RV frame so strong it would not flex. But it would not last long. Your LDT could not pull the weight safely. Many could not afford it. The abuse it would take in normal use would shake or twist it apart. That would be a design problem.
The design has been proven over the years. But in some cases the quality may be questionable. Two different things.
And the frame manufacturer does not design the frame to allow the user to modify it. What do you expect them to say in their warranty? "It's OK to modify the frame to install a welded trailer hitch or have a friend add holes anywhere you want them." Or "We warranty our product for 1 year...or maybe some more if you want, as long as you promise to use it no more than four weeks in the first year."
Empirical evidence lacking, the anecdotal evidence strongly suggests that the bigger issue is QC and not design. In the several years I've been reading about various problems with all different brands of RV's, the one thing that stands out is QC and not design. Whether it's a poorly fitted cabinet, oven or generator, or mis-aligned axles or a poorly welded frame, it seems that it's mostly QC issues. I said in another post that if the frame manufacturer doesn't catch a poorly constructed frame, why isn't the receiving manufacturer not catching it on receipt? Two major QC check-points that aren't being taken advantage of. IMHO, =both= the frame constructor =and= the RV constructor bear equal responsibility. The frame constructor should be delivering a quality product and the RV constructor should reject (or do in-house repairs) a poorly built frame. It's pretty damn simple, if you ask me.
Lyle
|
SuperdutyII
AZ
Full Member
Joined: 09/30/2009
View Profile
Offline
|
I think we are fencing with windmills relative to Design vs Quality. The design includes the components used, (tires included), defines the manufacturing procedures such as where to weld the frame and how strong it needs to be. Now there may be two engineering groups involved such as design engineering and manufacturing engineering. If the manufacturing procedures do not allow achieving high quality products then is it a design problem, a manufacturing engineering problem or a production problem? It really doesn't matter, it is a company problem and will only be fixed if the upper management declares low quality products unacceptable no matter which department caused the problem.
So if a frame is designed properly and the vendor (Lippert) doesn't build, fabricate and weld to the original design specifications but the RV manufacturer still accepts that product both parties are at fault. What are the incoming parts inspection criteria?
However, I don't agree this is necessarily a Lippert problem. We didn't buy a Lippert frame and a box on top of it. We purchased a RV from a specific manufacturer and the RV manufacturer is responsible for all components used on or in that RV. They selected the vendors of the parts installed and therefore they are responsible and IMHO that should include tires. If a plane crashes on landing and it is due to defective tires I suspect the airline and airplane manufacturer would get sued not the tire manufacturer. It is their responsibility to put good tires on that airplane. And they may have to sue the tire manufacturer to get financial relief. Not the passengers. However, I know that isn't true in the automotive industry which I also think is wrong. Quality starts in the design. If that hasn't occurred it is really hard and maybe impossible to build quality in. I do agree that the RV manufacturer needs to put limits on what can be done to the frame. And exceptions can get really dicey. I do think a little common sense needs to be applied but the design safety tolerences have to be observed religiously. I really think making unauthgorized additions or changes to a RV frame is opening pandora's box. And to be fair to the manufacturers they shouldn't have to negotiate every single modification issue. If they say "NO" modifications allowed. Don't do it. What part of "NO" don't we understand.
I agree that the manufacturers can set limits. But if they do they very clearly need to inform the RV buyer what those limits are. The real problem is they are selling expectations that they cannot and do not perform to. Not informing of their limits to the user after a problem occurs to avoid responsibility and accountability. It is a very immature industry and the cost of entry is too low!
|
richfaa
Ohio
Senior Member
Joined: 04/24/2005
View Profile
Offline
|
Brad...You may remember that Montana/Lippert corrected the "frame flex" issue in @ mid 05 by shorting the front cap and changing the frame design. We did see that at the factory. They also went from 6K to 7K axles on the larger models between the 06 and 07 models with a frame design change as the service center says. As you state they also went to a larger frame as the units got longer and heavier. Those would all be design changes. The Keystone service center in Goshen told me that there have been changes in frame design on a regular basis although my untrained eye can not tell the difference. We had a 2 inch class C receiver hitch welded on last month at the Mor Ryde plant and the Mor Ryde guys said that the addition of the hitch actually strengthened the frame as there is now a 2 inch beam across the rear of the frame. We also had a long talk with one of their certfied welders as they fabricate many of their products on site. welding is a complex process where skill and training play a critical part
It is easy to see where a unskilled welder could cause a poor weld and why good Q/C plays a huge part.
It is good to see some well thought out post appearing here..good post superduty and laknox...
We have toured several plants in the Elkharet area including the Montana plant several times and although we hear of Quality Control execpt for all those red tages on exterior things at the end of the line we have not actually seen how the Q/C process works. We do agee that Q/C is the biggest issue across he RV industry.
06 Montana 3400. 08 Ford F-350 6.4L
|
|
|
Vulcaneer
Northern New England
Senior Member
Joined: 10/17/2007
View Profile
|
I don't know how quality is controlled at the RV plants either. But there should be an "incoming (or receiving) QC" for any vendor supplied components. Then each major dept (structural, framing, roofing, assembly, etc) should have a QC specialist to look at each step in that departments manufacturing process for every unit that goes thru it. And corrections made before the unit leaves that dept. And at the end of the line, the overall unit needs a final QC to test all components, and to give a final inspection of major structural issues, and cosmetic inspections/approvals.
Years ago, a major automotive manufacturer found that many warranty claims were due to failures of vendor products. Maybe alternators, serpentine belts, transmission clutches, pumps, hoses, induction systems, hangers, brakes and components, etc. They tightened the manufacturing and performance specs on their suppliers. Results measured in "failures per million". And through testing, any supplier that could not comply with the quality requirement was dropped as an approved first tier supplier. Then the supplier price would determine the choice supplier.
They also tightened their own manufacturing and assembly specs too. They looked at assembly methods and changed manufacturing processes to initiate more efficient assembly processes. And they instrumented many in-process inspections. Rejected parts were identified as re-workable or scrap. And each department and the leadership was measured on their through put performance.
A very costly improvement. But when billions were saved in warranty costs, and customer satisfaction improved dramatically, the manufacturing, and vendor changes were well justified. This process was known as Fords "Quality is Job One" program.
It was just about that time that GM employed a new CEO. His name was Lopez. His specialty "claim to fame" was that he formed teams of engineers that would go to supplier plants and consult/demand to change supplier manufacturing methods to improve their efficiencies, performance and lower their price. Lopez did not last long. And we know the ultimate outcome for GM.
* This post was
edited 11/04/09 07:55am by Vulcaneer *
2006 F350 V10 4X4 SC SB SRW 4.30 22,500 GCWR
Keystone Sprinter 33'9" 12,500 GVWR
Pullrite Super Glide 18K
Super Duty, Super Cab, SuperGlide
|
|
