Rusty back axle

[boxman]

I have the chance to buy a 4x4 yeti 2010  the only problem if it has an advisory on the test certificate for a rusty back axle not sure if that is a problem can anyone advise  

Edited 24 July, 2020 by john999boy
Title

[Ootohere]

Welcome.

If cosmetic rust then maybe not, the car passed it's MOT.

 

But then what servicing has the car had or evidence of any?

That means has the Haldex been getting oil changes, has the rear diff ever had an oil change, what is the condition of the coupling on the prop shaft.

[boxman]

11 minutes ago, Roottoot said:

Welcome.

If cosmetic rust then maybe not, the car passed it's MOT.

 

But then what servicing has the car had or evidence of any?

That means has the Haldex been getting oil changes, has the rear diff ever had an oil change, what is the condition of the coupling on the prop shaft.

 Yes full test and all oil including Haldex changed at appropriate mileage   It is due for a timing belt and pump but that as been aloud for  its just that I cant get under to have a look  and wondered if it was a problem area I do suspect that it is just surface rust going on the cars general appearance I doubt its ever been off road   

[Ootohere]

@boxman

All you can do is inspect it underneath.  Is it a trader selling or a private sale?

 

The Haldex Oil change is not by miles, so does it show when it was wast done and how often over the 10 years.

The rear diff oil change is different from the haldex oil, does that show as done?

[Urrell]

If an advisory on the MOT it's something that is not going to get better and must be near to a fail.
Perhaps it could be saved if some form of protective coating could be applied.

[J.R.]

It could be 30 years away from a fail, they do an advisory for any surface rust, notwithstanding that the Yeti 4x4 does not have a rear axle every old school car that I have owned from the rotbox era had a rusty rear axle and none of them ever progressed to the point of it being an MOT failure.

 

I suppose the pressed steel rear trailing arms would be the most likely to eventually perforate given enough time and salt water exposure.

[petrolbloke]

6 minutes ago, Urrell said:

If an advisory on the MOT it's something that is not going to get better and must be near to a fail.
Perhaps it could be saved if some form of protective coating could be applied.

 

Not necessarily - MOT testers do have discretion on these things and the MOT tester might just be covering their arse. OTOH the car could have spent a lot of time near the coast and have more corrosion than is normal.

[boxman]

24 minutes ago, petrolbloke said:

 

Not necessarily - MOT testers do have discretion on these things and the MOT tester might just be covering their arse. OTOH the car could have spent a lot of time near the coast and have more corrosion than is normal.

Just checked cost of replacements and as long as it is not a majorj job to fit it is not a deal breaker  

[J.R.]

Agreed, possibly more corrosion than normal, my Octavia 2 was like that and the Yeti quite exposed to coastal weather, it made swiss cheese of the brake backplates on both vehicles but the suspension components will last for decades on both.

 

TBH I would be more worried if a 10 year old car had shiny wishbones, torsion beams, trailing arms etc, I would question if it had been in an accident.

 

And of course any advisorys of rust on the monocoque construction are to be investigated.

Edited 24 July, 2020 by J.R.