Rusting welds

[BeeLDub]

Yeah, I had pointed it out before that too in post 35, but nobody seemed to read it when I said it the first time.

Selective reading

Sponsored

 

[agordon117]

Selective reading

It's not a big deal, the important thing is that we have a better idea what we are seeing now. Fewer seem to actually be rusted than the ones that have exposed slag. Slag is an easier fix than rust really. Won't have to scrub as hard with a wire brush to get it to come off.

I just wish my damn JL would show up so I could help everyone figure this crap out. 90% of the time I buy something I end up having to change something about it because it was built/designed/inspected wrong. I've gotten very proficient at fixing things that shouldn't need fixing.

 

[ALEX-4LO]

I see pics and start reading LOL! :cwl: #chill

 

[Ruby Jack]

Heres a pic from me. Fahhhkkk I was hoping to look under there and not find anything. This was the only one "of concern" though.

Is that sort of thing covered by the warranty?

 

[That One Guy]

Is that sort of thing covered by the warranty?

If there is ONE thing that should be covered by bumper-to-bumper and anti-corrosion warranties, it's this. Drivetrains, body panels, etc can be replaced, but once a frame goes in a vehicle... well...

 

[Mordin Solus]

My knowledge of rust is.... not good and has a reddish color :p That said, doing a quick search on the net I see similar references to Jk’s, F150, Silverado, and Tundra. So perhaps it’s not all that uncommon.

 

[Ruby Jack]

If there is ONE thing that should be covered by bumper-to-bumper and anti-corrosion warranties, it's this. Drivetrains, body panels, etc can be replaced, but once a frame goes in a vehicle... well...

Good to know, is the rust warranty 3 years or 5 for Jeeps?

 

[BillyHW]

5 year rust warranty but it's a perforation warranty, which you're never going to get.

 

[Jeep_Dude]

If it really isn't rust it's slag from the weld. It should be chipped off prior to paint, but it looks like they don't go through that much effort, so instead the paint just flakes off of the smooth surface. Seems like an odd place to skimp since the slag is so brittle and can easily chip away. Even if the paint did stick to it, it would eventually chip off and take the paint with it.
.

I bet there is 140 to 150 foot of weld on this frame. Do you really think its cost effective to have people or even robots to try to chip or brush slag off every frame? I bet the assembling plant is kicking out 1000 frames a day just to try and keep up with Toledo. And all for a little bit of surface rust that has no factor in structural integrity of the vehicle.

 

[agordon117]

Okay, so if "a little bit of surface rust" isn't an issue, why do they coat anything at all on the underside of the frame? surely there's no need because it couldn't possibly affect the structural integrity no matter how long the car is driven right?

I mean, how dare I worry about the condition of my vehicle 5 or 10 years down the road when I go to trade it in.

Also, I'm not really worried about what's "cost effective" at this point. They want to charge $1445 for delivery and then only ship when they've crammed 9 on a truck, they're only spending maybe $5000 on their absolute worst day for that truck, if they don't have any sort of shipping contract with anyone and it's going to SoCal. That leaves them $800 per vehicle that they can spend elsewhere. It would probably take a robot with a spinning wire wheel 5 minutes to clean that slag off. Maybe said robot costs $500,000, and that's honestly pretty reasonable for something like that. In 1000 vehicles, with the profit from shipping alone, they've more than paid for that process. Then we don't have to worry about paint not sticking to slag, the slag eventually chipping, rust forming, paint continuing to peel and chip while rust continues to form, and at the time of resale having to hear from the dealers that the amount of rust under the car knocks a few thousand dollars off of our resale.

If you want to be okay with the rust, that's fine. Go ahead and be okay with it. Just don't try to act like it's unreasonable to expect that if the frame is dipped in something to prevent corrosion, that the dip actually works.

 

[Jeep_Dude]

Okay, so if "a little bit of surface rust" isn't an issue, why do they coat anything at all on the underside of the frame? surely there's no need because it couldn't possibly affect the structural integrity no matter how long the car is driven right?

I mean, how dare I worry about the condition of my vehicle 5 or 10 years down the road when I go to trade it in.

Also, I'm not really worried about what's "cost effective" at this point. They want to charge $1445 for delivery and then only ship when they've crammed 9 on a truck, they're only spending maybe $5000 on their absolute worst day for that truck, if they don't have any sort of shipping contract with anyone and it's going to SoCal. That leaves them $800 per vehicle that they can spend elsewhere. It would probably take a robot with a spinning wire wheel 5 minutes to clean that slag off. Maybe said robot costs $500,000, and that's honestly pretty reasonable for something like that. In 1000 vehicles, with the profit from shipping alone, they've more than paid for that process. Then we don't have to worry about paint not sticking to slag, the slag eventually chipping, rust forming, paint continuing to peel and chip while rust continues to form, and at the time of resale having to hear from the dealers that the amount of rust under the car knocks a few thousand dollars off of our resale.

If you want to be okay with the rust, that's fine. Go ahead and be okay with it. Just don't try to act like it's unreasonable to expect that if the frame is dipped in something to prevent corrosion, that the dip actually works.

The entire frame is dipped into a tank thus why the bottom of the frame is coated. Frame is dipped to coat the inside where its more difficult to clean and where salt, dirt, sand, ect could accumulate.

Just because FCA is charging 1500 to ship the unit doesn't mean anything. FCA buys all parts from suppilers and assembles them. That frame is supplied to them, built to their standard. If FCA had an issue with it they would be in contact with their supplier.

Apparently you have no idea about manufacturing and what it takes to build vehicles. 5 minutes to completely clean a frame would result in a JPH of 12 resulting in 288 frames a day. See not cost effective.

The dip actually does work. Its the EXACT same material applied to the JK. But the JK does not galvanized parts the JL is 85% galvanized.

 

[agordon117]

The entire frame is dipped into a tank thus why the bottom of the frame is coated. Frame is dipped to coat the inside where its more difficult to clean and where salt, dirt, sand, ect could accumulate.

Just because FCA is charging 1500 to ship the unit doesn't mean anything. FCA buys all parts from suppilers and assembles them. That frame is supplied to them, built to their standard. If FCA had an issue with it they would be in contact with their supplier.

Apparently you have no idea about manufacturing and what it takes to build vehicles. 5 minutes to completely clean a frame would result in a JPH of 12 resulting in 288 frames a day. See not cost effective.

The dip actually does work. Its the EXACT same material applied to the JK. But the JK does not galvanized parts the JL is 85% galvanized.

Please don't try to tell me what I do or do not know about manufacturing. They could match their throughput with little effort or lost profits and still clean the slag. That is the entirety of the point I am making. If you want to have a "basic math-off", and base your knowledge level of manufacturing on that, this isn't the place to do it.

FCA doesn't have an issue with it because they don't care. The vehicle is structurally sound now, and that's all that they are interested in. They will continue to say everything is fine until the warranty is up, and then when the vehicle goes for resale, suddenly it will become a problem.

 

[ZukiSam]

Sloppy fast construction is the excuse? Makes me wonder about the things I can't see.

 

[Jeepsterfreak]

If it really isn't rust it's slag from the weld. It should be chipped off prior to paint, but it looks like they don't go through that much effort, so instead the paint just flakes off of the smooth surface. Seems like an odd place to skimp since the slag is so brittle and can easily chip away. Even if the paint did stick to it, it would eventually chip off and take the paint with it.
.

I know nothing about welding or slag. Does this slag not allow the dipping process and paint to effectively protect the weld from rust? So eventually that slag flakes off leaving the weld exposed to the elements and allowing it to rust?

 

[agordon117]

I know nothing about welding or slag. Does this slag not allow the dipping process and paint to effectively protect the weld from rust? So eventually that slag flakes off leaving the weld exposed to the elements and allowing it to rust?

Yes, the slag prevents the paint from adhering, and it is easily chipped off. Once it chips, it will leave the weld exposed.

Sponsored