This is how Chevy treats my $45,000 "track ready" car

[ForcFed93]

Originally Posted by Billy10mm

For a manufacturer who markets the car as a "track ready vehicle", who's chief engineer clearly says on video (that has been presented in this thread multiple times) that if you break something on this car on the track, it will be covered ... one could make a clear case in court that all breakage at the track should be covered. While I say this, the realist in me knows that that is likely not going to be the case. That the average Joe isn't going to have the time or money to fight this cause in court and GM can simply not cover it and move on. But being a realist doesn't make the situation right.

First off, there are a few flaws with your argument. Being advertised as a "track ready" car, does not mean it's warrantied for failures on the track.

Second, that video you're referring to has absolutely nothing to do with the 1LE. You're referring to the video with the ZL1, which coincidentally has a starting price MUCH higher than the 1LE.

There is no argument to be made here. There are no grounds for a lawsuit or case of any kind.

Deeming a car track ready does not deem them liable for damages during track usage. I do not understand how people don't understand this.

[backeddy]

Forcfed, I will agree with what you said BUT if you remove yourself from everything you know or have read and put yourself in the posistion of a new car buyer, shopping for a car. Now add in that he wants to try an HPDE event to see if it is fun like everyone says. So he starts doing all of the research and comes across GM Al in the 1LE video and goes and buys one. Do you think for a second that the new car buyer has any idea that GM is going to deny him? Not a chance and that is the point.

[backeddy]

When GM Al says " we took the front tire from the ZL1 and stretched it over the 11 inch wheel on the rear, the reason we did this is that THIS IS A TRACK CAR"

To me, case closed, bait and switch. What says you?

[ForcFed93]

Originally Posted by backeddy

Forcfed, I will agree with what you said BUT if you remove yourself from everything you know or have read and put yourself in the posistion of a new car buyer, shopping for a car. Now add in that he wants to try an HPDE event to see if it is fun like everyone says. So he starts doing all of the research and comes across GM Al in the 1LE video and goes and buys one. Do you think for a second that the new car buyer has any idea that GM is going to deny him? Not a chance and that is the point.

I understand where you're coming from. And to be honest, I agree the clutch has a problem on some vehicles that can manifest on or off the track.

I, however, am against an overly litigious society that thinks the person shoulders no blame and it's all the fault of the company or manufacturer. If that person wants to run an HPDE, they should be aware of the risks involved. Anything less is irresponsible on their part. When companies have to cover the cost of the ignorance of all of their users, we'll no longer be able to afford anything.

Do I think you would've had the same problem off the track? Quite possibly. However, you violated the terms of warranty, whether or not it was knowingly. Some dealers are more than happy to help out their customers and are willing to pay (in terms of warranty work) to keep their customers happy. Others are not. It's a gamble you take when you make that choice.

I'm sure the kid in your hypothetical scenario would be absolutely devastated. However, they would also learn a valuable lesson about how the world works at the same time.

[Billy10mm]

Originally Posted by ForcFed93

First off, there are a few flaws with your argument. Being advertised as a "track ready" car, does not mean it's warrantied for failures on the track.

Second, that video you're referring to has absolutely nothing to do with the 1LE. You're referring to the video with the ZL1, which coincidentally has a starting price MUCH higher than the 1LE.

There is no argument to be made here. There are no grounds for a lawsuit or case of any kind.

Deeming a car track ready does not deem them liable for damages during track usage. I do not understand how people don't understand this.

But the damage wasn't done during track use. The symptom is showing up under track use, because to replicate it on the street could potentially land you with a hefty fine or at worst, in jail, but the damage was done somewhere else. OP is being railroaded out of a fix simply because he used the car the way it was intended to be used.

[ForcFed93]

Originally Posted by backeddy

When GM Al says " we took the front tire from the ZL1 and stretched it over the 11 inch wheel on the rear, the reason we did this is that THIS IS A TRACK CAR"

To me, case closed, bait and switch. What says you?

No, that's talking about the capabilities of the car. Not the warranty of the car.

If he says it's warrantied for track use point blank, then it's a bait and switch.

Anything else is a simple marketing trick.

[ForcFed93]

Originally Posted by Billy10mm

But the damage wasn't done during track use.

That's a bold statement. Care to offer proof?

[backeddy]

Agreed, but nowhere in the warranty is HPDE covered. The specific wording revolves around "competitive" driving I believe, which is a completely different animal. Am I missing something? Like I said, I did not really start this thread to seek anything from GM, I started it because of they approach THEY took, they should of handled it differently. They are basically saying, yeah lie to us and everything is ok......

Thanks for being civil too!

[backeddy]

That's a bold statement. Care to offer proof?

How about the other 1000 or so cars with the exact same symptom, that have never been near a track? Look through these forums, it's a pretty common issue.

[ForcFed93]

Originally Posted by backeddy

Agreed, but nowhere in the warranty is HPDE covered. The specific wording revolves around "competitive" driving I believe, which is a completely different animal. Am I missing something? Like I said, I did not really start this thread to seek anything from GM, I started it because of they approach THEY took, they should of handled it differently. They are basically saying, yeah lie to us and everything is ok......

Thanks for being civil too!

It actually says "racing or other competition use". The problem is, who's definition matters? You can argue semantics all you want, but they're confident theirs is right.

The second half of your statement is where the problem lies. Your dealer wasn't willing to eat the cost of the warranty work (when they likely could have pushed it through for GM's approval).

And really, in this situation, while it sucks, you don't have much grounds for recourse.

Best thing you can do is find a different dealer worth your business.

[ForcFed93]

Originally Posted by backeddy

How about the other 1000 or so cars with the exact same symptom, that have never been near a track? Look through these forums, it's a pretty common issue.

Like I said, I realize there may be some issues with the clutch. However, saying specifically that it did not break on the track (which you admit was the first time it manifested) is impossible to say.

And for every vocal member that has problems on here, I'm sure there are 10,000 that have never had an issue.

Best case scenario, if it is as big of a problem as you make it out to be, GM will offer a TSB to resolve it. That does not make it any easier to stomach in the interim though.

[Billy10mm]

Originally Posted by ForcFed93

However, you violated the terms of warranty, whether or not it was knowingly.

And this mindset, this statement right here, is a massive part of the problem. This idea that someone can somehow destroy an entire vehicle worth of warranty is a major issue. Far too many people think this way, including most of the moron techs and service writers at most dealerships.

No one who has bought a car in the last 50 years has ever been able to do something that can invalidate the warranty applicable to every physical part on the car. I can add rims, a super-charger, nitrous, pink-fluorescent headlights, taillights off a Range Rover, an amplifier, remove the exhaust system altogether and run open headers, and replace both window motors with Chinese knock-offs. And if my horn stops working tomorrow - it should be covered under warranty.

The onus is on the manufacturer to prove that an aftermarket component caused as issue (Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act) and less talked about but just as important, the onus is on the manufacturer to prove abuse if "abuse" is the excuse they are using to deny a claim. That isn't being done here. Abuse of a clutch is extremely easy to spot. They can measure the amount of clutch material left, inspect it for hot spots, they can check the clutch lines, fittings, and fluids for signs of excessive heat. None of that has been done.

A dealership, concerned that they would invest time into the car and possibly not recoup any monies from GM if GM denies the claim, took it upon themselves to cry "abuse" as some sort of "get out of jail free" card. This undermines the value of the warranty of EVERY vehicle on this forum.

I have occasionally used 100% throttle in my 1LE. I've even occasionally up-shifted at or very near red-line. I've even bumped into the rev limiter. I've also gotten some pretty good slip angles in my car. Does that mean I'm abusing it? No. That means I'm going through tires quicker than your average person and that my car is sucking down more fuel that it otherwise would, but I'm surely not abusing it.

What it definitely doesn't do, is give some 80-IQ tech the ability to deny my claim on a transmission that refuses to go into 4th gear, simply because my ECU reports that I've hit the rev limiter at some point in time.

[ForcFed93]

Originally Posted by Billy10mm

The onus is on the manufacturer to prove that an aftermarket component caused as issue (Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act) and less talked about but just as important, the onus is on the manufacturer to prove abuse if "abuse" is the excuse they are using to deny a claim. That isn't being done here. Abuse of a clutch is extremely easy to spot. They can measure the amount of clutch material left, inspect it for hot spots, they can check the clutch lines, fittings, and fluids for signs of excessive heat. None of that has been done.

Are you willing to stand in front of a judge and argue that his scrubbed tires and rubber in the wheel wells is not considered abuse here? That's all that matters. And I guarantee 99.999% of judges are going to take the evidence presented and tell you it's been abused.

You'd have to find one hell of a gear head judge to rule in your favor. And I guarantee GM will take your bet any day of the week on this.

Originally Posted by Billy10mm

I have occasionally used 100% throttle in my 1LE. I've even occasionally up-shifted at or very near red-line. I've even bumped into the rev limiter. I've also gotten some pretty good slip angles in my car. Does that mean I'm abusing it? No.

Again, this is 100% your opinion. You weight your opinion higher than others, obviously. The fact of the matter, is ultimately, it's A) the dealerships opinion that counts. If you argue that, then it's B) GM's opinion that counts. If you argue that then C) It's a judges opinion that counts. Not yours. Take any non-gear head person and show them what you're doing and 99.999% are going to tell you that you are abusing it.

At that point, you can only do what any other sane person would do. Cut your losses and choose not to give them your business.

[backeddy]

forcfed, take what billy said and then present GM Al clearly stating this is a track car, along with introducing the car to the public ON A RACE TRACK, and I will bet I can get 99% to sway the other way. I just don"t have the billions to fight them if I happen to get the 1%, they do..... I should start a poll on the general forum to find out what members say....