I'm an engineer, I have stuck with my 1st gen DSM because, while its a pain in the *** to repair. Road Race has done a decent job of keeping my car on the road.

While it's great that Mitsu has brought over the EVO... i just don't trust ANY first year product (at least software can be easily updated as a fail-safe). But a design flaw, that is just going to suck. All cars have problems... and with any car... there will always be people who drive hard to show those problem areas very quickly.

i only wish that car manufacturers were required by law to publish what they tested on their cars AND how they tested them. Because I can promise you that between the test team and design team... people will miss stuff. Especially if there are noobie employees on a team, mistakes will slip by. After all... everyone learns on the job.

While I have the money sitting on the sidelines waiting to buy the EVO all cash (well tied up in stocks... but could be liquid in about 3 days time). I would not trust the car so far based on what I have read so far, especially with a crafted/general statement from mitsubishi that obviously shows they are addressing the knowledge of the complaints that are always listed here.

I wonder how many STi's are having clutch issues? How many 00-02 S4's are having clutch issues? I can understand that dealers will want to not do warrenty work, but I think people need to make the effort to build up a good relationship with a good local trusted tuner shop rather then wasting time at the dealership.

I almost wish mitsu would offer a specailly discounted tuner warrenty, one that does not warrenty the engine/tranny/drive line. I would love to pay $5000 less on the car price and deal with any issues I have on my own (barring any issue that is experienced by a large population of owners in a given time period of produced cars, that way if you get a spun bearing like on the M3's it will still be a major design/product flaw and be covered). Let mitsu deal with the A/C going out or the door locks... just allow me to take my car to a real mechanic where i can get the service I want on my car.

I wish tuner shops would actually get the bright idea to offer supplimental warrenty packages (maybe thru a local insurer) to cover certain moded repairs. That would steal away A LOT of biz from the dealers. Because selling the car is only part of the money... supporting the car after its on the road is the other money maker. Hit mitsu in the wallet by only going to your local mechanic for oil/service/repairs and you will force them to listen. Change your own oil or take it to a local oil service place and give them the money rather then the dealer. If they are sitting around with their thumbs in their a$$'s they will love to work on your tranny or engine issue.

As far as i am concerned. My future car purchase will be based on the turbo 05 models. i'm leaning towards the Bimmer turbo that comes out next year or the EvoMR. I'll wait till after the initial stealer hype/mark ups. they can let the car sit on the lot till it comes down to a price i think the car is worth. Let all the stupid rich people by it at Retail or higher (Obviously they need the braging rights for ego or whatever). I work hard for my money and I will not spend it in a wasteful manor. I have no problems with mods as fun accessories for a toy car like this. But the real power is in your dollar votes. Invest your money in this Evo and you are giving mitsu your approval of what you hear and believe on here. Hold off on your purchase and they will be begging you to take the car off their lots. I would never pay more then Invoice + $500 for OTD price on a car in this price range and this class of car manufacturer.

IMHO... if you think this is all your probably right, but i think it is true to me and these are the words i live by on my own product purchase. You can do whatever you like.

happy motoring

 

That, or someone from the automotive press (like Autoweek) must have called...

 

Acutally doesn't subaru give you a AutoX licence for the first year after you buy a WRX (STI or non STI)?

 

To badmouth any manufacturer including for the basic waranty policy that says if you tune or bolt on performance parts that cause component failure is plain

DUMB.

Sorry, flame me if you want but you can't expect to do these things to your EVO's and not run the risk of a failure of some type. Brag about HP and Quarter Mile times all you want. It's not the fact that you RACE your cars that causes to void the warranty, it's the part/component failure!!!

Now the Catch 22 in this would be if you had a dealer install the part..While it stil may not have warranty per say, at least you had dealer involvement that could possibly support your case for a warranty repair..

And saying that doesn't back the cars is also false. Do they warrant every item? Well no. Every situation with these cars and the owners is different so how could they? It is on a case by case basis. The percentage of people that post that "mitsu screwed me" is small. And maybe they are just loudmouths or sore losers or both. Who knows. Who cares.

(I for one know that I don't have a thing to worry about because I didn't buy the car to soup up and get gobs and gobs of HP out of it for bragging rights. I bought it to DRIVE and enjoy as it is....period.)

Ultimately, built the son of a ***** so if something breaks, they will back it. But if someone else changes what put together..

Well then THAT person/tech/shop/facilty should be firing up the money to fix it.

Right?

 

Guess that is another good reason for us to not allow street racing threads on the forums.....

 

hey all,

I keep seeing a lot of references to dealers when diagnosing warranty issues. the dealer's role is simple: they are performing work on behalf of mitsubishi. they are NOT mitsubishi. their ability to speak on MMNA's behalf is limited; they are NOT the law.

a dealer might recommend that the item not be covered, document it, and MMNA might agree. example: manual boost controller installed on car with fried pistons.

or they might not. example: aftermarket suspension installed on car with fried pistons.

so in that second case, say the dealer is being a jagoff and denies your engine claim when everything under the hood is stock, but you've lowered the car a bit. here's where people go wrong: they get bent out of shape, come here and rant, and call a lawyer BEFORE they even try to work with MMNA.

first thing I'd do: call MMNA and go to a different dealer. be cordial and reasonable, but firm and assertive, and you'd be surprised what happens.

it's too easy to complain about how everyone is out to get us. it's also too easy for those that have no clue what's really going on with a car to wonder why they can't get a clutch replaced for free after 50 or so redline dumps (it should be built to handle that, why make a fast car that can't handle its own power is the mantra), or why things went so wrong with "just" a MBC, atmospheric BOV, and cone air filter.

honestly, I thought MMNA's statement was as friendly and flexible as they could possibly allow without exposing themselves. you want to get indignant? bogus warranty claims aren't free. if some neanderthal decides to see just how many 4.8s 0-60 runs his Evo can do back-to-back *he* is going to pay for the resulting damage, not you and I and all the normal customers of MMNA.

I'm not saying we hunt each other down and rat out people for what we see in their sigs. I'm saying that most of us know what is reasonable. Wrongly denied claims do leave a bad taste in your mouth, but nobody's perfect. MMNA basically has done their best to say that they're trying to work with us and they aren't going on a witchhunt for Evo enthusiasts. Let's just do the same. If someone still needs a lawyer, then get one. You know what's reasonable.

 

Just because EVO had only been introduced in the US market last year hardly makes it a first year product. This particular platform is over 10 years old... Why do you think it is EVO VIII and not I? This is probably the most road/race tested platform there is besides 911.

 

This press release is in direct response to the numerous Mitsu warranty denials. The press have been making inquiries and Mitsu reacted by putting out a press release to try to put a positive spin on it.

I've done 5 press interviews in the last two weeks about my situation. I'm providing contact info for other Evo owners with warranty denials from Mitsu for major problems on completely stock cars. Nastea, have the person with the failed motor send me a PM and I'll forward the contact info for the associate editor at Car & Driver that is working on this article.

Details on my motor failure (2 rods) and the warranty denial are here: https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...ad.php?t=83525.

Those that believe that dealers make the call as to whether something is covered under warranty are mistaken. 5 Star Mitsu dealers have some flexibility with low dollar warranty coverage, but anything of any real cost (clutch, turbo, motor, drivetrain, etc) absolutely requires approval from a Mitsu District Service Manager. A Mitsu USA employee that has nothing to do with the dealer.

Mitsu makes claims in the press release about giving their customers the benefit of the doubt, diagnosis of issues before making decisions about warranty coverage. In my case, warranty work was denied before Mitsu even looked at the car. No benefit of the doubt, no diagnosis, no dicussion.

I've been told by two automotive periodicals that articles on this will be published in Aug/Sep issues.

The Evo is a wonderful car. Mitsubishi is not standing behind it.

 

So, you've talked to Mitsubishi USA since that press release about your car, then?

 

I called them yesterday. I asked them to comment on the press release. I also asked them to explain why the warranty on my car was denied before anyone even looked at the car, which is completely inconsistent with the staments in the press release. I also asked them to give me a definition of racing. My warranty was denied because I participated in an SCCA Solo2 event 2 weeks before the rods failed.

Finally, I also asked them to send me in writing why the warranty repair work on my car was denied. Mitsu's position with me is that any Mitsu that participates in any SCCA event will have a "warranty restriction" placed on the car ... result of which means no coverage for any motor or drivetrain problems. I want something in writing for Mitsu for a packet of information that I'm pulling together for the SCCA (Sports Car Club of America).

As you might guess, no comments or explanation from Mitsu and of course nothing in writing.

It's ludicrous to believe the SCCA event is the reason that two rods in an Evo with 3,070 miles on it failed two weeks after the event. For those of you that are not familiar with SCCA Solo2:

The National Solo Rules, SCCA (2004) say:

Rule 1.6

A Category II Solo Event is a non-speed driving skill contest such as, but not limited to, autocrosses and slaloms. These events are run on short courses that emphasize the Driver's ability and the car's handling and agility. Competition licenses are not reuqired and hazards to spectators, participants and property do not exceed those encountered in normal, legal highway driving.

 

So they didn't remove the warranty restriction. Did you ask nicely, or did you start in on them just exactly like these last two posts, flushed with your newfound fame?

This was your first contact with them?

 

Oh and by the way, what is your goal at this point? What is the resolution that you are seeking from MMNA right now?

- warranty on the engine and hold status cleared on your VIN
- MMNA giving you a new car
- MMNA buying back your car (and you walk with cash, different from above)
- one of the above plus statutory damages?

 

I've had a lot of contact with Mitsu about this. Warranty restriction has not been removed. Two letters have been sent to the Mitsu National Center for Dispute Resoluntion, but I've yet to receive a response. I've been told to expect a long delay.

My conversations from the very beginning, both with the dealer and mitsu, have been calm, unemotional and professional. I'm not flushed with newfound fame ... and apologize if that is the way it came across.

Many seem to quickly dismiss Mitsu's warranty denials as "no big deal" or "it's to be expected." It is a small percentage of Evo owners that experience major failures, but for those that have it is not a minor issue when as in every case I'm familiar with Mitsu denies to cover the problem under warranty. I'm not talking about a $1,000 clutch. I'm talking about $5,000 to $8,000 motor failures on stock Evos.

Those with motor failures are in many cases hestitant to post on the forums. Why? As with most car enthusiasts people are passionate about their Evos and when someone posts bad news, the natural reaction is often for some to come to the defense of the car. Some are quick to lash out against the poster with posts about how they got what they deserved for beating the **** out of their cars, etc. I've dealt with more than a few of those myself. I'm fortunate to be in a position to be able to pay for the repair out-of-pocket without any problem. It infuriates me when I read posts or PMs from other Evo owners that are put in a position by a warranty denial where they are forced to drop out of college or make other very significant sacrifices.

-Michael

 

Warranty reimbursement for the repairs and warranty restriction removed for my VIN.

BTW -- I also mentioned to Mitsu that I'll walk away quietly from this whole thing, if they will simply do a press release about that participation of a stock Evo in any SCCA event will result in warranty denial for all motor and drivetrain claims.

 

Ah damn. Long post just went up in smoke. Sorry-- short hasty rework coming up.

I have read all your posts here and in the your other thread. I fully support you for whatever that's worth, and think you're playing the game fairly and properly. I have seen people in similar situations become overcome with greed or a desire for revenge, and they fly right past what their original goal was. Right past the bounds of reason.

I've also seen claims approved that should not have been. MMNA in particular can't afford that kind of loss, so I'm sure that all costly claims are getting heavy scrutiny.

Regarding your specific example about someone dropping out of college due to a denied claim, I doubt that was their only choice left to them. If they required transportation for work and school, they could purchase a $500 used car with a little dilligence and it would run for at least 6-12 months. (Been there-- hmm, college actually.) You don't kick over the card table; you keep paying the note on the non-functional car while you work arbitration, the press (as you're doing), and the courts. I have difficulty seeing a $30,000 car as a necessity rather than a luxury.