wirry1423

Hello everyone. I have a 1986 Volvo automatic 240 DL sedan with around
190,000 miles on it. About 3 weeks ago I took the car to my shop
because it was leaking brake fluid and the pedal was getting softer and
softer. They found a broken brake line as the cause and successfully
repaired it. They did not mention any other braking issues. Now today
while I was driving on the expressway, I hit a small piece of metal
debris at 65 mph with my right rear tire causing an immediate and
severe blowout. (luckily I kept good control and no crash or other
damage occured, but i was unable to locate and inspect the piece of
debris i struck, as the tire explosion probably sent the debris flying
into the grass.) When the government tow truck showed up (The state of
Illinois has a free motorist assist program for cars on the expressway
in Chicago with minor problems. The program is free and the drivers are
employed directly by the state, therefore they have absolutely no reason
to lie about needed repairs.) and he took the bad tire off (after some
major difficulty with a rusted log nut) to put the spare on, he became
very suprised and said that my brake pads were horribly worn. When I
asked him if he had ever seen worse, he said yes, but not many. Now I
have no knowledge of how the volvo brake pads normally look, so I took
his word for it and promised to have the pads inspected. He also
remarked that the rotar appeared very worn ("like a CD"?) and needed
replacement, and he even said the calipers were in poor shape. He also
said I could slam on the brakes one day and the caliper would brake off
and I could have an accident. I tried to tell him repeatedly that I
just had a brake repair and that the shop said nothing. I also told
him that since the repair, i have noticed no braking problems
whatsoever, but he didn't seem to believe me. He really scared me, so
after he changed the tire, I took the car to a Different repair shop,
to get the destroyed tire replaced, and while there I also asked them
to specifically look at the braking system of that tire, esp the brake
pads. After they finished, to my suprise, they told me the brake pads
and other braking components on the entire car look to be OK and do not
need to be replaced right now. Additionally, while the screw spindles
and the part where the tire sits are somewhat rusty looking, I have
always had brake work done as needed and have not noticed any problems
(ie squeeky or spongy) other then the brake line repair. [maintenance
within the prior four years (time since i acquired the car) includes
new master cylinder, new pads, new calipers, ground rotars, all new
brake lines, and other misc brake items] My questions are who do you
think is right? Could the government tow driver simply be unfamiliar
with the appearance of older volvo brake pads and other parts, and
mistaken that for worn parts? In other words, does the older 240 take
a smaller or otherwise different looking brake pad then typical
domestic cars?? Or could both shops be wrong and the tow driver
correct? What would you do in this case? Thank you for any help or
insight.


--
wirry1423
------------------------------------------------------------------------
wirry1423's Profile: http://www.usenetcars.com/member.php?userid=2761
View this thread: http://www.usenetcars.com/showthread.php?t=592155

Michael Pardee

"wirry1423" <wirry1423.1ssxzl@no-mx.forums.yourdomain.com.au> wrote in
message news:wirry1423.1ssxzl@no-mx.forums.yourdomain.com.au...
>
> Hello everyone. I have a 1986 Volvo automatic 240 DL sedan with around
> 190,000 miles on it. About 3 weeks ago I took the car to my shop
> because it was leaking brake fluid and the pedal was getting softer and
> softer. They found a broken brake line as the cause and successfully
> repaired it. They did not mention any other braking issues. Now today
> while I was driving on the expressway, I hit a small piece of metal
> debris at 65 mph with my right rear tire causing an immediate and
> severe blowout. (luckily I kept good control and no crash or other
> damage occured, but i was unable to locate and inspect the piece of
> debris i struck, as the tire explosion probably sent the debris flying
> into the grass.) When the government tow truck showed up (The state of
> Illinois has a free motorist assist program for cars on the expressway
> in Chicago with minor problems. The program is free and the drivers are
> employed directly by the state, therefore they have absolutely no reason
> to lie about needed repairs.) and he took the bad tire off (after some
> major difficulty with a rusted log nut) to put the spare on, he became
> very suprised and said that my brake pads were horribly worn. When I
> asked him if he had ever seen worse, he said yes, but not many. Now I
> have no knowledge of how the volvo brake pads normally look, so I took
> his word for it and promised to have the pads inspected. He also
> remarked that the rotar appeared very worn ("like a CD"?) and needed
> replacement, and he even said the calipers were in poor shape. He also
> said I could slam on the brakes one day and the caliper would brake off
> and I could have an accident. I tried to tell him repeatedly that I
> just had a brake repair and that the shop said nothing. I also told
> him that since the repair, i have noticed no braking problems
> whatsoever, but he didn't seem to believe me. He really scared me, so
> after he changed the tire, I took the car to a Different repair shop,
> to get the destroyed tire replaced, and while there I also asked them
> to specifically look at the braking system of that tire, esp the brake
> pads. After they finished, to my suprise, they told me the brake pads
> and other braking components on the entire car look to be OK and do not
> need to be replaced right now. Additionally, while the screw spindles
> and the part where the tire sits are somewhat rusty looking, I have
> always had brake work done as needed and have not noticed any problems
> (ie squeeky or spongy) other then the brake line repair. [maintenance
> within the prior four years (time since i acquired the car) includes
> new master cylinder, new pads, new calipers, ground rotars, all new
> brake lines, and other misc brake items] My questions are who do you
> think is right? Could the government tow driver simply be unfamiliar
> with the appearance of older volvo brake pads and other parts, and
> mistaken that for worn parts? In other words, does the older 240 take
> a smaller or otherwise different looking brake pad then typical
> domestic cars?? Or could both shops be wrong and the tow driver
> correct? What would you do in this case? Thank you for any help or
> insight.
>
My guess is the road assistance driver was mistaken - but the stakes are
high. It's worth a third opinion - most brake shops will do free inspections
on the chance of getting any needed repairs done in their shop.

I am concerned by the rusted lug nut. That shouldn't be happening if the
wheel was off recently.

Mike

wirry1423

There are four lug nuts. All of them have a pretty high degree of rust
on them, as they are likely the original lug nuts. However, three of
the four came off easily. It was only the fourth that required a large
effort to remove. It is possible that the fourth nut was simply
overtightened. I understand your point though. I am thinking that if
the pads were as severely worn as he stated, would not the braking
power have some noticeable decline? As for the original questions, if
anyone is familiar with the brakes on the 240 specifically--
--"Could the government tow driver simply be unfamiliar with the
appearance of older volvo brake pads and other parts, and mistaken that
for worn parts? In other words, does the older 240 take a smaller or
otherwise different looking brake pad then typical domestic cars?? Or
could both shops be wrong and the tow driver correct? What would you do
in this case? Thank you for any help or insight."-


--
wirry1423
------------------------------------------------------------------------
wirry1423's Profile: http://www.usenetcars.com/member.php?userid=2761
View this thread: http://www.usenetcars.com/showthread.php?t=592155

Randy G.

wirry1423 <wirry1423.1st936@no-mx.forums.yourdomain.com.au> wrote:

>
>There are four lug nuts. All of them have a pretty high degree of rust
>on them, as they are likely the original lug nuts. However, three of
>the four came off easily. It was only the fourth that required a large
>effort to remove. It is possible that the fourth nut was simply
>overtightened. I understand your point though. I am thinking that if
>the pads were as severely worn as he stated, would not the braking
>power have some noticeable decline? As for the original questions, if
>anyone is familiar with the brakes on the 240 specifically--
>--"Could the government tow driver simply be unfamiliar with the
>appearance of older volvo brake pads and other parts, and mistaken that
>for worn parts? In other words, does the older 240 take a smaller or
>otherwise different looking brake pad then typical domestic cars?? Or
>could both shops be wrong and the tow driver correct? What would you do
>in this case? Thank you for any help or insight."-
>

I would assume tha tthe bkare shop gave you paperwork stating that
they ahd done the inspection and certified that all was OK. Their
reputation and status as an open shop depends on your safety when they
certify such as being true. The tow truck driver has nothing riding on
his statements. That alone would ease my worries.

For the most aprt, if the pads are evenly worn and all things are
working correctly, disc brakes work quite well right up until the time
tha tthe friction material falls off the backing plate- I know from
experience. Some manufacturers place a metal wear indicator that rubs
and makes noise against a non-braking part of the disc if the pads
wear too far (not Volvo from what I have seen). That's why it is
important to get the brakes inspected regularly.


__ __
Randy & \ \/ /alerie's
\__/olvos
'90 240 Estate - '93 960 Estate

Alex Zepeda

On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 22:56:19 -0500, wirry1423 wrote:


> There are four lug nuts.

There should be five.

> I am thinking that if the pads were as severely worn as he stated, would
> not the braking power have some noticeable decline?

Probably not. You should notice more noise (more of a grinding noise than
a squeak) and more pedal travel required to stop the car tho.

> In other words, does the older 240 take a smaller or
> otherwise different looking brake pad then typical domestic cars?? Or
> could both shops be wrong and the tow driver correct? What would you do
> in this case? Thank you for any help or insight."-

I think you should look for yourself. Disc brakes are pretty straight
forward. The rotor itself you should check with a caliper, but if you
see/feel a lip at the edge, it's worn too far. You can eye the pads quite
easily with the wheel off. I think Volvo specifies a minimum amount of
pad material of about 2-3mm.

If you don't know what to look for, buy a copy of the Haynes or Bentley
manual for the 240s. They should both have good pictures.

--
alex

athol

wirry1423 <wirry1423.1st936@no-mx.forums.yourdomain.com.au> wrote:

> There are four lug nuts.

So you've lost one?

The 2-series including 240 all have 5-stud wheels, and there should be
wheel nuts on all 5 studs.

--
Athol
<http://cust.idl.com.au/athol> Linux Registered User # 254000
The state of infrastructure in New South Wales is a disgrace.
I'm a Libran Engineer. I don't argue, I discuss.

Pat Quadlander

Owned and maintained (including brake pad replacements) '78 245, '84 240,
and '91 240. The number 240, translated from Swedish, means "doesn't change
much". Disc brakes on the 240 series are very straight forward. Nothing
complicated or unusual. As others have pointed out, the government tow
truck driver's opinion should not be accepted without some additional
confirmation. Find a qualified trustworthy brake mechanic or shop to end
your worries.

"wirry1423" <wirry1423.1st936@no-mx.forums.yourdomain.com.au> wrote in
message news:wirry1423.1st936@no-mx.forums.yourdomain.com.au...
>
> There are four lug nuts. All of them have a pretty high degree of rust
> on them, as they are likely the original lug nuts. However, three of
> the four came off easily. It was only the fourth that required a large
> effort to remove. It is possible that the fourth nut was simply
> overtightened. I understand your point though. I am thinking that if
> the pads were as severely worn as he stated, would not the braking
> power have some noticeable decline? As for the original questions, if
> anyone is familiar with the brakes on the 240 specifically--
> --"Could the government tow driver simply be unfamiliar with the
> appearance of older volvo brake pads and other parts, and mistaken that
> for worn parts? In other words, does the older 240 take a smaller or
> otherwise different looking brake pad then typical domestic cars?? Or
> could both shops be wrong and the tow driver correct? What would you do
> in this case? Thank you for any help or insight."-
>
>
> --
> wirry1423
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> wirry1423's Profile: http://www.usenetcars.com/member.php?userid=2761
> View this thread: http://www.usenetcars.com/showthread.php?t=592155
>

wirry1423

First, yes I do indeed have five lug nuts and none are missing, I simply
wrote the wrong number. I took the car to a third shop that specializes
in brakes and mufflers. They put the car on the lift and removed all
four tires. They told me that the front brake pads are pretty worn and
have about three months of safe operation left. They said the rear pads
are still ok on both sides (including the tire the tow driver complained
about). They also said that the rotars and calipers are still good on
three tires (again, including the one the tow driver was worried
about). However, they did say that the rotar and caliper needed
replacement within the next two months, to be on the safe side, on the
rear driver's side wheel (they said that that rotar was too thin to
ground down any further). They quoted me an approximate total price for
the rotar and caliper replacement on that wheel of $170. So I am
relieved to finally know what is wrong and what is not wrong with my
braking system. Also while I was there, they found that the muffler
was dangling as both brakets were broken (due to backing into curbs on
several occasions and low driveways), and it was causing stress on the
entire exhaust system. They bolted it back up to the frame securely
and did not charge for the repair (however it ended up being secured a
bit snugly, as it is now rattling slightly against the frame mainly in
parking gear). They also rotated and balanced my tires at no charge.
The only other item they mention was that the three older tires (not
including the replaced tire) should be replaced soon because they had a
constant area of very small surface cracks circularly around the length
of the tire between the sidewall and the tread (an area about an inch
and a half in width). So my question now is do I really need new tires
because of the small cracks, even though the tread is still very deep
on all tires and none of the tires are loosing air? Or are my tires
still in good shape? (the shop also sells tires) Thank you for all the
replies.


--
wirry1423
------------------------------------------------------------------------
wirry1423's Profile: http://www.usenetcars.com/member.php?userid=2761
View this thread: http://www.usenetcars.com/showthread.php?t=592155

Randy G.

They sound like a reputable shop and their statements seem reasonable.
As far as the tire cracks, It would be hard for us to say without
seeing the tires. One way to check would be to let some air out (like
down to about 10 or 15 psi) and look into the cracks with a strong
light. If you can see cords (fabric threads) then they might be right.



wirry1423 <wirry1423.1sv3r5@no-mx.forums.yourdomain.com.au> wrote:
>
>First, yes I do indeed have five lug nuts and none are missing, I simply
>wrote the wrong number. I took the car to a third shop that specializes
>in brakes and mufflers. They put the car on the lift and removed all
>four tires. They told me that the front brake pads are pretty worn and
>have about three months of safe operation left. They said the rear pads
>are still ok on both sides (including the tire the tow driver complained
>about). They also said that the rotars and calipers are still good on
>three tires (again, including the one the tow driver was worried
>about). However, they did say that the rotar and caliper needed
>replacement within the next two months, to be on the safe side, on the
>rear driver's side wheel (they said that that rotar was too thin to
>ground down any further). They quoted me an approximate total price for
>the rotar and caliper replacement on that wheel of $170. So I am
>relieved to finally know what is wrong and what is not wrong with my
>braking system. Also while I was there, they found that the muffler
>was dangling as both brakets were broken (due to backing into curbs on
>several occasions and low driveways), and it was causing stress on the
>entire exhaust system. They bolted it back up to the frame securely
>and did not charge for the repair (however it ended up being secured a
>bit snugly, as it is now rattling slightly against the frame mainly in
>parking gear). They also rotated and balanced my tires at no charge.
>The only other item they mention was that the three older tires (not
>including the replaced tire) should be replaced soon because they had a
>constant area of very small surface cracks circularly around the length
>of the tire between the sidewall and the tread (an area about an inch
>and a half in width). So my question now is do I really need new tires
>because of the small cracks, even though the tread is still very deep
>on all tires and none of the tires are loosing air? Or are my tires
>still in good shape? (the shop also sells tires) Thank you for all the
>replies.

__ __
Randy & \ \/ /alerie's
\__/olvos
'90 240 Estate - '93 960 Estate
"Shelby" & "Kate"

wirry1423

Regarding the muffler. The shop was able to bolt the muffler back into
into position, but only after really applying some heavy duty pressure
(good old fashioned elbow grease) with the car on the lift. Now as I
am driving, the car seems to not move forward as much, ie. when in
drive gear, after taking the foot off the brake, but not on the gas,
the car does not seem to be coasting [idleing] itself as fast, and the
pickup does not seem to be quite as fast, while the deceleration is a
bit faster when I coast down from speed. However the change is small,
and I cannot be 100% sure it is not just my mind playing tricks. But
my question is - could they have bolted the muffler so snugly that it
is rubbing or touching against the rear drive axel, causing traction
against the momentum of the vehicle? Or is the axel out of the way of
the muffler to the point that this would not be possible (ie are they
seperated by a bar or frame component)? I don't really notice any
rattling except a little when in park. Also the car is not making any
rubbing or grinding sounds, and the car is not drifting in any
direction [ie it holds a straight line perfectly]. How fast [mph]
should the car (1986 volvo 240 sedan) normally move while in drive and
idling (coasting)? Any other thoughts?


--
wirry1423
------------------------------------------------------------------------
wirry1423's Profile: http://www.usenetcars.com/member.php?userid=2761
View this thread: http://www.usenetcars.com/showthread.php?t=592155