Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Fleet Maintenance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Dealer tells Tinmouth board differential failure likely caused by in-use shock loading; warranty unlikely
Summary
An Allegiance Trucks representative explained a rear differential failure on a town 2022 truck and told the Select Board the manufacturer’s analysis points to a 'shock load' from engaging a differential lock while wheels were spinning — a condition the extended warranty excludes.
Randy Clark of Allegiance Trucks told the Tinmouth Select Board that a rear differential in a 2022 town dump truck fractured after the operator’s differential lock was engaged while one or more wheels were spinning. Clark, who introduced himself to the board as a representative of Allegiance Trucks, described how tandem drive and driver-controlled differential locks operate and said the manufacturer’s failure analysis attributes the break to shock loading rather than a manufacturing defect.
"Operator locked the driver controlled differential lock when the wheels are spinning, which caused shock load to occur," Clark said, summarizing the Meritor analysis. He said the resulting metal fragments circulated inside the differential, causing progressive damage that eventually disabled the driveline. He added that the manufacturer and extended-service contracts typically exclude failures caused by that kind of operational shock loading, and that submitting the parts for warranty review often results in a quick rejection and additional freight/handling charges.
Board members pressed on what dash indicators or sensors could warn a driver before a catastrophic failure. The chair noted, "It's not a failure on the truck's part," and asked whether a warning light would have indicated the problem; Clark said the system has only the dash indicators that confirm a locker selection and a separate lamp that indicates the lock has engaged in the cluster, but there is no sensor that can detect internal mechanical breakage.
Clark recommended using the experience to inform future procurement and coverage choices, explaining dealer and warranty practicalities: dealers can submit parts for evaluation but incorrect submissions raise audit flags and can harm the dealer's coverage relationships. The board and staff said they would continue to weigh costs, credits already received, and future purchase specifications. Clark offered to provide contact information for Meritor technical representatives if the town wished to pursue further discussion.
