Sold the car

[PetrolioBenzina]

Don't lurk, post reports about your new car.

[Rampage]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

He did have the recall done. Probably has several hundred miles on the car since it was done. Was probably a success story that has now been turned into a horror one.

It is sad that the odds of an engine failure seem to be significantly increased if you do the recall which is meant to prevent a possible engine failure.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Rampage

It is sad that the odds of an engine failure seem to be significantly increased if you do the recall which is meant to prevent a possible engine failure.

I still am baffled why they recalled for this. There have been other issues that would cause the car to stall that they just issued TSBs for (the TOB and injectors on the early ones).


People also are forgetting, didn't know about, or are just ignoring the oil system failures that resulted in spun bearings on cars that had came straight from the factory. We have about 30 spun bearings reported on this forum before the recall was even thought of much less made. Most of those failures were cars from the same date range as the recall and the majority of the info we received included silicone blocking channels. I bet many of the others where no cause was found (or were blamed on low oil) also had sealant where it didn't belong but it was never found since nobody dug deep enough to see it.
So, with the current known number of post recall failures the odds of an issue are only slightly worse than they were right from the start.

[xdavidx]

Given the frequency of issues after having the recall work done vs the frequency of issues for which the recall was created combined with the current value of the older cars that are the only ones effected, I'd think it makes a lot more sense to take your chances with not having the recall done. Prime example of 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it'.


If your car only last a month longer and you lose $10k in value when it blows up, you are still better off than 1 months depreciation on a fiat 124.

[funwheeldrive]

FIX
IT
AGAIN
TONY

[PetrolioBenzina]

I traded my 13 because it needed new tires.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by PetrolioBenzina

I traded my 13 because it needed new tires.

I thought you wanted that more aggressive 17 front bumper!

[PetrolioBenzina]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

I thought you wanted that more aggressive 17 front bumper!

That, too. Agression, grrrrrrrrrrrrrr...............
Scares all the Camry's.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by PetrolioBenzina

That, too. Agression, grrrrrrrrrrrrrr...............
Scares all the Camry's.

Not the new ones!

[PetrolioBenzina]

JFC that's ugly. It might be worse than a Type R, too.

[Sapphireho]

Originally Posted by PetrolioBenzina

I traded my 13 because it needed new tires.

I thought it was because it needed a cabin air filter? It never runs the same after you change the original.

[humfrz]

Originally Posted by PetrolioBenzina

JFC that's ugly. It might be worse than a Type R, too.

Oh, I think it's quite handsome, for a 4-door sedan.




humfrz

[NWFRS]

I've been following this recall for a while and watching the post-recall engine-failure thread. I'll take my chances without the fix. Honestly not even really worried about it. The cost of a new engine/rebuild/upgrades are negligible anyway, especially when measured against the cost of jumping ship and taking that initial new-car depreciation hit again.

But whatever. I understand the appeal of Fiat. I'd go back to one of the old ones in an instant if I could justify a fair-weather car again. My 1970 124 Sport Spider was nothing but reliable after some performance upgrades and a professional tune-up. Best driving car I ever owned. Those Lampredi twin-cam engines were ahead of their time. The original 124 Spiders had dual overhead cams, timing belts, and all-wheel disc brakes from 1966.