2014+ Jeep Cherokee Forums banner

Why are some parts not painted or protected from rusting?

670 Views 13 Replies 7 Participants Last post by  grizzstang
2
I understand parts that get very hot don't need to be protected from rust. But others I don't get. For example, the Pinion flange for the rear diff.



Or for example, the backside of the rear diff mount



Both of these were severely rusted on my vehicle. I understand sometimes parts are not coated because they are meant to be "sacrificial" so that they would rust instead of others, but I don't think that is the case for these.

I'm guessing the answer is "because it doesn't need to be" as in the car will be junk before the outer part of the pinion flange or diff mount actually matters.
See less See more
  • Like
Reactions: 1
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
I have thought the same thing about this. A couple more reasons could be the additional cost, plus the reality that most of their customers never go under the vehicle, so wouldn't see it anyway.
And my favorite, the wheel hubs. Completely bare steel and when they rust they crack the tone ring.
Vehicle parts are manufactured by the lowest bidder as cheaply as possible.
If every part was Mil Spec nobody could afford to buy the vehicle.
Only the US Government can get away with it. Thanks to us Tax Payers.
  • Like
Reactions: 3
I understand parts that get very hot don't need to be protected from rust. But others I don't get. For example, the Pinion flange for the rear diff.



Or for example, the backside of the rear diff mount



Both of these were severely rusted on my vehicle. I understand sometimes parts are not coated because they are meant to be "sacrificial" so that they would rust instead of others, but I don't think that is the case for these.

I'm guessing the answer is "because it doesn't need to be" as in the car will be junk before the outer part of the pinion flange or diff mount actually matters.
Some of you may remember’ back in the day ‘ they used to spray undercoating, sometimes it was standard other times Extra charge…was it worth it? Sometimes it just made pockets for the water to sit in, But. At least they “ tried “
  • Like
Reactions: 1
At least they are zinc coating the factory brake rotors now. Probably 'cause you don't want to see a new Jeep with rusty rotors on the dealer's lot. :p
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 2
And my favorite, the wheel hubs. Completely bare steel and when they rust they crack the tone ring.
Vehicle parts are manufactured by the lowest bidder as cheaply as possible.
If every part was Mil Spec nobody could afford to buy the vehicle.
Only the US Government can get away with it. Thanks to us Tax Payers.
This happened on my last car. It just so happened that the transfer case (PTU) broke about a week later so I junked it. Funny how the same problems follow many vehicles... you would think they would come up with better parts.
Planned obsolescence?
Planned obsolescence?
I had just heard that the average age of an automobile in the USA is 12.5 years old, think your Jeep will make it?
  • Like
Reactions: 1
I had just heard that the average age of an automobile in the USA is 12.5 years old, think your Jeep will make it?
Well, my Jeep JKU is 16 years old and still going strong. My Jeep KL is 5 years old. No problems so far, but it's less than 1/2 the "average" age.

But averages get easily skewed by outliers. I did wonder what the mode (most common) age is. I found this:

VIN YEAR RANGE% OF VEHICLES
2020-2023 model years11%
2015-2019 model years26%
2010-2014 model years19%
2005-2009 model years20%
2000-2004 model years14%
1995-1999 model years5%
1990-1994 model years2%
1985-1989 model years1%
Older than 19852%

This data shows a little different story. 12.5 years would put the model year around 2011. That MY range only makes up around 19% of the total vehicles on the road. But cars 2014 or older are almost 2/3 of all the vehicles on the road! If it wasn't for Obama's "cash for clunkers" program I suspect the average age would be much older. A lot of fine, old cars were destroyed in the name of a few MPGs.
See less See more
  • Like
Reactions: 2
Well, my Jeep JKU is 16 years old and still going strong. My Jeep KL is 5 years old. No problems so far, but it's less than 1/2 the "average" age.

But averages get easily skewed by outliers. I did wonder what the mode (most common) age is. I found this:

VIN YEAR RANGE% OF VEHICLES
2020-2023 model years11%
2015-2019 model years26%
2010-2014 model years19%
2005-2009 model years20%
2000-2004 model years14%
1995-1999 model years5%
1990-1994 model years2%
1985-1989 model years1%
Older than 19852%

This data shows a little different story. 12.5 years would put the model year around 2011. That MY range only makes up around 19% of the total vehicles on the road. But cars 2014 or older are almost 2/3 of all the vehicles on the road! If it wasn't for Obama's "cash for clunkers" program I suspect the average age would be much older. A lot of fine, old cars were destroyed in the name of a few MPGs.
The introduction of periodic emission testing took most of the 'clunkers' off the road up here (Ontario, Canada). It ended my habit of buying a 'winter beater' for a couple of hundred bucks to get me through the salt season. Now that affordable old cars are gone, they scrapped the testing program. Oh well. :rolleyes:
  • Like
Reactions: 1
Some of you may remember’ back in the day ‘ they used to spray undercoating, sometimes it was standard other times Extra charge…was it worth it? Sometimes it just made pockets for the water to sit in, But. At least they “ tried “
Sure do. Similar consistency to roofing tar. Had to park on the street for a few days after or you had a real mess on the driveway. Ziebart was the big name for that around here, but there were others. Not sure if it did more harm than good for rust, but it was a decent sound deadener. Added a couple of hundred pounds to your curb weight to boot. :D
  • Like
Reactions: 1
Sure do. Similar consistency to roofing tar. Had to park on the street for a few days after or you had a real mess on the driveway. Ziebart was the big name for that around here, but there were others. Not sure if it did more harm than good for rust, but it was a decent sound deadener. Added a couple of hundred pounds to your curb weight to boot. :D
Yes it does harm. The moisture gets trapped underneath and rots the car. Just look on youtube.

For that reason I chose fluid film under my car which is just an oil based undercoating.
  • Like
Reactions: 1
Sure do. Similar consistency to roofing tar. Had to park on the street for a few days after or you had a real mess on the driveway. Ziebart was the big name for that around here, but there were others. Not sure if it did more harm than good for rust, but it was a decent sound deadener. Added a couple of hundred pounds to your curb weight to boot. :D
Mickey's and Ziebart were the only rustproofing companies that worked back in the 70s. The tar stuff was just technically undercoating that was often sold as "dealer rustproofing", and it was useless. That stuff was never meant to be anything other than sound deadening. Crooked dealers even tarnished the rustproofing reputation.
If you had your car rustproofed by Mickey's or Ziebart when it was new, it really didn't rust out, but it had to be done before it got soaked in salt spray.
The only rust proofing I would bother with is Krown or Fluid Film. I did our Wrangler the first couple of years myself with cans Fluid Film and then I found the local Krown application center could do it for ruffley the same price and I don't have to get dirty. Our Wrangler is 10 years old this year with zero rust. Pretty impressive with the toxic waste and salt they throw on the roads here. All our vehicles get done every year.
  • Like
Reactions: 1
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top