Interesting, so where was yours made?

At one of two VAG's plants in Russia. I don't know the exact place as it was made at the time when VAG was moving production from one plant to the other. It was made in Nizhny Novgorod according to documents, but the body could have been made in Kaluga.

It all comes down to whether Skoda Inc management are forced to acknowledge that the 'had' a painting process 'issue'.

Only statistics can make that case where the paint hasn't been penetrated from the outside.

It all comes down to whether Skoda Inc management are forced to acknowledge that the 'had' a painting process 'issue'.

Only statistics can make that case where the paint hasn't been penetrated from the outside.

Exactly, we still live in a democratic country. If the stats increase on these issues they will have to compromise on their stance

I'm surprised you're having trouble with this.  We had similar bubbling on the boot of a Fabia estate a few years ago.  The car was well past the three year paint warranty but the problem was rectified without fuss.  The boot then started to bubble in a different place, which Skoda initially refused to deal with.  Working with the dealer and Skoda Customer Servcies resulted in a new boot being fitted.  On our last Yeti the bottoms of all the doors were going rusty, and there was a zinc inclusion on the bootlid.  Again, the car was well outside the three year paint warranty but the car was repaired without any argument.  We also had an Audi A6 that had a zinc inclusion which was rectified without issue.  Skoda are well aware of problems with the bottoms of doors on Yetis and many on this forum have had their doors rectified under warranty - there are loads of posts relating to it in the Yeti forum.

Is there any chance that Skoda have solved this issue or are Yetis built today still susceptible?

I'm surprised you're having trouble with this.  We had similar bubbling on the boot of a Fabia estate a few years ago.  The car was well past the three year paint warranty but the problem was rectified without fuss.  The boot then started to bubble in a different place, which Skoda initially refused to deal with.  Working with the dealer and Skoda Customer Servcies resulted in a new boot being fitted.  On our last Yeti the bottoms of all the doors were going rusty, and there was a zinc inclusion on the bootlid.  Again, the car was well outside the three year paint warranty but the car was repaired without any argument.  We also had an Audi A6 that had a zinc inclusion which was rectified without issue.  Skoda are well aware of problems with the bottoms of doors on Yetis and many on this forum have had their doors rectified under warranty - there are loads of posts relating to it in the Yeti forum.

Thanks for the constructive reply JulieD, here is hoping they work something out

_{It's ironic that Fiat used to have a very poor reputation, along with other Italian marques, with regards to rust. Because of this, they then went to great lengths to overcome the problems. As a family we have owned Fiats for years and none of the latter ones have had any corrosion problems even where stone chips and scratches have been left untreated. A case in point being the 2003 Stilo I've just sold, 12 years old and not a sign of rust etc.}

 

_{But then we have a car which comes under the umbrella of one of the largest and prestigious manufacturers in the world and they have corrosion/defect problems with the body work!}

 

_{Considering the vast amount of money that manufacturers spend in design, manufacture and testing and the technology/processes that are available nowadays then why is it happening? And once it has happened why haven't they striven to solve the problems to protect their reputation? We are talking about a quality, German manufacturer here. Yes, I know Yetis aren't built in Germany but the mother company is German. I find it incredible that a problem I thought was dealt with many years ago is still happening!}

 

_{And despite these problems they promote themselves as producing high quality products that have been vigorously tested and as the OP has posted state that certain things are covered for so many years etc. to give you a warm feeling that you want have any problems Yes, it is a high quality product when new, but it's the poor old customer and subsequent buyers a few years down the line that then find that the warrantee isn't worth the paper it's written on. If you did get corrosion inside the panels (unlikely, surprise, surprise!) given the protection that the inside of panels get, then how many years would it take for any corrosion emanating from inside the panels to become evident?}

 

_{The fact that Skoda do rectification work beyond the 3 years paint warrantee under goodwill shows that they know that the problem is down to manufacturing defects whatever one wants to call it; paint defect or body work corrosion, and that it shouldn't be happening.}    

 

_{And what about that well worn phrase, fit for purpose?}

Edited 14 August, 201510 yr by VAGCF

Is this zinc inclusion problem associated with any other factory or manufacturer?

I've never heard of it before.

VW Passat

I have been told by someone inside the industry that it is a floodgate, if VAG were to fully admit the problem and rectification needed then it could literally cripple them. Far better for them to fight each case and then settle before anyone takes them to court (which apparently they alway do...). If any of these did get to court and won then there would be nothing stopping everyone with these issues getting it done.

 

The part I find astonishing is the issue is still happening and has not fully been resolved on new VAG cars

Edited 14 August, 201510 yr by tiddy

That was one of the reasons I went for new in the end, rather than one a couple of years old.

 

At least I've got 3 years warranty (excuse my miss-spelling previously!) they will find it hard to wriggle out of and then I can consider my options.

 

If the paintwork/galvanising is still sound I may keep for longer, if not I will change it.

Edited 14 August, 201510 yr by VAGCF

I had the zinc inclusion issue on the Yeti's driver's door when it was less than a year old. The dealer recognised it and said whilst they hadn't seen it on a Yeti before they had seen it on a number of other VAG cars. This was sorted within warranty, and so far so sign of it coming back. I've got the extended warranty, so have a couple more years of that before having to push for anything through good will!

Does the extended warranty cover that then? Usually it's just mechanical stuff.

It's supposed to be an extension of the standard warranty, with just a 4 year/80K or 5 year/100K mileage limit. No exclusions that I'm aware of.

Very interesting and alarming reading on this thread..I honestly thought the days of rust buckets were long gone, but not in the VAG world..Mine is 2 years old but I`ll be keeping a close eye on the paintwork and if it starts to bubble I`ll chop it in but not for anything VAG...Ironic that Fiat seem to be years ahead..

The Parent Company know fully well the issues as do Skoda CZ.

So do not take them panning you off and making it look as though it is an isolated incident, overblown online, 

'Do not listen to forums' (Briskoda) etc etc

http://rustingvolkswagen.co.uk/warranty.html

http://rustingvolkswagen.co.uk

Thanks for the positive replies, we also have a 2001 Seat Arosa 146000 miles, the paint on this is excellent and only after 12 year was it showing any sign of top coat issues where the jacking points are!! My parents have also had an arosas and Vws since 1967, I myself have had VWs all my life, so far..

 

1971 Beetle

1967 Type 3 variant

1967 beetle

1986 Polo Mk2

2001 Seat Arosa

 

This apparently counts for brand good will if you have been with VAG, I think I should qualify.

 

In terms of rust post galvanized body the 86 polo never needed welding and was scrapped due to the mechanics and a worn out fuel tank (wish I had kept that one as they are worth alot more than weighing them in now).

 

Over 50% of the pollution a car causes is due to manufacture, it is therefore my desire to keep these cars on the road as long as possible to offset this pollution by a long life on the road, therefore issues of corrosion need to be addressed

I am in agreement with the poster...why buy a car with a paint problem. It is very clear and not hidden. At least during negs you say....yes I will buy it if YOU sort the problem. Me, a 4 year old car with such a defect,  I would have walked away. I have nothing like it on my 17 year old A4.

Edited 15 August, 201510 yr by DonjSZ5

From what I understand this issue is NOT a corrosion one , it relates to the zinc treatment 'erupting' some time after purchase and also, for some, out of the normal 3yr warranty for paint etc.

If there are enough documented examples you have a case for a 'known fault' during manufacture (painting) and effectively a class actions.....not that it's likely to get to any court steps.

Muddling a 'zinc' issue with a corrosion one is simply confusing the issue you are trying to resolve.

Is the above correct?.

Pictures would help. Think the op should show his dad's Yeti.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

Edited 15 August, 201510 yr by FLAPPERJACK7

From what I understand this issue is NOT a corrosion one , it relates to the zinc treatment 'erupting' some time after purchase and also, for some, out of the normal 3yr warranty for paint etc.

If there are enough documented examples you have a case for a 'known fault' during manufacture (painting) and effectively a class actions.....not that it's likely to get to any court steps.

Muddling a 'zinc' issue with a corrosion one is simply confusing the issue you are trying to resolve.

Is the above correct?.

It is a corrosion issue, the Steel is galvanized a common manufacturer of this is zintec before it gets to the pressing facility, panels are then pressed and the car is assembled and spot welded by robots. The cars are then submerged in a Zinc Phosphate solution to provide additional protection. After all this the cars are painted.

 

If there is a problem with the galvanized sheet steel then the car will rust from under the paint, this is UNDER the paint, it is NOT caused by the paint and so is not a paint problem.

 

If it was a paint problem then when the paint came away from the bodywork the zintec metal would not rust, the zinc acts as a sacrificial annode and so when exposed to the air will slowly deteriorate, however the length of time that it takes would be reflected in how thick the electro zinc is on the sheet steel, if there has been a quality issue with the steel before it ever reached skoda with insifficient zinc or inclusions under the zinc (particles such as sand grit etc) then this is a manufacturing issue directly related to the corrosion resistance of the car. To re-itterate zinc is not part of the painting process.

Edited 15 August, 201510 yr by tiddy

Pictures would help. Think the op should show his dad's Yeti.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

I have its on page one

It is a corrosion issue, the Steel is galvanized a common manufacturer of this is zintec before it gets to the pressing facility, panels are then pressed and the car is assembled and spot welded by robots. The cars are then submerged in a Zinc Phosphate solution to provide additional protection. After all this the cars are painted.

If there is a problem with the galvanized sheet steel then the car will rust from under the paint, this is UNDER the paint, it is NOT caused by the paint and so is not a paint problem.

If it was a paint problem then when the paint came away from the bodywork the zintec metal would not rust, the zinc acts as a sacrificial annode and so when exposed to the air will slowly deteriorate, however the length of time that it takes would be reflected in how thick the electro zinc is on the sheet steel, if there has been a quality issue with the steel before it ever reached skoda with insifficient zinc or inclusions under the zinc (particles such as sand grit etc) then this is a manufacturing issue directly related to the corrosion resistance of the car. To re-itterate zinc is not part of the painting process.[/]

It's a moot point to me requiring a legalistic interpretation of the stated warranty, but in any case, the claim will have to be carefully worded to leave no wriggle room.

Either way the proof lies in the evidence.....lots of vehicles and lots of photos.

Go for it!

Edited 15 August, 201510 yr by Ryeman

So much knowledge and information in this thread and yet so much incorrect stuff as well. like right back about the paint thickness back in post #1 about what the Body Shop Employee said.   (what was their Qualifications?)

 

I can go right now and do a repair / refinish on a Skoda Panel and have the paint at the same thickness as a Factory Spec finish not thicker.

As can be done at a Refinisher when a vehicle is damaged in transit.

Repairs and repainting does not mean the finished job has a thicker coating than the factory paint.

Obviously if you just paint and lacquer over the original finish it may.

So much knowledge and information in this thread and yet so much incorrect stuff as well. like right back about the paint thickness back in post #1.

 

I can go right now and do a repair / refinish on a Skoda Panel and have the paint at the same thickness as a Factory Spec finish not thicker.

As can be done at a Refinisher when a vehicle is damaged in transit.

Repairs and repainting does not mean the finished job has a thicker coating than the factory paint.

 

To get a repair on a factory panel the same thickness as it left the factory is not easy.

 

The whole panel would need to be chemically dipped to remove all the paint from the panel inside and out, if the panel was sanded then you would not get an even removal of all the paint over all of the panel. When you do a thickness test the measurements are taken from various points on the same panel, these a measured in microns thus any deviation in the thickness on the panel will indicate a rework of that panel.

 

So after the chemically dipped panel is ready to be painted it would then have to be perfect and not requiring any filler, this is due to the fuller adding localized thickness to a particular area of the panel and thus show up on the thickness test.

 

After dipping a perfect panel then the panel would need to be sprayed in the same automated process that the panel was sprayed in the factory, this was highlighted in conversation with PVWI who inspect these panels for warranty issues, they stated that a hand sprayed panel could not provode a uniform finish that you would get from the robotic spraying employed at the factory.

 

Panels can in fact come from the factory with rework on them, if something happens in the factory then they will repaint affected areas and thus have thicker paint.

 

In my case the paint is thinner than it should be, this indicates

 

-Incorrect calibrated paint depth measurement as suggested by PVWI

 

-Very thin paint from factory

 

The panel shows no sign of being machine polished as it still has the same orange/eggshell surface, machine polishing removes this way before it gets to the depth indicated on page one of this thread.

 

So to summarise, to get a panel to register the same depth as factory paint is very hard to do and would require processes that are simply not employed by refinishers (such as chemical dipping, which is only employed in the classis car restoration process) , the panel would need to have no dent defects either

Edited 15 August, 201510 yr by tiddy

I have its on page one

Oh yeah. Sorry . I think I'm starting to rust. [emoji6]

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk