sure you do. don't share them with anyone even if they pm you or all release those pictures of your mom.

 

The pictures I have are not related to your car and I noticed you've answered none of the questions I asked you. Nice.

 

you don't have any pictures

i don't know the answers to your questions. i wasn't given any details and no explanation you have all the answers though none of this is fault it is all of us stupid customerss?

 

I think everyone should just agree to disagree on this one. Some poeple are going to defend mitsu no matter what. Its easier on their pride to say it's someone else's fault, than to admit they bought a car that probably won't be supported if there is a major malfunction.

As for find s2000 issue, there are times that people where denied warranty. If you look hard enough you'll find out the duffus who got refused was dropping his clutch at 6k rpms in a drag. S2k doesn't handle that well at all. Most issues with the s2k tranny come from people dropping in higher ratio differential gears or after market clutches. Some guys were droping in miata diff gears and they would shatter under stress. That isn't honda's issue.

My whole reason for NOT buying an evo is 1 part this thread, 2 parts my local mitsu dealer saying he didn't want anything to do with the car. I admit that there are plenty of people who abuse or don't pay close enough attention to their cars maintenance that cause the problem. But from what the dealer told me, and Mit's refusal to even LOOK and see what caused the damage doesn't say good things about the car or manufacturer. As someone who owned a 98 eclipse and 2002 eclipse I got to see first hand how the 2002 eclipse was a junker that was poorly built, and poorly supported if mits could weasle out of it.

So, I'm done. You'll never convince the people who support mits that there is a problem until mitsu refuses to support them. No point in arguing with them, they convert over once it happens to them.

 

I guess I'm one of those people that's supposed to be a defender of Mitsubishi no matter what, huh?

Well let me clarify. I'm actually a harsh critic of them - where its necessary and when I have all the facts. Other stuff I can't comment on because I haven't gotten the whole story. I've seen two Evo's with blown engines come into our shop. One was lightly modded (catback, neons) and we'd heard the kid talk about a boost controller but it wasn't present. The car had roughly 10-15K miles put on it in a two month span (if my memory serves me correctly) had bald tires. The dipstick was bone dry. Engine replaced, begrudingly, under warranty. Another car shows up with tons of mods: BC, Exede or Aem, TBE, etc. Owner doesn't even flinch or ask, just tows it back to his shop, presumably to rebuild his engine out of pocket.

Another car we know of, one of the first we got, sees regular track days at Barber Motorsports park, competes and wins at SCCA meets, has 20K+ miles and is still on the factory clutch. No complaints - driven by a professional.

I draw my conclusions about Mitsubishi or the Evolution on my limited experience with the 25 Evos we've sold. And I still believe there is no chronic issue with them. Your mileage may vary, but I say that if you mod a car or race it, you are taking that risk and ought to realize that.

 

No arguements there, but the LAW states that Mits at least has too LOOK at the car before deciding damage was from racing or mods. Mits isn't even doing that much any more, instead they just black list the car out of hand

 

It's been a while since I did a recap and many of the same issues keep coming up. Most of which are addressed in the correspondence I sent to Mitsubishi in response to their press release and quotes in the Autoweek article.

The language in the Mitsu warranty makes it clear that racing alone does not give MMNA any right to void the warranty ... problems or failures related to racing are not covered by warranty. Simple participation in an event does NOT give MMNA the right to void your warranty. As I'm directly experiencing fighting this type of situation is a difficult and time consuming process. One that Mitsu likely assumes most will not take the time to pursue.

As to Evo Neal's claims of pictures and low oil. A low oil explanation would make a lot more sense to me than the warranty restriction based on participation in an SCCA Solo 2 event. Dealer made no claim about the car being low on oil. Nor did the MMNA District Service Manager. First thing I checked was the oil and it was fine.

Here's the correspondence to Janis Little (MMNA):


Ms. Little:

I'm puzzled by the disparity between the 18-June-2004 Mitsubishi Press Release, your statements in the 30-June-2004 Autoweek article written by Andrew Luu and the specifics of Mitsubishi's handling of my situation.

My Mitsubishi customer service file number is: 351806.

I'd appreciate your clarifications on the disparity between the following Mitsubishi statements and Mitsubishi's handling of my warranty situation.
- "We give the benefit of the doubt to everyone..."
- "If a Lancer Evolution is brought to Mitsubishi Motors dealer for a diagnosis as to a possible warrantable condition and the dealer determines that modifications were made that may have caused the problem"
- "The dealer and if necessary, MMNA staff, investigate each case, always giving the owner the benefit of the doubt."
- "Adds Mitsubishi’s Little: "You’re not going to get black-flagged just for entering an auto-cross,..."

I expect that "benefit of the doubt" would include at a minimum the "diagnosis" that Mitsubishi claims as part of "investigated each case". So what was done in my case?
- No diagnosis or investigation of the issue whatsoever. If you doubt this, pls feel free to contact the service person from Ken Garff Mitsubishi in Sandy Utah. His name is Todd and his direct phone number is 801 523-5482.
- No one even looked at the car to determine what had failed -- let alone whether it was related to participating in a single SCCA event 2 weeks before.
- I was told by the Mitsubishi District Service Manager that the warranty restriction was put on my Evo on the 16-May, two weeks before the motor failure. Is that true? I have no idea. Either way, I know that no one did any diagnosis or investigation on the failure.

I'd also like a clarification on your statement that "You’re not going to get black-flagged just for entering an auto-cross,..."
- Puzzling statement as that is precisely what happened in my situation

Finally, let's take a look at this statement about the Mitsubishi warranty.
- "Mitsubishi clearly states in its Owner's Warranty and Maintenance booklet that problems or failures related to racing, alteration and/or vehicle modifications are not covered conditions."

The Mitsubishi warranty is explicit that it is problems or failures related to racing that are not covered by warranty. Is the failure of two rods in my Evo weeks after the SCCA event related to racing? A diagnosis would help; some investigation as to whether that is the case would help -- unfortunately no one from Mitsubishi or the dealer even bothered to evaluate the car or even determine what had failed before denying the warranty.

Does the warranty say anywhere that participating in a "racing" event automatically gives Mitsubishi the right to permanently void (warranty restrict) the motor and full drive train? Absolutely not, but again that is precisely what Mitsubishi has done in my case.

Does anyone at Mitsubishi really believe that 6 minutes of autocross -- 10 separate runs through cones in a parking lot of about 55 seconds each in first and second gear -- is the cause of the two rod failures? I don't.

Where there any modifications on my Evo? Nope, not one single modification.

What about other signs of customer abuse? Nope, clutch disk looks fine, brakes look fine and even the tires look fine. Todd from Ken Garff Mitsubishi in Sandy can help with any clarification you’d like here. I also have photographs and will soon have a failure analysis based on an evaluation I’m paying for.

My vehicle was purchased "new" with 179 miles on the odometer. I was assured that no abuse occurred during test drives of my Evo. In hindsight, I was a fool to purchase a new "performance enthusiasts" car with so many miles on it.

Is it likely that the two rod failures are related to test drive or dealer abuse during those 179 initial miles on the car during break in? I think so. I think any reasonable person would accept that it is every bit as likely, if not more likely, than it being related to 6 minutes of autocross in a parking lot after the car has 2700 miles on it.

I look forward to your clarifications on the above.

Regards,
-Michael Miller
__________________________________________________ ___

Like all of my other communication with Mitsu, I never received a response.

 

There again, I haven't experienced that. Each time we've experienced a powertrain failure an extensive investigation was carried out. Nobody's car from our shop got blacklisted just on a whim. I can't comment on the horror stories I've heard here, because I haven't heard the other side of the story from the service department they went to. I gotta give them the benefit of the doubt and I know there are two sides to every story.

 

Well then, therein lies the problem. IF you win it will set a precedent. People can race their cars all they want in any type of event from autocross, circuit, drag, drift. All they have to do is tow their car in and claim the car broke down somewhere off the track and Mitsu has to fix it because it wasn't racing related. The dealers would have to have proof of the car having failed on the track during an event. A conclusive videotape perhaps?

Do you really see that happening?

 

I agree with GPTourer. My point is that we only get a partial story from those who've had warranty issues, only their side of the story. I worked as a service advisor for about ten years and have experienced both sides of that coin, so I'd like to think I'm not so much defending Mitsubishi as I am looking at it based on my previous experience. Each warranty claim should be looked at on a case by case basis. I just don't think we have a high failure rate situation here with stock vehicles.

And Arcueil, if it was me that had my warranty claim denied I'd be dam sure I knew exactly why they denied it, instead of "i wasn't given any details and no explanation". That's crap and either you're not telling us the complete story or you should find out because maybe you can take your case to a higher level.

 

It's not clear that that's the precedent that will be set, a least not legally. In practice i believe it will probably come down to expert witness testimony. At least, that's what I've seen for similiar law suit types (faulty manufacturing, software copyright infringement, etc.). But of course, that's only if some of these warranty voiding cases go to trial.

Again, I'm no attorney. I just watch the process from afar...

 

It's easy to say "I'd be dam sure I knew exactly why" but speaking for my situation it seems to be impossible to actually get any details. I've been told that my warranty was restricted based on participation in the SCCA Solo 2 event. I've asked for it in writing and for further explanation with NO success whatsoever.

 

as you say i'm a doofus

of course i've asked for details and i've been given none i can see why most of the people with warranty denials don't post here anymore

 

I apologized for that.

I am saying the you have to be given an explanation, if not, take it to the next level. You have a legal right to know exactly why your warranty claim was denied. If you can't get anything in writing then I'd be documenting everything that was said in your conversations with the dealer. If you have a legit claim you have other options that are higher than the dealer level. The first step is to meet with the district service representative. Get the contact information from your dealer and request a meeting or written explanation about your case.

 

In my cases, I've done precisely what you are suggesting. Results?
1. I had one very brief conversation with the MMNA District Service Manager in which he told me the warranty restriction was put on my car based on SCCA Solo 2 event on 16-May. I asked for a written explanation even if it was that short. He refused. When I asked who else I could speak with he gave me the same Mitsu customer service number that I already had.
2. When I contaced the Mitsu customer service number and asked them for a letter with an explanation as to why my warranty claim had been denied, they said that wasn't possible and gave me the P.O. Box number for the Mitsu national center for dispute resolution. When I
3. Sent a letter to the Mitsu national dispute resolution center. Response? Nothing so far.
4. Sent email and letters to MMNA executives. Response? Nothing so far.

I've been told that participation in one SCCA Solo 2 event is the reason why my warranty work was denied. I've read statements by Janis Little MMNA claiming that that doesn't happen.

I'm out-of-pocket $7,963 for repairs on a completely stock Evo with 3,070 miles on it. No dialog or coherent answers from Mitsu whatsoever.

Yes, we have rights. I'm learning first hand that having those rights and realizing them ... in this case enforcing them ... are two very different things.

Would you like to join me in a teleconference with the Mitsu customer service center? Yes, I'm serious. Send me a PM and we'll call together. You can hear first hand the responses.