Lovemyev
Distinguished Member
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2021
- Messages
- 8,132
- Reaction score
- 8,919
- Points
- 2,671
- Location
- N.Wales ZS EV ( Gen 2 ).
I agree.Might be more meaningful to sacrifice £35 on a new flap then test it to destruction. If you had empiric evidence of the actual force required to break one you could better make the case that it isn't fit for purpose.
I do find it a little strange that this design would not have under gone some type of simple opening and closing cycles on a bench test before approving it as fit for purpose ?.
Maybe it did ?.
A robot cycling this hinge backwards and forwards about 100,000 times is the normal process ? .
This does not however mean the test had been carried out, it would simulate what would happen IF the flap has been over extended backwards, by the weight of a person passing by and catching it with part of his body, or even the weight of a heavy rapid charger cable weighing backwards against it ?.
These simulated lab tests are not real world testing of course.
There is no human element involved of course, throw this into the mix and it all goes to pot.
I know this to be totally accurate, because when we purchase another brand new vacuum machine that has been tested to total destruction over five years by the manufacture.
How is it then, when put in my wife is at the wheel, she can completely bugger it up, in only about 6 months

This is not a sexist remark, she admits it !.
She is a compulsive "Button Basher" with anything electrical.
I just know when we are in trouble again, when I hear these famous words :- "What's up with this bloody thing now ?".
Bless her !.
We have just been invited to the "Currys" Christmas party, because we are there best customers.