Received a response to my note to SRT regarding spun bearing issues

[sadil]

No offense Dave but you have beat this mantra to death in your last 100 posts in a row. We get it, FCA has lost a potential customer and they'll be damn sorry. Nobody is happy about the situation but this hysteria about warranties being denied is getting totally out of hand. Yes, the cars with performance enhancing PCM mods are being denied but somehow people have extrapolated this out to OMG I can't do an oil change myself. Can we get some PROOF of warranty claims being denied for other things like that before we crucify FCA? A bunch of posters feeding unsubstantiated rumors off each other. Is it that unreasonable for FCA to want to verify that an entire motor has to be replaced.

I totally agree. Its getting way out of hand!

[AZTVR]

I'd agree if it wasn't for the Magnuson–Moss Warranty Act. Doesn't matter what rules FCA wants to make up. They have to prove it caused the engine failure. It didn't.

I think that the point is that they only have to prove it if a customer invests unspecified thousands of dollars to make them prove it.

[BJG32]

I think that the point is that they only have to prove it if a customer invests unspecified thousands of dollars to make them prove it.

Yeah...but financial support has be offered by countless owners numerous times. IF this happened to me I'd fight it with the amount of help offered. Sounds like SACA has not given up yet....

[nx91notch]

Your car is still pending warranty work??? WTF?

Bone stock and warranty coverage has been pending this long.

Yeah this makes no sense. If the car is 100% stock there shouldn't be any time loss on warranty approval. The process should go tech removes oil pan and bearings. Snaps a few pics and sends them off to FCA. FCA should turn right around and approve the new motor.

Only thing that should be taking so long is waiting for the motor to actually arrive.

[Snorman]

I've watched these discussions over the last several months and opted to not comment until after I had my car.
The bottom line here is pretty simple...an Arrow PCM changes the configuration of the car as it was delivered by FCA. It doesn't matter if they covered cars with Arrows in the past. It doesn't matter if Dink Winkles designed it. It doesn't matter if FCA knows that there is a casting flaw in the Gen V blocks that may or may not place debris in the lubrication system and cause a failure. What matters is that the car was modified. You have a "contract" with FCA...follow the rules of that contract and they'll abide by its terms.

Insinuating that brake pads and tires and oil changes will void the warranty is a bit extreme. MMA was not written to allow consumers to modify the items in general. It was written to protect consumers' rights to the factory warranty if they use aftermarket replacement parts and service. They can't void your warranty with a part that is a replacement part with the same function as OEM, but they can void your warranty if that part is a "racing" part or changes the configuration of the car (i.e. fuel, spark, timing, AF, rev limiter, etc.).

A lot of the same teeth-gnashing is happening in the Corvette community relative to CAI's and tunes. It won't be hard for FCA to convince a judge that increasing horsepower, adjusting the AF ratio and changing the rev limiter would put internal components of the engine outside of their designed operating parameters.
S.

[mjorgensen]

I've watched these discussions over the last several months and opted to not comment until after I had my car.
The bottom line here is pretty simple...an Arrow PCM changes the configuration of the car as it was delivered by FCA. It doesn't matter if they covered cars with Arrows in the past. It doesn't matter if Dink Winkles designed it. It doesn't matter if FCA knows that there is a casting flaw in the Gen V blocks that may or may not place debris in the lubrication system and cause a failure. What matters is that the car was modified. You have a "contract" with FCA...follow the rules of that contract and they'll abide by its terms.

Insinuating that brake pads and tires and oil changes will void the warranty is a bit extreme. MMA was not written to allow consumers to modify the items in general. It was written to protect consumers' rights to the factory warranty if they use aftermarket replacement parts and service. They can't void your warranty with a part that is a replacement part with the same function as OEM, but they can void your warranty if that part is a "racing" part or changes the configuration of the car (i.e. fuel, spark, timing, AF, rev limiter, etc.).

A lot of the same teeth-gnashing is happening in the Corvette community relative to CAI's and tunes. It won't be hard for FCA to convince a judge that increasing horsepower, adjusting the AF ratio and changing the rev limiter would put internal components of the engine outside of their designed operating parameters.
S.

Trouble with this logic is that if there is a KNOWN issue that is actually causing failures that are the same on a stock engine or modified engines it is an FCA issue, not the parts that are on the car, failures are exactly the same in either scenario... "the PCM is NOT the cause" The defective part is.

[ACRucrazy]

trouble with this logic is that if there is a known issue that is actually causing failures that are the same on a stock engine or modified engines it is an fca issue, not the parts that are on the car, failures are exactly the same in either scenario... "the pcm is not the cause" the defective part is.

thank you!!!!

[Snorman]

Yes, that's understood. But by modifying the car you've just given FCA the ammo they need to enforce their warranty provisions.
There would be no difference in saying it's now okay to put H/C on the car and when it fails, claim that since FCA knew there was a casting issue in the block the H/C didn't cause the failure.
S.

[mjorgensen]

Yes, that's understood. But by modifying the car you've just given FCA the ammo they need to enforce their warranty provisions.
There would be no difference in saying it's now okay to put H/C on the car and when it fails, claim that since FCA knew there was a casting issue in the block the H/C didn't cause the failure.
S.

The out they have there is that you opened the engine and they can say you did it, likely NOT but you could have.

[Snorman]

Maybe H/C was a bad example, but to the point, a modification that has an effect and changes the operating parameters from when the vehicle left CAAP. I do agree, they are using the Arrow controllers and other minor modifications as an out in that they are enforcing their warranty provisions much more stringently.
Now if this turns into FCA invalidating warranties for cars that are 100% stock, but tracked and maintained in accordance with FCA recommendations and requirements...then there is a big problem. Especially for a car advertised as the ACR has been.
S.

[esm_viper]

Well I've had the Arrow PCM on my car since delivery and I have about 3,300 miles now. I just had my oil tested and here's the response from the guy at Blackstone, proof that an aftermarket computer does not cause spun bearings.....

Hi, Eric. Thanks for the email.

Yes, if there was a serious issue, we'd expect metals to be reading high,
even on a short oil run like this. Obviously, some metals will build up
more over time if you run longer on future oil change intervals, so we'll
have to see if the trends show wear metals holding steady even after longer
oil change intervals, but as for what we can see in this report, there's no
evidence of bearing wear or any other issues at this point. It looks great!

Hope that helps. Let me know if there's anything else we can do for you.
Thanks!

Travis Heffelfinger
Blackstone Laboratories
416 E. Pettit Ave.
Fort Wayne, IN 46806
260-744-2380
www.blackstone-labs.com

[lochnessmonster]

I've watched these discussions over the last several months and opted to not comment until after I had my car.
The bottom line here is pretty simple...an Arrow PCM changes the configuration of the car as it was delivered by FCA. It doesn't matter if they covered cars with Arrows in the past. It doesn't matter if Dink Winkles designed it. It doesn't matter if FCA knows that there is a casting flaw in the Gen V blocks that may or may not place debris in the lubrication system and cause a failure. What matters is that the car was modified. You have a "contract" with FCA...follow the rules of that contract and they'll abide by its terms.

Insinuating that brake pads and tires and oil changes will void the warranty is a bit extreme. MMA was not written to allow consumers to modify the items in general. It was written to protect consumers' rights to the factory warranty if they use aftermarket replacement parts and service. They can't void your warranty with a part that is a replacement part with the same function as OEM, but they can void your warranty if that part is a "racing" part or changes the configuration of the car (i.e. fuel, spark, timing, AF, rev limiter, etc.).

A lot of the same teeth-gnashing is happening in the Corvette community relative to CAI's and tunes. It won't be hard for FCA to convince a judge that increasing horsepower, adjusting the AF ratio and changing the rev limiter would put internal components of the engine outside of their designed operating parameters.
S.

THIS^^^^^^^^^^^^ X 1000 Snoreman, your analysis is spot on. Bravo!!!

[ViperGeorge]

To me what is really stupid and what I indicated in my response to Taylor is that FCA is losing future business as a result of their refusal to honor the warranties in question. Several folks have indicated in this thread and others that they are done buying new FCA products. Their denial of a warranty claim WHEN THEY KNOW there is a problem with the engine blocks is a stupid business decision. They would have been better off simply replacing the two engines as a customer service.

Before I retired I ran a large operation at a public company. Every so often a customer would call up and complain about something or other. We would investigate and usually determine it was through no fault of ours. Even in these cases though we might make the client whole in order to protect the relationship. Trust me those customers sing your praises. On the other hand we've all heard the stories that an unhappy customer tells at least 10 others of their bad experience. Simply a stupid decision on the part of FCA. If these were the only two engines to have failed with spun bearings we might say boy that's tough luck but we probably wouldn't be near as upset.

The other thing that people can't lose site of is what happens to the poor slob that buys a used Viper that at one time had the Arrow PCM installed but no longer does. Remember it takes about 2 minutes to swap them. If he subsequently blows the engine FCA will compare the mileage of the PCM to the odometer and deny the warranty. Who's this guy going to go after? What if it was sold by an FCA dealer and reported as still under warranty? I've spoken to at least one major Viper dealer and I know he's concerned about this as they do not run any type of diagnostic for purposes of identifying a PCM swap on any traded in Viper.

[lochnessmonster]

Maybe H/C was a bad example, but to the point, a modification that has an effect and changes the operating parameters from when the vehicle left CAAP. I do agree, they are using the Arrow controllers and other minor modifications as an out in that they are enforcing their warranty provisions much more stringently.
Now if this turns into FCA invalidating warranties for cars that are 100% stock, but tracked and maintained in accordance with FCA recommendations and requirements...then there is a big problem. Especially for a car advertised as the ACR has been.
S.

Again.........Bravo!! You are 100% correct. I realize that there's a lot of money, pride, and reputations at stake here, but at the end of the day, FCA is simply enforcing their contractual rights, and as I have said before, this would be a loser in Court for all the reasons Snoreman indicated. I supported an effort to chip in some cash for an engine replacement fund for people who were denied warranty coverage, and need to get their engines rebuilt, but I was never contacted back by the VOA after I was told they would look into the validity of the claims. Furthermore, it seems like people were more interested in litigation anyway. Months later where is the MMA (knight in shining armour) to the rescue? Nowhere, just as I said. People would rather do a lot of yelling and teeth gnashing rather than simply ponying up some dough and getting these guys back on the road. So be it.

[ViperGeorge]

What ever happened to that class action suit someone was starting?

[lochnessmonster]

What ever happened to that class action suit someone was starting?

Good question. Unless I hear otherwise, I would suggest that it is proceeding like so many of the other, "I'll sue your ass........." tantrums thrown by people who have walked into my office and felt they have been wronged so they threaten legal action: nowhere. All the while, the party on the other side quietly laughs to themselves for two reasons: 1. You're full of it and you're just trying to talk tough as a means of intimidation, and 2. Even if you did by some miracle get the cash together to retain a lawyer, our legal team and deep pockets would crush you like the annoying gnat that you are, and the only winner here would be the lawyer who laughs all the way to the bank, moves his trust funds into his general account, and promptly places a down payment on the latest Merc or Beemer.................

[TrackAire]

Well I've had the Arrow PCM on my car since delivery and I have about 3,300 miles now. I just had my oil tested and here's the response from the guy at Blackstone, proof that an aftermarket computer does not cause spun bearings.....

Hi, Eric. Thanks for the email.

Yes, if there was a serious issue, we'd expect metals to be reading high,
even on a short oil run like this. Obviously, some metals will build up
more over time if you run longer on future oil change intervals, so we'll
have to see if the trends show wear metals holding steady even after longer
oil change intervals, but as for what we can see in this report, there's no
evidence of bearing wear or any other issues at this point. It looks great!

Hope that helps. Let me know if there's anything else we can do for you.
Thanks!

Travis Heffelfinger
Blackstone Laboratories
416 E. Pettit Ave.
Fort Wayne, IN 46806
260-744-2380
www.blackstone-labs.com

Maybe you can answer a question regarding oil testing. If you sent in a sample of virgin motor oil (brand new out of the bottle) and also put in a flake of metal the size of a small match head in the sample bottle with the virgin oil, would that show up on the oil analysis report? The reason I ask is most "metals" are going to be very, very fine....probably can't easily see them in the oil with the human eye. My concern is people are using the oil analysis to prevent an issue with their engine due to high metal content. But if a flake of metal breaks off the block (what I'm assuming is happening here) and does get ground up while causing damage, wouldn't knowing you have "metal" in your oil analysis be information found too late?

I just wonder how Blackstone (or any oil analysis lab) measures the sample sent in to them. Would one large chunk of debris actually be picked up in their testing? Does the sample get prescreened through some sort of very fine mesh before it is put into spectral analysis? I know that Blackstone recommends not taking the first oil or the last oil coming out of the drain for the sample....so I'm not sure how large flakes of metal would be handled.

Glad your report came back clean.

[esm_viper]

Maybe you can answer a question regarding oil testing. If you sent in a sample of virgin motor oil (brand new out of the bottle) and also put in a flake of metal the size of a small match head in the sample bottle with the virgin oil, would that show up on the oil analysis report? The reason I ask is most "metals" are going to be very, very fine....probably can't easily see them in the oil with the human eye. My concern is people are using the oil analysis to prevent an issue with their engine due to high metal content. But if a flake of metal breaks off the block (what I'm assuming is happening here) and does get ground up while causing damage, wouldn't knowing you have "metal" in your oil analysis be information found too late?

I just wonder how Blackstone (or any oil analysis lab) measures the sample sent in to them. Would one large chunk of debris actually be picked up in their testing? Does the sample get prescreened through some sort of very fine mesh before it is put into spectral analysis? I know that Blackstone recommends not taking the first oil or the last oil coming out of the drain for the sample....so I'm not sure how large flakes of metal would be handled.

Glad your report came back clean.

Thanks, me too! I've been worried about it since I have the Arrow PCM. Not sure how they do their test, but I am going to send another sample in that has a few thousand miles on it to compare.

[ViperJon]

Since we have seen cars blow with 10K or more on them, not so sure what the oil testing is going to prove anyway. Even if it showed elevated metals what are you going to do about it, call FCA and order a new motor? Now I don't know if I even want to know.

[Policy Limits]

Can they deny warranty on a stock car if you track it? Even if it's a "Time Attack" or "American Club Racer" variant built specifically for that purpose?

[Dman]

Can they deny warranty on a stock car if you track it? Even if it's a "Time Attack" or "American Club Racer" variant built specifically for that purpose?

They're not built for that purpose, those are marketing model variants, they're built for street use, but capable of track performance. It's certainly a possibility that if proven it was done, FCA can state that it's abuse above street use and so, warranty is gone. We have an owner right waiting to get approval for a bone stock car, why? It's a certainlty it's so they can look for any reason to deny, once they've exhausted that path, then eventually, hopefully it'll be warranted.

[ViperSmith]

It's only a matter of time before track use voids warranty. They aren't even covering design flaws (shattered rear glass) at this point.

If you think they aren't going to pull GPS data and see where you were when the vehicle has a manufacturing issue, you are crazy.

The new and improved dodge, Sergio gearing up to dump.

[Dman]

Last 100 posts, that hurts. More like 10-15 total, and 85-90 drool/congrats posts, but no offense.

I'm posting here on this point in the long shot that FCA is reading here, which some claim, but probably not.

Sorry if I irritate you and any others with the posts like this, I'm doing it out of my support for owners and my frustration with being a devout Viper owner, tracker, representor since '99 and now not having one and feeling forced out. Which is how I feel from FCA.

I'll stop posting on the topic, last thing I want is for good owners and members to think of me as negative and irritating, so I'm done. It was in good intent and frustration. But, I'll stick to congrats and any tech help posts from now on. Im out of viper ownership for the first time in 17 years, so I guess I'll lurk around now and then, but chill. Just pissed off a bit, but no reason for you or others to have to 'listen' to it, since it's not going to help really anyway I guess.

Sorry, my viper brother, and no worries calling me out, I appreciate the honesty, Peace.

No offense Dave but you have beat this mantra to death in your last 100 posts in a row. We get it, FCA has lost a potential customer and they'll be damn sorry. Nobody is happy about the situation but this hysteria about warranties being denied is getting totally out of hand. Yes, the cars with performance enhancing PCM mods are being denied but somehow people have extrapolated this out to OMG I can't do an oil change myself. Can we get some PROOF of warranty claims being denied for other things like that before we crucify FCA? A bunch of posters feeding unsubstantiated rumors off each other. Is it that unreasonable for FCA to want to verify that an entire motor has to be replaced.

[harley56]

To me what is really stupid and what I indicated in my response to Taylor is that FCA is losing future business as a result of their refusal to honor the warranties in question. Several folks have indicated in this thread and others that they are done buying new FCA products. Their denial of a warranty claim WHEN THEY KNOW there is a problem with the engine blocks is a stupid business decision. They would have been better off simply replacing the two engines as a customer service.

Before I retired I ran a large operation at a public company. Every so often a customer would call up and complain about something or other. We would investigate and usually determine it was through no fault of ours. Even in these cases though we might make the client whole in order to protect the relationship. Trust me those customers sing your praises. On the other hand we've all heard the stories that an unhappy customer tells at least 10 others of their bad experience. Simply a stupid decision on the part of FCA. If these were the only two engines to have failed with spun bearings we might say boy that's tough luck but we probably wouldn't be near as upset.

The other thing that people can't lose site of is what happens to the poor slob that buys a used Viper that at one time had the Arrow PCM installed but no longer does. Remember it takes about 2 minutes to swap them. If he subsequently blows the engine FCA will compare the mileage of the PCM to the odometer and deny the warranty. Who's this guy going to go after? What if it was sold by an FCA dealer and reported as still under warranty? I've spoken to at least one major Viper dealer and I know he's concerned about this as they do not run any type of diagnostic for purposes of identifying a PCM swap on any traded in Viper.

Similar experience for me. I have owned a few Harley-Davidson dealerships, prior to that I worked for Harley-Davidson. Everyone probably knows Harley's are often modified by it's rider, and Harley certainly knows that. They will cover powertrain related claims as long as they determine the failure was not related to the modifications done to the bike, including powertrain mods.

[mjorgensen]

Last 100 posts, that hurts. More like 10-15 total, and 85-90 drool/congrats posts, but no offense.

I'm posting here on this point in the long shot that FCA is reading here, which some claim, but probably not.

Sorry if I irritate you and any others with the posts like this, I'm doing it out of my support for owners and my frustration with being a devout Viper owner, tracker, representor since '99 and now not having one and feeling forced out. Which is how I feel from FCA.

I'll stop posting on the topic, last thing I want is for good owners and members to think of me as negative and irritating, so I'm done. It was in good intent and frustration. But, I'll stick to congrats and any tech help posts from now on. Im out of viper ownership for the first time in 17 years, so I guess I'll lurk around now and then, but chill. Just pissed off a bit, but no reason for you or others to have to 'listen' to it, since it's not going to help really anyway I guess.

Sorry, my viper brother, and no worries calling me out, I appreciate the honesty, Peace.

This was one of the classiest response post here in a LONG time, nice job Dave hope you stick around.