Stew im sorry to hear everything... let us know any updates.

 

+1 for updates curious to know if anything how this gets resolved

 

No real updates yet guys. I'm busy working on getting a 2nd job to pay for the repairs, which will be in the form of performance parts, so I can get my 15,000 mile 2005 Evo back on the road. I'm pretty dissapointed with the lack of cooperation from Mitsubishi and that now I have to work 60+ hours per week to even be able to drive my 5 month old car.

 

 

Cipriano is a clown. I can't stand that guy. I hope you win this one Stew, then I will fight to have the red flag on my warranty lifted. That rep knows NOTHING about cars.

 

This is BS. That nut clearly lost it's torque and lossened it's way off the rod bolt.
That one nut caused all of the damage pictured, it's that simple.

Maybe the rod bolt did stretch, maybe it waas improperly torqued.
Some things to consider. The nut could stay on the rod long enough to make it to that mileage. I have seen engines make it to 15000 miles with never having an oil change. You take the filter off and the oil is a thick gel.
Answer this, if the bolt stretched then how did he over rev the engine?
I thought these cars have a rev limiter and the whole purpose of it is for the manufactuer to protect the engine from overreving. Just like the stationary revlimiter exists on that car.

Don't laydown to Mitsu on this, they are at fault 100% for this failure.
I will leave you this link you should read. This is from an industry expert.
http://www.carrilloind.com/pdfs/10777_eprint.pdf

 

I see that you had a flash so the rev limiter was raised.
Here is another link to check out
http://www.semasan.com/main/main.aspx?id=60128

 

Oh and btw a nut laying the pan is irrefutable evidence of what failed.
Any trained technician or engine builder would agree that it was the cause of all the damage. The problem is you have the failure clearly identified. Mitsubishi on the other hand has no evidence that any mod caused this failure and cannot prove the rod bolt even stretched or more accurately over-stretched. I would definitely measure all the other bolts in the other rods to see what their length is. I have a stretch gauge and can tell you that even an ARP at ARP torque specs often times is not properly stretched and requires more torque to meet the stretch spec.

If you pursue this with Mitsu, I would be happy to testify if you are on the East Coast.
I have been certified before to act as an expert witness in the automotive field and I was the plaintiff! Lol
Like it is stated on SEMA website, get everything in writing from Mitsu. If the flag your warranty and deny all current and future claims you want that documented. They are not allowed to do this.

Oh here is some more info on SEMA’s site.
http://www.semasan.com/main/main.aspx?id=60127
Anyone who doesn’t know, SEMA drives all the fights against restrictive legislation in the aftermarket industry. They knock down more bills then get past in every state.

 

Don't EVOs have Electronic Data Recorders (EDR)? I read something to that extent in my IX manual.

Couldn't they just pull this data to see what the engine was doing before it went boom?

Sounds like an easy way for them to deny alot of warranties. On the other hand, it'll clear you of those over-reving accusations.

Good luck.

Tony

 

Thanks for all the info timzcat. I've been through most of the typical steps, dealer -> owner -> district rep -> state DMV -> and now I have a claim in with the better business bureau. I have contacted a state consumer protection agency (typically for lemon law) and they have informed me I may come in for a $200 consultation to review my case. I am going to get the warranty denial in writing and then most likely take it to the consumer protection lawyer for review. I might make a few phone calls to the FTC and some others in the mean time as well.

Oh, and I am on the east coast. I'm located in CT.