Probability of failure is a way of saying how likely something is to break or go wrong. The segment’s point is that even when people see those numbers, they may still decide to proceed as if it won’t happen.
It’s when a team keeps letting small problems slide because they don’t seem to cause disaster right away. Over time, those problems become “normal,” even though they’re warning signs.
Risk management is basically “spot the danger, estimate how bad it could be, and decide if it’s worth doing.” The point here is that the decision wasn’t really careful risk management—it ignored the warnings.
An O-ring is like a rubber gasket that helps keep things sealed and leak-free. If there are O-ring issues, it means that seal isn’t working properly, which can let dangerous leaks happen.
The Dodge Challenger is a car built for strong acceleration and performance. The podcast is describing a problem that seems to get worse over time and then suddenly stops working. That kind of pattern can help diagnose what part is failing.
They’re referencing the Challenger disaster to show how small problems can build up. The point is about how procedures and standards can slip over time.
Wheel alignment is adjusting the angles of your wheels so the tires wear evenly and track straight. Some cars also need a reset/calibration after the alignment is changed.
Calibrations are the car’s “settings updates” after work is done. If the wheels are adjusted but the car isn’t told the new baseline, some systems can be off even if nothing feels wrong right away.
Thrust line is basically the direction the car is being pushed by the rear wheels. If it’s not set correctly (or the car isn’t updated to match), the steering may not line up with where the car is actually going.
Term
mobile tech
A mobile tech is a mechanic who does the work at your location instead of you going to a shop. The episode’s point is that outsourcing can still lead to steps being skipped.
Warning lights are the dashboard messages that tell you something is wrong. The episode’s point is that sometimes you won’t get any warning right away even if a required calibration wasn’t done.
Concept
tire plugging
Tire plugging is a repair approach where a rubber plug is inserted into a puncture to seal it. It’s often considered less robust than a proper inside patch for many puncture types/locations, which is why shops and standards distinguish between plug-only repairs and approved repairs.
Patch plugs are a way to fix a punctured tire by sealing it from inside and plugging the hole. Not every puncture is safe to repair this way—location matters.
The Honda Fit EV is a small electric car based on the Fit. The podcast is talking about a collision repair, which matters because electric cars have special high-voltage parts that must be handled correctly. If those parts aren’t repaired or checked properly, the car can have problems later.
Adhesive is glue-like bonding material used to attach parts. If a shop uses adhesive when the car maker expects a different method, it can affect how safe the repair is.
Spot welding is a way to join two metal parts by fusing them at small spots. Some repairs require it because it’s the method that best matches the car’s original structure.
OE procedure is the repair method the car maker says to use. Collision shops that skip it may end up with a repair that doesn’t perform as designed in a crash.
TPMS is the system that monitors tire pressure and warns you if a tire is low. After tire work, technicians may need tools to confirm the sensors are working and reporting correctly.
OEM means the carmaker. Following OEM procedures means doing repairs the exact way the manufacturer says, so the fix matches the vehicle’s design and safety requirements.
Torque sticks are tools that tighten wheel bolts to a set tightness. Instead of measuring every time with a torque wrench, they help workers hit the same target torque more consistently.
Retorque means you re-check the wheel bolts after some time has passed. It helps make sure they’re still tight to the correct spec after the car has been driven a bit.
Here, “impact” means an impact wrench—an air/electric tool that tightens bolts fast. If it’s too strong for the job or used incorrectly, it can tighten lug nuts too much or not consistently.
A torque wrench is a tool that tightens bolts to a measured “tightness” setting. It’s designed to prevent over-tightening or under-tightening—unless the tool itself is no longer accurate.
A lug nut is the bolt that holds your wheel onto the car. If it’s tightened too much or too little, it can lead to wheel problems—like loosening over time.
Lug studs are the threaded “posts” the wheel’s lug nuts tighten onto. If they’re damaged or if the lug nuts aren’t tight enough, the wheel can become unsafe.
An SOP is a written checklist of how a shop is supposed to do a task. The point is that if people stop following it closely, the process can slowly get less safe.
A tolerance of acceptability is the allowed range around a specification where work is considered “good enough.” When that tolerance expands (e.g., tightening beyond spec but still calling it acceptable), it increases the chance of inconsistent clamping, fitment, or component stress.
LIVE
This is the Automotive Repair Podcast Network.
Welcome everyone to yet another episode of diagnosing the aftermarket
disease. I'm Matt Vonsel and she broke your heart and inadvertently drove men
to deviant lifestyles. That and more after a word from our sponsors,
Pico Technology, Autel and Independent Wrench Jobs.
Are you chasing elusive automotive problems? Pico Technology empowers you to
see what's really happening. Pinpoint faults and sensors, wiring and components
with unmatched accuracy. Picoscope oscilloscopes transform your diagnostic
capabilities. Visit picoauto.com that's picoauto.com and revolutionize your
tools trusted by technicians across North America. Backed by Autel North
America experts in sales, training and technical support. From drivability
diagnostics and TPMS service to ADOS and advanced safety systems, Autel helps
technicians follow OEM procedures and repair with confidence. Learn more at
autel.com. Sponsored by Independent Wrench Jobs, tech-only jobs, no runaround. Built
by TechnicianFind helping tech sense 2017. Join free at independentwrenchjobs.com.
I want to bring up the Challenger disaster again. Not because I like it, but I
think the last discussion I had about it, I don't think a full discussion, but I
brought it up. I think I was needling whatever Brainiac was to bring in
Richard Feynman into the kind of the review board or research board and also
just the disaster itself. But there's something I didn't talk about and I
wasn't holding it back. I guess it's just, I don't know. It's hard to think of
everything all the time. But I think there's room for discussion as to why.
And I think even after that Netflix documentary on it, one could be left
with the idea solely that management under the pressure of time overruled
engineers' warnings. Because they did know. So if you don't know about the
Challenger disaster, of course, the space shuttle blew up 73 seconds after
launch in 1986. It was awful. Seven astronauts lost their lives. And the
study research fact-finding mission as to what happened blamed an O-ring, a
lost its flexibility, if you will, its malleability. It was no longer sealing
and hardened. That, you know, being a cold morning, launching the way they
shipped these booster rockets. Those are the big white rockets, if you will,
silos next to the large orange-red. It's really more orange-orange-brown fuselage,
which looked just like a rocket, kind of that shape. To ship these boosters,
they came in pieces and they had these O-rings. And nothing different than we've
ever seen and stuff we do, except this was for rocket fuel. I guess not trying to
go down the road of what powers rockets. So we'll just skip all that and go to
Elite. It was cold that morning. It was cold mornings before that. They put off the
launch, put off the launch. Finally, they got a go. Launched
and boom, a disaster. It is. It was tragic. The narrative is evil inept management,
overruled employees slash engineers slash expert advice to not launch. The problem with that is
it's not exactly true. At least not a hundred percent true. There's more to it. There's a
sociologist named Diane. Make sure I get the name right because I say it wrong, unfortunately.
Diane Vaughan is a sociologist who was looking at the data going, this doesn't make sense.
Evil management, evil board members who all they cared about was money,
okayed this and killed those astronauts. Maybe to a certain degree that is true,
except maybe the evil part is rough. But it's not that simple. I guess when you start
thinking about things and looking into it and start digging and things aren't so simple,
we'd like to simplify things. That's what humans do. We oversimplify things.
I guess arguably some of us over complicate things. I'm not going to name names, but in this case,
okay, there's over complicating and then there's oversimplifying and it's the answer is usually
somewhere in the middle, right? Well, this is more complex than just we're going to lose money,
we're going to lose contracts, we're going to lose the faith of the public, launch, launch, launch.
The assumption is that they knew the risk, that they were looking at the risk and somebody
presented them a paper that said, this is the probability of failure. And they looked at that
and said, that's worth it. Go. But that's not exactly true. And what Diane Vaughan found was
something that I think was named, she named it perhaps or coined the term or invented, if you
will, something called normalization of deviance. And that may sound all super fancy, but you start
thinking about it. We see this in shops all the time. We see this in normal life all the time.
And what it is, is it isn't straight up risk management. It's not. I'm looking at this data
and it screams warning, warning, warning. I'll do it anyways. There's still this percent chance
nothing bad will happen. It's not that simple. What happened is over time, over years, what was
a tolerance, or I should say what maybe a better way is years ago, what would have been out of
tolerance is now intolerance. That's what happened. They knew about O-ring issues. There were signs
of issues, many missions, many missions. They knew there were issues, but nothing bad happened.
So the tolerance for acceptability expanded. What would have failed in 1981 passes in 1986.
And when I think about this, it reminds me of another, I don't know, terms of the wrong word
phrase. And I'm sure he didn't invent it, but where I've heard this and I've brought it up before
is when a New York City divorce attorney, James Sexton, who's interviews, if you haven't
ever watched them, I can't recommend enough. I really can't. I know some people don't much
care for him, but I think what he says is important. I really do. Does he trump other
experts? I don't know that he necessarily disagrees with certain experts, to be quite honest. I think
he's just on a different side of things. But when asked, why do marriages fail? Why do relationships
fail? How does it just happen? His response has been, it happens slowly and then all at once.
That's what happened with Challenger. Not the O-ring itself, failing, failing, failing, and then
boom, it failed all the way. No, no, no. The tolerances, the acceptability over the years
and over the missions, success, success, success. Yeah, there's signs of where,
but nothing happened. It was fine. Go for it. It's happened very, very slowly and then all at
once and the rocket exploded or the shuttle exploded. Divorces, relationships crumble
very slowly. Nothing's wrong. We're okay. We had a little spat. There's hurt feelings.
And then one or both are done. It didn't happen like that. It started long ago. And I'm sure
different people are different. Like the time, this isn't the divorce episode. Stechler and I
did that already, although I don't know that we'd necessarily explained it. And then really,
if you listen to any episode with Margaret Light, especially the earlier ones with her on
relationships, we go into that. And then even further, with any reference to like Gottman's
and marriage counseling for your shop, like there's hints to that, that things like that don't just
boom happen. Challenger explodes because of a normalization of deviance. Now let's look at shops
and the one I think most would be thinking about is ADOS. I don't know if that's a good
example to be quite honest. You know what I mean? Because I don't think it starts out where a shop
is doing wheel alignments on cars that explicitly state that certain calibrations must be done
afterwards, an Audi. These calibrations should be done per the manufacturer after a wheel alignment
that adjusts thrust line. Okay, well, they start out, they do it. They sublet it, they bring in a
mobile tech, whatever, mobile company, send it to the dealer, they get them done. And then there's
one that slips through the cracks. They don't get it done. No warning lights, no complaints, five star
review, customer may be paid for the calibration didn't get done. Maybe they got reimbursed.
Maybe they didn't. Oh, we don't want them to know we didn't do it, but let's just wait and see.
I don't know. Not cool. Not the right way. But that's how it starts. And then another one,
like we can't get them in. The Audi dealer won't be able to do it for two weeks or a week, or it's
been sitting on their lot. This is the last time I'm going to send it there. It takes them forever.
So it gets skipped, it gets missed. And after years, 23
four years, maybe more, whatever, it's just stopped doing the calibrations.
You stop quoting the calibrations, you just don't do them. Never had a problem. I don't know
that I've seen anything really pop up. I've seen a couple of lawsuits and stuff against
glass companies start to come up. I don't know that I've really seen a repair shop yet,
or even a collision shop off the cuff concerning ADAS calibrations. Some of that stuff's hard
to find because it depends on where it gets, how far it gets. I think there's some stuff against
dealerships, but nothing happens for how long and then it does. I don't know what other real
reference we have to something going very, very bad tracked back to the shop that did the work
other than really tire plugging or straight up patching, not the plug-in patches or
plug-in seals, whatever they call them, patch plugs, the actually authorized way to repair a tire.
There's a lot of those, those type of lawsuits where a tire was just plugged
or patched or even plug-in patched or patch plugged in an area that was not deemed appropriate or safe,
tire fails, something bad happens, the shop gets sued and loses. The other reference gets brought
up fair bit because I think we have to, you can't ignore it, is the John Eagle case. This is a case
against a collision shop. The vehicle, I believe it was a Honda Fit, was in a collision, the collision
shop repaired it and involved replacing the roof. The thing is, is they used what would be deemed a
very industry accepted appropriate way to install a new roof by adhesive. I don't know too many
collision shops or collision techs, if you will, that would look at that and say, that's a real
hacky way to fix that. Maybe there is, I'm sure there is now with this type of evidence, but
the reality is, is most that I know would chalk that up as a good repair. That's solid. Maybe even
better than the OE recommended procedure of spot welding, but that's not what they did. They adhered
it. They used an adhesive. The car was in another accident and this time bad things happened.
The collision shop was sued and lost because they didn't follow OE procedure, published OE
procedure. That's why I think we'd like to think about ADOS is we're not doing them, we're waiting.
We're waiting for something very, very bad to happen. We're rolling the dice. Maybe that's what
it's going to take. I'd rather it didn't, but maybe that's what it takes is some big
media driven thing like the key programmer level stuff or bigger where people got hurt
because the shop did not have an ADOS calibration done, didn't do the calibrations, didn't do them
right, didn't document it, something like that. I don't want. I wish it wouldn't come to that. I
wish we'd just do the calibrations and the shops that aren't doing them, not throwing the
shops that are per the manufacturer's recommendations, throwing them under the bus. That makes no
sense to me. I'm not big on throwing anyone under the bus really, but it would make more sense for
the shop that's trying to follow procedure, throwing the shop or tech or whoever, not doing them
against OE recommendations. At least that's somewhat logical. I don't think it's a great
long-term plan, but at least it's reasonable. The shops that are not following OE procedure are
demonizing the shops that are. That's awesome. It's just ridiculous. Now we have to educate
clients about that too. Then what do you do with that? Shop is now just throwing a
shop facility, trying to do things the right way, following the procedure set by the manufacturer
that built the thing. Electric and hybrid vehicles are here, and with them a new era of
diagnostics. Don't get left behind. Pico Technologies EV diagnostic kits are your all-in-one solution
to safely and efficiently service any electric or hybrid vehicle from comprehensive high-voltage
system analysis and insulation testing to guided step-by-step procedures. Pico puts the power of
confident repairs right at your fingertips. Future-proof your shop, boost your efficiency,
and become the go-to expert for the next generation of cars. Visit picoado.com today.
That's picoado.com. This episode of diagnosing the aftermarket A to Z is brought to you by Autel.
Autel is a global developer and manufacturer of award-winning professional automotive diagnostic
tools and service equipment trusted by technicians, educators, and shop owners across North America
With diagnostics at their core, Autel's real-world solutions support repair workflows ranging
from full-system vehicle diagnostics to servicing the most advanced automotive technologies.
What sets Autel and North America apart is the team behind the tools. Dedicated experts across
sales, training, and technical support, each bringing deep, hands-on experience supporting
professional technicians. When questions arise, you're working with people who understand the
vehicles, the procedures, and the real-world demands of modern repair. Whether diagnosing
complex drivability concerns, servicing TPMS systems, validating repairs, or working with
ADOS and advanced safety technologies, Autel tools are engineered to support accurate,
efficient repairs, and strict accordance with OEM procedures and standards. To learn more about
Autel and their diagnostic solutions, visit Autel.com A-U-T-E-L.com
Use Autotech Resume Pro to generate a resume and shop-specific cover letter in about two minutes.
Built by TechnicianFind, serving the industry since 2017. Join free at independentwrenchjobs.com
Maybe a better one would be torque sticks. Maybe when you first start your shop or a new manager
comes in and you're not allowed to use your torque sticks anymore. Every vehicle has the wheels
torqued to spec using a torque wrench. Those torque wrenches are calibrated, however often.
Quarterly, every six months a year, whatever. You're to follow those to the letter, and then
the client is to return with their vehicle. They're asked to return after a week or two,
you know, whatever day, a week. We'll just say a week, however many days, but we'll say a week.
For a retorque, for you to charge, somebody will drop everything to go retorque those wheels ASAP.
And that's how things are done for years. And then, I don't know, somebody comes in,
they're using their torque sticks, or they're skipping the retorques. And this goes on for a
while, a little bit. And they get, you know, reprimanded, all the things, but nothing bad happens.
Maybe they bring you out and show you like, hey, look, I'll use this torque stick,
now I'll take the torque wrench to it. See, it's the same, it's tight. And over time, over years,
little more deviance, little more, not fully engaged with the retorques, not retorquing anymore,
not fully on board with the torque sticks, but it wasn't a big no-no like it was. And then,
after a while, everybody's using torque sticks. And there's many people right now listening
who have been using torque sticks for years and never had a problem, ever. Well, there's a lot
of shops that do tire plugs. They've never had a problem. There's millions and
and millions of miles on tires that have been plugged. No problem. It's not a problem until it is.
And then it's a big problem. Or, okay, it could be a big problem. So with the torque sticks,
I don't know. Somebody buys a new impact, the old one maxed out at, I don't know, 300 foot
pounds, 400 foot pounds. And now they got the new, whatever, electric, air, or pneumatic,
whichever, that thing's got like 700 or more. I don't know, just for the sake of discussion,
right? Well, now the torque stick that's supposed to be, you know, I don't know, 100 foot pounds,
it's a bit more. And I'm not saying it's proportional or anything like that. Like,
don't get me wrong. It will still be limited. Or, I don't know, maybe something other
more reasonable is somebody messed with the impact or they lowered the output, lowered the torque,
if you will, and forgot to turn it back up. I don't know, just some something where something
is now different. The torque wrench won't have made that mistake. It really couldn't have unless
it was left out of calibration for a long time and it was way out of calibration. And then maybe
that's the deviance where you used to have them calibrated regularly. And then because they never
were out of calibration, you stopped having calibrated and then one started to go out of
calibration over years. And now it's under torquing or over torquing. And the over torquing maybe
breaks lug nut or I should say lug studs or under torques. And after a while, they kind of go loose
and we don't do the re torques anymore. Bad things could happen. Really, really bad things.
I think there's so many different things in a shop and other businesses don't get me wrong.
It's not limited to auto repair, but there's so many things, so many procedures. Somebody set up
an SOP shop operating procedure or standard operating procedure that had the best of intentions,
which was a to deliver quality to the client to protect the shop, protect the reputation,
protect it from liability, all the things. But because nothing bad happened as that veered off
or started to deviate away, started to move away outside of certain tolerances, the tolerances over
time start to expand, expand, expand very, very slowly. And then all at once. And that's why
you should pick up a copy of the Challenger Launch Decision by Diane Vaughan, sociologist,
or just keep in mind that sometimes the bad things don't happen because of somebody looking.
And I think this is a very important point about what normalization of deviance really means.
It's not like a manager is presented with some data that says, hey, I torqued these lug nuts to
150 foot-pounds. The spec is 90. And a manager looking at that going,
yeah, what are the chances something happens? Like, you know, it's worth the risk. Let it go.
Versus somebody looking at the data going, they use torque sticks. And then maybe not even looking
at the data so much, they just know what's going on. Like, I remember when I first started here,
they would have never let us use torque sticks. That's normalization of deviance. It's just
not somebody that knows the risk and go on like, ah, it's all right. We'll be okay. I'm sure we'll
be okay. It's that the tolerance itself moved over the years. We used to torque things to exactly
specification. And over time, ah, we started to look the other way on 10%, 20%. And now it's,
you know, 150%. And it's within spec, our tolerance of acceptability, like, yeah,
it should be okay. You might not even say it that way. You might just be like,
don't even think about it. That's what it is. And I think it happens on the shop floor. I think it
happens just in KPIs. I think it happens in people's behaviors and their relationships, all of it.
Think about what used to be a certain way. And I'm not saying be rigorous in areas where evolution
shouldn't occur. But on the flip side, when there is a reason for a tight tolerance,
and because nothing bad happened, it's okay. And just that becoming the new normal, like,
I would never call my girlfriend a name and then, oh, and then we're engaged. And I really would
never call her a name. And well, then we had that one fight and I called her a name, but
she didn't get that mad. And then more arguments. And then I'm just calling her a name in every
argument. But nothing bad happens. We don't have more arguments because of it. It's just now
that tolerance has been expanded. I personally would have never done that. But through time and
acceptance, it's being allowed. And then we're married. And arguments are just maybe not just
not arguments, just little spats, you know, little frustrations, not not even close to arguments,
but there's name calling. That would have never, ever, ever happened. But because of time and
acceptance, their tolerance, my tolerance has changed. Maybe their tolerance hasn't, but mine
has because I haven't, there hasn't been any repercussions until one day I come home and
she's not there anymore. And she's had enough. That last, it wasn't even a spat. Like, she said
something and I responded with a name and that was it. She was done. This didn't really happen to me.
I'm just using it as an example of tolerances expanding my personal tolerances. Maybe hers
didn't. Maybe should have the other way. She should have set boundaries. Different discussion.
Same thing happens over and over and over. And we need to be aware of it and understand
that it's not foul play. It's not somebody being nefarious. It's actually natural. I hope you got
a kick out of it or see some value in that. Go watch the Netflix documentary. Go pick up the book
or just think about it. Think about just all the stuff in the shop. And it could be little stuff.
Maybe it's uniforms. Used to require everyone wear a uniform and it's just gotten a little
more lax. Everyone had to wear protective footwear. No, they don't. Used to be really anal about
safety glasses. No, we don't. At least when they're using tooling that should require that.
Used to be super vigilant about training. And just after a while, there hasn't really been
anything in we couldn't do. So yeah, we just don't really, we don't push it like we used to.
Those are all examples. And be aware. Be aware of something going awry. Something failing
very, very slowly. All at once. So that's how I will leave you. Thank you so very much for
listening. Really appreciate it. If you're on YouTube, please leave comments. Love to hear
examples of this in your shop. If you guys are doing stuff to fight against it. Yeah,
anything like that. If you get a chance, give a thumbs up. It really helps. Subscribe so you
can stay on top of new episodes. And yeah, thank you to our sponsors, Autel, Pico Technology and
independent rents jobs. Thank you to the aftermarket radio network for let me do this.
And until next time, take care.
About this episode
“Normalization of deviance” is the thread tying the Challenger disaster to everyday shop shortcuts. The shuttle “blew up 73 seconds after launch in 1986” after an O-ring “lost its flexibility” in cold and “it was no longer sealing and hardened.” The hosts argue that when “the tolerance for acceptability expanded,” warning signs get treated as routine. They connect that drift to missed OEM calibrations, skipped documentation, and retorque/torque-spec slippage—until “All at once” something fails.
Matt Fanslow revisits the Challenger disaster, not just as a historical tragedy, but as a case study in how standards, tolerances, and risk perception can shift over time. The common simplified story is that management ignored engineers, pushed the launch forward, and disaster followed. While that is part of the story, Matt looks at the deeper concept sociologist Diane Vaughan identified: normalization of deviance.
The Challenger disaster happened 73 seconds after launch in 1986, killing all seven astronauts onboard. The failure was traced to O-rings in the solid rocket boosters that lost sealing ability in unusually cold conditions. But the broader lesson is not simply that one part failed. It is that warning signs had appeared before, yet each successful mission expanded the boundary of what NASA considered acceptable. What would have once been treated as outside tolerance gradually became normal.
Matt connects this idea to the phrase, “slowly, then all at once,” often used to describe the collapse of relationships, marriages, systems, and businesses. The visible failure may seem sudden, but the conditions that made it possible usually developed over a long period of tolerated drift.
From there, the discussion moves into automotive repair. Shops can experience the same pattern with ADAS calibrations, wheel torque procedures, tire repairs, safety glasses, uniforms, training expectations, and other operating standards. A procedure gets missed once. Nothing bad happens. It gets missed again. Still nothing bad happens. Eventually, the shop no longer treats the original standard as the standard at all. The absence of immediate consequences becomes false evidence that the deviation is safe.
Matt uses ADAS calibration as a major example. A shop may begin by following OEM procedures after alignments or repairs, but over time, scheduling problems, delays, cost pressure, or customer pushback can lead to skipped calibrations. If no warning lights appear and no customer complains, the skipped step starts to feel acceptable. But that does not mean the risk disappeared. It may simply mean the failure has not happened yet.
The episode also references tire repair liability and the John Eagle collision repair case as examples of what can happen when accepted industry habits conflict with OEM procedure. The lesson is not that every shop owner or technical specialist who drifts from procedure is malicious. The more uncomfortable lesson is that drift is natural. That is exactly why it has to be recognized and managed.
Matt closes by encouraging listeners to look around their own shops and ask where tolerance has expanded without conscious approval. Are torque procedures still being followed? Are retorques still being performed? Are safety practices still enforced? Is training still treated as essential? Are customer-facing and liability-related procedures being maintained, or have they quietly become optional?
Key Themes
Normalization of deviance: The gradual process where unacceptable practices become accepted because nothing bad happens immediately.
Challenger as a system failure: The O-ring failed physically, but the larger failure involved shifting standards, repeated warning signs, and expanded tolerance.
“Slowly, then all at once” Major failures often appear sudden, but the underlying drift usually develops over time.
Automotive examples: ADAS calibrations, tire repairs, torque sticks, wheel retorques, safety glasses, uniforms, training, and shop SOPs can all become vulnerable to tolerance drift.
OEM procedures and liability: The episode reinforces the importance of following documented procedures, especially where safety, liability, and driver-assistance systems are involved.
Not always malicious: Deviance can become normalized without anyone consciously deciding to take a major risk.
Memorable Ideas
“What would have failed in 1981 passes in 1986.”
“The tolerance for acceptability expanded.”
“It happened slowly and then all at once.”
“It’s not a problem until it is, and then it’s a big problem.”
“The absence of consequences is not the same thing as proof of safety.”
Listener Takeaway
Every shop has standards that were created for a reason. Some protect quality. Some protect the customer. Some protect the business. Some protect people’s lives. The danger is that those standards can erode so gradually that no one notices until the failure is already public, expensive, or irreversible.
Thanks to our Partner, Pico Technology
Are you chasing elusive automotive problems? Pico Technology empowers you to see what's really happening. Their PicoScope oscilloscopes transform your diagnostic capabilities. Visit PicoAuto.com
Thanks to our Partner, Autel
From drivability diagnostics and TPMS service to ADAS and advanced safety systems, Autel helps technicians follow OEM procedures and repair with confidence. Learn more at Autel.com
Thanks to our Partner, Independent Wrench Jobs
Independent Wrench Jobs is a new, tech-only community to help you find better independent shops—fair dispatch, steady work, real leadership. No games.
