Camaro team's response to concern about Transmission Output Shaft Failure

[mwt18]

Originally Posted by Milk 1027

Trust me the burden of proof is much higher for you than it is for them.

The law is that the burden of proof is on them. But, I have plans to determine the root cause. It helps that I work at a place that specializes in failure analyses.

Originally Posted by Milk 1027

Bottom line is, if you are going to modify to that level, make sure the weak points are taken care of. There are too many variables to ascertain whether the Maggie did in fact not cause the break.

You do know that there are guys (on this forum) putting 600-800 HP through the stock TR6060. I haven't heard of a single output shaft breaking on cars with a VIN>~25,000.

[mwt18]

Had my BBB arbitration hearing yesterday. Here's a summary of the information I requested followed by the response from the GM rep:

Question:
1: Can you please tell me, was my vehicle built before the transmission issue was identified and the hold was issued?
GM's response: You have to be careful about what you read on the internet. There is a lot of false information. But, yes, your car was built on 6/18/09.

2. Can you please inform me what the transmission problem was and how it was resolved?
GM's response: Refer to safecar.gov and you will notice that there is not a recall pertaining to the transmission.

3. Was the VIN list of affected cars ever released? If not, why? Was my VIN on this ‘list’?
GM's response: GM does have a list of affected VINs. The list was never released because it was not deemed necessary. Letters were sent to all involved. Your VIN was not on this list.


4. Did GM contact those involved?
GM's response: We sent letters to all those with affected cars. If you didn't receive a letter, then your car was not on the list.


5. If there was a known defect, why did GM deny my warranty claim?
GM's response: Again, your VIN was not on the list of affected cars.

6. Do you think the failure of my transmission may be caused by the same defect that led to the other early 2010 manual Camaro SS manual transmission failures?
GM's response: No, your VIN was not on the list.

The GM rep said all this under oath.

[JusticePete]

I have been under oath as a corporate person in a prior life. Corporate council instructs you on how to respond truthfully while being concise. It is frustrating for all involved. I have a lot of friends at GM. They are good people as I am sure you are. I hope you find a suitable resolution.

[GTAHVIT]

Originally Posted by mwt18

The law is that the burden of proof is on them. But, I have plans to determine the root cause. It helps that I work at a place that specializes in failure analyses.



You do know that there are guys (on this forum) putting 600-800 HP through the stock TR6060. I haven't heard of a single output shaft breaking on cars with a VIN>~25,000.

I'm sorry this happened and is happening. but you don't stand a chance.

If I were sitting across from you I'd ask you to provide a dyno sheet or I'd go get Maggies performance data and say look, The Camaro is sold at 426 BHP...

You are running somewhere near 500 RWHP... estimate that is near 600BHP... that is a 174 BHP increase or just over 40%...

How can GM be held accountable for a 40% increase in power... bad transmission or not....

Again I'm terribly sorry. I wouldn't wish a failed tranny on anyone. But, I'm guessing you will be left paying the bill on this.

[Russell James]

Originally Posted by mwt18

Had my BBB arbitration hearing yesterday. Here's a summary of the information I requested followed by the response from the GM rep:

Question:
1: Can you please tell me, was my vehicle built before the transmission issue was identified and the hold was issued?
GM's response: You have to be careful about what you read on the internet. There is a lot of false information. But, yes, your car was built on 6/18/09.

2. Can you please inform me what the transmission problem was and how it was resolved?
GM's response: Refer to safecar.gov and you will notice that there is not a recall pertaining to the transmission.

3. Was the VIN list of affected cars ever released? If not, why? Was my VIN on this ‘list’?
GM's response: GM does have a list of affected VINs. The list was never released because it was not deemed necessary. Letters were sent to all involved. Your VIN was not on this list.


4. Did GM contact those involved?
GM's response: We sent letters to all those with affected cars. If you didn't receive a letter, then your car was not on the list.


5. If there was a known defect, why did GM deny my warranty claim?
GM's response: Again, your VIN was not on the list of affected cars.

6. Do you think the failure of my transmission may be caused by the same defect that led to the other early 2010 manual Camaro SS manual transmission failures?
GM's response: No, your VIN was not on the list.

The GM rep said all this under oath.

Letters? List?

Sounds like he was just making stuff up. And to criticize a lot of false internet information.... The most false information in this thread just came from his responses.

[Ltdodge]

in other words if you break the output shft your SOL because your car was not in the vin # list.....

they dont care about the buyer after we bailed them out by buying these cars

[JusticePete]

Originally Posted by Ltdodge

in other words if you break the output shft your SOL because your car was not in the vin # list.....

they dont care about the buyer after we bailed them out by buying these cars

No sir. That would not be at all accurate. The warranty in the glove box of any car brand specifically states that the warranty can be voided by the owner through modification or abuse. Those definitions can be crystal clear as would be the case with a pristine bone stock car with a failed tranny. We get in the grey area when there are minor modifications and signs of abuse (tire boogers in the wheel wells). Get towed to the dealership with a supercharger, slicks and skinnies and there is no gray area. There is also no warranty.

My Camaro has been driven at tracks across the country. It has been run hard. Nothing in thee OE driveline has failed. Nothing. If it failed on track it would be my responsibility as I am the one who made the modifications.

We have a member that feels he should be covered by warranty and he is doing what he thinks best. He is carefully investigating the cause of the failure and I respect his efforts. I don't think he is right, but that is just one man's opinion.

On the other hand, bashing GM over this is not appropriate. Show me thee factory warranty from ANY automobile manufacturer that covers the drive line when the owner has boosted the horsepower. When you show me a copy of that warranty I'll jump on the bash GM bandwagon. Until then, I think GM is handling this issue well.

[Ltdodge]

Originally Posted by JusticePete

No sir. That would not be at all accurate. The warranty in the glove box of any car brand specifically states that the warranty can be voided by the owner through modification or abuse. Those definitions can be crystal clear as would be the case with a pristine bone stock car with a failed tranny. We get in the grey area when there are minor modifications and signs of abuse (tire boogers in the wheel wells). Get towed to the dealership with a supercharger, slicks and skinnies and there is no gray area. There is also no warranty.

My Camaro has been driven at tracks across the country. It has been run hard. Nothing in thee OE driveline has failed. Nothing. If it failed on track it would be my responsibility as I am the one who made the modifications.

We have a member that feels he should be covered by warranty and he is doing what he thinks best. He is carefully investigating the cause of the failure and I respect his efforts. I don't think he is right, but that is just one man's opinion.

On the other hand, bashing GM over this is not appropriate. Show me thee factory warranty from ANY automobile manufacturer that covers the drive line when the owner has boosted the horsepower. When you show me a copy of that warranty I'll jump on the bash GM bandwagon. Until then, I think GM is handling this issue well.

there was a problem with the manuals under 25K vin numbers and GM knows it. thats the problem, any other higher vin number and I trully agree with you and Gm on ther stance, but unfortunatly mine falls under that range and im ready to get raped when it happens. what vin number is yours??? if mine was over 25K then i would not even be worried.

i feel like I bought a house with chinese drywall

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by Ltdodge

there was a problem with the manuals under 25K vin numbers and GM knows it. thats the problem, any other higher vin number and I trully agree with you and Gm on ther stance, but unfortunatly mine falls under that range and im ready to get raped when it happens. what vin number is yours??? if mine was over 25K then i would not even be worried

There was an isolated batch of transmissions that were effected. It was not all transmissions below 25k VIN, as you seem to be misunderstanding. GM does know it, you're right. And they've contacted those individuals. If you weren't contacted, then you weren't effected by this problem....

Pete is very correct in his statements, what we have in this 2.5 year-old thread is a bit of delayed over-reaction, imo...

[Ltdodge]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

There was an isolated batch of transmissions that were effected. It was NOT "all transmissions below 25k VIN", as you seem to be misunderstanding. GM does know it, you're right. And they've contacted those individuals. If you weren't contacted, then you weren't effected by this problem....

Pete is very correct in his statements, what we have in this 2.5 year-old thread is a bit of delayed over-reaction, imo...

well i would love to see just 1 person to come up showing us that they were contacted and they fixed the problem....any why not publish the list of vin numbers to keep everyone under 25k vin relieved that thier car will not break.

i think i may be in the clear cause i did made a bunch of competitive mode clutch dumps before installing my supercharger...but i would still like to have piece of mind.

i m sure if you had a camaro under that vin range you would like to make sure you were good....

when your cobalt power steering pump was recalled werent you glad you were informed????

[JusticePete]

Originally Posted by Ltdodge

there was a problem with the manuals under 25K vin numbers and GM knows it. thats the problem, any other higher vin number and I trully agree with you and Gm on ther stance, but unfortunatly mine falls under that range and im ready to get raped when it happens. what vin number is yours??? if mine was over 25K then i would not even be worried.

i feel like I bought a house with chinese drywall

Mine was just over and in the maybe area. Most failures didn't just happen. It is no different than the RLCA endlink tab issue. When I spoke with those that has had a failure. I was just driving along when it broke, but I kissed a curb when i slid in the rain a few days before. Mine just broke, but I did have a loose endlink flopping around for a few weeks. Mine just broke, but... That is not to cast blame, but I couldn't find one case where there wasn't an outside influence on thee failure.

There was one owner in this thread that posted his failure video launching his car on drag radials at 5000 RPM. For the most part the Chinese drywall is holding up pretty well

[JusticePete]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

Pete is very correct in his statements..

I was right? Hot damn! This should be a sticky!

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by Ltdodge

well i would love to see just 1 person to come up showing us that they were contacted and they fixed the problem....any why not publish the list of vin numbers to keep everyone under 25k vin relieved that thier car will not break.

I imagine there aren't that many...given that there was no recall issued. And so it stands to reason that out of a couple hundred thousand cars produced, the few who were contacted might not be members.....

Originally Posted by Ltdodge

i think i may be in the clear cause i did made a bunch of competitive mode clutch dumps before installing my supercharger...but i would still like to have piece of mind.

Piece of mind is here for you to have...but you seem to be chasing ghosts, instead. The fact is, they didn't release a list of VINs...I can't blame them because there are weirdos out there who could use VINs to obtain identities or locations of people....but that's besides the point. If you weren't contacted - you're fine!

Originally Posted by Ltdodge

i m sure if you had a camaro under that vin range you would like to make sure you were good....

when your cobalt power steering pump was recalled werent you glad you were informed????

I was glad they sent me a letter...to be honest, though it wouldn't have mattered too much, because I wouldn't have noticed until I got the car down to < 2-3 mph. And even then, it would still be driveable.....but I digress...

If I had an early-build Camaro I'd have expected to see a letter within 2-3 months of the problem being identified...I don't know what the real time frame was. Assuming I didn't get it, I'd figure I was okay. Honestly! I'm not blowing smoke, here.

If I owned an early-build Camaro with a supercharger on it, I'd want to enjoy the heck out of it instead of worrying about my transmission because it doesn't really matter at this point - since I effectively threw my powertrain warranty out the window by installing the blower...

Originally Posted by JusticePete

I was right? Hot damn! This should be a sticky!

How 'bout you frame it, instead? Carry it around in your wallet?

[JusticePete]

How 'bout you frame it, instead? Carry it around in your wallet?