Those more privy than myself, please correct me.
There are reports that a material change occurred somewhere around S/N 3000.
Zermatt has said a geometry change addresses the issue. Does that mean the material change will stay? Why would a material change necessitate altered geometry? I haven’t followed as closely as I would like.
Some have gotten new bolts; among that group, some had no issues, while others still experienced galling.
Who knows?
I placed an order a couple weeks ago and was quoted 18 weeks. That’s fine with me. Quality over expediency.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chrs_28
Those more privy than myself, please correct me.
There are reports that a material change occurred somewhere around S/N 3000.
Zermatt has said a geometry change addresses the issue. Does that mean the material change will stay? Why would a material change necessitate altered geometry? I haven’t followed as closely as I would like.
Some have gotten new bolts; among that group, some had no issues, while others still experienced galling.
Who knows?
I placed an order a couple weeks ago and was quoted 18 weeks. That’s fine with me. Quality over expediency.
Per Ray, "..we've changed the geometry on the leading edge of the affected area to drastically increase the amount of surface area that will interact with the receiver at the initial contact point." Increasing surface area in contact during the high stress bolt close distributes the force over more material, reducing the wear on the bolt during operation. It sounds like the material & state originally used for the bolt did not have issues with the peak forces experienced, but the new bolt had issues with gouging when experiencing the same forces during operation. There are lots of reasons to change materials, from cost of production to raw material sourcing, so if changing the geometry of the bolt fixes the gouging issue, that's a better change than going back to the other material for Zermatt.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CC13 and buckleboy