STI vs the warrenty

[StephenH]

Buying a brand car and expecting the warrenty to work can be fun.
Abusing the car then expecting the warrenty to kick in is often
unrealistic.
I have seen Subaru repair cars that are obviously abused as a good
will nature. sometimes we have to say "enough is enough"
A 2006 STI is in the shop again. The last time it was in we put a new
computer in it. Overall, Subaru's don't have computer issues so it's
the tech guess that someone was trying to adjust the computer and
fried it. the car has been lowered, has a bypass exhaust system on it
custom front end with no steel bumper under it. This time it's
"smoking" under the hood. The turbo has oil on the outside of it.
Now at school this week, another tech reported that Subaru is going to
stop replacing all the turbo's that fail- stats show 3/4 are not a
normal failure- abuse.
As I looked at the car I noticed the oil feed banjo bolt was to tight,
a oil support line bolt missing, he turbo has been opened up-leaking
oil and coolant. several cat mount bolts missing. Obviously, the cat
was reinstalled (poorly) to get it into the shop for the warranty
claim.
The district tech rep was in today and i think they are denying the
claim. It amazes us that people can do so many mods (and damage) to a
car and expect the dealership to fix it.
Also on this car (altho I can't verify the fact that this owner had
the car at this time) it has has a warranty clutch and short block
done.
Anyway, that's my rant today.
Steve

 

[suburboturbo]

Buying a brand car and expecting the warrenty to work can be fun.
Abusing the car then expecting the warrenty to kick in is often
unrealistic.
I have seen Subaru repair cars that are obviously abused as a good
will nature. sometimes we have to say "enough is enough"
A 2006 STI is in the shop again. The last time it was in we put a new
computer in it. Overall, Subaru's don't have computer issues so it's
the tech guess that someone was trying to adjust the computer and
fried it. the car has been lowered, has a bypass exhaust system on it
custom front end with no steel bumper under it. This time it's
"smoking" under the hood. The turbo has oil on the outside of it.
Now at school this week, another tech reported that Subaru is going to
stop replacing all the turbo's that fail- stats show 3/4 are not a
normal failure- abuse.
As I looked at the car I noticed the oil feed banjo bolt was to tight,
a oil support line bolt missing, he turbo has been opened up-leaking
oil and coolant. several cat mount bolts missing. Obviously, the cat
was reinstalled (poorly) to get it into the shop for the warranty
claim.
The district tech rep was in today and i think they are denying the
claim. It amazes us that people can do so many mods (and damage) to a
car and expect the dealership to fix it.
Also on this car (altho I can't verify the fact that this owner had
the car at this time) it has has a warranty clutch and short block
done.
Anyway, that's my rant today.
Steve

Granted, many high performance cars are abused, and there are many
modifications that should void a warranty. At the same time, there
are some cars out there that just weren't put together right. My 2004
WRX blew a clutch at 11,000, threw a rod at 30,000 and another at
41,000. For what it's worth I'm a 53 year old driver who uses the car
almost exclusively for a daily 15 mile commute to work and back.
While I take advantage of the car's capabilities and enjoy spirited
driving, I keep the revs within a safe range and change my oil and
filters religiously. I've driven about 300,000 miles on manual
transmission cars (including two prior Subies) without ever having to
replace a clutch.

I give Subaru credit for covering the clutch and two short block
replacements under warranty and have written corporate headquarters to
compliment the dealership and service rep who took care of me. I love
the car; it just came with a few optional bugs.

 

[Big Jim]

So they want to deny warranties on turbos? I doubt that's legal in
most states. If there is evidence of abuse or tampering, fine.
Outbacks and foresters have turbos too and if subaru denies claminms
they will be bankrupt too

 

[Hachiroku $B%O%A%m%/(B]

So they want to deny warranties on turbos? I doubt that's legal in
most states. If there is evidence of abuse or tampering, fine.
Outbacks and foresters have turbos too and if subaru denies claminms
they will be bankrupt too

Most modifications void most warranties on most makes.

I'd say this guy tried to push his luck too far, said, OH well, Subaru
will pay for my fu@k up, and brought it back.

I'm surprised they did as much as they did. A guy fried a Celica, and when
they brought the car in on the flatbed he was ranting and raving. The tech
went into the OBD-II and found the engine had hit a 10,000 rpm spot. The
service manager guessed the guy had been racing, blew a shift and
overreved the engine. He denied it and wanted a Factory Rep. We got one
in, showed him the data from the ECU and the rep denied the claim as
"blatant abuse".

The guy with the STi should consider himself damn lucky they covered what
they did.

 

[Hachiroku $B%O%A%m%/(B]

Without more than the obd claiming a 10000 rpm he could easily go to
arbitration or court and win.. Most vehicles are rev limited and
cannot get near that. Was there additional tachs installed?
Alteration to ECU? otherwise there is no concrete evidence of abuse.

Toyota used to be real easy on making sure customers were happy. Back in
the 70's and through the 80's they were usually more than happy to fix
something, even if it was beyond the warranty.

However, since the mid 90's their mood seems to have shifted, possibly
because of the volume of cars they now sell in the US, and getting
something YOU may have done fixed is really tough.

They caved on the 'engine sludge' issue, however, even though one customer
said they changed the oil at 12,000 miles and another at 15,000.

 

[Big Jim]

Without more than the obd claiming a 10000 rpm he could easily go to
arbitration or court and win.. Most vehicles are rev limited and
cannot get near that. Was there additional tachs installed?
Alteration to ECU? otherwise there is no concrete evidence of abuse.

 

[Hachiroku $B%O%A%m%/(B]

Many makers have upped the oilchange to 7500 or more miles. This will
lead to sludge.

Toyota actually dropped theirs to 6,000, I think. They always recommended
7,500 as far back as I can remember (and that goes back to my first
Corolla, a brand new '74 1200, when I was in High School! That's how
inexpensive they were!)

I have never gone more than 4,500.

 

[Big Jim]

Many makers have upped the oilchange to 7500 or more miles. This will
lead to sludge.

 

[nobody >]

Many makers have upped the oilchange to 7500 or more miles. This will
lead to sludge.

Depends on your car usage and the quality of oil used.

I've been doing 7K+ changes for years on my own vehicle, but it gets a
filter EVERY time. I also use high-quality oil. My commute is long
enough to get the engine hot enough to "burn off" any water vapors in
the engine.

Water vapor is the leading cause of sludge.

My wife's car doesn't get the "burn off", most of her trips are only
about 2-6 miles, so her car gets the 3K changes.

Ive seen the guts of a 2.9L Ford V6 (mine) after a valve keeper broke
and dropped a valve.(Same 7K+ changes on that one also). There was just
a very thin film, couldn't really call it "sludge" after 140K miles.

Much of the improvement comes from the huge improvement in oils in the
last few years.

BTW, I do know sludge, I rebuilt a few engines back in the '60s and
remember too well the scraping off of a half-inch (at least) of crud
from the pan and valve covers.

 

[news.us.easynews.com]

That's easily done in _any_ manual trans car: hit 2nd instead of 4th or
3rd instead of 5th...rev limiter will not help stupidity or misfortune.
I really doubt (hope sanity would prevail) he'd win that.

FWIW, one reason I drive a WRX and not a M3 or S4, other than the fact
that it puts a smile on my face every time I drive it, is that Subaru
& their dealers understand what constitutes abuse and are realistic of
owner mods vs. abuse. IMO, they follow the SEMA line of thought (and
the law in most areas) that it is their responsibilty to prove that a
mod caused the failure before denying warrantee. On the other hand, in
my experiences, BMW & Audi will OK a mod if they install it but will
deny warrantee on anything on the car, even totally unrelated items, if
you install the exact same mod yourself.

Brent.

 

[weelliott]

Without more than the obd claiming a 10000 rpm he could easily go to
arbitration or court and win..  Most vehicles are rev limited and
cannot get near that.  Was there additional tachs installed?
Alteration to ECU?  otherwise there is no concrete evidence of abuse.

I really don't think that more is necessary. I think that you are
assuming that a rev limiter will always prevent an engine from being
over-revved. However, if one is traveling too fast for a gear, but
downshifts into it anyways, the engine will over-rev, and the ECU
apparently can store that information. Miatae are known for being
bulletproof since they can safely rev to 8K, but the rev-limiter kicks
in at 7200. However, spec miata guys blow the engines all the time by
trying to downshift into third coming off a straight, and not yet
being quite slow enough to do so.

I don't see why you'd need to produce more information than what the
ECU says. What else do you suppose should prove that eth engine hit
10K? A sworn testimony from a passenger? I think that this IS concrete
evidence, and that your reasoning would not hold up in arbitration or
court.

 

[Evan24]

Without more than the obd claiming a 10000 rpm he could easily go to
arbitration or court and win.. Most vehicles are rev limited and cannot
get near that.

All engines are rev limited.
But no engine is rev limited when downshifting - how could you ever limit
*that*?
The guy entered 2nd gear while trying a 5->4 shift, and was unable to push
the clutch.
There's no remedy for bad drivers.

 

[Big Jim]

We all know about computer glitches dont we? Shouldn't the engine cut
out above a certain point? I had a check engine light come on on my 04
Outback once. Dealer checked the code but they code find nothing
wrong. So these computers are certainly imperfect. If Subaru wants
to prevent overreving then the engine should cut out at a certain
rpm.

 

[1 Lucky Texan]

We all know about computer glitches dont we?  Shouldn't the engine cut
out above a certain point? I had a check engine light come on on my 04
Outback once.  Dealer checked the code but they code find nothing
wrong.   So these computers are certainly imperfect.  If Subaru wants
to prevent overreving then the engine should cut out at a certain
rpm.

Jim, of course you can't put your foot on the accelerator and rev
above - what? - 8K.

But, if I were on the highway doing 60mph in my WRX and pushed in the
clutch, shifted to 2nd gear and removed my foot from the clutch pedal
before the car slowed, it could rev to almost 12K!

At some point, a manufacturer has to say - sorry, there's just too
much evidence of abuse/neglect. They may not always be right. There
are kids out there who think they can rev their STI to 6K and sidestep
the clutch to 'launch' or get a 4 wheel burnout. Then, when they
shatter the tranny, daddy has it towed in to the dealership(after
removing the accessport, atmo blow-off valve and all the stickers)
and whines "we don't know what happened, Timmy was doing 20 thru his
school zone and it just quit on him."

Carl

 

[1 Lucky Texan]

We all know about computer glitches dont we?  Shouldn't the engine cut
out above a certain point? I had a check engine light come on on my 04
Outback once.  Dealer checked the code but they code find nothing
wrong.   So these computers are certainly imperfect.  If Subaru wants
to prevent overreving then the engine should cut out at a certain
rpm.

Jim, of course you can't put your foot on the accelerator and rev
above - what? - 8K.

But, if I were on the highway doing 100mph in my WRX and pushed in the
clutch, shifted to 2nd gear and removed my foot from the clutch pedal
before the car slowed, it would rev to almost 10K!

At some point, a manufacturer has to say - sorry, there's just too
much evidence of abuse/neglect. They may not always be right. There
are kids out there who think they can rev their STI to 6K and sidestep
the clutch to 'launch' or get a 4 wheel burnout. Then, when they
shatter the tranny, daddy has it towed in to the dealership(after
removing the accessport, atmo blow-off valve and all the stickers)
and whines "we don't know what happened, Timmy was doing 20 thru his
school zone and it just quit on him."

Carl

 

[Big Jim]

Without other evidence subaru just has to eat the repair. How many
abuse cases are there that arent obvious? Not too many. If someone
were to remove any addons what proof is there that abuse took place.
The head gasket problem affected many cars that were driven all types
of people. It was a design/manufacturing defect. Same with STi's .
They get lemons too just like every other make/ model.

 

[StephenH]

So they want to deny warranties on turbos?  I doubt that's legal in
most states.  If there is evidence of abuse or tampering, fine.
Outbacks and foresters have turbos too and if subaru denies claminms
they will be bankrupt too

Not at all, but they will be looking harder at the possibility of
abuse before they repair it

 

[StephenH]

The STI left today on the back of a tow truck.

It is amazing how many people clame a faulty car when the abuse is
obvious.
A GI was driving his WRX on the tank range, hit a big puddle and
stalled it- then they tried to push it with another car. The hydro
lock destroyed the engine.
A young kid went to court over a failed Subaru with his dad, Subaru
lawyers were able to show youtube clips of the car at the drag strip,
The dad thumped the kid on the head when he saw the video.
Another person trashed his car then bragged on a forum how Subaru was
going to fix it, until someone else on the forum forwarded the links
to all three of the kids city Subaru dealers, the service manager was
pleased to see it.
I have seen countless other ends where the abuse was obvious, and
Subaru still repaired the car. I have a clutch coming in soon, good
customer- middle aged and generally not a racer. As he bought the car
used from us, so the wear could have started with the prior owner.
Also seen 2 clutches replaced on a wrx, the first at 7000. it was
shredded. After the second one- he was told no more.

Anyway, I just like people to see both sides of a issue.
Steve

 

[JD]

Without more than the obd claiming a 10000 rpm he could easily go to
arbitration or court and win.. Most vehicles are rev limited and
cannot get near that. Was there additional tachs installed?
Alteration to ECU? otherwise there is no concrete evidence of abuse.

I doubt it. In some juristictions, the OBDII data has been used to convict
people of reckless and dangerous driving after an accident; the ECU stores
the last few frames of data in flash memory, including speed. So, if they
are convicting people of such offences because of OBDII, I would guess a
court would accept it as to why a warranty claim was voided.

 

[Stewart DIBBS]

Buying a brand car and expecting the warrenty to work can be fun.

Hey Steve,

my '05 Impreza RS wagon had a Subaru "remanufactured" clutch fitted by the
dealer a couple of months before I got it. The usual Subaru 1 year warranty
applies. Now, this clutch exhibits clutch judder when it warms up, or even
if the car has been sitting in the midday sun for a few hours. Never does it
when the engine in cold. Didn't do it (of course) when I took the car in for
an evaluation.

The local dealer and another one near my office both tell me that engine
mounts almost never fail. The 2nd dealer tells me that they have had bad
experiences with resurfaced flywheels.

What's your experience of replacing clutches? Are the Subaru reman clutches
OK? Is there a problem with resurfacing a flywheel?

regards
Stewart DIBBS