what do you guys think of this
07-27-2004, 06:52 AM
#11
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by DWVW:
Exactly, the Magnusson-Moss act. It only affects the U.S. though as no one has gobne to court in Canda over anything like that. If you add a coil over suspension and your motor blows the two are in no way related and they cannot void your warranty. Same with a cold air intake, unless it is what caused the problem (water entering the intake for example) they cannot deny warranty. I would like to see how Chrysler would handle that as they sell many performance parts like CAI, headers, cat back exhausts, performance chips etc right from the dealership for many of their cars.
Exactly, the Magnusson-Moss act. It only affects the U.S. though as no one has gobne to court in Canda over anything like that. If you add a coil over suspension and your motor blows the two are in no way related and they cannot void your warranty. Same with a cold air intake, unless it is what caused the problem (water entering the intake for example) they cannot deny warranty. I would like to see how Chrysler would handle that as they sell many performance parts like CAI, headers, cat back exhausts, performance chips etc right from the dealership for many of their cars.
07-27-2004, 07:02 AM
#12
Guest
Posts: n/a
actualy according to some Srt-4 owners if you buy any of the mopar performance hop up kits (stage1, ect..) it voids your powertrain warrenty also
I can understand putting on certain parts or abuse not being covered.
but when the use parts such as an air intake or guages as "proof" that you may have had some other warrenty vioding performance enhancing part on there that's wrong
and evem thogh the magnusson-moss act is there it seems common practice is to atomatically viod the warrenty and see if the person fights it.
I know one guy(from texas) who had his duramax's crank case fill with fuel (bad injector)..... first thing they said was he musthave had a fueling box on and refused it . His truck always was and is bone stock.
he had to get a lawyer and once a court date was set and GM was notified they settled out of court, payed all repair costs and reinstated his warrenty.
[ July 27, 2004, 08:03 AM: Message edited by: dodgeram ]
I can understand putting on certain parts or abuse not being covered.
but when the use parts such as an air intake or guages as "proof" that you may have had some other warrenty vioding performance enhancing part on there that's wrong
and evem thogh the magnusson-moss act is there it seems common practice is to atomatically viod the warrenty and see if the person fights it.
I know one guy(from texas) who had his duramax's crank case fill with fuel (bad injector)..... first thing they said was he musthave had a fueling box on and refused it . His truck always was and is bone stock.
he had to get a lawyer and once a court date was set and GM was notified they settled out of court, payed all repair costs and reinstated his warrenty.
[ July 27, 2004, 08:03 AM: Message edited by: dodgeram ]
07-27-2004, 07:21 AM
#13
Guest
Posts: n/a
Yup, as for the starter on the Ford, ask them to put it in writing, they won't do it. It is against the law in the U.S. and since Canadian courts follow what Amercian courts do, they woiuld institute a Magnusson-Moss type act. Otherwise you could not put Canadian Tire parts or oil in your car without voiding the warranty.
Of course the stealerships are going to lie and tell you everything coids your warranty, how many $700 basic starters would they sell otherwise?
Of course the stealerships are going to lie and tell you everything coids your warranty, how many $700 basic starters would they sell otherwise?
07-27-2004, 07:56 AM
#14
500 Watt CAFz'r
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 746
I think it's BS. If the performance part wasn't the reason is broke it should be covered! I mean if you lower your car and your tranny goes, it should still be covered.
I watched trucks and they did the Tomb Raider Jeep TJ, he even said at the end of the show the warranty wasn't void and they have a 4 in lift, suspension lift, snorkel kit new interior and everything and his was still covered?!
I watched trucks and they did the Tomb Raider Jeep TJ, he even said at the end of the show the warranty wasn't void and they have a 4 in lift, suspension lift, snorkel kit new interior and everything and his was still covered?!
07-28-2004, 10:54 AM
#15
Guest
Posts: n/a
A friend put a supercharger on this GrandAm, then toasted his transmission about 3 months later. Brought it to the dealer, WITH the superchager on it, and they replaced the transmission anyways!
Racing shouldn't be covered by a warrantee. I have raced my Beretta and it's WAY out of warrantee. If I bust something racing, it's my own dumb fault.
I am sure if people that raced their cars were actually competent drivers, they wouldn't have to add these clauses. At ANY track even I have been to, 90+% (this is a guess, don't make me try and justify it) are HIGHLY incompetent racers (I am probably in the limbo group between competent and incompetent). Missing gewars resulting in some special grinding sounds, clutches I can smell from 100m away due to burning the heck out of a clutch on a launch, engines needing OBVIOUS help but still racing around the track probably causing way more damage, and many other stupid things. You can't distinguish (easily) the difference between racing and beating on a car is the root problem. At one event I go to, a guy with a '91 Talon races around like he's running from the police, but never breaks anything. He knows how to drive, and he keeps his car in tip-top shape (ie: checking tire pressures, changing oil, making sure nothing is obviously wrong, the little things). Not to hack on Civics but there are a lot of them at racing events. Those cars are ALWAYS busted, not because they're crap, but because 16 year olds drive them like they're driving a racecar.
Most people that race do it because they want to go fast and see how good they are vs. whoever but have zero training in doing so and are trying to learn by experience. I have taken a few classes but I am far from an exceptional race driver. In fact, I totally suck at the 1/4 mile.
Racing shouldn't be covered by a warrantee. I have raced my Beretta and it's WAY out of warrantee. If I bust something racing, it's my own dumb fault.
I am sure if people that raced their cars were actually competent drivers, they wouldn't have to add these clauses. At ANY track even I have been to, 90+% (this is a guess, don't make me try and justify it) are HIGHLY incompetent racers (I am probably in the limbo group between competent and incompetent). Missing gewars resulting in some special grinding sounds, clutches I can smell from 100m away due to burning the heck out of a clutch on a launch, engines needing OBVIOUS help but still racing around the track probably causing way more damage, and many other stupid things. You can't distinguish (easily) the difference between racing and beating on a car is the root problem. At one event I go to, a guy with a '91 Talon races around like he's running from the police, but never breaks anything. He knows how to drive, and he keeps his car in tip-top shape (ie: checking tire pressures, changing oil, making sure nothing is obviously wrong, the little things). Not to hack on Civics but there are a lot of them at racing events. Those cars are ALWAYS busted, not because they're crap, but because 16 year olds drive them like they're driving a racecar.
Most people that race do it because they want to go fast and see how good they are vs. whoever but have zero training in doing so and are trying to learn by experience. I have taken a few classes but I am far from an exceptional race driver. In fact, I totally suck at the 1/4 mile.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
