You know what would be cool? If the car manufacturers had some option where you pay a certain amount each year or month if you will be using your car for racing or hard driving. Something like an extended warrantee. This way the manufacturers will have money coming in even if the owners don’t beak stuff and if a couple do they should have the extra money to fix the couple of cars that break. Just something that popped in my head...

 

No offense to you because you are just the messenger, but that is the biggest load of crap I have heard about the EVO VIII yet...What does this "guy" drive? And how many EVO VIII's had HE seen this problem happen to? Sounds like EVOitus..A symptom that many EVO envious car enthusiasts struggle with due to the fact that they have a civic or cavalier rollin' on steelies with a universal muffler and euro taillights...

 

I think everyone on this site is figuring out why the people who have been on the 2G websites like 2GNT.com and DSM.org for several years have nicknamed Mitsu Satan.

 

Although I can see the point of view from the manufactuer, I think they should at least make the disclaimer ALOT larger on the advertisement's.

The problem is, how do you market a Performance vehicle without talking about its performance? or its racing heritage? people get excited about things like that, I personally think automakers shouldent put numbers down like "0-60 in under 5 seconds" or ".98G's on the skidpad", they should let 3rd party magazines give those specs so at lease they can covor their asses.

They're should be some serious steps taken in the automotive industry on where to draw the line when it comes on marketing a performance vehicle, without stubling the consumer on thinking they can do anything with the car and expect warranty work done to it.

If you want to autocross, buy a car that holds no warranty on it (like a CRX, or Miata), toss some azenias on it. At least if it breaks you dont have to worry about it since you have your nice new car that will take you to work

 

The car was run in a single SCCA Solo 2 event. Weeks later the motor failed -- 2 rod failures which then led to a turbo failure). Simply participating in a event, by Mitsu's own admission supposedly will not lead to a warranty denial. Regardless, even per the specifics of the warranty it is ONLY issues related to racing that Mitsu has the right to deny warranty coverage on.

In my case, no diagnosis was done on the car whatsoever to determine the cause of the failure. Mitsu put a warranty restriciton on the car VIN simply based on my participating in one SCCA event. The car was never looked at and according to Mitsu customer service and the MMNA District Service Manager the restriction was put on the car weeks before the failure because of my participation in one event.

The Evo was completely stock with only a few thousand miles on it. No signs of abuse (clutch disc was fine). It's easy to claim that it is an owner issue and that we beat the **** out of the car and got what we desserved. You may want to get more familiar with the issue before making such claims, but that is entirely up to you. Regardless, those of us that have had our warranties denied do not consider it to be a small issue. It's unfortunate that so many have the same attitude that you've demonstrated ... it allows Mitsu to get away with denying warranty coverage without much impact on them other than to improve the company's earnings.

If you're interested in understanding the issue, check out the Mitsu denying warranty thread. You'll read examples of people having their warranty coverage denied. Many of whom did not participate in any type of event. Most of whom had low mileage cars with significant motor failures (rods is the most typical with some turbos).

 

Just a quick clarification on this. Mitsu put a warranty restriction on the motor and drivetrain (including transmission) of my Evo. So, the radio would be covered.

More alarming, however, is Mitsu position on the car now that it is fully repaired by the dealer. Mitsu's stance is that even though the car is fully repaired and even if we never participate in another SCCA or other event the warranty restriction remains -- meaning that this Evo with a few thousand miles on it has NO warranty coverage on the motor and drivetrain.

They have no right to do that, but as someone else suggested in this thread arbitration and eventually a lawsuit is the only remedy. I can speak from personal experience that this is time consuming, expensive process.

 

Wrong. Read the warranty. Coverage exclusion is only for issues that arrise related to racing, etc. Mitsu has no right to deny warranty coverage simply because you participate in an event or mod a car. In my case, it's faily simple as the car is completely stock. Only warranty exclusion possibility is issues that arise related to racing or abuse.

If Mitsu had bothered to take the time to look at the car to investigate and diagnose the issue my claim would be more difficult. No investigation, no diagnosis ... how can they possibly determine that the motor failure is related to racing?

Does anyone here or at Mitsu really believe that 6 minutes of autocross is the cause of a motor failure weeks later?

Below is a copy of the letter that I sent the Mitsu spokesperson quoted in the autoweek article. I also copied Andrew Luu the writer of the article on the email. So far no response from Ms. Little.


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 on 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.

Were 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

 

I think this is grounds for a angry drunken mob to go burn down mitsubishi dealers. >_> RISE UP MY OPPRESSED BRETHREN!

Sorry, I just got the urge to revolt after reading all this info.
(Just joking btw...maybe.)

Oh yeah its July4th too :P Lets get in the spirit of things.

 

i fully agree... they just shot your warranty to hell BEFORE they even bothered to "determine" what was the problem and just said, your warranty is not worth a thing... Mitsu contradicted itself multiple times, why can't ppl understand and see that...

"we give the benefit of the doubt"
"we'll discuss what is the cause of the problem"
"we won't put a restriction on the warranty for one autox event"

all lies...

and i wouldn't take your car to that dealership anymore, nor do business... something there is fishy, as in "yes, that's the idea to have, let your kid get it out on a safe course, not the streets", then, "hey billy bob, let's go to all the autox events in the area and nail them..."

if i crank the boost, and blow the engine, i got my just deserves... but do you agree that an aftermarket filter can void your powertrain warranty instantaniously for something that went not because of that part... that's what your saying, and that's why there's now laws in place to take care of rediculous dealerships and motorcompanies, and people who agree with those before mentioned... now if the filter element gets sucked into the turbo, that's a different story, and we don't need to really worry about hydrolock (the main culprit of many many of the warranty voids due to an aftermarket intake )too much as the lack of CAI's with a turbo car...

my regards to you for going through a horrible experience such as this... it's unfortunate that there's not a Toyota badge on this car sometimes... they worked well with this sort of stuff...

 

I agree with your comment on the Toyota badge. Some friends with a Toyota Celica had motor problems while at an SCCA event. Toyota fully covered the repair.

I've confused a lot of people about the dealer. There are three different dealers involved.
- Car was purchased from a dealer in Arizona (only silver Evo I could find at the time)
- Car was delivered through a dealer in Orem Utah called Barber Bros (sp?)
- Car was taken in for service to Ken Garff Mitsubishi in Sandy Utah

The service people at Ken Garff Mitsubishi have been excellent to work with. My issue is not with the dealer, but with MMNA.

 

and mitusbishi* wondered why i didn't opt for their "extended" warranty package.... bunch of thieves if you ask me -rob

 

they should really make a program, where you take a driving school, the manufacturers should allow warranty on your car.

I understand it tho, since most of people can't drive worth of penny.

 

People who are against MSM's position need to think about what Mitsubishi is implying in all of this...

They (apparently) have so little confidence in the build quality of the engine and drivetrain that they will void its warranty at the slightest "provocation". As a fellow participant in Solo II (running a $12,000 Mazda Protege), I can only chuckle at an organization that voids warranties for entering in it. My Protege has seen MORE action on the street (stop/go/accident avoidance) that it EVER has between the cones.

One of two things is true...
1. MSM's engine failure has NOTHING to do with Solo II and should be covered by the warranty.
2. MSM's engine failure was caused by Solo II. If this is true then, by extension, Mitsubishi admits that the build quality of the EVO's drivetrain is so porous and shoddy that anything beyond gentle street/highway driving presents a grave threat to the longevity. Furthermore, since Solo II is nearly indistinguishable from street driving, Mitusbishi is REALLY saying that the EVO is barely reliable even on the street.

Which option does Mitsubishi hold to be true for this "rally-inspired, high-performance" vehicle?

Regards,
Joel

 

I hope that simplified for the masses statement will be able to be understood by some who still haven't gotten it. It's a car, but basically they claim driving it is enough to consider it abuse and void the warratny - absolutely ridiculous. That's like saying you went around a corner too fast and so it voids the warranty.. If the car is built to do something, then doing it should be covered under warranty.

I wonder how long before they will be sening out reminders that the warranty is void when someone gets a citation.. Just like you get all the offers from lawyers who watch public records when you get a ticket, Mitsu will be there to send you a nice postcard to let you know that becuase you drove 37mpg in a 35, you abused the car.. Sheesh.

 

I like the idea of the car companies possibly offering an extended type of warranty that covers people who plan on racing... that may not be feasible for lots of reasons but it is at least a good thing to think about. They could charge a fair amount of money for it but it would probably be worth the money because if you race, you are pretty much guaranteed to run into exspensive problems somewhere down the line.