R50/53 Warranty Woes: Whether abuse or autocrossing, most automakers are not covering it.
Warranty Woes: Whether abuse or autocrossing, most automakers are not covering it.
Please Note: Two other threads on the same subject have been merged into this one (the original thread). It may be slightly disjointed as a result. However, all content from the other threads is included in this thread. - DiD
I wonder what MINI's take on this is interesting/disturbing article in AutoWeek:
Warranty Woes: Whether abuse or autocrossing, most automakers are not covering it.
http://www.autoweek.com/cat_content...._code=02612566
Given the latest edict concerning "no more than two factory driving lights or we don't cover cooling related issues" [ http://www.motoringfile.com/2004/06/...on_of_warranty ] this manufacturer/dealer attitude could adversely affect MINI owners.
TB
I wonder what MINI's take on this is interesting/disturbing article in AutoWeek:
Warranty Woes: Whether abuse or autocrossing, most automakers are not covering it.
http://www.autoweek.com/cat_content...._code=02612566
Given the latest edict concerning "no more than two factory driving lights or we don't cover cooling related issues" [ http://www.motoringfile.com/2004/06/...on_of_warranty ] this manufacturer/dealer attitude could adversely affect MINI owners.
TB
Last edited by dave; Jul 2, 2004 at 05:12 PM.
This is a response from a local MINI group:
"As a Motoring Advisor and an autocrosser involved in the ****** Region of the SCCA I wanted to dispel some of the mis-information in this post. In ****** Region we no longer list the make of the competitor's vehicle for autocross event results. We actually had wanted to list EVERYBODY as driving a Lancer EVO just to do our part as a civil protest, but something called maturity weighed in an we decided to not go down that road. Competitors can have their brand of car listed at their request as I've done. Both Mitsubishi and Subaru have been the most active in denying claims based on competitive activity. These cars have been known to suffer gearbox failures or related drivetrain problems. The main reason for this is that the cars are putting down huge horsepower numbers through all wheel drive. At launch, there is no slip in traction so the drivetrain components take up all of the stress. I've seen a few Subarus destroy transmissions. All vehicle manufacturer's warranties exclude competition events from coverage. The difference here is how the manufacturers are going about essentially voiding warranties BEFORE there is a problem. They may be getting themselves into hot water as they'd have to prove that the car was raced. When citing web page results (as believed that they've done in the past) how do they know that it's the same car? VIN numbers aren't reported on the websites, where is their proof? On the other hand, a trained technician can spot abuse to the drivetrain. It really doesn't matter if the car's been raced or not. Abuse is abuse. Even the diagnostic computers can tell the car's secrets. If the motor was over revved, the computer knows, for how long, at what speed, even the date and time. Are the brake rotors purple and cracked? This would be abuse. As someone who uses my car in competition and enjoys it to the fullest extent of the law, and a little more, I'm familiar with the line between wear and tear and abuse. Generally, typical autocrossing and driver's ed track activities don't endanger the car. The usual culprit is driver error or over aggressive driving techniques. To address the idea that area dealers are "looking" to void warranties, this couldn't be further from the truth. With the exception of Jeff Jacobs (who is supported by MINI of Charleston, a dealer that supports racing in a BIG way), all of the regular MINI competitors in ****** Region have bought or serviced their cars at ******. ****** looks to support ALL MINI enthusiasts wether it be through social events, scenic rally events, or motorsports activities. ***"
I blanked out identifying words as I took the liberty of posting this. The original poster to the local group did not keep this info hidden.
"As a Motoring Advisor and an autocrosser involved in the ****** Region of the SCCA I wanted to dispel some of the mis-information in this post. In ****** Region we no longer list the make of the competitor's vehicle for autocross event results. We actually had wanted to list EVERYBODY as driving a Lancer EVO just to do our part as a civil protest, but something called maturity weighed in an we decided to not go down that road. Competitors can have their brand of car listed at their request as I've done. Both Mitsubishi and Subaru have been the most active in denying claims based on competitive activity. These cars have been known to suffer gearbox failures or related drivetrain problems. The main reason for this is that the cars are putting down huge horsepower numbers through all wheel drive. At launch, there is no slip in traction so the drivetrain components take up all of the stress. I've seen a few Subarus destroy transmissions. All vehicle manufacturer's warranties exclude competition events from coverage. The difference here is how the manufacturers are going about essentially voiding warranties BEFORE there is a problem. They may be getting themselves into hot water as they'd have to prove that the car was raced. When citing web page results (as believed that they've done in the past) how do they know that it's the same car? VIN numbers aren't reported on the websites, where is their proof? On the other hand, a trained technician can spot abuse to the drivetrain. It really doesn't matter if the car's been raced or not. Abuse is abuse. Even the diagnostic computers can tell the car's secrets. If the motor was over revved, the computer knows, for how long, at what speed, even the date and time. Are the brake rotors purple and cracked? This would be abuse. As someone who uses my car in competition and enjoys it to the fullest extent of the law, and a little more, I'm familiar with the line between wear and tear and abuse. Generally, typical autocrossing and driver's ed track activities don't endanger the car. The usual culprit is driver error or over aggressive driving techniques. To address the idea that area dealers are "looking" to void warranties, this couldn't be further from the truth. With the exception of Jeff Jacobs (who is supported by MINI of Charleston, a dealer that supports racing in a BIG way), all of the regular MINI competitors in ****** Region have bought or serviced their cars at ******. ****** looks to support ALL MINI enthusiasts wether it be through social events, scenic rally events, or motorsports activities. ***"
I blanked out identifying words as I took the liberty of posting this. The original poster to the local group did not keep this info hidden.
Last edited by tontobird; Jun 30, 2004 at 11:36 AM.
MINIUSA has encouraged participation of MINI owners in autocross events since the beginning of time (They have even given out prizes, etc).
However, when it comes to warranty coverage their stand remains the same.
So this is kind of a Catch 22 situation.....Fine if you want to race the vehicle but when it comes to warranty coverage should something go wrong as a result of the increased stress of racing the car, you are on your own.
All of this is open to free interpretation....
However, when it comes to warranty coverage their stand remains the same.
So this is kind of a Catch 22 situation.....Fine if you want to race the vehicle but when it comes to warranty coverage should something go wrong as a result of the increased stress of racing the car, you are on your own.
All of this is open to free interpretation....
The main issue is wether or not they are taking the time to find out what caused the failure...NOT wether they will repair it under warranty. I mean, if my trany brakes, and it's due to my driving it on the track etc...why should they have to pay for it. At the same time, what if it only broke because there was a problem before I even raced it? At that point they should pay...either way, the tranny is expensive, and I'm not looking forward to changing that.
Careful X-Crossing your MINI
Found this on Autoweek about warranty and entering SCCA events.
Warranty Woes: Whether abuse or autocrossing, most automakers are not covering it
By ANDREW LUU
"When it hits the track, all bets are off," says Bob Carlson, Porsche Cars of North America spokesman. (Photo by AP/Wide World Photos) MICHAEL MILLER DIDN’T know it, but the drivetrain warranty was already void on his son’s new Mitsubishi Evolution before he even took the car in for service to his local Salt Lake City dealership.
Unbeknownst to Miller, Mitsubishi placed a lifetime warranty restriction on the engine, clutch and transmission in Miller’s Evo because the company discovered the car had been entered in a Sports Car Club of America autocross event a month earlier.
Miller said that about two weeks after entering the Evo in the SCCA event he heard bad noises emanating from the engine bay and took the car in for service. “The dealer performed a vehicle service inquiry and I was told there was a restriction placed on my file,” Miller says.
Bottom line: After entering the car in one SCCA event, Miller was left with a $7,000 bill for repairing two failed connecting rods and a blown turbocharger.
“Problems related to racing or modifications are not covered under warranty,” says Mitsubishi spokeswoman Janis Little. “Autocrossing, or timed competition, is classified under the warranty terms as racing. It’s difficult for us to know if you’re out there racing, but if there is evidence of racing damage, we’re going to look into it and you may have warranty restrictions placed on certain parts of the vehicle.”
Most owners recognize that part of the cost of going racing means footing the repair bill when something goes awry. Manufacturer warranties and owner manuals typically specify that harsh use, abuse, non-factory modifications and racing can void all or part of a vehicle’s warranty intended to cover defects in materials or workmanship. Miller’s case, however, raises questions about how the company discovered his autocross involvement.
The buzz in online communities suggests Mitsubishi is cross matching names from its owner database with SCCA autocross results. Those who turn up on both lists are notified that their vehicle warranties are void, the online chatter claims. Miller says Mitsubishi wasn’t clear on how it learned of his autocrossing.
Mitsubishi adamantly denies that it uses automated web search systems to look for Evolutions involved in race events. “We don’t have people out there searching websites for names,” says Little.
No matter how racing involvement comes to the attention of an automaker, companies steadfastly stand by their right to limit warranty coverage—even if the cars they sell are clearly built for speed and marketed with flashy ads and brochures that promote enthusiastic driving. Most automakers say the same thing: Racing, track use, competition and other abuses aren’t covered.
“When it hits the track, all bets are off,” says Bob Carlson, Porsche Cars of North America spokesman.
For instance, even though Subaru pops for a one-year SCCA membership for every interested WRX buyer, and in its marketing materials appears to encourage owners to enter their cars in autocross events, the company says autocrossing is racing and racing can void warranty coverage. The WRX/SCCA application form says the SCCA “looks forward to helping you fully experience the benefits of owning this car.” But the form also includes a disclaimer that Subaru’s warranty excludes “damage or failure resulting from participation in competition or racing events.”
“If the damage looks to be racing related, you’re not going to be covered,” says Subaru spokeswoman Larkin Hill. “We don’t want to punish the person who goes out once in a while and autocrosses—and that shouldn’t cause any problems with the car anyway. However, autocross is considered competition and the warranty does not cover abusive driving or competition. If you’re out there racing every weekend, you can’t expect us to fund it.”
You’ll hear the same story at DaimlerChrysler Street and Racing Technology, where they make the Dodge SRT-4, the Viper-powered Ram SRT-10 and the supercharged Chrysler Crossfire SRT-6. “Technically, racing damage is not covered under warranty,” says SRT spokesman Dan Bodene. “If a guy autocrosses, submits a problem for warranty and the dealer suspects it is racing related, he’s going to huddle with our technicians to find out. If it is, our dealers are not obligated to cover it under warranty.”
Chevrolet lures young buyers with the performance promise of its 2005 supercharged Cobalt SS, but the owner’s manual clearly states the warranty does not cover alterations and misuse.
“Under the misuse heading, such things like running over curbs, improper loading and competition or racing are spelled out specifically,” says Chevy spokesman Mike Stoller. “If there’s a car coming into the dealer that has been racing and that results in damage, and it’s something that is probable or obvious, that would not be something we would be compelled to cover.”
Internal investigations aren’t limited to auto-crossing, but cover any activity deemed outside normal use, such as track days and plain old aggressive driving.
“If a guy’s constantly lighting up the tires on the street, that’s not normal wear and tear,” says Chrysler’s Bodene.
Adds Mitsubishi’s Little: “You’re not going to get black-flagged just for entering an auto-cross, but if something happens we want people to be reasonable and responsible for their own actions. If you go once in a while, just like if you drive hard on the street, who’s going to really know? But if you’re coming in two or three times to replace a blown clutch, we know you’re probably testing your car’s 0-to-60 time.”
But what about all those manufacturer- and dealer-sponsored “racing” events—track days, club meets and performance driving programs that seem to encourage owners to drive competitively?
The big difference, companies note, is that manufacturer-sponsored driving programs such as Mazda’s Rev It Up or the Porsche Driving Experience provide cars and instruction, and no owner vehicles are permitted.
One rare exception is track day events organized, sponsored and sanctioned by the national Ford SVT Owners’ Association and local Ford/SVT dealers. Owners bring their cars, and the association and participating dealers agree to cover any mechanical failures brought on by normal track use.
“Owners can participate in the instructional days without automatically voiding their warranties,” says Ford Performance Vehicles spokesman Alan Hall. “Obviously if they abuse it [the car] on the track, or there’s a part that breaks due to aggressive driving, that will not be covered under warranty. But your warranty will not be voided across the board by just participating in that event. We don’t automatically void a warranty unless above-normal abuse is shown on a vehicle.”
By ANDREW LUU
"When it hits the track, all bets are off," says Bob Carlson, Porsche Cars of North America spokesman. (Photo by AP/Wide World Photos) MICHAEL MILLER DIDN’T know it, but the drivetrain warranty was already void on his son’s new Mitsubishi Evolution before he even took the car in for service to his local Salt Lake City dealership.
Unbeknownst to Miller, Mitsubishi placed a lifetime warranty restriction on the engine, clutch and transmission in Miller’s Evo because the company discovered the car had been entered in a Sports Car Club of America autocross event a month earlier.
Miller said that about two weeks after entering the Evo in the SCCA event he heard bad noises emanating from the engine bay and took the car in for service. “The dealer performed a vehicle service inquiry and I was told there was a restriction placed on my file,” Miller says.
Bottom line: After entering the car in one SCCA event, Miller was left with a $7,000 bill for repairing two failed connecting rods and a blown turbocharger.
“Problems related to racing or modifications are not covered under warranty,” says Mitsubishi spokeswoman Janis Little. “Autocrossing, or timed competition, is classified under the warranty terms as racing. It’s difficult for us to know if you’re out there racing, but if there is evidence of racing damage, we’re going to look into it and you may have warranty restrictions placed on certain parts of the vehicle.”
Most owners recognize that part of the cost of going racing means footing the repair bill when something goes awry. Manufacturer warranties and owner manuals typically specify that harsh use, abuse, non-factory modifications and racing can void all or part of a vehicle’s warranty intended to cover defects in materials or workmanship. Miller’s case, however, raises questions about how the company discovered his autocross involvement.
The buzz in online communities suggests Mitsubishi is cross matching names from its owner database with SCCA autocross results. Those who turn up on both lists are notified that their vehicle warranties are void, the online chatter claims. Miller says Mitsubishi wasn’t clear on how it learned of his autocrossing.
Mitsubishi adamantly denies that it uses automated web search systems to look for Evolutions involved in race events. “We don’t have people out there searching websites for names,” says Little.
No matter how racing involvement comes to the attention of an automaker, companies steadfastly stand by their right to limit warranty coverage—even if the cars they sell are clearly built for speed and marketed with flashy ads and brochures that promote enthusiastic driving. Most automakers say the same thing: Racing, track use, competition and other abuses aren’t covered.
“When it hits the track, all bets are off,” says Bob Carlson, Porsche Cars of North America spokesman.
For instance, even though Subaru pops for a one-year SCCA membership for every interested WRX buyer, and in its marketing materials appears to encourage owners to enter their cars in autocross events, the company says autocrossing is racing and racing can void warranty coverage. The WRX/SCCA application form says the SCCA “looks forward to helping you fully experience the benefits of owning this car.” But the form also includes a disclaimer that Subaru’s warranty excludes “damage or failure resulting from participation in competition or racing events.”
“If the damage looks to be racing related, you’re not going to be covered,” says Subaru spokeswoman Larkin Hill. “We don’t want to punish the person who goes out once in a while and autocrosses—and that shouldn’t cause any problems with the car anyway. However, autocross is considered competition and the warranty does not cover abusive driving or competition. If you’re out there racing every weekend, you can’t expect us to fund it.”
You’ll hear the same story at DaimlerChrysler Street and Racing Technology, where they make the Dodge SRT-4, the Viper-powered Ram SRT-10 and the supercharged Chrysler Crossfire SRT-6. “Technically, racing damage is not covered under warranty,” says SRT spokesman Dan Bodene. “If a guy autocrosses, submits a problem for warranty and the dealer suspects it is racing related, he’s going to huddle with our technicians to find out. If it is, our dealers are not obligated to cover it under warranty.”
Chevrolet lures young buyers with the performance promise of its 2005 supercharged Cobalt SS, but the owner’s manual clearly states the warranty does not cover alterations and misuse.
“Under the misuse heading, such things like running over curbs, improper loading and competition or racing are spelled out specifically,” says Chevy spokesman Mike Stoller. “If there’s a car coming into the dealer that has been racing and that results in damage, and it’s something that is probable or obvious, that would not be something we would be compelled to cover.”
Internal investigations aren’t limited to auto-crossing, but cover any activity deemed outside normal use, such as track days and plain old aggressive driving.
“If a guy’s constantly lighting up the tires on the street, that’s not normal wear and tear,” says Chrysler’s Bodene.
Adds Mitsubishi’s Little: “You’re not going to get black-flagged just for entering an auto-cross, but if something happens we want people to be reasonable and responsible for their own actions. If you go once in a while, just like if you drive hard on the street, who’s going to really know? But if you’re coming in two or three times to replace a blown clutch, we know you’re probably testing your car’s 0-to-60 time.”
But what about all those manufacturer- and dealer-sponsored “racing” events—track days, club meets and performance driving programs that seem to encourage owners to drive competitively?
The big difference, companies note, is that manufacturer-sponsored driving programs such as Mazda’s Rev It Up or the Porsche Driving Experience provide cars and instruction, and no owner vehicles are permitted.
One rare exception is track day events organized, sponsored and sanctioned by the national Ford SVT Owners’ Association and local Ford/SVT dealers. Owners bring their cars, and the association and participating dealers agree to cover any mechanical failures brought on by normal track use.
“Owners can participate in the instructional days without automatically voiding their warranties,” says Ford Performance Vehicles spokesman Alan Hall. “Obviously if they abuse it [the car] on the track, or there’s a part that breaks due to aggressive driving, that will not be covered under warranty. But your warranty will not be voided across the board by just participating in that event. We don’t automatically void a warranty unless above-normal abuse is shown on a vehicle.”
Last edited by bruintoo; Jun 30, 2004 at 01:21 PM.
I like this statement and attitude showed in this article by the guy from FORD.
“Obviously if they abuse it [the car] on the track, or there’s a part that breaks due to aggressive driving, that will not be covered under warranty. But your warranty will not be voided across the board by just participating in that event. We don’t automatically void a warranty unless above-normal abuse is shown on a vehicle.”
This is what I am still hoping will become MINI's attitude and the attitude they direct there dealers to take.
“Obviously if they abuse it [the car] on the track, or there’s a part that breaks due to aggressive driving, that will not be covered under warranty. But your warranty will not be voided across the board by just participating in that event. We don’t automatically void a warranty unless above-normal abuse is shown on a vehicle.”
This is what I am still hoping will become MINI's attitude and the attitude they direct there dealers to take.
That is a standard term and condition of any new car warranty. It's not like they did not tell you. Fact is, when you autocross it or race it, you abuse it.
Trending Topics
yea, agreed with pocketrocketowner; this is a "like, (flips long blonde hair), Duh!" sort of situation.
Below: Rrrriiiiiigggghhhttt
Ford Performance Vehicles spokesman Alan Hall: “...We don’t automatically void a warranty unless above-normal abuse is shown on a vehicle.”
^^^Woah, a rational statement, hit the decks!
Below: Rrrriiiiiigggghhhttt
Mitsubishi adamantly denies that it uses automated web search systems to look for Evolutions involved in race events. “We don’t have people out there searching websites for names,”
^^^Woah, a rational statement, hit the decks!
The thing is--the manufacturers ARE reviewing event results on-line looking for owners who are autocrossing. It's a topic on the local SCCA email list recently. A couple of people (some first-hand, some are reporting second-hand experience) have been turned away for warranty work without the dealer even looking at the car.
I haven't heard of any problems with mini, fwiw.
I haven't heard of any problems with mini, fwiw.
Originally Posted by friedduck
I haven't heard of any problems with mini, fwiw.
Also, our local dealer had a special DE form for MINI owners that stated entering in this event could void their warranty.
This is especially funny as the MINI accessories catalogue has an entire page devoted to explaining how one joins the SCCA and takes part in auto-crossing.
Sounds to me like any lawyer worth a spit would have no trouble at all in court with that sort of recommendation in their publications - regardless of any disclaimers, which usually aren't worth the paper they are printed on.
Sounds to me like any lawyer worth a spit would have no trouble at all in court with that sort of recommendation in their publications - regardless of any disclaimers, which usually aren't worth the paper they are printed on.
Last edited by gravedgr; Jun 30, 2004 at 10:28 PM.
I really have no worries about this. MINI even PAYS people for winning SCCA SOLO II events.
I also know that Mitsubishi is in very bad shape financially and it makes sense that they would make any cost-cutting measures they can to stay afloat.. . .
I also know that Mitsubishi is in very bad shape financially and it makes sense that they would make any cost-cutting measures they can to stay afloat.. . .
Originally Posted by gravedgr
This is especially funny as the MINI accessories catalogue has an entire page devoted to explaining how one joins the SCCA and takes part in auto-crossing.
Sounds to me like an lawyer worth a spit would have no trouble at all in court with that sort of recommendation in their publications - regardless of any disclaimers, which usually aren't worth the paper they are printed on.
Sounds to me like an lawyer worth a spit would have no trouble at all in court with that sort of recommendation in their publications - regardless of any disclaimers, which usually aren't worth the paper they are printed on.
This may be true in some cases, but I think it’s the individual dealers and not the parent company’s that are responsible for not honoring service agreements because you may take your car out for a bit of legal fun on the weekend.
My local SCCA district auto-x races are sponsored buy a local Subaru/Mitz dealer, in fact the monthly event and news letter is named in the dealers honor. The owner comes to the events every month and will plug his cars at the drivers meetings in the morning. He even gives a healthy discount to anyone who is a member of the local SCCA district on any of the autos on his lot. Not one person who has bought an auto through his dealership has ever been refused service because of an SCCA racing incident.
My local SCCA district auto-x races are sponsored buy a local Subaru/Mitz dealer, in fact the monthly event and news letter is named in the dealers honor. The owner comes to the events every month and will plug his cars at the drivers meetings in the morning. He even gives a healthy discount to anyone who is a member of the local SCCA district on any of the autos on his lot. Not one person who has bought an auto through his dealership has ever been refused service because of an SCCA racing incident.
This may be true in some cases, but I think it’s the individual dealers and not the parent company’s that are responsible for not honoring service agreements because you may take your car out for a bit of legal fun on the weekend.
My local SCCA district auto-x races are sponsored buy a local Subaru/Mitz dealer, in fact the monthly event and news letter is named in the dealers honor. The owner comes to the events every month and will plug his cars at the drivers meetings in the morning. He even gives a healthy discount to anyone who is a member of the local SCCA district on any of the autos on his lot. Not one person who has bought an auto through his dealership has ever been refused service because of an SCCA racing incident.
My local SCCA district auto-x races are sponsored buy a local Subaru/Mitz dealer, in fact the monthly event and news letter is named in the dealers honor. The owner comes to the events every month and will plug his cars at the drivers meetings in the morning. He even gives a healthy discount to anyone who is a member of the local SCCA district on any of the autos on his lot. Not one person who has bought an auto through his dealership has ever been refused service because of an SCCA racing incident.
SCCA Auto-X Results on the Internet Can Screw You
An article in Autoweek http://www.autoweek.com/cat_content...._code=02612566
indicates how Mitsubishi denies warranty claims because of autocrossing a car in an SCCA event. I searched SCCA and my name on Google and the 4 Washington DC area auto-crosses I entered in my mini cooper are the first search results.
While it may have little effect, I think the SCCA should post on its "Results" and "Lineup Pages" that the information contained on this site is proprietary and is to be used only by the participants, and in no case is an automobile manufacture or dealer or the agents thereof permitted to view or use the information on the site.
If there was a "click" type license where the page could only be accessed upon agreeing to such terms, it would likely be effective.
Brian G, do you think you could bring this to the attention of the SCCA?
What is this world coming to.
indicates how Mitsubishi denies warranty claims because of autocrossing a car in an SCCA event. I searched SCCA and my name on Google and the 4 Washington DC area auto-crosses I entered in my mini cooper are the first search results.
While it may have little effect, I think the SCCA should post on its "Results" and "Lineup Pages" that the information contained on this site is proprietary and is to be used only by the participants, and in no case is an automobile manufacture or dealer or the agents thereof permitted to view or use the information on the site.
If there was a "click" type license where the page could only be accessed upon agreeing to such terms, it would likely be effective.
Brian G, do you think you could bring this to the attention of the SCCA?
What is this world coming to.
Although I do auto-x, I was questioned about whether or not I take my MINI out on the track when I brought my MINI in for warranty brake work after this year's Dragon event.
The service advisor looked at my heavily worn and nearly bald tires and said "You can't tell me that you haven't taken your car out on the track with those tires"
I was able to honestly reply "Nope, I don't take it to the track on those tires" since I have dedicated race tires. Those tires were only used for my every day normal dragonslaying!
The service advisor looked at my heavily worn and nearly bald tires and said "You can't tell me that you haven't taken your car out on the track with those tires"
I was able to honestly reply "Nope, I don't take it to the track on those tires" since I have dedicated race tires. Those tires were only used for my every day normal dragonslaying!
Define abuse. What is the difference between riding the redline at the autocross and riding the redline on the highway? To deny a waranty claim the manufacturer will have to prove, by VIN, that a car was autocrossed or tracked. My $.02.
It would seem to me that if the marketing message to customers is in support of autocross, as in several of the Mini marketing messages, then this would be defined as normal wear and tear. By putting the message in the marketing material they have defined this as normal and expected use.
I am not a Lawyer but I play one on TV.
I am not a Lawyer but I play one on TV.
Most definitely of concern.....
Another thread on this: https://www.northamericanmotoring.co...ad.php?t=27625
Another thread on this: https://www.northamericanmotoring.co...ad.php?t=27625
well as a few of you may know, the whole we dont look at internet threads is a load of crap, i was fired from my job at bmw because i badmouthed the service their a month before i was hired, i spoke of how they did not service my ...car corectley and when i took it back because of squeeling breaks they turned me away saying they where done looking at it, so when my boss pulled me in the office he had files upon files of people on nam here and he had my forum post of the insadent with my breaks, i was fired that morning for badmouthing the company, a month before i was hired, when they found out it was probably illeagal they hired me back that afternoon. he had files on ryephile and many others that they where "tracking" so watch out what you all say cause you are being watched!!!!!
sorry but i get the feeling im being traked ...........so i got to go!
sorry but i get the feeling im being traked ...........so i got to go!
Last edited by 4GAZM; Jul 1, 2004 at 12:40 PM.
SCCA Solo II is not RACING
SCCA does not call Solo II a RACING event. Solo II is a type of autocross, a timed agility contest, used with DOT legal tires in stock and street touring classes, NOT racing tires (usually called slicks and run in prepared and modified classes only). Speeds at Solo II events for the fastest stock cars should not exceed highway-legal speeds.
That said, I would NEVER ask for warranty coverage on a failed part if I thought it was an autocross-related failure. And in hundreds of autocross events I have attended, I have never felt I was abusing the car more than I would during street driving, and I don't recall ever having a warranty-covered part fail during an autocross. I have also done 40 or SCCA road races so I know the difference.
Dave
That said, I would NEVER ask for warranty coverage on a failed part if I thought it was an autocross-related failure. And in hundreds of autocross events I have attended, I have never felt I was abusing the car more than I would during street driving, and I don't recall ever having a warranty-covered part fail during an autocross. I have also done 40 or SCCA road races so I know the difference.
Dave


