LS1GTO Forums banner

1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
226 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
im thinking about a new air induction for my 04 gto what do u guys think looks good and works the best with performance not effectin my warranty
 

·
13 year owner
Joined
·
16,384 Posts
Have you read the numerous posts about it first?

All are the same in overall design, all will net roughly the same gain, however there are different costs between them as well as visual differences.

As to warranty, anything non-factory can technically void your warranty, however if you put a CAI on and your power trunk release fails, the two can't be correlated and warranty shouldn't be denied.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
CMNTMXR57 said:
As to warranty, anything non-factory can technically void your warranty, however if you put a CAI on and your power trunk release fails, the two can't be correlated and warranty shouldn't be denied.
I refer you to the Magnuson Moss Act. This is the bible for all warranty issues.
http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/buspubs/warranty.htm#Magnuson-Moss
If you install a CAI and you have valve train issues in the future, the dealership can't just say "You have a CAI, that was the problem". There must be a thorough examination of the problem and it's cause. They can try to say you voided your warranty but as soon as you mention the Magnuson Moss Act, they usually cave. Especially if they try to say you damaged the engine by putting a cat-back on or something like that.

The law is your friend!!!! :secret:
 

·
Oh my f*ck!
Joined
·
6,464 Posts
powrtrippin said:
I refer you to the Magnuson Moss Act. This is the bible for all warranty issues.
http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/buspubs/warranty.htm#Magnuson-Moss
If you install a CAI and you have valve train issues in the future, the dealership can't just say "You have a CAI, that was the problem". There must be a thorough examination of the problem and it's cause. They can try to say you voided your warranty but as soon as you mention the Magnuson Moss Act, they usually cave. Especially if they try to say you damaged the engine by putting a cat-back on or something like that.

The law is your friend!!!! :secret:
That may be the case, but if you have an auto and a CAI, the dealership can say that the problem was due to the CAI - they actually put out an advisory about it. It's posted here someplace. How they are connected I have no idea - never bothered to RTFA.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
phobos512 said:
That may be the case, but if you have an auto and a CAI, the dealership can say that the problem was due to the CAI - they actually put out an advisory about it. It's posted here someplace. How they are connected I have no idea - never bothered to RTFA.
Yea, but wasn't that something to do with the oil from the filters affecting the MAF sensor?
 

·
13 year owner
Joined
·
16,384 Posts
powrtrippin said:
I refer you to the Magnuson Moss Act. This is the bible for all warranty issues.
http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/buspubs/warranty.htm#Magnuson-Moss
If you install a CAI and you have valve train issues in the future, the dealership can't just say "You have a CAI, that was the problem". There must be a thorough examination of the problem and it's cause. They can try to say you voided your warranty but as soon as you mention the Magnuson Moss Act, they usually cave. Especially if they try to say you damaged the engine by putting a cat-back on or something like that.

The law is your friend!!!! :secret:
I worked in the service department in a warranty claims capacity for about a year and a half, I'm well versed in the Mag-Moss Act. HOWEVER, Dealerships are individual franchise owned facilities acting as a representative of GM. They pay out of their pocket to cover warranty costs, then get re-imbursed by GM after all warranty claims are validated and/or parts returned examined. In which case, most dealers with a great degree of success can use the Magnuson-Moss act to their advantage in determining a "Yea/Nay" decision in declining coverage. In essence, if you have modified the vehicle, you have altered it from status quo of what GM engineered the vehicle for. It doesn't matter whether you put a set of oversized tires on, or a stereo. If the parts you replace it with ARE NOT FACTORY certified, they can refuse coverage, PERIOD!

HOWEVER, many dealer such as ours, realize people DO indeed customize their vehicles, (especially trucks for business purposes) to fit their needs. As such we realized a little breathing room on stuff and of course we also were smart enough to realize a "cause and effect" relationship.

I've had every argument thrown at me in the book, including Mag-Moss.

Here is a perfect scenario of a dilemma we faced in covering an LS1;

A kid who bought a used '99 Z28 from us complained numerous times about CSK. We legitimately made diagnosis that the CSK he was experiencing was indeed normal and wasn't affecting performance. We did this through the normal ear test (knocking went away after about 30 seconds) and further did an oil analysis on it the third time he brought it in.

Well, junior wasn't happy and then modified it as would be expected of such a car. About two weeks later, on a Sunday morning his car was dropped off at the dealership due to a slight engine problem. Monday morning we got it in, the tell tale puddle of oil and parts on the ground didn't make things look rosey. He had CAI, exhaust, MAF, TB, plugs, wires, etc, etc on the car. Standard bolt on mods for these things. He tried telling us he started it up and the engine just went "BOOM" from the CSK. Well the engine did indeed go "BOOM" It had a nice punch through the right side of the block and connecting rod stew in the oil pan. He then made it a point to tell us he's had it in three or four times for the CSK issue, which we never took to seriously and then threw Mag-Moss in our faces preemptively if we didn't cover it and get the car back to him by the end of the week.

A closer scan with a Tech 2 revealed a more telling story. :) It seemed as though within a half second, the car flashed to nearly 7,000rpm and sustained it for about 30 seconds....COLD! It was like 0* outside. No oil sufficient oil pressure and full throttle before the starter had even disengaged on a balmy 0* morning DON'T mix well. We also found pieces of cinder block on the driver's side footpad. Hmmmmmm..

We also noted his bald tires, which he later blamed on his dad for "Driving recklessly" (which is even greater of a story) meanwhile he drove like a little old lady. Of course a salesman was standing there who saw him light em up out of the dealership one day to refute that one.

How would you have handled it?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
CMNTMXR57 said:
I worked in the service department in a warranty claims capacity for about a year and a half, I'm well versed in the Mag-Moss Act. HOWEVER, Dealerships are individual franchise owned facilities acting as a representative of GM. They pay out of their pocket to cover warranty costs, then get re-imbursed by GM after all warranty claims are validated and/or parts returned examined. In which case, most dealers with a great degree of success can use the Magnuson-Moss act to their advantage in determining a "Yea/Nay" decision in declining coverage. In essence, if you have modified the vehicle, you have altered it from status quo of what GM engineered the vehicle for. It doesn't matter whether you put a set of oversized tires on, or a stereo. If the parts you replace it with ARE NOT FACTORY certified, they can refuse coverage, PERIOD!

HOWEVER, many dealer such as ours, realize people DO indeed customize their vehicles, (especially trucks for business purposes) to fit their needs. As such we realized a little breathing room on stuff and of course we also were smart enough to realize a "cause and effect" relationship.

I've had every argument thrown at me in the book, including Mag-Moss.

Here is a perfect scenario of a dilemma we faced in covering an LS1;

A kid who bought a used '99 Z28 from us complained numerous times about CSK. We legitimately made diagnosis that the CSK he was experiencing was indeed normal and wasn't affecting performance. We did this through the normal ear test (knocking went away after about 30 seconds) and further did an oil analysis on it the third time he brought it in.

Well, junior wasn't happy and then modified it as would be expected of such a car. About two weeks later, on a Sunday morning his car was dropped off at the dealership due to a slight engine problem. Monday morning we got it in, the tell tale puddle of oil and parts on the ground didn't make things look rosey. He had CAI, exhaust, MAF, TB, plugs, wires, etc, etc on the car. Standard bolt on mods for these things. He tried telling us he started it up and the engine just went "BOOM" from the CSK. Well the engine did indeed go "BOOM" It had a nice punch through the right side of the block and connecting rod stew in the oil pan. He then made it a point to tell us he's had it in three or four times for the CSK issue, which we never took to seriously and then threw Mag-Moss in our faces preemptively if we didn't cover it and get the car back to him by the end of the week.

A closer scan with a Tech 2 revealed a more telling story. :) It seemed as though within a half second, the car flashed to nearly 7,000rpm and sustained it for about 30 seconds....COLD! It was like 0* outside. No oil sufficient oil pressure and full throttle before the starter had even disengaged on a balmy 0* morning DON'T mix well. We also found pieces of cinder block on the driver's side footpad. Hmmmmmm..

We also noted his bald tires, which he later blamed on his dad for "Driving recklessly" (which is even greater of a story) meanwhile he drove like a little old lady. Of course a salesman was standing there who saw him light em up out of the dealership one day to refute that one.

How would you have handled it?
There is no doubt that was his fault. That's not the argument. If you install a CAI and have engine failure, the dealership can not refuse you warranty work based soley on the fact that you have a CAI. As your place did, further investigation usually shows the problem. There must be proof that the installed part caused the problem. Say, if I were to install a blower and bust a head gasket, chances are I will not get warranty work from my dealer. Not too much investigation needed for that one.
 

·
13 year owner
Joined
·
16,384 Posts
This is correct. But a GM dealership cannot vouch for the aftermarket CAI and cannot vouch for the installation of said CAI since it most likely wasn't installed at the dealer.

Suppose the CAI is of poor quality and falls apart once you slam the hood closed, opening up the intake to filterless air, that then ingests a nail that someway, somehow gets ingested into the motor (believe me, it happens), a nail would cause catastrophic damage internally if it got all the way through the intake, into the plenum and down a runner and through the valve.

Believe it or not, I've seen this happen on a slammed 97 Tahoe.

In order to protect themselves and have one standard, they must make a whole blanket coverage to CYA. From there they can make individual determinations. It is sorta like the saying "1 person ruins it for everybody else!"
 

·
Oh my f*ck!
Joined
·
6,464 Posts
powrtrippin said:
Yea, but wasn't that something to do with the oil from the filters affecting the MAF sensor?
The document I read had the words "excessively oiled". Who is to determine what "excessively" means? That's like the statutes that say a car's exhaust cannot be so loud as it disturbs the greater environment or something (there are plenty of states that have statutes that read that way). It comes down to the cops or the SM and the mood they are in at the time you bring your car in.

However, if you're responsible and develop a good relationship with your SM, then it won't be a problem. Don't try to lie to them about stuff - I know that really bothers me and I'm sure that's true of most people :)
 

·
13 year owner
Joined
·
16,384 Posts
It pertained to K&N style oil/gauze filters.

Normal oiling of these filters isn't an issue. It's when you marinate the filter in it overnight then install it that TSB comes into play.
 

·
Oh my f*ck!
Joined
·
6,464 Posts
CMNTMXR57 said:
It pertained to K&N style oil/gauze filters.

Normal oiling of these filters isn't an issue. It's when you marinate the filter in it overnight then install it that TSB comes into play.
I have to ask...why would anyone do that? I mean, I've taken law classes, I know that if a rule exists for something it's because somebody did it, but still, that's just dumb.
 

·
13 year owner
Joined
·
16,384 Posts
There are stupid people out there!

They either think that the whole can has to be used for proper filtration, OR don't think it's red enough, or something!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
CMNTMXR57 said:
Suppose the CAI is of poor quality and falls apart once you slam the hood closed, opening up the intake to filterless air, that then ingests a nail that someway, somehow gets ingested into the motor (believe me, it happens), a nail would cause catastrophic damage internally if it got all the way through the intake, into the plenum and down a runner and through the valve.
You are describing a situation where there would be no question at to what caused the problem. Not the same. BTW, any intelligent vehicle owner would come up with a stock air box, in this situation, and install it before the car goes to the shop..... :secret:
 

·
13 year owner
Joined
·
16,384 Posts
Don't say that man! You'd be amazed!!!!

We had people come in for grenaded rear ends on F-Body's demanding that it be covered under warranty. But for some reason, in their rush to get it over to the dealer, they forgot to take their slicks off and clean off all the shredded rubber from the fender and wheel wells.


"You wouldn't have been drag racing now, would you?" :D
 

·
THE ROKET WAS SOLD ON 6/22/14
Joined
·
9,794 Posts
I have a question, my dealer painted my MPD hood and installed my MPD air box and K&N filter. In this situation am I covered? Can I say, "well since you installed it, your responsable for it under the warrantee"? Or can *they* say, "it's an after market product and if something goes wrong *because* of it, we won't cover it". Hmmmm, it looks like im in a catch 22 here.......

ROK
 

·
13 year owner
Joined
·
16,384 Posts
Yes and no. They are responsible for any work THEY do, they are not responsible necessarily for the hood. MPD is, if it's a manufacturer defect. Now if they damage the hood in the process of painting and installing it, the dealer is liable for that.

Most dealers have a 12 month/12,000 mile warranty on their work.
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Top