BLOWN Motor Part 3 (DECISION)
Originally Posted by blonde
however, if you tuned your ecu and the car blew up, don't go looking at mitsu...
Originally Posted by Stew
"FAIR" would be Mitsubishi not looking at a MBC WITHOUT knowing what it was set to, and denying warranty coverage (random theoretical situation). Should a Evo with the ONLY mod being a MBC set to 18 psi be denied warranty?
sorry man, just saying what i think. i wish you all the best and i hope that your car will be fixed very soon..
Originally Posted by Stew
*unless*, the tuning had no effect on the breakdown. Which, however, is a very fine line.
you knew exactly that ANY change you wil make to the engine will void the entire engine warrenty. i agree with you that your engine failure was not a result of the ecu tuning but the warrenty was not designed just for you. also, did you manage to PROVE to them that the engine failure was not a resulot off the tuning or mods to the car?
Originally Posted by Stew
Running without a fuel pump was not the best idea, and I was aware of that. I hope you're not pointing blame here. Does it look to you like a lean condition caused serious detonation, enough to spin a bearing? You may PM me with that answer if you'd like.
IMHO, that heavily contributed to the engine failure. You may have only driven it a week in that configuration, but one on ramp on to the highway is all it can take. Trust I know... I toasted the motor in my old talon the same way, using a SAFC to do the work... and like you I was on the way to the track for a track day...
You can't blame
for covering their ***. Once they saw your mods, you were screwed.It sucks to hear I know, but you can't eliminate the possibility that your mods caused the problem. the other possiblity is that you 5w30 oil was to blame.
Originally Posted by "factory service manual: 12-3
NOTE: SAE 5W-30 fully synthetic engine oil can be used to improve engine start ability in very cold weather areas where the lowest atmospheric temperature is below −23°C (−10°F).
Good luck...
WRONG.
MBC=defeating stock boost control=NO WARRANTY.
Stock Evo's do not hold 18psi to redline, so in that situation, warranty is void.
I am of the opinon that you should be a man and take responsibility for modding your car. The instant you touched the ECU, all bets are off. Trying to scam mitsu because you THINK that you DESERVE to make a mistake and have someone else pay for it is...um...comical, at best.
Whether detonation killed your motor or not is a moot point. The point is, you modded the car and want to go crying back that you didn't.
That, my good friend, is warranty fraud, by definition.
MBC=defeating stock boost control=NO WARRANTY.
Stock Evo's do not hold 18psi to redline, so in that situation, warranty is void.
I am of the opinon that you should be a man and take responsibility for modding your car. The instant you touched the ECU, all bets are off. Trying to scam mitsu because you THINK that you DESERVE to make a mistake and have someone else pay for it is...um...comical, at best.
Whether detonation killed your motor or not is a moot point. The point is, you modded the car and want to go crying back that you didn't.
That, my good friend, is warranty fraud, by definition.
Originally Posted by Stew
"FAIR" would be Mitsubishi looking at a MBC WITHOUT caring what it was set to, and denying warranty coverage (random theoretical situation). Should a Evo with the ONLY mod being a MBC set to 18 psi be denied warranty? NO. Would Mitsubishi deny the warranty SIMPLY because the MBC was attatched to the car? YES. Prove me wrong. Thats what they just did to me and removing the mods was a way to avoid that whole fiasco, but here we have the fiasco anyway. Why don't you look at the piston/head pictures and tell me if you think Mitsubishi was fair in denying the warranty due to "Detonation". Please report back with your opinion.
Get my point?
Get my point?
I understand what you guys are saying about the tuning, I guess I'm using more of a straight up logical standpoint. If said mod caused said problem, user's problem, absolutely fine. If said mod did not cause said problem, manufacturer's problem, even if they are closely related.
It has not been that cold here at all this year, the oil most likely was not a contributing factor.
It has not been that cold here at all this year, the oil most likely was not a contributing factor.
Evolved Member
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,798
Likes: 0
From: North Mexico (Inland Empire)
Originally Posted by chrisw
IMHO, that heavily contributed to the engine failure. You may have only driven it a week in that configuration, but one on ramp on to the highway is all it can take.
Good luck...
Good luck...
Originally Posted by blonde
did you manage to PROVE to them that the engine failure was not a resulot off the tuning or mods to the car?
Their statement of proof seems to be that examination of the top end of the motor showed 'pre-detonation.' I guess that's the psychic condition in which the motor knows that it's about to suffer detonation and decides to throw a rod for the hell of it.
Last edited by joshd; Mar 10, 2006 at 02:32 PM.
Okay, let's appeal to logic:
The following statement is ALWAYS true:
Modifying the ECU will always void your warranty.
The following statement is ALWAYS true:
Modifying the ECU will always void your warranty.
Originally Posted by Stew
I understand what you guys are saying about the tuning, I guess I'm using more of a straight up logical standpoint. If said mod caused said problem, user's problem, absolutely fine. If said mod did not cause said problem, manufacturer's problem, even if they are closely related.
It has not been that cold here at all this year, the oil most likely was not a contributing factor.
It has not been that cold here at all this year, the oil most likely was not a contributing factor.
Originally Posted by 4G63>OOOO
Okay, let's appeal to logic:
The following statement is ALWAYS true:
Modifying the ECU will always void your warranty.
The following statement is ALWAYS true:
Modifying the ECU will always void your warranty.
Originally Posted by joshd
I disagree. I still submit that Magnuson-Moss holds and the manufacturer must prove that the modification caused the failure. What if the only change to the ECU was to LOWER the rev limit by 200 RPM and otherwise the code was bit for bit exact?
and btw, this is exactly why so many car companies are being so tough on warrenties and send people to the forums to spy on us. it has become such a common thing to mod your car to hell and than if something go wrong, return it to stock and get the warrenty.... the companies lose soo mucch money on warrenty fraud that they will do what ever it takes to cut their losses, if it means denying warrenty on a stock car from an honest person (that is the worst..)
Ah, yes, the wonderful hypothetical. While it has a place in learning institutions, it has no place here.
The car was modded to increase performance and did NOT have an uprated fuel pump. I think it's safe to say it was starving for fuel.
The rev limit was NOT lowered, so what little point you had has no application here in the real world. If you want to wax poetic about it, though, you can spend your money fighting Mitsubishi in court, I'll be spending my money on taking my car to the track and not whining in a Mitsu service department how the world owes me everything.
The car was modded to increase performance and did NOT have an uprated fuel pump. I think it's safe to say it was starving for fuel.
The rev limit was NOT lowered, so what little point you had has no application here in the real world. If you want to wax poetic about it, though, you can spend your money fighting Mitsubishi in court, I'll be spending my money on taking my car to the track and not whining in a Mitsu service department how the world owes me everything.
Originally Posted by joshd
I disagree. I still submit that Magnuson-Moss holds and the manufacturer must prove that the modification caused the failure. What if the only change to the ECU was to LOWER the rev limit by 200 RPM and otherwise the code was bit for bit exact?
Originally Posted by blonde
won't matter. the ECU is directly related to the engine so any mod done to the ECU will automatically void the warrenty. all the manufacturer has to do is show that you played with the ecu and the warrenty will be void....
Do they not have to prove that altering the ECU has effect on the motor enough to gernade it?
FAULT lies in the motor tear down. In summation, detonation = my fault, clean pistons/heads/plugs = Mitsubishi's fault.
RESPONSIBILITY lies in the paperwork. Fortunately for the consumer, federal warranty law (such as the Magnuson-Moss act) supersedes anything Mitsubishi decides to type up on a whim.
Originally Posted by 4G63>OOOO
Ah, yes, the wonderful hypothetical. While it has a place in learning institutions, it has no place here.
The car was modded to increase performance and did NOT have an uprated fuel pump. I think it's safe to say it was starving for fuel.
The rev limit was NOT lowered, so what little point you had has no application here in the real world. If you want to wax poetic about it, though, you can spend your money fighting Mitsubishi in court, I'll be spending my money on taking my car to the track and not whining in a Mitsu service department how the world owes me everything.
The car was modded to increase performance and did NOT have an uprated fuel pump. I think it's safe to say it was starving for fuel.
The rev limit was NOT lowered, so what little point you had has no application here in the real world. If you want to wax poetic about it, though, you can spend your money fighting Mitsubishi in court, I'll be spending my money on taking my car to the track and not whining in a Mitsu service department how the world owes me everything.