• There were many reasons for the change of the site software, the biggest was security. The age of the old software also meant no server updates for certain programs. There are many benefits to the new software, one of the biggest is the mobile functionality. Ill fix up some stuff in the coming days, we'll also try to get some of the old addons back or the data imported back into the site like the garage. To create a thread or to reply with a post is basically the same as it was in the prior software. The default style of the site is light colored, but i temporarily added a darker colored style, to change you can find a link at the bottom of the site.

Safety recall already

Freddy, it's obvious you love bashing the quality level of BRP products. They could be better and one my concerns is they don't have a total complete grasp of the concept of process control. I spent 22 years with the Department of Defense and Department of Energy, much of it involved in overseeing contractors' quality assurance programs. We pushed the quality practices of Edward Deming and Joseph Juran. As you may know Deming was primarily responsible for the quality achievements of Japan after WWII. He stated one time in his later years that if you wanted to see some of the finest examples of top level quality go to Japan. We know that from the quality of Japanese vehicles beginning in the 70's. But, he also said if you wanted to see examples of some of the worst quality practices in manufacturing, go to Japan. BRP isn't the best. BRP isn't the worst. For that think Yugo! In spite of you thinking BRP quality is crap, when looked at objectively it's quite good. Not perfect, but d*** good!

As an opinion, in the modern times, it seems companies and management place a lot of confidence in 6 Sigma programs and ISO programs. Not computer programs for those unfamiliar with 6S or ISO, but kind of work environment culture and quality programs. Sadly though, again my opinion, is that many companies fly a 6S and / or ISO banner, claiming to comply, but truthfully, often they become stymied by how the programs become limiters, and then have difficulty adhering to the requirements and being profitable.

The next company in the chain believes they have received a quality item with on time delivery and no incurred costs from having to warehouse items. But if that vendors item is low quality, bad things can happen.

As for the 2020 brake concern, reading not all machines are affected, seems there was a limited number that had a bad day at one of the assembly or welding stations.
 
My biggest concern is the brake pedal issue. How was this not discovered during factory extreme road testing????

The safety bulletin says it applies to certain serial numbers, i.e., not all 2020 RTs. So everything may have been just fine until a defective batch of parts came in with a hidden defect. In that case it would not have been discovered in pre-production road testing. And for all we know maybe it was discovered in a road test of a random production model. One thing we can be sure of. BRP won't tell us any more than what we absolutely need to know.

Following up on the above comments. The Safety Recall Report published by NHTSA includes this information. See JCThorne's post: https://www.spyderlovers.com/forums...icial-Recall-Notice-and-BRP-Warranty-Bulletin. There are four other documents linked to in the above document.
Four floorboard supports broke on the production line between January 22 and February 18, 2020.
This is a new part introduced for the Spyder RT MY2020.
BRP started its investigation in collaboration with its supplier. The investigation is now completed and BRP
decided in the week of March 23, 2020, to issue a Safety Recall on the affected vehicles.
It was found that some supports may have shrinking cavities which could weaken the part in an undesired
location. The part resistance could therefore be below the potential pressure applied during an emergency
braking situation. The part can break resulting in a disconnection between the brake pedal and the brake
system.
We have no report from the field.
Based on the words "shrinking cavities", and on the sketches in the TSB issued to dealers, I surmise this piece is a casting. Metals, when they cool during casting, can shrink and if the shrinkage isn't properly factored in the metal can have cavities form inside. I've no idea what the metal is. A visual inspection of the piece won't disclose the defects. I hope BRP engineers are reviewing the support bracket in all respects including shape, size, material, and manufacturing process. Maybe they did thoroughly review all that and the vendor in Viet Nam was careless. We won't ever know, but I'm sure BRP does.
 
Back
Top