FCA and social media

[BJG32]

I want to encourage anyone pissed off about this warranty stuff to do what i am doing. Troll all social media ads. Make them do the right thing and shut us up.

Screenshot_20160819-231443.jpg

[BJG32]

I received the message below from a member. Since he didnt say it here i will not disclose the member, but FYI....

"I own a Reputation Management company that deals with removing online activity like this. I know the impact of this very well and it absolutely, without a doubt, works!

You are on the right path, and others should join in. If you really want to make an impact, create a blog (wordpress or blogspot) and include the individual names of execs responsible for these denials. Soon enough, when someone Google's the exec personally, it will show in search results (most likely page 1) and will be the ultimate form of embarrassment. People will respond. I see it everyday...but I'm the guy on the other side cleaning the mess up.

If this is an idea that interests you or any others you know, feel free to PM me for any advice. Google prioritizes wording with negative connotation. Words like "Scam, Fraud, Pissed" etc.

Blogs are the modern day big corp response mechanism.

[sadil]

This is exactly what I wanted to do. If you setup a blog, analysis of the issue by the commuity works wonders to create depth for the discussion!

[Space Truckin]

The only way to get the attention of the powers that be at FCA.

[Arizona Vipers]

Do we really want to do this over 2 motors that have been denied warranty claims that we don't even know the full story?
Seems that we are all causing the ruin of the Viper's reputation forever. The car will always be known as a piece of junk.
Up before the last couple of motors, Chrysler has not only replaced the motors but extended the warranty 5 years. We should at least praise them for that before ruining the last 25 years of reputation due to two warranty claims being denied.

Thoughts?

[BJG32]

Valid concern. Maybe we word our complaints more strategically and aim it more at FCA's handling of viper warranty work than the engine.

But on that note, with enough of us involved, FCA should nip this in the bud fast. Hardly anyone will see what we write.

Yes, its only 2 cars right now but more to come. I want to enjoy my $100k car again and not feel like i am risking an $8k rebuild just to drive it.

[Viper Girl]

Hardly anyone will see what we write.

Actually these forums get read often by FCA... I think Flatout said they are taking another look at the motors... I'd suggest we get all the facts first...

[BJG32]

Actually these forums get read often by FCA... I think Flatout said they are taking another look at the motors... I'd suggest we get all the facts first...

I was talking about general public reading our comments inside the ads/posts on Facebook/twitter. In other words I dont think the smear campaign will ruin vipers rep for good. What is being written and documented this forum will be 1000 times more damaging to viper's reputation.

Yes, I know for sure FCA will see this forum and what we write in the ads if they have half a brain. If not they don't, then they are failing at their jobs.

[Topplayer]

If the cars were bone stock I would get behind this idea. This sounds over the top for a MODIFIED car warranty denial. Just my 2 cents

[Bruce H.]

This is absolutely the wrong approach...at this very early stage about what we're afraid "might" happen based on two claims that we know very little about when you get right down to it.

These forums are for the support of the Viper community, and the manufacturer hasn't just been a part of it, it's been the backbone of it. Those of us here who have met and interacted with various Team Viper members have uniformly been extremely impressed with their enthusiasm, dedication, commitment, integrity and pride in the Viper and owner community.

Many here have purchased their Vipers in large part because of the enormous goodwill that Team Viper has created with individual owners and the community at large. It's a source of pride that we share in what they created as much for themselves as for those who would purchase and share in their passion.

To turn on them like this is an absolute betrayal of the relationship THEY have worked so hard to create, enhance and maintain. This relationship doesn't exist because of some slick marketing move, it's from years of meeting and getting to know many of the individual hard-care enthusiasts who designed, engineered, tested, raced, and supported the Viper over the years, and who have made themselves accessible to owners and car enthusiasts over many, many years. That's who they are, and they've tried in every way imaginable to make us family. I doubt this close relationship exists with any other marque.

Attacking FCA in public is also a public attack on our Team Viper friends, and it's not much of a stretch to see it's an attack on our whole community. Angry members flinging extremely harsh and vulgar criticism, threatening not to buy another, warning others not to buy any Viper, selling theirs, some claiming to be afraid to drive theirs, advising others not to make even minor modifications of things that they know have no bearing on warranty. All the while we knew, or should have known, that modifying the engine with an aftermarket computer and more aggressive tune could risk the vehicle warranty, or make a claim more difficult....

And that's where we are at now...two claims refused. Those owners need to aggressively establish their cases and pursue their warranty claims within the protection that the law provides. If the community wants to help we should be assisting them with establishing their cases, their claims, and help fund escalating legal costs if a strong case is made and refused by FCA.

That's the approach we should be recommending, and the way to support our community rather than destroying it.

[BJG32]

Easy to say for someone not led down the wrong path and has opportunity to keep the car stock. The modification didn't cause the $8k repair or $30k replace bill. I dont care what the car manual says. Throw it out and say you didnt get one.

I am now seeing arrow controllers for sale with no warning to potential buyers....just advertised as a "good deal"

Mods were never a problem in the past. This mod was created by the engineer of the engine.

They are using a loophole to screw us over for somebody else's incompetence.

[Rapidrezults]

If the cars were bone stock I would get behind this idea. This sounds over the top for a MODIFIED car warranty denial. Just my 2 cents

In most circumstances I would agree with this, however, it sickens me to think that the TA I sold that had an Arrow PCM, that I replaced with the stock PCM prior to sale, could potentially be trading hands and the unsuspecting buyer has no idea if his motor goes, they'll deny the claim because of something someone else (me) had installed at an earlier date.

There are hundreds of Arrow PCMs installed out there. At what point will they create a protocol to start denying any and all claims related to the drivetrain because of a PCM. They already placed restrictions on every driveline component/category of the second reported failure/denial. What is next? GPS location tracking to determine whether a car has been tracked so they can create another warranty denial protocol?

[Vibert]

If the cars were bone stock I would get behind this idea. This sounds over the top for a MODIFIED car warranty denial. Just my 2 cents

The two failures that are causing so much concern were not modified at the time of failure. Both had the arrow PCM installed but then subsequently taken off. They failed with the stock PCM on them. Additionally, there have been an untold number of failures of "stock" cars, so, modified or not, these engines are problematic. FCA knows it but they're being slimy SOBs in how they handle this.

And by the way, if the cars were significantly modified, then I would agree with negating the warranty. But, c'mon! A temporary installation of an aftermarket PCM?! FCA is exercising their right to cancel a warranty because of that? It's tiring to read the inevitable apologists' posts justufying the immoral actions of these faceless global corporate conglomerates. FYI, they'll screw you if it earns the CEO an additional nickel.

Total BS.

SCREW YOU FCA!!! I was considering a charger hellcat for me and a Pacifica for my wife and kids. NO MORE FCA PRODUCTS. Act with some morality and transparency.

[nx91notch]

Until we see the outcome of what happens with these 2 motors I think we should hold off on the social media front.

Flatout and others are working hard to fix this. They don't need to have the added wall put up with FCA being pissed off about a social media attack.

Plus we don't want the Vette guys catching too much wind of this we won't hear the end of it.

[Murpowa]

This isnt going to solve squat and, if anything, might even backfire putting a bad taste in FCA's mouth about the overall Viper community.

Let the big boys like Woodhouse and VE serve as the middle man for masses.

[Steve M]

There are hundreds of Arrow PCMs installed out there. At what point will they create a protocol to start denying any and all claims related to the drivetrain because of a PCM.

You speak as if this is something new and unexpected...have you ever owned/modded a GM product that was under warranty? I had my first experience with this back in 2002 with the Camaro I bought new that same year...I had trouble with my transmission getting stuck in 3rd gear and rear axle gear whine. I had the car in at least 5-6 times for different warranty claims related to the powertrain, and do you know what they did immediately when it came in? They read the PCM to check for any type of aftermarket tuning...thankfully at that point, GM hadn't implemented a counter that showed how many times the PCM had been flashed, and I had been smart enough to put it back to stock before bringing it in. If I'm not mistaken, GM eventually closed that loophole a few years later by implementing a counter in the PCMs.

The last time the transmission was replaced in that car under warranty, I was informed that they would no longer be covering any future transmission warranty claims from me. Why? Because I had installed a shift light, and that was evidence of the car being raced. That's right...a shift light was enough to void my powertrain warranty.

This isn't the first time, nor will it be the last that a manufacturer denies a warranty claim because of an aftermarket modification. This started becoming an issue for all of them in the late 90s and early 2000s, and they've taken steps to protect themselves from dishonest customers. If you modify the PCM in any way, you should reasonably expect that you stand a chance of losing your powertrain warranty.

[Rapidrezults]

You speak as if this is something new and unexpected...have you ever owned/modded a GM product that was under warranty? I had my first experience with this back in 2002 with the Camaro I bought new that same year...I had trouble with my transmission getting stuck in 3rd gear and rear axle gear whine. I had the car in at least 5-6 times for different warranty claims related to the powertrain, and do you know what they did immediately when it came in? They read the PCM to check for any type of aftermarket tuning...thankfully at that point, GM hadn't implemented a counter that showed how many times the PCM had been flashed, and I had been smart enough to put it back to stock before bringing it in. If I'm not mistaken, GM eventually closed that loophole a few years later by implementing a counter in the PCMs.

The last time the transmission was replaced in that car under warranty, I was informed that they would no longer be covering any future transmission warranty claims from me. Why? Because I had installed a shift light, and that was evidence of the car being raced. That's right...a shift light was enough to void my powertrain warranty.

This isn't the first time, nor will it be the last that a manufacturer denies a warranty claim because of an aftermarket modification. This started becoming an issue for all of them in the late 90s and early 2000s, and they've taken steps to protect themselves from dishonest customers. If you modify the PCM in any way, you should reasonably expect that you stand a chance of losing your powertrain warranty.

I get it, and it's always been hit or miss depending on dealer and other circumstances. I am newish to the Viper community, but the stories I've heard about past generation Viper warranty coverage does not echo your experience with GM what so ever. I had a Viper owner tell me a story that his motor was covered even after Arrow/Dodge determined he had a supercharger installed at the time of incident. That's why Woodhouse and VE have been so supported over the years, because of their willingness to go above and beyond and help customers overcome issues that were not looked at with a level of diploamcy and realism ...now FCA has started to implement its authority over these issues and our good friends at Woodhouse & VE are essentially powerless. What used to be more of an enthusiast, tight-knit feeling to warranty process is now consistent with your GM war stories.

I totally understand the don't mess with my motor mentality by FCA, if that's how it has to be. What I don't agree with is a spun bearing that is consistent with a substantial number of incidents in the warranty archives being denied because of something that was clearly not the culprit.

Sidenote: I recently had my diff replaced because of the "known" issue that occurred with some of the 2016s. Even though my car did not fall under the reported dates of affected diffs, they still honored the replacement. Here's the kicker...I have a HC package on the vehicle and "technically" going by the new FCA rules this would've precluded me from a new differential. So in this one instance, they decided that a known problem was okay to fix on a car that had a modified power train.

[Vibert]

Had FCA built a reliable product, I would have accepted the risk of possibly voiding the warranty with an aftermarket PCM. I thought it was a reliable platform, "bulletproof". They built a plague ridden engine this time around and are now maneuvering to shift the cost of their F-up to undeserving customers.

I like the idea of a social media blitz if the big guys here in the forum can't make FCA see reason.

[BJG32]

Had FCA built a reliable product, I would have accepted the risk of possibly voiding the warranty with an aftermarket PCM. I thought it was a reliable platform, "bulletproof". They built a plague ridden engine this time around and are now maneuvering to shift the cost of their F-up to undeserving customers.

I like the idea of a social media blitz if the big guys here in the forum can't make FCA see reason.

Agreed. I can hold off, but we have this in our back pocket. If they stick to their guns I'll smear. Could care less what it does to the company because ill never own their products again. Stab your customers in the back, im pulling the knife out and jamming it in theirs.

If you think this strategy will have no effect, do a little more research. There are companies thriving on the business of cleaning up negative social media/internet attention.

I get it if going forward they want to void a warranty for performance upgrades. BUT if the car is returned to stock, honor the warranty.

And dont advertise track records if you are going to void warranties for track use.

[ViperTony]

If you think this strategy will have no effect, do a little more research. There are companies thriving on the business of cleaning up negative social media/internet attention.

It won't have any effect. Viper is all but a memory at FCA. It's not even a blip on their sales radar. The Viper owner population does not exist in their eye when compared to massive numbers of owners for their other vehicles. It won't get any attention from FCA. Back in 2006/2007 a similar social media campaign was started against Chrysler to stop them from closing down dealerships such as Tator's Dodge. Despite the social media activities, letters, rallies, documentary, etc. it did shit. They shut him down and others without giving it another thought. Since then FCA took over more layers of bureaucracy and bean counters have been added. The people, the right people, that once existed that could help with warranty issues are LONG gone. When the CEO of a company is solely focused on trying to sell the company vs. doing whats right for the customer, and with an outgoing Viper they don't care about, we're not going to get any attention. Most certainly, they're not going to taint the sale by acknowledging a defect issue with Viper engines (even they knew about it).

At the end of the day, Vipers and Viper owners are nothing more a few obscure pimples on the otherwise massive ass that is now FCA. Threatening the sales of their other vehicles because a few thousand Viper owners won't buy their products anymore won't do anything. They have MILLIONS of customers for their other vehicles. On the other hand, had Viper been a mass-produced vehicle like Corvette and tens of millions of customers complained....you can bet your ass this issue would've been resolved as soon as it started.

Good luck. I'm not knocking you, it's a great cause but you'll find yourself more frustrated.

[Bruce H.]

Make them do the right thing and shut us up.

Do we know what is the right thing? We'd all be relieved to know what the cause(s) is of the bulk of the failures. Many have no doubt been from low oil levels caused by owners who didn't check, and those owners were extremely lucky to have theirs replaced under warranty when they could have been denied.

Do we want them to cover engines that owners have modified with just the Arrow pcm because we feel that couldn't possibly cause engine failures, and what about other engine mods that we feel are equally safe. Where do you draw the line? I'm guessing every vendor installing turbos and superchargers with tunes thinks their installs are safe. And how does FCA protect themselves from abuse? The first thing owners with engine problems do is remove the Arrow pcm and any evidence of a mod. Why, if they think it couldn't cause a problem and wouldn't affect warranty?

One of the owners of a denied claim was warned about the Arrow potentially causing an engine claim before he purchased it. He understood and accepted that potential risk. He appears to be taking responsibility for that and is not one of those promoting a public lynching. I'm sure he's also hoping that he'll be able to successfully make the claim that the pcm wasn't the cause of the failure, and that's where our efforts should be focused.

Easy to say for someone not led down the wrong path and has opportunity to keep the car stock. The modification didn't cause the $8k repair or $30k replace bill. I dont care what the car manual says. Throw it out and say you didnt get one.

I am now seeing arrow controllers for sale with no warning to potential buyers....just advertised as a "good deal"

Mods were never a problem in the past. This mod was created by the engineer of the engine.

They are using a loophole to screw us over for somebody else's incompetence.

I don't ever recall seeing it stated that the Arrow PCM would not, and could not, void your engine warranty, and I've followed and wanted one since before they were made available. Many chose not to buy the Arrow because they didn't want to risk having any issue with their warranty. I discussed the Arrow tune with Dick in 2014 and he could not recommend it for our 91 octane premium most commonly available in Ontario. More aggressive tunes and lower octane don't mix, nor do more demanding operating conditions. More aggressive drivers buy more aggressive tunes, and if they accidentally or intentionally use lower octane, or get some bad fuel, then shit happens. If I had bought one I'd make that decision with eyes wide open, and i suspect most here did also.

So that's looking at the reality the manufacture faces, and knowing that owners who are guilty of abusing their engines will likely deny it, with this forum is full of examples of that intent.

And Dick and Arrow weren't incompetent...they created it for those who were willing to accept the trade-off of higher risk for higher performance. It was never designed to be sold or warranted by FCA.

In most circumstances I would agree with this, however, it sickens me to think that the TA I sold that had an Arrow PCM, that I replaced with the stock PCM prior to sale, could potentially be trading hands and the unsuspecting buyer has no idea if his motor goes, they'll deny the claim because of something someone else (me) had installed at an earlier date.

There are hundreds of Arrow PCMs installed out there. At what point will they create a protocol to start denying any and all claims related to the drivetrain because of a PCM. They already placed restrictions on every driveline component/category of the second reported failure/denial. What is next? GPS location tracking to determine whether a car has been tracked so they can create another warranty denial protocol?

This is an unfortunate situation all arpound, and hopefully buyers will be aware of the potential issue, and then make an informed decision.

[Vibert]

It won't have any effect. Viper is all but a memory at FCA. It's not even a blip on their sales radar. The Viper owner population does not exist in their eye when compared to massive numbers of owners for their other vehicles. It won't get any attention from FCA. Back in 2006/2007 a similar social media campaign was started against Chrysler to stop them from closing down dealerships such as Tator's Dodge. Despite the social media activities, letters, rallies, documentary, etc. it did shit. They shut him down and others without giving it another thought. Since then FCA took over more layers of bureaucracy and bean counters have been added. The people, the right people, that once existed that could help with warranty issues are LONG gone. When the CEO of a company is solely focused on trying to sell the company vs. doing whats right for the customer, and with an outgoing Viper they don't care about, we're not going to get any attention. Most certainly, they're not going to taint the sale by acknowledging a defect issue with Viper engines (even they knew about it).

At the end of the day, Vipers and Viper owners are nothing more a few obscure pimples on the otherwise massive ass that is now FCA. Threatening the sales of their other vehicles because a few thousand Viper owners won't buy their products anymore won't do anything. They have MILLIONS of customers for their other vehicles. On the other hand, had Viper been a mass-produced vehicle like Corvette and tens of millions of customers complained....you can bet your ass this issue would've been resolved as soon as it started.

Good luck. I'm not knocking you, it's a great cause but you'll find yourself more frustrated.

There's a very sad reality to much of this.

[ViperGeorge]

Do we know what is the right thing? We'd all be relieved to know what the cause(s) is of the bulk of the failures. Many have no doubt been from low oil levels caused by owners who didn't check, and those owners were extremely lucky to have theirs replaced under warranty when they could have been denied.

Do we want them to cover engines that owners have modified with just the Arrow pcm because we feel that couldn't possibly cause engine failures, and what about other engine mods that we feel are equally safe. Where do you draw the line? I'm guessing every vendor installing turbos and superchargers with tunes thinks their installs are safe. And how does FCA protect themselves from abuse? The first thing owners with engine problems do is remove the Arrow pcm and any evidence of a mod. Why, if they think it couldn't cause a problem and wouldn't affect warranty?

One of the owners of a denied claim was warned about the Arrow potentially causing an engine claim before he purchased it. He understood and accepted that potential risk. He appears to be taking responsibility for that and is not one of those promoting a public lynching. I'm sure he's also hoping that he'll be able to successfully make the claim that the pcm wasn't the cause of the failure, and that's where our efforts should be focused.



I don't ever recall seeing it stated that the Arrow PCM would not, and could not, void your engine warranty, and I've followed and wanted one since before they were made available. Many chose not to buy the Arrow because they didn't want to risk having any issue with their warranty. I discussed the Arrow tune with Dick in 2014 and he could not recommend it for our 91 octane premium most commonly available in Ontario. More aggressive tunes and lower octane don't mix, nor do more demanding operating conditions. More aggressive drivers buy more aggressive tunes, and if they accidentally or intentionally use lower octane, or get some bad fuel, then shit happens. If I had bought one I'd make that decision with eyes wide open, and i suspect most here did also.

So that's looking at the reality the manufacture faces, and knowing that owners who are guilty of abusing their engines will likely deny it, with this forum is full of examples of that intent.

And Dick and Arrow weren't incompetent...they created it for those who were willing to accept the trade-off of higher risk for higher performance. It was never designed to be sold or warranted by FCA.





This is an unfortunate situation all arpound, and hopefully buyers will be aware of the potential issue, and then make an informed decision.

Except that Dick has also said that the Arrow PCM did not cause the spun bearings in these two engines. From what I understand he examined the bearings in Disc's engine. Now Dick is the guy that was responsible for engine development at SRT before he retired and went to Arrow where he then developed the Arrow PCM. If you can't believe him then who can you believe? Besides, as has been stated dozens of times, the engines are prone to spinning bearings even when stock. Given this I don't believe that FCA's position is reasonable.

In the case of the second warranty denial the PCM had a mileage difference of about 300 miles. This indicated that the Arrow PCM was only installed for 300 or so miles. Are you saying that in that time it trashed the bearing? My Arrow PCM has been on my car for 8000 miles and so far so good and I'm running 91 octane usually here in Colorado. I'd bet dollars to donuts that the engine would have failed even if it had been left stock. Then what? Would FCA start denying claims because you were running a slightly different viscosity oil or a different brand oil with a different additive package? This thing stinks.

[FLATOUT]

Bruce, you are wrong. Those of us that are in this business that are seeing the failures including engineers that work for the manufacturer can quickly look at the failure and determine if it was or was not caused by the Arrow controller. When there are ZERO signs of oil starvation other than the one affected bearing, or detonation (what you'd see on a 91 octane failure) it points to some other manufacturing defect.

I know that you are new to the Viper platform with your gen V but Mopar sold this same controller for the gen IV's for years and STILL does and we never had issues like this.

Your statement about a bunch of motors being replaced because owners ran them low on oil? Where do you get that from? Any facts to back that statement up? I can tell as someone that has seen a lot of these failures in person that that is not an accurate statement.

Do you think I would waste a good portion of my vacation with my family if this wasn't a situation that truly waranted extra attention?

[FLATOUT]

Hell my car makes an extra 130rwhp over stock and on the factory bearings and my motor has been incredible and EXCEPTIONALLY reliable. I got a good one it just turned 11,000 miles and I've had my oil analyzed multiple times and my motor has been absolutely spot on.

And there have been quite a few engineers that have seen these motors recently and I can assure its not just Arrows stance that it wasn't the controller.

Except that Dick has also said that the Arrow PCM did not cause the spun bearings in these two engines. From what I understand he examined the bearings in Disc's engine. Now Dick is the guy that was responsible for engine development at SRT before he retired and went to Arrow where he then developed the Arrow PCM. If you can't believe him then who can you believe? Besides, as has been stated dozens of times, the engines are prone to spinning bearings even when stock. Given this I don't believe that FCA's position is reasonable.

In the case of the second warranty denial the PCM had a mileage difference of about 300 miles. This indicated that the Arrow PCM was only installed for 300 or so miles. Are you saying that in that time it trashed the bearing? My Arrow PCM has been on my car for 8000 miles and so far so good and I'm running 91 octane usually here in Colorado. I'd bet dollars to donuts that the engine would have failed even if it had been left stock. Then what? Would FCA start denying claims because you were running a slightly different viscosity oil or a different brand oil with a different additive package? This thing stinks.