Blew engine today under extremely normal circumstances. not happy.EDITED
Stewie,
What I'm saying is that the warranty on the engine goes out the window when you modify the engine to produce more power, which if you take the time to scroll back 11 pages to the original post, you will see that this is the case. Or you can close your eyes and hope that Mitsu pays for your mistakes.
PS-Houses don't have warranties. 
What I'm saying is that the warranty on the engine goes out the window when you modify the engine to produce more power, which if you take the time to scroll back 11 pages to the original post, you will see that this is the case. Or you can close your eyes and hope that Mitsu pays for your mistakes.
Originally Posted by Stew
If that house had a warantee claiming the walls were prepared properly (i.e. engine built properly), it would obviously be the house builder's fault, so YES you would blame them. How are you going to tell how well the frame was constructed when sheet rock is covering it, until it breaks?
Sounds like your comparison is a bit off though. If you were to buy a house and you put a garage on as an addition and the main roof falls off 2 weeks later, was it the addition of the garage that caused the main structural failure, even though the garage added to the structural integrity? No. Would you suck it up and pay for the house to be rebuilt without considering the architecture to be at fault initially? Definitely not.
See how easy it is to make comparisons that work in your favor?
Sounds like your comparison is a bit off though. If you were to buy a house and you put a garage on as an addition and the main roof falls off 2 weeks later, was it the addition of the garage that caused the main structural failure, even though the garage added to the structural integrity? No. Would you suck it up and pay for the house to be rebuilt without considering the architecture to be at fault initially? Definitely not.
See how easy it is to make comparisons that work in your favor?
Account Disabled
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by UT_Evo
They'll tell you what they told us when the engine blew at 3076 miles... "Warranty Restricted" but its worth a shot.
anytime your motor spins a bearing you are going to get particles like that everywhere in your motor. that really isnt indicative of anything (like tolerances out of wack or whatever) except that you spun a rod bearing.
Originally Posted by 4G63>OOOO
Yes, there very well may be dealers voiding warranties when they "shouldn't" be, but that "should" part is the killer. Take a look at the Magnussen-Moss Act, it states:
"This federal law regulates warranties for the protection of consumers. The essence of the law concerning aftermarket auto parts is that a vehicle manufacturer may not condition a written or implied warranty on the consumers using parts or services which are identified by brand, trade, or corporate name (such as the vehicle maker's brand) unless the parts or service are provided free of charge. The law means that the use of an aftermarket part alone is not cause for denying the warranty. However, the law's protection does not extend to aftermarket parts in situations where such parts actually caused the damage being claimed under the warranty. Further, consumers are advised to be aware of any specific terms or conditions stated in the warranty which may result in its being voided. The law states in relevant part:
No warrantor of a consumer product may condition his written or implied warranty of such product on the consumers using, in connection with such product, any article or service (other than article or service provided without charge under the terms of the warranty) which is identified by brand, trade or corporate name... (15 U.S.C. 2302(C))."
Basically, this means that you are allowed to use non-OEM parts to fix your car, but you can NOT use a part that causes the damage and go back to demand that your warranty is honored. The only shady part of this whole thing is that the OEM is usually the one that determines this.
Also see: SEMA page on Magnusson Moss
The problem with the "weak parts" defense is that no one will know that the parts would have failed under stock conditions unless SURPRISE! , you leave it stock!
"This federal law regulates warranties for the protection of consumers. The essence of the law concerning aftermarket auto parts is that a vehicle manufacturer may not condition a written or implied warranty on the consumers using parts or services which are identified by brand, trade, or corporate name (such as the vehicle maker's brand) unless the parts or service are provided free of charge. The law means that the use of an aftermarket part alone is not cause for denying the warranty. However, the law's protection does not extend to aftermarket parts in situations where such parts actually caused the damage being claimed under the warranty. Further, consumers are advised to be aware of any specific terms or conditions stated in the warranty which may result in its being voided. The law states in relevant part:
No warrantor of a consumer product may condition his written or implied warranty of such product on the consumers using, in connection with such product, any article or service (other than article or service provided without charge under the terms of the warranty) which is identified by brand, trade or corporate name... (15 U.S.C. 2302(C))."
Basically, this means that you are allowed to use non-OEM parts to fix your car, but you can NOT use a part that causes the damage and go back to demand that your warranty is honored. The only shady part of this whole thing is that the OEM is usually the one that determines this.
Also see: SEMA page on Magnusson Moss
The problem with the "weak parts" defense is that no one will know that the parts would have failed under stock conditions unless SURPRISE! , you leave it stock!
Originally Posted by Andrew LB
Yeah. I also find it odd how in the brochure you get at the dealer if you're looking at buying the car it talks about modifying the car some 4-5 times in it. And on the last page, it even promotes a car club which is all about modifying these cars. Heck... on the first page it says larget than any words on it "To Modify". LoL. Punks.
4G63<OOOO had me feeling like I was saying things that didn't make sense for a minute.
just kidding
Originally Posted by Hotshot940
Thanks cheif, I'm familiar with the Magnusson Moss act, I told Bruno about it and he used it to his advantage to prevent himself from being SCAMMED by his DEALERSHIP. The thing about this is that you fail to understand what is going on. When Mitsu advertises this car as a performance car, and they advertise it as a "mod-ready" or "moddable" car, they are saying that you "can" and realistically "should" modify this car. .
frowns upon modifications to the engine of their cars... I agree with the ppl who say that any modification for more power has it's trade-offs. Reliability and driveability are always compromised by power enhancing modifications. It's just illogical and irrational to think otherwise....
What a complete waste of time to reread all the same arguments about warranty issues. I wish newbs would keep to the topic at hand.
As far as those metal shavings - if they were in the old oil filter from two days before, then I think you have some objective proof that there was a problem prior to the rod going. This was an on-going issue and from what I've read here tonight, I think your initial assessment was correct = defective motor.
As far as those metal shavings - if they were in the old oil filter from two days before, then I think you have some objective proof that there was a problem prior to the rod going. This was an on-going issue and from what I've read here tonight, I think your initial assessment was correct = defective motor.
Dude, if you had a bone stock evo with no mods at all and this happened I'd definitely be feeling your pain. Bottom line is the minute you extracted more than the factory horespower from the engine you voided the warranty. Why start speculating the cause or insinuating that Mitsu engine parts are inferior?(if not you, then some of the other contributors) Sounds like you're trying to have your cake and eat it too. Mitsubishi has spent millions of dollars in endurance tests and racing sponsorships to see how well their cars hold up. They take that data and use it to improve their product to the best of their ability. The company's survival is greatly dependent on the product's depenability. Do you honestly think that any of the aftermarket tuners out there have come close to spending that much when testing out their products? If you want a faster car then save your money for a Z06 or something but don't give Mitsu any more reason to put legitimate warranty requests under the microscope. My advice to those that cannot afford to have something go wrong with their evo is love it or leave it, or at least be willing to accept the inherent risks that come with modding it.
ps. it sounds like you tried to get by as-is until you got your upgraded fuel pump. hmm...could that have contributed to the engine's failure? we'll probably never know so lets try to warranty it shall we?
ps. it sounds like you tried to get by as-is until you got your upgraded fuel pump. hmm...could that have contributed to the engine's failure? we'll probably never know so lets try to warranty it shall we?
Originally Posted by Stew
Well, I was on the way TO the track today and the motor blew. Just passed 15k miles, and did my 3rd oil change last night with Mobil 1 5w30 Full Synthetic. "Extended life" oil my ***.
Originally Posted by Mercenary3
Stew - are these particles all over the place?....meaning if you touched any part that has a pool of oil on it, would you also get these shavings all over your finger?
Originally Posted by SP00LIN
As far as those metal shavings - if they were in the old oil filter from two days before, then I think you have some objective proof that there was a problem prior to the rod going. This was an on-going issue and from what I've read here tonight, I think your initial assessment was correct = defective motor.
Originally Posted by savaho
Are you insinuating Mobil had something to do with this? A bad batch of oil perhaps?
I think we need to clear things up. First off, I am not trying to hide anything from Mitsubishi and hope to pull a fast one for free parts. I am bringing them the car for inspection, and if they deem that I am at fault, so be it. I AM removing a few of the parts that may blind mitsubishi's judgement and cause them to make a too-quick decision that is not correct. The only way they can ACTUALLY determine the cause of the problem is by INSPECTING THE PARTS. NOT BY LOOKING AT A DIFFERENT FILTER IN THE ENGINE BAY. By inspecting the motor they should be able to determine the actual route of the problem and guess what, you WONT catch me b*tching if they deny my claim *IF* it's justified. If they make up BS reasons, you better believe there will be a sh*t storm. Guess what, that's what's right. If I was planning on *fraud* I wouldn't tell 300,000 people about it on the internet. Any questions?
Originally Posted by kimletrim
I am not reading this whole thread. I just read the title of this topic and just stopped there. Is there such thing as "extremely normal"?