ican agree with that.

personally i do think that solo II type stuff shouldnt void the warranty, im just arguing that based on the definitions of racing they were within their rights imo.

I'm of the mentality, "If I broke it, I have to fix it."

But that said, my concern is the ease at which Mitsubishi is willing to void warranties without giving any real specific parameters or guidelines it would follow.

The fact is, we bought a car with a warranty. The warranty is factored into the price of the vehicle, so it must be worth some dollars. Since they're willing to void warranties, I feel they should reimburse us some money. I'd call that fair.

I'll take $2000 to have my warranty voided. If Mitsu sold the Evo for $30K w/ warranty or $28K w/ NO warranty, I'd choose the no warranty option.

Even that is not black and white. What about the owner who goes to one Solo II event for the purpose of learning more about his/her car? The owner makes 3 or 4 runs with an instructor; the driver and times are not competitive but instructional. However, you could argue a denial for an owner who actively competes weekly and competitively in SCCA events with race tires, upgraded brakes etc.

I would be surprised if :mitsu: has made a nationwide corporate decision to implement a warranty denial based upon SCCA events. It is probably local and dependent upon the circumstance not withstanding an alleged verbal breach of use agreement between MSM_S2K and his dealership. I guess we will find out in the coming weeks.

Speedlimit... :)

I'm sure many others (like Al or Shiv) who fully plan on tuning the car to the max would take the $2000, too. Of course, that value is much like insurance, if half the people don't take it, the other half would have to pay more for it.

I also have to agree that the only way to deal with :mitsu: is to seek a MASSIVE legal action. They would have never dare to treat Japanese customers this way. The American customers of VW of Americas suffered from the same treatment when Mass Air Flow sensors were failing at insane rate and VW would 1. refuse warranty and 2. make owners pay $600 for a 50cent electrical (not something mechanical like a clutch or transfer case!!!) part. So people sued with class action and won . Next issue was window regulators - same thing, for 2 years VW denied sh&t, people sued in class action and bOOm - 7 years extended warranty :D . I told my mom who lives in Germany about issues with VWoA and she right away said VW would've never dare to pull this sh&t in Homeland, but American customers suffering is ok, I guess.
Another case in point - State of Florida vs. Ford, where Ford customers were p*ssed about false horsepower claims and insisted Attorney General take a swing of a bat at Ford. Floridians won. But I have to give Ford props for not denying warranties on performance cars ( and Ford builts more high and mid level performance cars than any :mitsu: in the world). Or take Chevy with Corvettes.
Upper levels of :mitsu: management who after all brought :mitsu: to almost a brink of extinction (read recent news) now are trying to cover their @ss#s and are issueing a "NO_NO" orders to dealers, so while dealers COULD make more money on fixing transfer cases and transmissions under warranty now they just WON"T, because :mitsu: wouldn't reimburse dealers for such repairs.
So the way I see it- preventative attack. Always hit them where it hurts and hit them before they pull a stunt on you. :mitsu: already spit in a collective US customers' face by ways of misguiding, false advertisement and unfair practices, also they target customers of under 30 age which :mitsu: assumes would be afraid to sue. So US customers should have no remourse towards :mitsu: even if it means EVO will be pulled out of USA. As the wise man said: "Holy man's chair is never vacant". If Evo is gone - there is gonna be another "evo" around the corner, made by a decent car manufacturer. US market has barely scratched the surface of all-wheel drive four-door fun-to-drive econoboxes with A4, S4, R32,STI, Turbo Forester. 2005 and 2006 gonna bring new SVT models with new Focus platforms and all-wheel drive cars and trucks. SMILE!!! :D

Kurt you have a good point. However, I said I would be on you side couple monthes ago but i got screwed and I did not race the car. They made fun of me when i said my brakes a wrraped. They said I did this. man Mitsu has to relize that not every one who is buying the car is complete bone head. there are the good people and the bad people and you cant mix both in the one plate.

bigval I agree however. an EVO is an EVo not SVT sorry. Mitsu made agreat car with out backing it up.

Personally, I am OK with paying for the problems that may arise from my use of my heavily modded Evo on real track days. I would also expect anyone drag racing their modded Evo to do the same.

I feel the problem lies in Mitsubishi not backing up cars that are ocasionally auto-crossed or used for an ocasional driving school. They advertise and sell the car essentially as a street legal race car.

I also feel that there is a larger problem behind all of this, in that as a member of our society you have more protection if you illegally street race your car than if you safely and legally participate in track events. It bothers me that if I "follow the rules", I risk paying far more of a price than someone who breaks them. When the rules are that far out of balance they need to be re-evaluated.

Here's a link to another thread about an Evo driver whose warranty has been voided.

https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...572#post986572

I just started reading your thread and notice that you participated in the Utah auto-x event with your son. You by chance didn't buy your car from "I back up every car I sell" Ken Garff down town did you? If you, that explains why you're having some many problems. I bought a 00 Eclipse from them and had horrible problems with there service department. They voided my warranty and made false claims about my car and the district manager was even a bigger clown. You take them to court (whether it's Ken Garff or not) and get you warranty re-issued and stick it to them good.

A clear case of MMNA and the dealers shooting themselves in the foot. They should make an exception for Solo II events - they generally aren't that hard on the car. Apparently, MMNA wants to flatten future sales figures for stock, RS, and MR models, as well as encourage owners to steer their maintenance and repair business away from dealerships. The interesting (and big dollar) legal question will not be so much whether Solo II participation should void the warranty, but rather whether MMNA's advertising strategy and sales tactics constitute consumer fraud. They didn't sell them to us on their merits as family sedans!

You post a verifiable case number for the class action suit and I will send you $200.00 to help pay for it. I am so sick of Mitsu right now I could spit blood. My clutch started slipping (with no abuse and no mods) at around 2000 miles, and I know how to drive a stick.

You try to do the 0-60 times they advertised and the car can't take it, that's BS. I too autocross some, and for those that haven't, I guarantee a trip in and out of Chicago from the burbs (even at posted speeds) puts more wear on the car than an autocross does.

And this months Mitsubishi employee of the month award goes to......KurtP, congrats Kurt, enjoy your close parking spot for June. :lol:

The logic behing their actions really doesn't make sense, does it?

An important item that MSM keeps bringing up is what the dealer said. What the dealer says and what Mitsubishi say are two entirely different things. The dealer is NOT Mitsubishi. What the dealer tells you does not necessarily imply or represent Mitsubishi's position on the matter. If the dealership told you something that is clearly not Mitsu's position, perhaps you should be suing the dealer and not Mitsubishi.

Anyone know how I might get in touch with Mitsubishi's customer relations department?

----

Mitsubishi knows what types of folks they're targeting for the Evolution. Wouldn't it only make sense to take some sensible steps in catering to their enthusiast customers?

They know folks are going to modify the car. Why not bring over Ralli//Art parts, clearly state which parts do not, and do void the warranty, and have dealers install them?

Why not extend the PitPass program to owners who will push the car hard and make modifications to the car that are not otherwise covered by the warranty. Offer a special extended warranty perhaps. Perhaps introduce several levels of PitPass, in which these enthusiast customers who will break things and require maintenance more often can at least get a reasonable discount.

It would only make sense, otherwise, why on earth would they produce the RS? That car has no place EXCEPT for the track. You don't roll extra thin sheet metal for nothing, ya know.

-----

As for these disputes, this'll probably be resolved on a case-by-case basis, but it wouldn't hurt for Mitsubishi to make a bad situation into something better. If anyone can get me a phone number with customer relations (I am crazy busy), that'd be great.