Life after RoadTrek: Ecotrek, rebuild Ecotrek module, or DIY?

[cruising7388]

Originally Posted by gregmchugh

I am not familiar enough with the RT inverter/charger but what caused the inverter to shut off when the charge ports all disconnected?

I think it will continue to operate with the transfer of shore power to the van and the AGM battery connected to the charger until at some point the BMS reconnects the charge port some of the Ecotreks as they discharge from the 12v loads (and in some vans the secondary inverter for the kitchen which is connected to the load side of the Ecotreks) to the point where the BMS reconnects.

I can't verify this one way or the other with our Powerstar inverter because RT connected our inverter to the battery discharge port. When we had a failed battery replaced under warranty at a RT repair facility, the factory work order included an instruction to rewire the inverter to the charge port. The shop discussed this further with the factory, and for reasons never explained to us, the factory told the shop to leave the inverter connected to the discharge port. Go figure.

But in any event with regard to the KS2 inverter, your description is accurate. KS2 indicates that their inverter will remain powered up and wiling to pass-thru 120V to the AC loads even if the charge port opens because it doesn't even need to see a battery to power up.

[Road_F'ed]

Does anyone know what the fuse like parts are near Hand Brake Cable?

[markopolo]

Originally Posted by Road_F'ed

Does anyone know what the fuse like parts are near Hand Brake Cable?

I think we pretty much answered the question here:

http://www.classbforum.com/forums/f2...html#post92394

I also think it would be good to continue the discussion and maybe this current topic is a good place for it as an owner may want to improve that point in the wiring when doing other improvements.

George posted a link to a 300A automatic reset breaker which would be better than doubling up two 150A automatic reset breakers.

The more I think about it though the less I'd be inclined to use automatic reset breakers at all for this. In the event of a fault at 300A+ current flow the last thing I'd want is the breaker automatically resetting.

If the circuit is designed correctly and used in accordance with that design then it won't trip a breaker or blow a fuse unless there is something wrong. At 300A current flow you'd want the opportunity to fix the problem.

This article - Hazards of Automatic Reset Circuit Breakers - explains that automatic reset circuit breakers offer little long-term protection when a short-circuit condition is present:
https://www.optifuse.com/blog/t100127.php

It also explains that you could add a higher rated fuse inline with the automatic reset circuit breaker for additional circuit protection.

For my last high power installation, a 3000W inverter/charger, I chose to use fuses at each source point of power. One fuse is mounted on the battery + terminal and another on the inverter/charger + terminal. I keep a spare fuse in the RV but it is unlikely that it will ever be needed. If a fuse does blow I absolutely want to know why it blew.

You want to have your circuit protection devices close to the sources of power. In the installation I just mentioned there were two sources of power for that part of the circuit - 1. the battery & 2. the charger.

[GeorgeRa]

Originally Posted by markopolo

…………………………….
George posted a link to a 300A automatic reset breaker which would be better than doubling up two 150A automatic reset breakers.
The more I think about it though the less I'd be inclined to use automatic reset breakers at all for this. In the event of a fault at 300A+ current flow the last thing I'd want is the breaker automatically resetting.
If the circuit is designed correctly and used in accordance with that design then it won't trip a breaker or blow a fuse unless there is something wrong. At 300A current flow you'd want the opportunity to fix the problem.
…………...

I agree, 300A current flow with an automatic reset CB is outright dangerous, after a few resets cables can get hot, fiery hot. A CB with manual reset or preferably a fuse would be safer.

I am also surprised that there is no protection for these CBs and connections, they are fully exposed to elements. Some salt and water and electrochemical corrosion will progress.

[booster]

A also chose to go with 300 amp fuses on our setup. Just looking at the specs and reviews on even the non auto reset breakers indicated a need to spend near $100 or more apiece to get reliability, and several of them are in the engine compartment or under the body so in bad conditions besides.


If you blow a 300 amp fuse, as was mentioned, you have a problem and need to find it before the power goes back on.

[RossWilliams]

The warranty void stickers are not "nonsense". The FTC has not said they are in situations where someone broke into a part then sought replacement under warranty. The federal act does not apply to parts where the company has agreed to replace them at no cost.

To be clear, it is nonsense if you interpret the warning to apply to unrelated parts. You don't lose your warranty on the plumbing. But that sticker is a clear warning that the company considers opening the battery as evidence that the battery was not defective and therefore not eligible for replacement. They get to make that decision and you will need to go to court to prove otherwise.

I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice.

[avanti]

Originally Posted by RossWilliams

The warranty void stickers are not "nonsense". The FTC has not said they are in situations where someone broke into a part then sought replacement under warranty. The federal act does not apply to parts where the company has agreed to replace them at no cost.

Sigh...

Magnuson-Moss:

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-...gs-are-illegal

https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/a...rs-illegal-ftc

https://www.digitaltrends.com/comput...ckers-illegal/

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-43724348

Warranty void stickers are nonsense.

[RossWilliams]

"T]hose warnings are bunk. Worse than that, actually: The Federal Trade Commission says they're illegal."

According to Colin Dwyer who "covers breaking news for NPR. He reports on a wide array of subjects — from politics in Latin America and the Middle East, to the latest developments in sports and scientific research."

Here is an FTC quote from his story:

""Provisions that tie warranty coverage to the use of particular products or services harm both consumers who pay more for them as well as the small businesses who offer competing products and services," Thomas B. Pahl, acting director of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection, said in a statement released Tuesday.

Specifically, the agency explained, those provisions violate the 1975 Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, which bars companies from conditioning their warranties on demands that consumers use certain articles or services in connection with the original product."

You can decide whether that sounds like a "completely separate prohibition of requiring the use of OEM supplies as a condition for warranty coverage". In fact, as far as I can tell, there is no "separate prohibition" at all specifically against "OEM" supplies. And I suspect an Etrek battery would qualify as an OEM part for a Roadtrek in any case.

But my point is simpler. I would talk to a real lawyer if you think its important rather than relying on advice from a poster on the internet whose legal opinion relies on an NPR news report. Particularly from someone who repeats the same dogmatic claim over and over and over again with great authority, despite lacking legal training to support it. And then gets annoyed when someone challenges him.

[booster]

OEM warranty control battles have been going on for years and years, with the OEMs constantly trying to find ways to limit access to alternative parts and services. For the most part, I think, they get away with a new way to lock in customers for while and then regulations seem to catch up and stop it.


Any one who is old and has worked on their own vehicles for the whole time will remember multiple versions of OEM rules to be able to keep a valid warranty.



One of the early ones was intended to keep people from changing their own vehicle's oil and filter even. First they said to keep the warranty you needed to use the OEM brand oil and filter and needed a "valid" receipt to prove they were used with the mileage also on the receipt. They repeatedly would disallow claims based on "non valid" receipts for other oil brands and filters, "questionable" mile claims, "unreliable independent garages" whatever. I had a huge folder of receipts for the products, pictures of the odometer, and running logbook just to comply, but there still would have been possibilities of being denied if I had a claim IMO. Sometimes warranty claims would be held up for months because all warranty parts had to be held at the dealer until a factory rep could come and look at and approve the claim after which they were physically destroyed while the rep was allegedly there. They never saw the symptoms or the parts as they came out of the vehicle and routinely denied claims based on appearance only. To be sure, their were crooked dealers also, who would put in a new engine and then clean up the removed parts and use them on another vehicle, but that is a different story



There was also a period when the OEMs stopped any and all access to the factory service manuals for non dealers and individuals and that didn't last very long before it was booted. They did the same thing with diagnostic codes and specs and for quite a while there was no way to get a good PCM diagnostic without going to the dealer. Ever try to get a Roadtrek wiring diagram for the post 2008 timeframe? Not available, I know, because I and many others were refused by Roadtrek. I spent an entire day tracking the surround sound speaker wiring just to find out that the selector switch was factory miswired, and it would have taken 20 minutes with schematic. Even with warranty expired you have to figure it all out on your own, as do independent shops.



The emphasis for lots of products now, like RVs seems to be trending toward making it so difficult to get service that you need to always go the dealer or you go to end of the line when something happens or just say they are too busy with "regular customers".


IMO, this will continue on as, for the most part, it costs to much to fight it legally even when obviously against the rules. Nearly everyone I know who has gone to small claims court, who had reasonable documentation not excessive, has come out on top against denied warranty claims.



I am not a lawyer, don't claim to be, but I have been around this stuff since I was a little kid because my father was a parts manager in a Chrysler dealer, and back then the parts department was also the cashier for the service area. He saw both side of what was going on from the less than ethical stuff to unhappy customers when they came to settle up their bill. The only real thing that has changed is how the manipulations are done.

[booster]

Interesting coincidence, just finished above post and saw this on the local TV station newsfeed.


https://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2019/...o-repair-bill/

[avanti]

Yes. The reason I continue to provide information on these issues has to do with fact that these are important consumer rights, but they are very much "use it or loose it". Magnuson-Moss is an incredibly good law--one of the few that actually gives consumers an even shot against big-company bullying. But if people don't understand and exercise their rights, they are worthless.

The web is full of nonsense of the kind posted earlier in this thread. I am just so sick of reading that such-and-such will "void your warranty". Just about ALL of it is false. Fighting this is, I admit, a bit of a hobby horse of mine.

Originally Posted by booster

IMO, this will continue on as, for the most part, it costs to much to fight it legally even when obviously against the rules. Nearly everyone I know who has gone to small claims court, who had reasonable documentation not excessive, has come out on top against denied warranty claims.

Small claims court is great, and really pretty easy. However, it is really not true that it "costs too much to fight" even in real court. MM anticipated this difficulty and did two very important things:

(1) The burden of proof on almost all warranty claims issues is placed on the OEM, not the consumer. This is a BIG deal. Your dealer may (and probably will) say that your engine blew up because you used the wrong oil. But, if it goes to court, they can say that till they are blue in the face. It won't do them any good unless they can PROVE it. You, on the other hand, don't have to prove ANYTHING. Having receipts can't hurt, but no such requirement legally exists. I repeat: This is a BIG deal.

(2) The law requires the OEM to pay your legal fees if they lose a case. The reason this is important is that it ensures that there will be plenty of spec lawyers who will gladly review your case, and if it is valid they will defend you for free. They will do almost all the work, and it will never cost you a cent. I have personal experience with this--it works as advertised.

Know and use your rights, or they will go away.

[GeorgeRa]

Originally Posted by avanti

..................

Small claims court is great, and really pretty easy. However, it is really not true that it "costs too much to fight" even in real court. MM anticipated this difficulty and did two very important things:

(1) The burden of proof on almost all warranty claims issues is placed on the OEM, not the consumer. This is a BIG deal. Your dealer may (and probably will) say that your engine blew up because you used the wrong oil. But, if it goes to court, they can say that till they are blue in the face. It won't do them any good unless they can PROVE it. You, on the other hand, don't have to prove ANYTHING. Having receipts can't hurt, but no such requirement legally exists. I repeat: This is a BIG deal.

(2) The law requires the OEM to pay your legal fees if they lose a case. The reason this is important is that it ensures that there will be plenty of spec lawyers who will gladly review your case, and if it is valid they will defend you for free. They will do almost all the work, and it will never cost you a cent. I have personal experience with this--it works as advertised.

Know and use your rights, or they will go away.

I am very tuned to this subject going through some pains with my vehicle. Besides small claim court there is also an arbitration court option, at least in the state of Oregon. Some parts were replaced the dealer, they should be covered under warranty but we paid ransom to get back home. I am glad that:

1. I have the replaced part.
2. I have most of communication via email.

While working this issue, I am purposely vague, sorry. This is over 2-month long ordeal. I had a few vehicles from various manufacturers, with one case being practically a lemon - 1987 Chevy Suburban. But none of my past experience is even close to the current nightmare.

[booster]

Originally Posted by avanti

Small claims court is great, and really pretty easy. However, it is really not true that it "costs too much to fight" even in real court. MM anticipated this difficulty and did two very important things:

Totally agree on the use it or lose it as that is very important.



I should have more clear on the cost thing. I wasn't necessarily referring to legal cost like an attorney. Those costs will be repaid if you win, but not if you lose, so many folks are reluctant to take risk, especially with the false garbage that is out there of your poor chances.


Mostly, I was referring to time and effort costs, like getting everything together, filing, day off work to go to court, etc. The actual collection costs can also get expensive that way also, at least here.


If you win, as we did on a several thousand dollar case, and whoever loses just doesn't pay, you have to go to file in district court to force another appearance before a district judge. In our case, they didn't show to defend themselves and just figured we wouldn't have the knowledge of how to collect, so they just ignored the whole thing. Judge ruled a default judgement that is legally binding, but to actually collect the funds I had to identify assets that could seized by the Sheriff to pay off the judgement. As it turns out claim was against Chrysler and the dealer. We couldn't claim anything against Chrysler as they had not in state assets to claim, but the dealer always has cash because they have a cashier. I called the manager of the dealership and told him that if I didn't get a check by next day I was sending the Sheriff to claim whatever cash they had, and would send him back as many times as needed to get the entire amount. The check showed up by courier by noon the next day. It was a huge PITA but got to be a matter of principal.

[avanti]

Originally Posted by booster

I should have more clear on the cost thing. I wasn't necessarily referring to legal cost like an attorney. Those costs will be repaid if you win, but not if you lose, so many folks are reluctant to take risk, especially with the false garbage that is out there of your poor chances.

True. But, that is the big advantage of using a spec lawyer. They will assess the likelihood of success for free. If they are not good, they will decline the case. But, if they accept it, all the risk is on them. If you lose the case, they will eat their costs and fees. If you win, they will get you a check.

Not infrequently, a single letter from them will cause the dealership to fold. They know what it could end up costing them in legal fees.

Say what you will about "ambulance chasers". But, the spec lawyer system plays a very important role in evening the playing field for consumers.

Mostly, I was referring to time and effort costs, like getting everything together, filing, day off work to go to court, etc. The actual collection costs can also get expensive that way also, at least here.

No doubt about it. It is a huge hassle under the best of circumstances. Frankly, though, I consider it a civic duty to follow through on these things. The collective alternative is not pretty.