[gajagfan]

Originally Posted by Elite Engineering

The Magnasun/Moss act clearly states a manufacturer CANNOT write a warranty in such a way as to forbid the use of aftermarket parts or services no matter how the warranty may be written. This applies to everything from vacuum cleaners (they were telling customers they HAD to buy their own bags, belts instead of lower priced aftermarket ones) to automobiles, to homes.

The law also is clear that the manufacturer MUST provide proof the part/service/etc. directly caused the failure in question. We can provide all the technical data needed to win legally of the OP chose to pursue it, and we also provided the OP in the original thread contact to law firms that specialize in these cases.


The problem is so few even know of the law, and most will not fight the "giant". GM knows very well it is impossible for a properly designed and properly installed "catchcan" system to cause ANY damage, much less oil pump failure, but so few actually pursue legal remedy that GM and others count on intimidation causing the customer to not pursue their rights. A simple complaint to the FTC usually is all it takes, and that can be done at no cost.


Also, to address the post that a proper catchcan does little to benefit a port injection engine is false. There are examples all over of excessive oil consumption cases in GM LS engines were improved or cured once the halt of oil and other contaminants are not causing rings and groves to stick from the deposits formed, and also the reduction in Knock Retard due to the oil ingestion. The dual valve Elite systems give evacuation at all operating levels where the OEM PVC only evacuates at idle, cruise, and deceleration and any time the engine is accelerating or at WOT NO evacuation tales place, and the damaging combustion byproducts and other contaminates are allowed to settle and mix with the engine oil causing increased wear from the abrasive compounds.


I oil analysis performed on a engine w/out a Elite dual valve system w/cleanside separator done at the same change interval and then done after the installation of the dual valve system will show a lessor amount of wear causing contaminants as the oil remains cleaner longer. These contaminates most be removed before they have a chance to settle and are still in a suspended state. Once they settle and mix with the engine oil, they are there to stay, and most of the abrasive compound particles are far smaller then the 15 micron size the oil filter is able to trap so they are in the oil circulating accelerating wear.


App. 70% of all internal engine wear is caused by these particles smaller than 15 microns.


So even though a port injection engine has NO intake valve coking issues like all GDI engine do, there are many benefits.

I am asking this for clarification, not to start a fight. I agree with your definition of The Magnasun/Moss Act in regards to use of aftermarket parts in a replacement situation for OEM parts. That is not the situation with the OP. The use of your catch can on any GEN 5 Camaro is not as a replacement. There is no dirty side catch can on any Gen 5 model that I am aware of. How do you see The Magnasun/Moss Act applying when there is no mention of (that I am aware of) covering the modification of a system and / or the use of additional parts in a system? I am on board with this problem not being the result of a catch can, but the members of the site need to understand the risk they are or are not taking by making modifications to their car. The Magnasun/Moss Act gets brought up like a saving blanket, and I am not so sure it means what many think it means. Thanks again for always being upfront and helpful.