For stock trading, rely on Jin Qilin analyst reports—authoritative, professional, timely, and comprehensive, helping you uncover potential thematic opportunities!
On October 13, the "Zunjie V800 Brake Pedal Inspection Statement" (hereinafter referred to as the "Statement") sparked heated discussion. According to the Statement, the Zunjie V800 brake pedal underwent longitudinal force testing at 1500N, with an average displacement of 2.61mm. The longitudinal force was gradually increased to 3000N at a loading speed of 20mm/min, held for 5 seconds, then released. This was conducted a total of 5 times across 14 brake pedal assembly components. Visual inspection found no cracks or damage.
In response, Dongmen Jiannan, head of automotive safety content at Dongchedi (Sina Weibo ID: Dongche Da Keji Dongmen, one of the personnel involved in the Zunjie V800 brake testing), posted four consecutive Weibo messages questioning the contents of the Statement. Dongmen Jiannan said, "May I ask, is static loading the same as dynamic loading? Are PP polypropylene plus GF40 facing static loads and instantaneous dynamic loads the same thing? With loading of 20mm per minute, since it all passed, then don't bother upgrading. And since it's a testing institution, where is the inspection stamp?"
"There are no sample photos, no videos, no before-and-after comparison of sample testing. We don't even know if these are parts from current mass-production vehicles. The thickness of the brake pedal bracket vertical plate, what the bracket vertical plate looks like—none of this is known," Dongmen Jiannan questioned in the Weibo post. "So many bench tests have already been done in the laboratory, using so many samples. Spending 10 minutes to brake 6 times at 1500N at 100km/h shouldn't be difficult, right? The company has test sites, ample test vehicles, test equipment, and test personnel—all readily available. Randomly pulling one mass-production vehicle for verification shouldn't be hard, right? Loading statically on the bench this many times would waste more time and energy than that, yet they sent it all the way to Chongqing for inspection."
Sina statement: This news is reproduced from a Sina partner media outlet. Sina publishes this article for the purpose of conveying more information and does not imply endorsement of its views or confirmation of its descriptions. The article content is for reference only and does not constitute investment advice. Investors who act on this do so at their own risk.
Comments