WARNING: If you changed your transmission fluid, please read

[protpibe]

Originally Posted by mav1178

See below.

Basically if you want to use something out of this range, you can... but you better have a service writer who knows how to communicate these issues with corporate. Otherwise it invites a long list of things to easily write your car off on from a warranty perspective.

-alex

Well that explains the rattle I have at idle sometimes.

[MrBodyMassage]

Originally Posted by mav1178

In any case, I still think the dealer could have communicated the non-OEM transmission fill better to Subaru corporate. To assume a seal would leak because of a different fill fluid (that isn't even that much thinner than stock) is borderline irresponsible as a service technician or manager.

-alex

Alex, he did this as a favor to me because of the angle Subaru was taking. He knew they were trying to deny my warranty claim for non-factory fill. He didn't even ask me if it wasn't factory fill. I don't think he thought the fluid was at fault at all, I think Subaru did. He seemed realistic about the situation, and was helping the customer in this case. I think he knew the seal was leaking, but if he told them it wasn't factory fill that I would be screwed regardless.

[Norton 850]

Originally Posted by mav1178

See below.

Basically if you want to use something out of this range, you can... but you better have a service writer who knows how to communicate these issues with corporate. Otherwise it invites a long list of things to easily write your car off on from a warranty perspective.

-alex

Notably, the service manual on this site calls for 75W-85 fluid for the manual transmission.

[reeves]

44K+ miles on my Pentosin fluid.. no problems so far

I don't track or race, but i don't baby my tranny either.
I've been slacking on maintenance too.. I have 3 more Pentosin bottles in the garage waiting for the next fluid change

[mav1178]

Originally Posted by MrBodyMassage

Alex, he did this as a favor to me because of the angle Subaru was taking. He knew they were trying to deny my warranty claim for non-factory fill. He didn't even ask me if it wasn't factory fill. I don't think he thought the fluid was at fault at all, I think Subaru did. He seemed realistic about the situation, and was helping the customer in this case. I think he knew the seal was leaking, but if he told them it wasn't factory fill that I would be screwed regardless.

You just said what I've been trying to say: the service manager should be able to argue this case for you, on your behalf, to Subaru corporate. There's no issue with running aftermarket or non-OE fill as long as it meets the required specs.

I don't know why he didn't just get details on the oil used in the transmission, because a good warranty claim is FREE MONEY for the dealer. If he simply took down the oil info, time of replacement, it would be a simple warranty claim with ZERO issue.

The fact that this info wasn't taken from you just shows he made this process unnecessarily complicated. To assume a non-factory fill oil would void warranty is just absurd and signs of a horrible dealer service department.

The bolded part is just pure ignorance, plain and simple. You used a valid oil suitable for this transmission, there's nothing to hide.

-alex

Edit: I realize I'm taking a weird position on this... It's mostly the fact that the service manager was hesitant to back your choice of non-OE transmission oil. That is dumb.

[Hot Lava]

Originally Posted by CamryDS

wow -- what a load of crock from subaru

Originally Posted by Dezoris

Subaru makes me limp. Sometimes wish I never bought this pile because of their post purchase support and attitude. It's insulting the lengths they go to create BS excuses for everything.

Originally Posted by mav1178

I'm sorry.

This just reeks of a bad service manager.

"Service manager could not tell if seal was to blame or the fluid was actually too thin."???????????????????????

Really?
If you used an oil within the specs that the FSM or owner's manual called for, there would be zero issue and the seal would be to blame.

Subaru may have complained about the non-OEM fluid, but that's an irrelevant issue and shows a gap in communication between the dealer and the regional service rep. Any properly trained monkey (or laser shark) can provide the proper info.

But back to what I wrote above: What this service manager is smoking, I want to know.

-alex

Reading fail? Short story, short. Service Manager backs OP. Subaru fixed it. I see no problems with this.

[mav1178]

Originally Posted by Hot Lava

Reading fail? Short story, short. Service Manager backs OP. Subaru fixed it. I see no problems with this.

Not reading fail.

The OP implies that the service manager would have an issue with a non-OE tranny oil fill. The OP implies that, from what he was told, Subaru has an issue with a non-OE fill.

In this case, there's no issue. The oil meets Subaru's own specs, the service manager should not be afraid of warranty denial... but OP writes that the service manager thinks otherwise.

That's my beef with this. We all know what we put in our cars, if we have a legitimate claim the service manager should take our position, not the "we might not be able to warranty this problem because you aren't using factory-fill oil" BS.

Maybe the service manager took the side of OP and worked it out. But to suggest that disclosing usage of Pentosin oil instead of Subaru (Idemitsu) oil would be a warranty problem is ignorance at its best.

-alex

[qqzj]

the warranty rate they charge subaru is less than normal rate they charge us. period.

Originally Posted by mav1178

Not reading fail.

The OP implies that the service manager would have an issue with a non-OE tranny oil fill. The OP implies that, from what he was told, Subaru has an issue with a non-OE fill.

In this case, there's no issue. The oil meets Subaru's own specs, the service manager should not be afraid of warranty denial... but OP writes that the service manager thinks otherwise.

That's my beef with this. We all know what we put in our cars, if we have a legitimate claim the service manager should take our position, not the "we might not be able to warranty this problem because you aren't using factory-fill oil" BS.

Maybe the service manager took the side of OP and worked it out. But to suggest that disclosing usage of Pentosin oil instead of Subaru (Idemitsu) oil would be a warranty problem is ignorance at its best.

-alex

[mav1178]

Originally Posted by qqzj

the warranty rate they charge subaru is less than normal rate they charge us. period.

Why does that matter? If you as a dealer have a valid claim on behalf of a customer, you will get paid from Subaru. Only the recently graduated, non-certified accountant with zero experience would try to maximize revenue by charging the customer instead of the corporate office.

I must be the only person on this site seeing this from a different perspective. Everyone else seems to take on the "us vs. Subaru Corporate" mentality, thinking they're out to get us.

-alex

[SHOspazz92]

Just remember that failed parts that are replaced under warranty are kept, then sent off to Subaru afterwords for inspection. If it is found that a dealer replaced a part under warranty that they shouldn't have (Like, for instance the part failed because of misuse, abuse...etc) then the dealer will then have to eat the cost of parts and labor for whatever it is that was replaced (as opposed to SOA eating the cost).

Recently, a BMW dealership in this area had to pay over 100,000 dollars for warranty work that BMWOA found to be unwarranted, all because the Service Writer was happy to do the work "No questions asked". With that being said, if it seems that a dealer, or SOA is being ****y in regards to wanting to deny your claim, just keep in mind that a lot of money is at stake. And while your warranty claim may be warranted I can almost guaruntee that the last 5 enthusiasts before you removed their down pipes, Cobb AP (with a shitty "pro-tune") and intake before bringing their STI in to have the shortblock replaced.

[Poodles]

On the simple subject of the thread, an oil seal isn't going to fail from thinner oil. Oil seals either fail from age/heat or the bearings around them are worn and allow the shaft to move more than the seal can handle. Also common is if there is a groove worn in the shaft on really old engines.


Though in reality, most common is installation error, which is most likely what occurred here (no assembly line is perfect).

[aristo]

This happen to anyone else?

[Hyper4mance2k]

Originally Posted by Kuros

Thin fluid leaking by seals lol.

I don't understand why SOA has become such a pain to deal with over the last few years.

Over the last few years? Anyone who complains about SOA and warranties did absolutely zero research before buying a BRZ. In 2002 Subaru was giving away SCCA memberships to WRX purchasers and then voiding the warranties of the people who used them.

http://www.motorsport.com/automotive...ship-progra-m/

http://autoweek.com/article/car-news...makers-are-not

[shiro]

Originally Posted by Abenaki

I believe you are thinking of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnuson–Moss_Warranty_Act

You beat me to it! lol