[bruecksteve]

I couldn't help but laugh when I read this... I hate it for the owners but I'm sure they can beat it...

http://forums.evolutionm.net/showthread.ph...25&page=1&pp=15

[00 Trans Ram]

I saw this a few days ago, and thought it was just WRONG then too! I mean, anyone who has ever driven a typical Solo 2 course knows that the stresses endured there are no more than on the common street, when driven hard.

I know that, when I bring mine to the dealer, he sees the aftermarket suspension. Therefore, if he refused to warranty some part of the suspension, I wouldn't argue. But, if he refused to warranty the drivetrain (which I have never drag raced or really modified), I'd be pissed!

[98_1LE]

This is very common but also logical. Subaru is doing the same thing.

If you beat the hell out of your clutch, do you really think you should get it repaired free? If you crank the boost and a piston melts, should that be covered under warranty? If I took my "stock" car and went out and did a rally event and blew the motor, should Mitsubishi fix it under warranty?

Racing is racing... If Peter Solberg went and bought an STi off the showroom floor and then entered it into a drag racing event, should Subaru cover the warranty? They absolutely wouldn't if he went to a rally in it. So what's the difference?

Any time you enter a racing event, you already know that you will be "abusing" the car. Could you imagine how great it would be if NASCAR teams could buy their cars with "warranties" so that everytime they blew the motor it would get replaced for free?

If you plan on racing the vehicles you purchase, then you should plan on paying for the things that you break along the way. Yes, it sucks, but it is only fair. If your stereo dies, then it's a different story... This holds true for EVERY manufacturer. Even Porsche, Ferrari, Mercedes, or BMW will only go so far. Yes, since you paid more they tend to be more lenient. However, when it comes time to replacing your motor a second time... then they start asking questions.

That pretty much covers my thoughts on the matter.

[trackbird]

I saw this a few days ago, and thought it was just WRONG then too! I mean, anyone who has ever driven a typical Solo 2 course knows that the stresses endured there are no more than on the common street, when driven hard.

I used to think that until I watched a BMW snap a front spindle "right off the car" in the middle of a corner at an autocross. Then there was the Mustang with a rod hanging out of the block. I personally broke a trans mount in my 2000 GTI VR6 which caused the dealer to rebuild the trans (they didn't figure out it was a mount) over 3 weeks time. Then, the gearbox wasn't right when it came back and I waited until the mass air meter died (2k out of warranty) to take it back. They took 2 more weeks to fix 5th gear and simply reset my check engine light. They finally fixed the gearbox (that was never broken) and another dealer fixed the mass air meter (and that car was gone soon after). Also, I have seen cornering loads while autocrossing that allowed the flex in my rims to allow them to contact the front brake calipers in my F-body. I'd love to say that autocross is like a daily commute, but so far, that has not been my experience. I don't think 1G+ on race compound tires is exactly "driving to work".

I think the fact that they are searching for results online is a little "slimy", but if it looks like abuse and they call it abuse, bring your visa card. I'm not saying I completely agree with their tactics, but I think calling autocross and "hard street driving" the same thing is incorrect, based on my personal experience.

Consider if I broke a driveline part from "brake hop" at an autocross. I've never seen brake hop on street tires, it seems to be a race tire only problem (for me anyway). If brake hop snapped a clutch (or other driveline part), I'd think that is not GM's problem.

I'm not really trying to take the side of Corporate America here, but there is a reason we call autocross racing (though some don't think it is "real racing", it seems that it truly is racing). If I hit the strip, dump the clutch at 6 grand and break an axle, was I racing? If I had the stock tires on it, I may feel better about saying "that's the same as street use", but is it? Drag strip use is racing/abuse. That is why forums are full of "I just broke 3rd gear again" posts. If you drive it like you are trying to break it, don't be suprised when you do.

If someone really wants to believe that all the stuff we do to increase grip above factory levels and the resulting use of that extra grip is "just like driving a stock car on the street", you are even less of a realist than I am.

Just my thoughts.

[/end rant]

[trackbird]

That pretty much covers my thoughts on the matter.

And, as I remember, you've broken more parts and such than most of us....

[Nestromo]

We will warranty cars with suspension (Ford). But if you come in with a Lightning that has abviously had a pulley swap then don't expect a new transmission....not unless the tranny guy is REALLY low on work. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[98_1LE]

And, as I remember, you've broken more parts and such than most of us....

Actually my car has been pretty reliable, considering the amount of abuse it has seen. It is still technically under factory warranty (2.6 years old and 35.3K miles), and the only thing that has been fixed under warranty is the spring that holds tension on the clutch pedal. The slave cylinder starting acting up a few months ago and the clutch was replaced with a Spec & new GM slave. Other than a bunch of worn out tires (36 R compounds) and brakes (lost count), nothing else has broke. I never considered having GM warranty the motor, and paid for that out of pocket. Now if a power window motor or headlight motor died, I would consider letting the warranty cover it.

[bruecksteve]

I think the issue is how the cars were marketed. These are not your "normal" commuter cars by any stretch of the imagination. You don't conduct ad campaigns that suggest that this car is a high performance car and then go out of your way to not warranty what goes wrong. Read their ads. Also, read the comments by an attorney that posted on that forum.

So it's ok for Mitsu to assume that every failure is "race" related??? I say bullshit. If GM did this they would go out of business very quickly.

Obviously they didn't do their homework when it came time to designing appropriate parts to handle the stress that they implied the car was designed for. Now it's breaking and they don't want to honor their commitment. When you design a high performance car you do it with some level of abuse in mind.

No wonder they're going out of business.

[trackbird]

Not every failure is race related. But, if they find your autocross results and two days later it comes in with a blown gearbox. I have a pretty good feeling that they and we know what happened to it. Again, this comes back to most of the drivers on the various forums that are "on their 4th clutch in 10,000 miles" or "just broke my gearbox....again", etc. You turn enough guys loose with high performance cars (or any cars) and they will manage to break them. The dealer should not be liable for those guys.

The root of this question is "if you mount drag slicks and break and axle or destroy the rear end, would you ask the dealer to pay for it?". (or, would you be suprised when they don't?)

Autocross is just a drag race with corners, we just run heads up (no brackets).

I mean, sure, they have to "prove" what caused the failure. But, if they know that autocross runs seem to destroy gearboxes and you autocross and blow a gearbox and they have your results, I'd say they could begin to provide a body of proof. Also, almost every EVO I know of has a boost controller on it. I'd think that would void your warranty right there.

I guess my point is, autocross is much harder on parts than many people give it credit for being.

If I go to McDonalds, get a coke, put a lid on it and drop it on the floor. Do I "warranty" that coke for a defective lid? Or, did I use it in a manor that it was not intended?

What if they know I dropped it? (many will say "it's a big company, they can afford it more than I can")

Now, as for the dealer marketing, that could be another story....

How has GM handled the "track" Z06's? Anyone know?

[bruecksteve]

And that's part of my point, are Z28's and Corvettes not "abused"?? Do they go searching the internet for people that autocross or drag race our cars?? Were they not designed with those possibilities in mind? Sure if you keep coming back in with obvious "self destructing" parts I can understand not fixing it under warranty. But you don't sell a performance car and think that no one is going to drive it hard.

I could take an Evo on the Tail of the Dragon ( http://www.tailofthedragon.com ) and abuse it more than any autocross, 318 turns in 11 miles and still run under the 55 mph speed limit is alot more abusive than any autox I've driven ever driven yet would still not be on a track and not exceeding the speed limit. Isn't that was this car was designed to do???? Would they try to deny my warranty claim??

Let's face it, the cars are defective right off the showroom floor. NOTHING should break as easily as they do. Now they're trying to cover up and claim that everyone is abusing a vehicle that was marketed as a race and track ready car.

[mitchntx]

I've always contended there was a definite and distinct line between a warranty and a sponsorship.

Cars sold to the general public from a dealership are meant to be used on public roadways. Abiding by all applicable laws is implied and should be understood. That is the car's normal operating environment. Anything beyond that ....

Whether or not a car is subjected to the same stresses when driving 70 on a freeway vs the front straight at the local autocross is an opinion and very subjective. I've witnessed folks pussy-footing around the cones and folks wailing down the local off ramp.

Now, in the particular instance of the EVO driver 2 things come to mind ...

1) the evidence against them, other than the confession, was a name, model and color car, all from an internet website. Surely that car isn't a rare one off car ...

2) a salesman will tell you anything to make a sale ... the service department doesn't care what was told to you while signing the papers.

[trackbird]

I'll not disagree that they seem underbuilt. But, after working for a Mitsubishi dealer as a salesman in 1995, I wouldn't buy one anyway (I stay far, far away from their stuff).

I agree that searching for results online is "slimy". I agree that the cars seem exceedingly fragile. And, I agree that performance cars get "beat on". However, none of that was the original issue. It was the dealer not covering "racing abuse", which is a fair and reasonable thing for them to do (not to do?).

My point was simply that if I race it and I break it, as a rule, I don't expect them to fix it. That's fair.

If the car has a "glass jaw", then that may be a reason to consider a class action suit or to persue some other remedy. I am not a fan of todays "sue me" society, but a class action lawsuit regarding durability and warranty claims may be of merit in a case like this. Though, as someone on that post stated, it may kill both the Evo and Mitsubishi in the process. If Mistubishi goes bankrupt (I don't think they are far from it), there will be no warranty work for anyone.

I agree that the car seems underbuilt and non-reliable. And, I agree with you that "something should be done" about that problem. However, I (as a whole) don't expect dealers to cover things I break while racing. Fair enough?

We are really working with two questions here, Mitsubishi's underbuilt EVO and a more general "should dealers cover racing damage" question. I guess I can sum it up by saying:

"Mitsubishi seems to have a problem on it's hands and needs a viable solution. But expecting any dealer to cover damage from participating in a timed motorsports event is not practical either (if the car with damage has a "known problem" then that situation may need specific rules applied to it)."

I think we are both on the same side here. We agree that the EVO is fragile and may be more prone than most to racing injuries. And, as a rule, track abuse is not covered under warranty, but the EVO may make a special case for extending that coverage.

[AllZWay]

I think Mitsu surfing the web finding offenders is pretty crappy and very dirty and thus would solidify the fact that I would NOT own one.

But, I don't blame them for not warranting broken parts on RACE CARS.

Much like Chuck said earlier... a window motor, radio...etc.. would be fine to warranty, but to expect them to warrant a blown motor for excessive boost or axles for running slicks is asking a bit much.

[Nestromo]

I know a fellow with an '03 Z06. Another of his friends has one, and it was seen by SOMEONE at a 1/8 mile strip, and it's warranty was voided. My friend went to the same track, but before he rolled into the gates, he pulled off his plate and put a sticky note over his VIN #. Later that night, he actuouly saw someone looking through his window at his sticky note. He went up and talked to the guy and the guy seemed startled at first and said "Nice car". He seemed as if he just wanted to B.S. about the Z06....

....now who the hell hire these guys? Is it a joint effort between the dealerships? I would think that just GOING to the drags could void your warranty.... if your car is parked inside the gates (and one of those assholes sees it).

[prockbp]

i feel that it is the responsibility of manufacturers to build cars that can handle the job that they were built for...

the EVO is a performance car.. it should be built to handle high performance


i don't understand why you guys are so willing to bend over... if your work truck roasted a ring gear while pulling a heavy load, you would definately take it to the dealer and get it warrantied

[bruecksteve]

I agree, and if it were your Evo that broke while you were autocrossing, you'd be PO'd beyond belief. I considered buying one for that purpose. I'd be VERY po'd if my $30K+ car that was supposedly designed to be "driven" crapped out and the Mitsu people backed out on their warranty claims. To me that's no different than a bait and switch scam. Lure me in with all these great performance claims, talk about how great it is on a track, then tell me they're washing their hands from it!!!!! (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/dry.gif)

[mitchntx]

2) a salesman will tell you anything to make a sale ... the service department doesn't care what was told to you while signing the papers.

You make a good point, Josh ...

But

[Nestromo]

if your work truck roasted a ring gear while pulling a heavy load, you would definately take it to the dealer and get it warrantied

EXACTLY. And we get those in all the time... not just ring gear either. Powerstrokes make up 80% or more of our tranny guy's work. And have you ever noticed how most diesel drivers drive? Pedal to the metal constantly.

[pknowles]

How has GM handled the "track" Z06's? Anyone know?

I do know of ZO6's going in for warranty work with numbers on the cars from a few locals. Can't remember what was done off the top of my head, but it was not trival like a window motor or wiper motor.

I can just as easily do a 6000 rpm launch on DOT tires at a stop light or in a parking lot like in an autocross. I can drive down the highway at 5000 rpm's in third if I wanted to. I can understand not covering suspension if it modified, but if the motor hasn't been touched I can't see how that can't be covered if I toss a rod if I never over reved it passed the factory cut off. Keeping the revs up for a 60 second run in the motor's designed operating range should be fine. I'm a fence sitter about a track day, if your keeping the rev's up for 20 min sessions then the internals are probably getting really hot and outside there normal environment. But it's still in the designed operating range so I don't know if I would take that in for warranty or not. Missing a gear and going into 2nd rather then 4th and kicking a rod out because you reved to 9000 should not be covered.

Since I have done a lot of suspension work to my car I wouldn't take it in for warranty if I broke a front or rear lower control arm even though they are 100% stock, that would be just trying to screw over GM. However if I had an engine problem that was not related to me messing up a shift or something like that I would take it to the dealer since my only engine mod is a lid, which I could of gotten as an SPL option which would be covered. So if a coil pack went out, I think that should be covered. If I killed a rear on a ProSolo launch I would probably suck it up and fix it myself out of my pocket.

I argee with you Mitch that a salesman will say anything to sell a car, but should the buyer pay for the salesman's loose mouth?

[pknowles]

I would also say that the manufacturer has to clearly define what abuse is. I could easily argue that starting up your car when it's cold is abusive. How dare you grind your dry piston rings aganst the cylinders! (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)