"Warranty void" - Not a myth anymore? VLP content.

[Craig 930 RS]

http://forums.evolutionm.net/showthread.php?threadid=83525

FWIW

Craig
@RS

[IROC]

I briefly read this and it appears to fall into the "urban legend" category to me.

How in the world can Mitsubishi prove an individual used his car on the track by scanning websites that post track event results? SCCA requires that you enter your VIN when you sign the waiver?

Mike

[Craig 930 RS]

I found it hard to believe - when I posted this.

There, by law, has to be PROOF that the activity or modification caused the problem.

The burden is on the manufacturer -

Craig
@RS

[Schuey]

I read most of it, and looks like it happened to one of the posters...obviously the SCCA must use VIN's otherwise it it would be impossible to find out which car was doing this...

obviously they must be having issues with warranty claims

[dotorg]

Craig: no it doesn't. In terms of warranty service, they have to prove that you getting your scheduled maintennance done using OEM-eqivalent parts from qualified 3rd parties caused a problem to be able to not cover a claim, and in those cases only where the service would've cost you money.

The rest of the warranty is a contract, they can void it for violating any other clause from it not explicitly covered by warranty law. A lot of manufacturers have buried clauses about motorsports and even driving events in their warranties that do, in fact, have teeth.

Subaru did the same thing... and they even were giving away SCCA memberships with the WRX when it first came out.

[Craig 930 RS]

So this may be more than an urban myth....

Craig
@RS

[dotorg]

Originally posted by Craig911
So this may be more than an urban myth....

Craig
@RS

A number of years ago Audi was voiding warranties among S4 owners who were chipped as a result of comments about being chipped by those owners made in on public forums like Audiworld.

Doing things other than driving your stock car in a legal manner on public roads really starts to fall under "you play, you pay".

[Grady Clay]

Mike, I agree – this may just be legend.

If this turns out as represented, I’ll vote with my $$$ and word-of-mouth. I’d like to see a scan of some official Mitsu correspondence. If true, I guess each manufacturer gets to set its own policy and live by the consequences.

My son raced Spec Miata all last summer and we were very impressed with Mazda’s support. Mazda actively supports taking their new cars on track. Look at what Honda and Toyota are doing. I wonder what GM, Ford and DC’s policies are?

If I buy a new Carrera S and take it to a PCA track event would Porsche void the warranty? NO, not unless I stuffed into 1st at 90 MPH and turned the engine 15,000 RPM.
Historically we have a wonderful manufacturer that sells raceable cars on the street – well 911s anyway. I wouldn’t hesitate to take a new 911 CS coupe off the showroom, a little break-in driving to Florida, install the required cage, etc. and run the 24 hours of Daytona successfully (just not quite as fast as a GT3-RSR.) I’ll bet Porsche wouldn’t void the warranty.

If true, it seems that Mitsu is telling their customers that their cars can’t even handle a parking lot autocross.

Best,
Grady

[jluetjen]

Grady - I used to deal with the Mazda Competition folks when I raced in ITB and yes they are very supportive. But I doubt that they would cover track damage under warranty nor accept any liability for anything whatsoever. I'm pretty sure that it's in the fine print. But if they sold you a competition part that failed prematurely, I'm pretty sure that they would do right for you as gentlemen. But that is very different from a warranty which is void as soon as you use your car in a competition event.

[camgrinder]

Have you heard the one about the Z06 Corvette? He hit something at Thunderhill hard enough to deploy the air bags. When "Onstar" couldnt get a reply from the owner they notified the CHP. The CHP met him at the gate with the Vette on a trailer.
I guess he couldnt claim it on his insurance after that.

[emcon5]

http://www.pulpracing.com/honda.htm

[Grady Clay]

Guys,

I just went back and re-read that thread (all 12 pages). This single issue, multiplied by all the other Evo owners wronged, may be the demise of Mitsubishi.

All other manufacturers of high performance cars, including Porsche, should read this thread. It is not about warranty for taking a car to an autocross. No one expects a manufacturer to warranty a race car. It is about how a manufacturer treats its customers. Mitsubishi could halve its sales and be out of business for relying on bean counters, lawyers, and their marketing BS people to cover up bad management decisions.


Porsche listen to its customers and treats them right.


Perhaps “Mitsubishi ZERO” has revived meaning.

Best,
Grady

[David]

I skimmed all twelve pages plus a few links. I then sent an email to Autoweek. I wouldn't have bought a Mitsubishi anyway, but I will go out of my way to spread the word.

[rdane]

If I buy a new Carrera S and take it to a PCA track event would Porsche void the warranty? NO, not unless I stuffed into 1st at 90 MPH and turned the engine 15,000 RPM.
Historically we have a wonderful manufacturer that sells raceable cars on the street – well 911s anyway. I wouldn’t hesitate to take a new 911 CS coupe off the showroom, a little break-in driving to Florida, install the required cage, etc. and run the 24 hours of Daytona successfully (just not quite as fast as a GT3-RSR.) I’ll bet Porsche wouldn’t void the warranty.

Really? My understanding is [b]any track use[b] will void the warrenty on a new Porsche. Worse yet the on board computers will tell the dealership how the car was ran, with track use easily visable. Again I was told the computer..can even detect a set or R rubber on the car.

Someone want to clarify that Porsche dumps the warrenty for any track use?

[dotorg]

rdane: I was told the same by a guy who moved to the Porsche marquee shortly after the Audi of America coming out guns blazing at their owners for modding their cars.

He said a while later it was pretty clear if he so much as changed his exhaust, Porsche wasn't going to warranty the car, and any off-road use at all (autox, DE, racing) was a voided warranty.

Its obvious based on how a manufacturer covers their warranties that any manufacturer would do that. They calculate risk, spread it out among the units sold and use it to cover the warranty costs, or they go through a 3rd party insurance policy. Turning a blind eye to racing use or other modding means those risks are skewed.

When S4 owners were chipping their S4, a very high percentage of owners were ending up needing new turbos, to the tune of $7-$8k in repairs. And people were suprised when Audi cracked down, hard?

No manufacturer would care, especially mainstream manufacturers like Mitsu, if a core of performance enthusiasts get mad and go elsewhere... they're the owners who are going to try to pull things over on them, and end up costing the company money in the long run.

[layzee]

I have definitely read that track use on a 996 C2/C4 voids the warranty.

They can easily read the engine rpms at the time of engine failure and it'll be pretty clear it was on a track.

See this thread.

[89911]

One good thing about most of our cars is the warranties were up at least 10 years ago

[jluetjen]

... or 30!

[David]

What gets me is we're not talking about mods or track use, this was one autocross. This is 60 secnonds of turning fast, you hardly get a chance to use the throttle or brakes.

[TimT]

FWIW, when I picked up my F250 diesel last summer, the service manager mentioned that Ford was aware of the chips, piggy back computers, cold air kits etc that are available for the Power Stroke diesel, and installing them would void my warranty.

AND they could tell if one was used, even if you removed it.