2007 Pierce Impel Problems

REF: NHTSA #15V615000 VOQ #10671053 1/8/15 WE FILED A COMPLAINT THAT OUR '07 PIERCE IMPEL FIRE TRUCK HAD A STEERING ISSUE, OPERATOR DID NOT FEEL IN CONTROL, AND MECHANICS FOUND BALL JOINTS FAILED. THERE IS A 910 PIERCE FIRE TRUCK RECALL THAT REFERENCE OUR COMPLAINT. THE RECALL COVERS 06/07 ARROW, QUANTUM, DASH, LANCE, AND ENFORCER. HOW CAN WE FILE THE COMPLAINT ON A PIERCE IMPEL, SEND FAILED BALL JOINTS, AND THEN NOT HAVE THE COMPLAINT TRUCK COVERED IN THE RECALL? WE SENT FAILED BALL JOINTS TO NHTSA. MOST OF THE BALL JOINTS SENT DID NOT HAVE BOOT FAILURES, THE BALL JOINTS WERE LOCKED-UP, GALLED, AND COATINGS MISSING. THE TAK4 SUSPENSION IS AN ASSEMBLY WHICH INCLUDES THE BALL JOINTS. WHEN A PIERCE FIRE TRUCK IS BUILT, THE TAK4 ASSEMBLY IS TAKEN AND BOLTED UNDER THAT CHASSIS, IT IS ADJUSTED TO THE TRUCK WEIGHT. IF PIERCE CLAIMS IN THEIR 910 TRUCK RECALL THAT THE BALL JOINT BOOTS COULD RIP/TEAR ON THE MODELS LISTED FOR 06/07, HOW CAN THE SAME BOOTS NOT RIP ON IMPEL, VELOCITY, OR OTHER MODELS WITH TAK4 IN THE 06/07 MODEL YEAR? ONE STEP FURTHER, THE BALL JOINT BOOTS THAT PIERCE IS CLAIMING RIPS/TEARS IS THE SAME BOOT USED ON THE TAK4 SUSPENSION FROM 04 TO 09. WHY ARE THESE BOOTS NOT BEING RECALLED? IS PIERCE ALLOWED TO BASE THEIR RECALL SOLELY ON WARRANTY RECORDS? THAT WOULD BE ONE OR POSSIBLY TWO YEARS. AFTER THE WARRANTY PERIOD OR DENIED CLAIM, THERE IS NO RECORD OF FAILURE. RESEARCH HOW MANY REPLACEMENT BALL JOINTS, BOOTS, AND CONTROL ARMS HAVE BEEN SOLD BY PIERCE! MANY OF THESE ISSUES HAVE BEEN IGNORED BY PIERCE AND LEFT FOR THE OPERATORS OF THE TRUCKS TO CORRECT AND PAY FOR. STRAIGHT AXLE FRONT END SUSPENSION TRUCKS HAVE GIVEN MANY YEARS OF SERVICE WITH NO ISSUES; THE TAK4 IS NOT RELIABLE IN COMPARISON. THERE HAVE BEEN TRUCKS WITH WHEEL OFF EVENTS AND TRUCKS THAT DRIVERS REPORT NOT FEELING IN CONTROL OF. THESE BALL JOINT RECALLS SHOULD BE LED BY THE NHTSA.

3/7/15, THIS FIRE TRUCK HAD STEERING ISSUES. THE CREW WAS RETURNING FROM A FIRE CALL. THE CREW CALLED THE ON-CALL TECHNICIAN AND REPORTED THE TRUCK WAS HARD TO DRIVE, HARD TO CONTROL, AND NOT SAFE. THE TECHNICIAN TEST DROVE AND AGREED WITH THE DRIVER. THE ILL STEERING TRUCK WAS TAKEN OUT OF SERVICE. (HISTORY WITH THIS TRUCK, BALL JOINTS WERE INSPECTED ON MONTH PRIOR TO THIS INCIDENT. THE BALL JOINTS WERE INSPECTED WITH A PIERCE TECHNICIAN, IT WAS FOUND THAT TWO BALL JOINTS WERE JUST OUT OF SPEC. THE TRUCK WAS LEFT IN SERVICE AFTER DISCUSSING THE FINDINGS WITH THE PIERCE TECH. HE FELT THAT IT NEEDS TO BE SCHEDULED FOR REPLACEMENT, BUT WERE NOT BAD ENOUGH THAT THE BALL JOINT WOULD FAIL AND COME APART. WE ALREADY HAD TWO TRUCKS OUT OF SERVICE WITH FAILED BALL JOINTS. IF WE DID NOT HAVE THE TWO TRUCKS OUT OF SERVICE, WE WOULD HAVE STARTED THE REPAIRS RIGHT AWAY. THIS TRUCK ALSO WENT BACK TO THE DEALER SHORTLY AFTER DELIVERY IN 2008. THEY REPLACED BALL JOINTS/COMPONENTS DUE TO HARD TO DRIVE COMPLAINTS). 3/9/15 THE BALL JOINTS WERE REMOVED ON THIS ILL STEERING TRUCK, WE THOUGHT WE WERE GOING TO FIND EXCESSIVE PLAY BETWEEN THE BALL AND THE SOCKET OF THE BALL JOINT. WE ALSO FOUND THAT THE PASSENGER SIDE LOWER BALL JOINT WAS ROTATING INSIDE THE CONTROL ARM, THE UPPER BALL JOINT THRUSH WASHER HAD THE ALIGNMENT DOWELS SHEARED AND WAS ROTATING WITH THE BALL OF THE JOINT, AND THE PASSENGER SIDE LOWER BALL JOINT SHIMS WERE DAMAGED, (POSSIBLY ROTATING). PICTURES WERE ATTACHED OF THE UPPER THRUST WASHER. TWO CONTROL ARMS WERE NOT ABLE TO BE REUSED, SO WE HAD TO REPLACE AT LEAST TWO CONTROL ARMS. SINCE WE WERE GOING TO HAVE TO REPLACE TWO CONTROL ARMS THAT NOW COME WITH THE NEW STYLE BALL JOINT, WE DECIDED TO REPLACE ALL FOUR CONTROL ARMS. THIS WAY THEY ARE THE NEWEST DESIGN BALL JOINT. THIS IS NOT JUST A BALL JOINT FAILURE. THE CONTROL ARMS ARE ALSO BEING DAMAGED. *TR

REF: NHTSA #15V615000 VOQ #10671053 1/8/15 WE FILED A COMPLAINT THAT OUR '07 PIERCE IMPEL FIRE TRUCK HAD A STEERING ISSUE, OPERATOR DID NOT FEEL IN CONTROL, AND MECHANICS FOUND BALL JOINTS FAILED. THERE IS A 910 PIERCE FIRE TRUCK RECALL THAT REFERENCE OUR COMPLAINT. THE RECALL COVERS 06/07 ARROW, QUANTUM, DASH, LANCE, AND ENFORCER. HOW CAN WE FILE THE COMPLAINT ON A PIERCE IMPEL, SEND FAILED BALL JOINTS, AND THEN NOT HAVE THE COMPLAINT TRUCK COVERED IN THE RECALL? WE SENT FAILED BALL JOINTS TO NHTSA. MOST OF THE BALL JOINTS SENT DID NOT HAVE BOOT FAILURES, THE BALL JOINTS WERE LOCKED-UP, GALLED, AND COATINGS MISSING. THE TAK4 SUSPENSION IS AN ASSEMBLY WHICH INCLUDES THE BALL JOINTS. WHEN A PIERCE FIRE TRUCK IS BUILT, THE TAK4 ASSEMBLY IS TAKEN AND BOLTED UNDER THAT CHASSIS, IT IS ADJUSTED TO THE TRUCK WEIGHT. IF PIERCE CLAIMS IN THEIR 910 TRUCK RECALL THAT THE BALL JOINT BOOTS COULD RIP/TEAR ON THE MODELS LISTED FOR 06/07, HOW CAN THE SAME BOOTS NOT RIP ON IMPEL, VELOCITY, OR OTHER MODELS WITH TAK4 IN THE 06/07 MODEL YEAR? ONE STEP FURTHER, THE BALL JOINT BOOTS THAT PIERCE IS CLAIMING RIPS/TEARS IS THE SAME BOOT USED ON THE TAK4 SUSPENSION FROM 04 TO 09. WHY ARE THESE BOOTS NOT BEING RECALLED? IS PIERCE ALLOWED TO BASE THEIR RECALL SOLELY ON WARRANTY RECORDS? THAT WOULD BE ONE OR POSSIBLY TWO YEARS. AFTER THE WARRANTY PERIOD OR DENIED CLAIM, THERE IS NO RECORD OF FAILURE. RESEARCH HOW MANY REPLACEMENT BALL JOINTS, BOOTS, AND CONTROL ARMS HAVE BEEN SOLD BY PIERCE! MANY OF THESE ISSUES HAVE BEEN IGNORED BY PIERCE AND LEFT FOR THE OPERATORS OF THE TRUCKS TO CORRECT AND PAY FOR. STRAIGHT AXLE FRONT END SUSPENSION TRUCKS HAVE GIVEN MANY YEARS OF SERVICE WITH NO ISSUES; THE TAK4 IS NOT RELIABLE IN COMPARISON. THERE HAVE BEEN TRUCKS WITH WHEEL OFF EVENTS AND TRUCKS THAT DRIVERS REPORT NOT FEELING IN CONTROL OF. THESE BALL JOINT RECALLS SHOULD BE LED BY THE NHTSA.

3/7/15, THIS FIRE TRUCK HAD STEERING ISSUES. THE CREW WAS RETURNING FROM A FIRE CALL. THE CREW CALLED THE ON-CALL TECHNICIAN AND REPORTED THE TRUCK WAS HARD TO DRIVE, HARD TO CONTROL, AND NOT SAFE. THE TECHNICIAN TEST DROVE AND AGREED WITH THE DRIVER. THE ILL STEERING TRUCK WAS TAKEN OUT OF SERVICE. (HISTORY WITH THIS TRUCK, BALL JOINTS WERE INSPECTED ON MONTH PRIOR TO THIS INCIDENT. THE BALL JOINTS WERE INSPECTED WITH A PIERCE TECHNICIAN, IT WAS FOUND THAT TWO BALL JOINTS WERE JUST OUT OF SPEC. THE TRUCK WAS LEFT IN SERVICE AFTER DISCUSSING THE FINDINGS WITH THE PIERCE TECH. HE FELT THAT IT NEEDS TO BE SCHEDULED FOR REPLACEMENT, BUT WERE NOT BAD ENOUGH THAT THE BALL JOINT WOULD FAIL AND COME APART. WE ALREADY HAD TWO TRUCKS OUT OF SERVICE WITH FAILED BALL JOINTS. IF WE DID NOT HAVE THE TWO TRUCKS OUT OF SERVICE, WE WOULD HAVE STARTED THE REPAIRS RIGHT AWAY. THIS TRUCK ALSO WENT BACK TO THE DEALER SHORTLY AFTER DELIVERY IN 2008. THEY REPLACED BALL JOINTS/COMPONENTS DUE TO HARD TO DRIVE COMPLAINTS). 3/9/15 THE BALL JOINTS WERE REMOVED ON THIS ILL STEERING TRUCK, WE THOUGHT WE WERE GOING TO FIND EXCESSIVE PLAY BETWEEN THE BALL AND THE SOCKET OF THE BALL JOINT. WE ALSO FOUND THAT THE PASSENGER SIDE LOWER BALL JOINT WAS ROTATING INSIDE THE CONTROL ARM, THE UPPER BALL JOINT THRUSH WASHER HAD THE ALIGNMENT DOWELS SHEARED AND WAS ROTATING WITH THE BALL OF THE JOINT, AND THE PASSENGER SIDE LOWER BALL JOINT SHIMS WERE DAMAGED, (POSSIBLY ROTATING). PICTURES WERE ATTACHED OF THE UPPER THRUST WASHER. TWO CONTROL ARMS WERE NOT ABLE TO BE REUSED, SO WE HAD TO REPLACE AT LEAST TWO CONTROL ARMS. SINCE WE WERE GOING TO HAVE TO REPLACE TWO CONTROL ARMS THAT NOW COME WITH THE NEW STYLE BALL JOINT, WE DECIDED TO REPLACE ALL FOUR CONTROL ARMS. THIS WAY THEY ARE THE NEWEST DESIGN BALL JOINT. THIS IS NOT JUST A BALL JOINT FAILURE. THE CONTROL ARMS ARE ALSO BEING DAMAGED. *TR