On Jun 30, 2004, at 09:30, Scott Troyer - DDR TestEng wrote:
> Kevin,
>
> I'm not arguing with you, and am in agreement with what you say, but I
> will also point out that I know for sure GM replaced many an A-arm
> for that bushing flaw. I don't think it was until 2003 that they
> changed
> the bushing material to something which will hopefully correct this.
>
> Not to say that GM didn't deny anyone's claim, but I don't know of any
> cases where that happened for that particular problem.
Now you do. My dealer (who was always aware of my autocross activity,
I was always upfront with them) replaced my control arms once on my
1999 C5 at 12K miles. I retired the car from competition after one
more event (after which the bushings were still ok). At 20K miles they
slipped again, and the dealer refused to replace them, citing
competition use. I had the choice of selling the car or paying about
$500 a year to keep replacing the bushings. For that and other reasons
I sold the car. Prime reason I never bought a Z06.
In an unrelated case, another Chevy refused to replace the driveshaft
in my 1994 Camaro Z28 "because the suspension had been modified"
(aftermarket shocks/springs). There was a known issue with driveshaft
vibration, and my car was so affected that the transmission shook
violently above 65mph. They were unimpressed by my pointing out that
the official GM test procedure they had already performed for the
driveshaft problem involved putting the car on a frame lift, thus
eliminating the suspension from the situation altogether. I ended up
having to endure the problem for months, no doubt further "abusing" the
shaking transmission, until GM finally issued a TSB on the problem,
which, combined with finding another dealer, allowed me to get the
problem fixed.
I would never take a car in with abuse damage and expect them to fix it
under warranty, but given my experiences with GM in trying to get
legitimate problems fixed, I don't have a lot of sympathy for their
position.
KeS
|