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

[Ltdodge]

Originally Posted by PQ

All correct. And supposedly there was a letter sent to the owners of suspected vehicles. Point is that even the effected cars may never have a problem. There's no way to know. But modifying the car takes the odds out of GMs favor.

no one has ever seen these so called letters. those letters are like the lochness monster or a Savini wheel that doesnt vibrate. they know its exists, but none has ever seen it.

[Dr Jkel]

Originally Posted by PQ

All correct. And supposedly there was a letter sent to the owners of suspected vehicles. Point is that even the effected cars may never have a problem. There's no way to know. But modifying the car takes the odds out of GMs favor.

Oh I agree that they can not just go around and arbritrarily fix things that are not broke, but it would be nice to know if I fall in that range, then I could better prepare so to speak. We both know that I really dog my car though,

Originally Posted by Ltdodge

no one has ever seen a Savini wheel that doesnt vibrate. they know its exists, but none has ever seen it.

Ha ha very funny, LOL

[mwt18]

Let's try a democratic approach :
http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showthread.php?t=157383

[PQ]

Originally Posted by Ltdodge

no one has ever seen these so called letters. those letters are like the lochness monster or a Savini wheel that doesnt vibrate. they know its exists, but none has ever seen it.

That actually makes perfect sense for what I'm saying. Most of those shafts will not break at all. So why address it? Fix them as they happen. Doesn't seem to ba a safety issue. They sit back and hope that few break. But adding power to them kinda assures that they break. But I recognize there are two diffeent ways to approach it. From the business aspect and from the consumer aspect.

I can see the point on both sides. I just support the business side.

Savini wheel that does not vibrate = Lochness Monster

[mwt18]

Originally Posted by PQ

I can see the point on both sides.

PQ, you're not going soft are ya? j/k

[JusticePete]

I was thinking about this on the way home. Over the Memorial Day holiday the alternator on my Denali went out. It is still under GM warranty. We were headed to Six Flags and warranty never crossed my mind. I just wanted to complete our trip. I pulled into the closest CarQuest and bought a rebuilt alternator. They let me use some tools and we continued on our way to Six Flags. It never occurred to me to take the bill for the repair to GM. I had it fixed outside thier system. The old unit was left with CarQuest. Maybe I look at this all wrong. I wanted it fixed and fix on the spot. I made my decision and went on my way.

How does this fit with modified Camaros? When I put my ProCharger on I said good by to my warranty in my mind and I belive by the rules of contract law as it would apply to the printed warranty. I am pleased that mwt18 had a favorable decision by the BB, but also belive the BBB made the wrong decision.

[Coldpants]

Originally Posted by PQ

That actually makes perfect sense for what I'm saying. Most of those shafts will not break at all. So why address it? Fix them as they happen. Doesn't seem to ba a safety issue. They sit back and hope that few break. But adding power to them kinda assures that they break. But I recognize there are two diffeent ways to approach it. From the business aspect and from the consumer aspect.

I can see the point on both sides. I just support the business side.

Savini wheel that does not vibrate = Lochness Monster

This is not a Consumer vs. Business issue This is a short sighted profits vs. Long term customer retention issue. Whether GM will make more money denying warrenty claims for a known problem whatever the excuse than they will loose in the long term by alienating customers. I think the short sighted approach that GM is taking will be born out to be unwise.

[BackinBlackSS/RS]

I think all of this is mostly negative press for GM. This was a known issue and whether they should pay or not, they should just take care of those within the VIN limit who have problems. In the long run I think it would be WAY cheaper on so many levels. I mean how many have broken that we know of modded or not. It's not a staggering amount. I just think this is a good business decision, and not that I think GM should fix modded cars failures.

[JusticePete]

Why is this a consumer vs business issue? It is a matter of contract law.

[mwt18]

Originally Posted by JusticePete

I was thinking about this on the way home. Over the Memorial Day holiday the alternator on my Denali went out. It is still under GM warranty. We were headed to Six Flags and warranty never crossed my mind. I just wanted to complete our trip. I pulled into the closest CarQuest and bought a rebuilt alternator. They let me use some tools and we continued on our way to Six Flags. It never occurred to me to take the bill for the repair to GM. I had it fixed outside thier system. The old unit was left with CarQuest. Maybe I look at this all wrong. I wanted it fixed and fix on the spot. I made my decision and went on my way.

How does this fit with modified Camaros? When I put my ProCharger on I said good by to my warranty in my mind and I belive by the rules of contract law as it would apply to the printed warranty. I am pleased that mwt18 had a favorable decision by the BB, but also belive the BBB made the wrong decision.

Can't see the connection..
How much did the alternator cost?
Did it take you guys 3 weeks to get it repaired?

I went to close my trunk the other day and noticed that my spoiler was a bit loose. I went to walmart and got some loctite and used my own tools to fix it. I guess I should send GM a bill for it because it should have been covered under warranty.
But wait, my supercharger could have caused it to vibrate loose. So, I will give GM the benefit of the doubt and suck it up..

[Coldpants]

Originally Posted by JusticePete

Why is this a consumer vs business issue? It is a matter of contract law.

I agree I was just commenting on part of PQ's post. I think the specific issue here is whether a contract between two parties can override the law. This decision is in line with centuries of precedent which says it cannot.

[GTAHVIT]

Knock it off..

Stop dancing around the issue.

and yes I'm going to bully pulpit this. If you don't like it, complain to the website owner. Tran.

The contract you sign with GM for warranty coverage is for the car as delivered. NOT as modified. Whether or not supercharged car could have warranty claims continuously denied or approved is up for grabs. Obviously MWT showed us that, (due to his car's VIN and association to the out put shaft problem) he won in spite of his supercharger.

Good for him.

Without that connection to the output shaft problem he is in for a much different fight. Could he win his case even without that early VIN? Sure. But would it be a harder fight? I'd guess it would be.

We done debating this.

If you want to modify your car and fight tooth and nail to get every thing fixed regardless of your mods... Go nuts. beat GM up take advantage of the law and get everything you can for free...

The discussion that we won't tolerate any more is whether or not GM is obligated to fix your car after you modify it. Camaro5 's position is that if you modify your car. Don't bitch about it when you your power train warranty is denied.

All Warranty and customer service threads are temporarily closed.

I'm DONE reading it. Don't start new threads and don't pm me.. I'll ignore it and delete it.

And before you start claiming constitutional rights.... This is a privately owned and operated forum... Freedom of speech doesn't apply here.