Last post on Nov 11, 2008 at 5:55 PM
You are in the Smart Shopper
What is this discussion about?
Chrysler, Car Buying, Car Warranties
#408 of 437 Re: wear and tear [Mr_Shiftright]
Feb 29, 2008 (9:17 am)
I don't see how an owner who has a oil burning engine with 150,000 miles on it is going to prove that this isn't due to "normal wear and tear" or than worn piston rings in an engine that's gone 3/4 the way to the moon is a "defect in workmanship".
some Chrysler owners are definitely going to get snagged on this "lifetime" warranty because cars wear out "normally" and that's not a defect.
That's why Chrysler put the phrase in there. They wouldn't put it in there if they weren't going to use it.
They have no intention of warrantying worn out cars.
Exactly - I really find it extremely hard to believe that if I buy a 2008 Chrysler and take it back to the dealer in 2020 with 150K miles and it's burning oil, they are going to give me a new engine. The dealer's service manager is going to say "wear and tear"... (and it probably is legitimately wear and tear at that point)
Also, I still say, a truly "defective" part is going to break well before 100K miles anyway, otherwise it's probably not 'defective'.
#409 of 437 Re: wear and tear [xhe518]
by Mr_Shiftright HOST
Feb 29, 2008 (10:14 am)
Oh absolutely it's "wear and tear". An engine with 150K on it owes you nothing at that point.
#410 of 437 Re: wear and tear [Mr_Shiftright]
Mar 01, 2008 (1:00 am)
You guys can keep talking this wear and tear thing all you want. If the engine is still operational don't expect a free replacement. If it has stopped working then you have grounds for a lifetime warranty claim, provided you're the original owner.
Lifetime Warranty FAQ
#411 of 437 It's something to consider...
Mar 01, 2008 (7:21 pm)
I know with 7 children, my wife and I are pretty much resigned to purchasing a Suburban. However, since the eldest lives with her biological father, and the second eldest is quite angsty and she does not go many places with us, a 7-passenger vehicle would theoretically work for us.
That means a DGC, T&C, or Commander would possibly work for us. With a lifetime powertrain warranty, we would be able to think about one of these vehicles. I know some of the rebates are smaller than they were but newspaper ads on these vehicles are still looking good. In the meantime, I would worry about two things.
One, a new van or Commander is somewhat above our budget. We could finance it out six years and get the payment where we need it, and the warranty would still be in effect long after the payment book is an empty spine. Right now we're looking at used 02-05 Suburbans in the $10-$15K range and one of these new vehicles are more like $20-$25K.
Two, if we were to spend this extra money and get the new van and have the transmission conk out 4 years in at what would be around 80K, is the dealer going to come back and say, "you have 5 kids plus soccer and softball equipment and bring home meat for your freezer 375lbs at a time, you abused the van and we're not covering it!"
#412 of 437 Re: [occupant1]
Mar 02, 2008 (12:46 pm)
If there ever was a bullet proof automatic tranny, Chrysler made it!
#413 of 437 Re: wear and tear [tedebear]
by Mr_Shiftright HOST
Mar 02, 2008 (3:55 pm)
yes but not in cases of oil starvation, or severe overheating or failure to prove the periodic maintenance requirements were done--these are owner negligence issues and not defects in materials or workmanship. Other cases might be torn CV joint boots, damage to an oil pan, incorrect parts installed by owner, evidence of stripped threads or broken studs, wrong fluids, different size tires, etc.
There are plenty of loopholes available.
#414 of 437 beware the risky
Mar 02, 2008 (5:02 pm)
This all leads back to my decision some years ago to hopefully never buy a vehicle I wasn't able to "eat." By that, of course, I mean-- If at all possible never buy a vehicle whose total loss would bankrupt you mentally or fiscally!
Now how can one REALLY prove that they provided proper maintenance? I read here that saving receipts for oil purchases will be accepted as proof of oil changes. If that is true, then it proves that only a game is being played with the buyer. Then, again, I'll say, buy a moderately priced vehicle and take your chances. Do not buy a vehicle you think may require considerable repairs, warranty repairs included. Caveat Emptor.
#416 of 437 Re: It's something to consider... [occupant1]
Mar 09, 2008 (8:09 am)
It's the age-old question.....do I by used, pay less, and take more risk, or buy new, pay more, and take less risk? Time and time again, it is always better (financially) to buy used. First....you can still get decent warranties on used cars. AND, re-built trannies cost about $1500 and you can buy rebuilt, used-motors on some cars for under $2,000. A new Suburban.....$40k+ plus. I just sold my 2002 Z-71 for $12,000.....had a 100k on it, but chances are the motor and tranny would have gone anout 100k w/o issues.
I have a 2007 Pacifica and it came with free oil changes until 100k. I take it in every 3500 miles and let the dealer do it. That way, if there are any warranty issues down the road, there is no argument. I also follow the book for everything else....not what the dealer says. Those jokers recomend changing all fluids every 15k.....the book says more like 45k.
#417 of 437 Re: It's something to consider... [waterdr]
Mar 09, 2008 (11:00 pm)
Those jokers recommend changing all fluids every 15k.....the book says more like 45k.
The free oil changes are probably like the lifetime light bulb warranty at the hardware stores. When you're in the store to exchange the defective bulb they figure you will purchase other things that will more than offset the cost of a 50-cent light.
I have lifetime free oil changes and tire rotation from the dealer I bought my car through. All I pay is $8 for the oil filter. So far they haven't tried to hit me up with any additional services but it only has 6,000 miles.
I like to do the majority of my own maintenance anyway. I keep any receipts on things I did on my own for warranty reasons.