Stupid Mitsu doesn't wanna fix my broken Transfer Case
 

Mitsu is trying to claim that my Exedy Twin Plate Clutch is a racing clutch is a clutch that doesn't allow slipping the clutch and therefore may have caused the Transfer Case damage.

This is not set in stone yet. Any suggestions.

Thanks in advance. :beer:

:shoot: :mitsu:

Replacing the clutch is something of normal maintinance in a manual car, just like break pads or tires, if you put better brake pads in and something happend to the car, are they going to say ohh it was your new pads? It just does not make since some of the stuff they do, their clutch does not last worth ****, but they don't want any other clutch in their either, what about a broken transfercase is not warranty?

ALL manufacturers will void ANY warranty that MAY be a result of an after-market part. This means that if you replace the piece of crap Evo clutch, anything the after-market clutch may damage will NEVER be covered under warranty (ie, drivetrain stuff).

It's a bad deal for all Evo owners. We all know the stock clutch is nearly worthless, but if you decide to replace it (not really a bad deciscion), anything the new clutch might break is your responsibility. This is not a Mitsu issue, but ALL manufacturers will do the same.

I'm currently trying to fight my clutch failure after 4K miles - I've never raced it or dropped the clutch at high RMPs. But I'm still fighting a $1,100 invoice.

All I can say is - Best of Luck!

Attn Mitsubishi: Any and all modifications to my vehicle are equal or higher in quality and performance to those that were provided stock. As such under Title 15 Chapter 50 of U.S. Code (aka the Magnusson-Moss Warranty Act of 1975) particularly Section 2302(c) Mitsubishi must honor the warranty as provided with the car. Any refusal of service must be accompanied by absolute proof that an aftermarket component was the cause of any failure in the OEM materials. Failure to adhere to the letter and spirit of the law will result in prompt legal action against Mitsubishi and/or their authorized dealer.

Someones sig... I like the sound of this.

They have to prove it was the cause....take them to court. You can have a lawyer write a letter for about $150. I did this at the Chevy dealer and it worked great.

look, calling the Mitsu dealer stupid for what they are doing here is unwarranted.

The exedy twin plate grabs better, theres no question about it. When a clutch grips better, the transfer case takes that much more shock. It is PERFECTLY reasonable that in this case, an aftermarket clutch that is substantially different from the original equipment, in that it causes more strain and shock to the drivetrain will void a warranty for the transfer case. the presumption is against you, and although the dealership would have the burden of proof, the plaintiff in this case would have the burden of persuasion.

You, sir, are fighting a losing battle.

evov8, just fix the car it is not mitsproblem that you broke you car. just deal with it and move on. two many people want to blame the dealer for their **** up.

just because someone puts in a better part does not mean they abuse it. I run an EVC5 to turn DOWN the boost..for our 91 gas. If your car is RED it must be faster right???? It has to be proved your part did it, you DO NOT have to prove it didnt!!! I have never been denied, because i dont roll over easy...Roll over if you want, but ime telling you, you dont have to.......M2C

I think the point is did it break due to the hard launches (Mine did..Cusco twin carbon). If you killed it, take it like a man and don't expect someone else to fix your screw-up. Even if they do have "deep Pockets" and for the stock clutch issue 24K on mine when I replaced it lots of drag racing, 6 track days and uncountable hard "street launches" still holding like a champ and showed less than 1/2 wear..It's not mitsu's fault they gave us a high HP car and the rest of you guys are learning how to drive a stick---Killing the clutch in the process. (I've never owned an automatic ion 30+ years of driving.).

But thats not the legal standard. is this really that difficult to comprehend? the issue is whether the modification CAN cause the damage or extra strain.

If your car is RED it must be faster? WTF are you talking about?

Here's an example that will hopefully make it clearer. If you put in a 600hp engine in the car, the fact that everything else is so much more likely to break will in fact void the warranty, regardless of whether the dealership can prove actual abuse. The abuse is imputed by the fact that the modification was done.
Here, the dealership would not have to prove that you actually pushed the 600hp engine hard.

and the defense you bring up, that "well you can't prove that i actually used it or abused it" will hold absolutely no weight.

Well if I were you EVO8 I would be honest and ask myself did I launch the car soo hard because I believed that my Exedy clutch will handle it if so please pay for it. If you truly believe that you did not then hell with Mitsu. Fight for it and take them down, being a man is the KEY.

if you replaced the clutch and it held stronger than the old, it gives more stress to the rest of the drivetrain and it messes up, I don't see how you think that mitsu would be responsible. in your standards, the exedy clutch was "better" because it grab better, in mitsu's standards, your new clutch is "worse" because it causes more shock and stress..

so it's a fight between who's standard is right.. and I think that you should accept the fact that the transfer case got too much shock and died

-joe

yeah, it just doesn't make any sense about how they're at fault for your transfer case?

were you unaware that the clutch would put more strain on the drivetrain, thus voiding your warranty and possibly harming your car?

but then, it's not set in stone, so good luck... i do hope you get lucky enough to get a new xfer case

YOU ARE SO UNBELIEVABLY CONFUSED ABOUT HOW LEGITIMATE BUSINESS WORKS.

BUSINESS 101:
==============================================
say your business was making barbecues and you warranty them against defects. you make them with enough quality to cook just about anything that will fit on a platter to eat.

then some redneck A-hole calls you and says he's going to SUE YOU because he dropped a 1200-lb COW on his new BBQ and the thing crumpled like a soda can under the weight.

it also smashed his foot and he's seeking damages because you were negligent in your engineering.
==============================================
YOU, SIR, are PRECISELY the source of the problem in this country when it comes to frivolous lawsuits and driving up the costs of LEGIT warranty work for others who have completely STOCK cars for the sole purpose of keeping their warranty valid.

if Mitsu didn't say it loud enough, let me repeat for them:

"Here's a funnel and a pencil, now GO PACK SAND"

Jesus f---king christ. Quick pointer to everyone on here that tries to argue some point or another. Namecalling is not persuaive. Its embarassing. It makes people lose respect for anything that comes out of your mouth.

That being said, ill try to simplify this one again for those that don't understand. The point is NOT that the transfer case was DEFINATELY broken by the clutch. The point is that the clutch greatly increased the chances that the t-case would ACTUALLY break.

You, grod101, are obviously in a better position that he is b/c you actually left your **** stock. But even then, at the point where the t-case failure isn't happening to everyone, or even to a substantial amount of people (poll it if you don't believe me), it is still very likely that the failure is attributable to driver error or abuse. Naturally, every single person on here that breaks his t-case is going to deny that he can't drive, but you and i both know its an ego-fest on here, so i don't expect you to admit anything. But, if you want to keep your next t-case from breaking, you might want to think twice about how you drive your car, and maybe learn from someone else.

But back to the main point. The issue is that he put in a part that greatly increased the chance of the t-case breaking. This is enough for the dealer to deny a claim. Try to follow me here:

Does anyone remember the crankwalking problems with the 2g? You want to know why Mitsu never gave a rats ass about it on a large scale? b/c most people that suffered from crank walk already had mods in their car. That is directly analogous to the situation here. It didn't matter that the mods didn't cause the crankwalking.

do we understand a little more now? :)