2005 Workhorse W22: brake failure

Filed Nov 17, 2010 · Brakes · MD

2005 workhorse w22 chassis. Winnebago adventurer. Consumer states brake failure *tgw the consumer stated in september 2009 while driving, the brakes failed for the first time. The consumer and his wife began to smell the brakes burning. The ABS light illuminated, the front wheels were too hot to touch and the rear wheels were hot as well. The rv was taken to a local workhorse facility. They replaced a cracked caliper, but did nothing to the brakes. In august 2010, the brakes failed again. The rv was towed to a workhorse facility. They replaced the front calipers, front center caps and three ABS sensors. A claim was submitted to workhorse, but the it was denied. Workhorse stated the brake failure was not recall related.

Filed Sep 20, 2010 · Brakes · 11,990 miles · TN

Letter from congressman davis on behalf of constituent requesting a recall on his 2006 fleetwood that he purchased from rv service & accessories of tennessee (dot/I 2010-2160-respond to rockwood, tn office) *tgw the consumer experienced complete brake failure at 11,990 miles. The consumer stated other chassis models were recalled, but not his model.

Filed Sep 16, 2010 · Brakes · 7,126 miles · FL

Tl*the contact owns a 2005 holiday rambler admiral se motor home with a workhorse w22 chassis. While driving 40-45 MPH he engaged the brakes and the pedal went to the floor. He pumped the brakes and the vehicle slowed down. He also smelled something burning inside the vehicle. He later determined that the smell was coming from the rear brakes. The vehicle was taken to an authorized dealer who replaced the rear brake calipers. The dealer also informed him that the failure was caused by the brakes freezing. The contact does not feel safe driving the vehicle. He referenced recall 09v110000, service brakes, hydraulic. He stated that the manufacturer would not reimburse him because his vehicle was repaired in august 18,2007 and they did not take responsibility for the repairs until november 16, 2007. The failure mileage was 7,126 and the approximate current mileage was 10,000.

Filed May 21, 2010 · Brakes · 21,591 miles · FL

Tl* the contact owns a 2005 workhorse w22 rv. The contact stated that he received an interim recall notice from workhorse to address the brake failure over a year ago (the federal safety agency campaign id number: 09v110000: service brakes, hydraulic). While driving 40 MPH, the contact smelled a burning odor and within a few minutes noticed smoke on the front drivers side of the vehicle. The contact was able to safely drive onto the emergency lane and confirm that the right front wheel was on fire. The manufacturer was contacted and stated that the recalled repair parts were not available. The vehicle was towed to a local repair shop. The manufacturer advised the contact that he would be reimbursed for any repairs that were made to correct the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 21,591 and the current mileage was 24,791. Updated 7/26/10 *cn the consumer stated the right front caliper smoked profusely, but did not catch fire. Updated 08/09/10

Filed Jul 21, 2009 · Brakes · 22,361 miles · FL

Workhorse has a safety recall on the brake system on certain motor homes. My motor home is part of the recall. Last week my brakes overheated and I had no brakes. I called workhorse and they agreed that the failure was due to the recall. However,during the repair process they are saying certain parts are maintenanence parts and are the customers responsibility even though the failure was due to excessive heat buildup. An example is the brake fluid, which brakes down under high heat conditions. They say it is a maintenance item because the brakes should be bled once a year (this is not in the maintenance manual). This procedure loses an ounce of break fluid and does not require a complete purge of the break system, which is required when the brake fluid is exposed to excessive heat. Also the rotors are considered a maintenance item when changing the brake pads. During this repair process the rotors are not covered, even though they have obvious damage, unless they are starting to disintegrate. I believe if these items need to be replaced due to excessive heat damage they should be covered by the recall and not be considered maintenance items and customer resopnsibility. I am fully aware of normal maintenance procedures and keep the maintenance on my motor home current. I just don't believe I should be responsible for maintenance items when they fail due to a manufacturing defect.