Toyota GR86, 86, FR-S and Subaru BRZ Forum & Owners Community - FT86CLUB

Toyota GR86, 86, FR-S and Subaru BRZ Forum & Owners Community - FT86CLUB (https://www.ft86club.com/forums/index.php)
-   Issues | Warranty | Recalls / TSB (https://www.ft86club.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=72)
-   -   Has anyone had a warranty claim denied? Seized engine! Pics of teardown added 6/5 (https://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=37810)

sierra 05-30-2013 11:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ATL BRZ (Post 970909)
The issue is the direct injector seals failing due to detonation between up shifts because the transient ignition retard tables are not optimized (flawed) in the factory ecu tune. 91 octane gas and lots of heat in the block on track increases the risk of said detonation. The seals fail, cylinders run dangerously lean and boom.

I don't know how many times this needs to be repeated before people stop speculating otherwise...

Thanks for that info.
Another interesting point. Is this engine is designed for E10 or did they decide it should be alright from the spec? My car states on the filler cap 98 RON only. On my mates 2013 Ford Fiesta is says 91RON or higher and E20 compatible[something like that]. So why isn't the FA20 suitable for any ethanol in Oz but it is in the US?

Opie 05-30-2013 11:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by P@ul (Post 971018)
Someone has already downloaded the previously mentioned new ECU calibration that specifically identified the change in transient retard tables, extending the original 5,600 rpm all the way out to 10,000 rpm. http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showp...3&postcount=67

Hence, NO speculation.

You are speculating that our ECU mapping doesn't already account for this. If you haven't noticed, this isn't South Africa.

Opie 05-30-2013 11:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lonewolf (Post 971348)
Don't be so quick to make legal or factual determinations, you've been wrong before...:slap:

And I'm not afraid to admit it if I am, unlike 99.999999% of everyone else here.

Dave-ROR 05-30-2013 11:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ahausheer (Post 971190)
Lots of semantics going on. All race engines will die at some point we all know this. It is not reasonable to think you can race/track your car all you like and then keep ordering new engines when it breaks. Don't mean to be condescending but it is their right to deny a warranty claim due to race conditions or abuse.

A car that has been tracked a lot will need a rebuild earlier, sure. However, it shouldn't need one in 20,000 miles or so given that it's a stock engine we are talking about.

Opie 05-30-2013 11:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FirestormFRS (Post 971074)
The Act makes it easier for purchasers to sue for breach of warranty by making breach of warranty a violation of federal law, and by allowing consumers to recover court costs and reasonable attorneys' fees. This means that if you lose a lawsuit for breach of either a written or an implied warranty, you may have to pay the customer's costs for bringing the suit, including lawyer's fees.

I was referring to the earlier mention of the Magnussen-Moss Act that keeps getting brought up, this Act refers to the use of aftermarket replacement parts and their effect on warranty coverage, none of which applies to this case from what I've read since no one is denying warranty due to a replacement part.

Quote:

Originally Posted by FirestormFRS (Post 971074)
Quoted from FTC.gov. Refusing to replace the engine if it is found to be a manufacturing defect would constitute a breach of written warranty.....

Correct, assuming it's a manufacturing defect. If this were the case, I doubt Subaru wouldn't waste the time fighting it.

Opie 05-30-2013 11:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave-ROR (Post 971364)
A car that has been tracked a lot will need a rebuild earlier, sure. However, it shouldn't need one in 20,000 miles or so given that it's a stock engine we are talking about.

I agree it "shouldn't", but I've also seen new STI's that "shouldn't" need a new clutch after only 2,000 miles either but did...Not due a defect, due to the loose nut behind the wheel.

Of course the nut cried warranty all over the place too...

Lonewolf 05-31-2013 12:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Opie (Post 971362)
And I'm not afraid to admit it if I am, unlike 99.999999% of everyone else here.


Okay, so that means you're the only one...lol

Lonewolf 05-31-2013 12:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Opie (Post 971379)
I was referring to the earlier mention of the Magnussen-Moss Act that keeps getting brought up, this Act refers to the use of aftermarket replacement parts and their effect on warranty coverage, none of which applies to this case from what I've read since no one is denying warranty due to a replacement part.



Correct, assuming it's a manufacturing defect. If this were the case, I doubt Subaru wouldn't waste the time fighting it.

The Magnusson-Moss WARRANTY Act goes far beyond that...jeezus, just stop posting, lol

Further, manufacturers fight recognizing and admitting to manufacturing, design, and assembly defects all the time...look up the Ford Pinto and the Firestone tire fiasco...looks like another swing and a miss

By the way, I am a licensed attorney unlike 99% of the people here...(pssst, that means you)

Dave-ROR 05-31-2013 12:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Opie (Post 971385)
I agree it "shouldn't", but I've also seen new STI's that "shouldn't" need a new clutch after only 2,000 miles either but did...Not due a defect, due to the loose nut behind the wheel.

Of course the nut cried warranty all over the place too...

Of course. However I don't see much evidence of excessive user abuse in this case. Unless you know something the rest of us don't...

I've seen engine, trans and clutch failures on other brands in the 20-50k mileage range, I don't know anyone who's had that denied due to track use (vs misshifts, etc).

Nate's ITR went to the dealer with track numbers on it, 49,xxx miles, cage, etc with a bad clutch, replaced no questions asked. Craig's motor went at 10k, spun a bearing, determined that it was an issue despite the cars track usage, replaced without an issue.

The problem here, IMO, is that it doesn't seem like Subaru is even willing to really determine what happened. If it was the DI injector seal problem then they should cover it. If it was a misshift, they should not.

The CSG car is a tracked car, it's not a race car though.

dsgerbc 05-31-2013 12:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Opie (Post 971362)
unlike 99.999999%

Too many nines, sir.
There are only 20 thousand members here.

Frozen_skidmark 05-31-2013 12:24 AM

Take a look at the list people with the idle problem in this thread - and take a look at the amount of catastrophic engine failures. Obviously there is catastrophic problem with this engine, whether it's driving your ass to work or at autocross.

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=15577

This is the lawyer that launched the class action lawsuit against Kia for gas mileage overstating and won.

http://www.doylelowther.com/

In the mean time enjoy the Scion Racing page: where you can sign up to participate in racing events with your brand new Scion FRS! Yay!

http://www.scion.ca/scion/en/lifestyle/racing

or Scion Track Day at Shannonville Ontario: organized by hmmmm Scion, come try our cars at the track and then go buy one because they're awesome on a track.

http://www.scion.ca/scion/en/vehicle...ille-track-day

Read the Scion RACING AGREEMENT here:

http://s3.amazonaws.com/scion.site.p..._waiver_en.pdf


I would suggest some screen shots for future reference. Before these pages disappear.

Wink, wink,
Clay

Hindi 05-31-2013 09:23 AM

Bad Luck twins.

Mikem53 05-31-2013 10:42 AM

When I bought my Z06.. It came with a DVD explaining how to lower the car for the track and to add an extra quart of oil before tracking it and other tips.. Etc..
This was from the manufacturer.. Yet the warranty states that the warranty is void if the car is used on the track or any kind of racing event..
Amazing how they tell you it's made for the track, how to use it on the track... But forget the warranty if something breaks... That's like bait and switch...
Back to the statement... If you wanna play... Your gonna pay..

xjohnx 05-31-2013 10:43 AM

@CSG Mike - Have you considered going the Jalopnik/Autoblog route yet?


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:11 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.


Garage vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.