Warranty-friendly performance mods?
#26
My son got his car tuned by a Dinan-owned company, they had a 30-day-trail "money back guarantee". Long story short, 2 weeks into the tune, we decided to go back to stock and get our money back. They had no problem flashing it back to stock and "we'll send you a refund check by mail"........ 5 months later, a dozen of emails and 20 long/hold phone calls, we got our money back minus "labor". While it wasn't a lot of money, I just can't imagine filing a blown turbo or engine claim with them or any of the other "tuners" for that matter. Good luck having any of them honor a claim, after you prove their tune caused a failure.
Thank, but I'll take my chances with a piggyback and MB
Thank, but I'll take my chances with a piggyback and MB
#27
for a big liability issue you can get a contingent fee lawyer, not for a crappy little warranty claim. You will be paying that out of your pocket win or lose. It will cost $10K before you ever sniff a court room.
#28
Are you a lawyer? Most of these guys drum up a class rep who doesn’t pay a dime. Individual cases may involve huge potential punitive damages, and go forward on a contingency fee basis. In nearly 40 years, with plenary discovery, I don’t recall anyone, ever, at any time paying a fee out of pocket or a retainer.
in the early Magnusson years, manufacturers quickly understood a causal connection required expensive experts, and the costs were only rational in class actions to defend a product and trial lawyers quickly discovered even small claims meant HUGE attorneys fees under the lodestar formula.
in the early Magnusson years, manufacturers quickly understood a causal connection required expensive experts, and the costs were only rational in class actions to defend a product and trial lawyers quickly discovered even small claims meant HUGE attorneys fees under the lodestar formula.
Last edited by removedCFGaccount; 01-17-2018 at 06:48 PM.
#29
nearly every U.S. jurisdiction provides for a case schedule order and trial in one year. Nearly every U.S. jurisdiction provides for punitive damages. A consumer’s conconurrent remedy is to seek to avoid ANY underlying contract under Magnuson or SUSPEND performance pending the outcome. I advocate nothing, and as for being in the wrong, that’s why Magnuson exists: there MUST be a proven causal connection else the manufacturer is going to suffer punitive damages.
So, know what you are talking about before letting fly. I defended scores of manufacturers in similar cases and juries usually find against manufacturers, find punitive damages for consumers, and pro-manufacturer experts are hard to find, expensive and seldom believed.
Sum: consumers have MEANINGFUL remedies in the U.S., and manufacturers fear them.
Try not to let your **** overload your mouth.
This act was set up to keep manufacturers from using BS excuses to avoid their warranty obligations, not to allow consumers to modify products potentially causing them to fail and still be under warranty. Again you can try, but I do not think it is good advice in general to rely on this Act in someone’s decision process on getting a tune or not.
Again, just my opinion.
#30
I appreciate your input, but we are talking about a one off event not a defect in a car that would result in some sort of class action. The person in question modified the car which probably either caused or contributed to the failure. This is not some manufacturer trying to duck their responsibility. It is in fact the consumer trying to be reimbursed for the consequences of their own decision. Again if it is unrelated to the tune, that is different but the working assumption here is that you have a Powertrain failure. This is likely going to be a you against MB lawsuit, if it comes to that.
This act was set up to keep manufacturers from using BS excuses to avoid their warranty obligations, not to allow consumers to modify products potentially causing them to fail and still be under warranty. Again you can try, but I do not think it is good advice in general to rely on this Act in someone’s decision process on getting a tune or not.
Again, just my opinion.
i neither stated nor implied what you wrongly impute to me, and simply sought to explain the remedy to those who might listen to poor future advice.
nor, as you imply, would anyone confuse a warranty claim, subject to the federal economic loss doctrine, with a products liability claim, assuming no damage to other property, personal injury or death.
what part of “I advocate nothing.” Did you not understand?
addendum: the false issue you raise goes to typicality, not commonality, which, were a class certified, would apply to the global deceptive or unfair trade practice of denying any warranty claim without regard to the existence of a causal connection....punitive damages would predominate and be of such a common quantum as likely to outweigh typicality objections.
Last edited by removedCFGaccount; 01-17-2018 at 07:48 PM.
#31
well, my opinion is based on a JD and, an Ll M, an A rating and forty years of practice. As for causation, it can and will be apportioned among the at fault parties by a trier of fact under well settled principles. Magnusson is supplementary of state law unless it preempt such, and NOT limited to one transaction or occurrence per its LEGISLATIVE history. More than anything it is a strong deterrent.
i neither stated nor implied what you wrongly impute to me, and simply sought to explain the remedy to those who might listen to poor future advice.
nor, as you imply, would anyone confuse a warranty claim, subject to the federal economic loss doctrine, with a products liability claim, assuming no damage to other property, personal injury or death.
what part of “I advocate nothing.” Did you not understand?
addendum: the false issue you raise goes to typicality, not commonality, which, were a class certified, would apply to the global deceptive or unfair trade practice of denying any warranty claim without regard to the existence of a causal connection....punitive damages would predominate and be of such a common quantum as likely to outweigh typicality objections.
Since you are a lawyer it would be easy and not costly for you to litigate. What about the consumer who is facing a $5k for a blown turbo that MB says the warranty will not cover because you modified the car with a Tune (which they did do). What would be your recommendation and what do you think the cost of litigating this would be for the consumer against the chance of winning? From a practical perspective it would seem to me not a good place to be and assuming I could be successful in this, would not be part of my decision process to go forward or not with a tune.
#32
My advice, stated and implied, was find a trial lawyer with experience in the field who realizes small claims can result in HUGE lodestar fees fixed by the COURT. Manufacturers seldom win. As for what to do in the interim, you are in no different position than an abuse/misuse claim. False premises lead to false conclusions. If you can’t survive a warranty claim, you should not buy an expensive car. The world is not free from risk.
#33
Super Member
well, my opinion is based on a JD and, an Ll M, an A rating and forty years of practice. As for causation, it can and will be apportioned among the at fault parties by a trier of fact under well settled principles. Magnusson is supplementary of state law unless it preempt such, and NOT limited to one transaction or occurrence per its LEGISLATIVE history. More than anything it is a strong deterrent.
i neither stated nor implied what you wrongly impute to me, and simply sought to explain the remedy to those who might listen to poor future advice.
nor, as you imply, would anyone confuse a warranty claim, subject to the federal economic loss doctrine, with a products liability claim, assuming no damage to other property, personal injury or death.
what part of “I advocate nothing.” Did you not understand?
addendum: the false issue you raise goes to typicality, not commonality, which, were a class certified, would apply to the global deceptive or unfair trade practice of denying any warranty claim without regard to the existence of a causal connection....punitive damages would predominate and be of such a common quantum as likely to outweigh typicality objections.
Remember, this is NOT a manufacturing defect or design flaw. This is a customer who has purchased a MB vehicle and chosen to modify its operational characteristics in a way that has the potential to cause problems to the power train of the vehicle.
#34
Christ, when did you stop beating your wife, a classic misleading question, containing an inference not intended by the witness. Are most of you people children? How did design defects get into this? A properly instructed jury must decide if the condition is causally connected with the device or not, and nothing more. Magnusson makes all inconsistent warranties, limitations or disclaimers void ab Initio. Jesus H. Freakin Christ.
before you ask, juries always decide the weight and credibility of the evidence.
before you ask, juries always decide the weight and credibility of the evidence.
Last edited by removedCFGaccount; 01-17-2018 at 09:16 PM.
#35
Everyone is clearly missing CFG's point in all of this: You are not going to trial on whether you used a piggy-back/tune or not, you are going to trial over whether that modification resulted in a failure from your car. Admission of guilt/perjury has nothing to do with this. This is the whole point of Magnuson-Moss.
Side note: If you are THAT worried about retaining your warranty, you have no business making ANY modifications to your car. According to Mercedes, even something as small as changing your exhaust can potentially "void" your warranty, nevertheless a tune.
Side note: If you are THAT worried about retaining your warranty, you have no business making ANY modifications to your car. According to Mercedes, even something as small as changing your exhaust can potentially "void" your warranty, nevertheless a tune.
Last edited by aggies15; 01-18-2018 at 08:25 AM.
#38
Everyone is clearly missing CFG's point in all of this: You are not going to trial on whether you used a piggy-back/tune or not, you are going to trial over whether that modification resulted in a failure from your car. Admission of guilt/perjury has nothing to do with this. This is the whole point of Magnuson-Moss.
Side note: If you are THAT worried about retaining your warranty, you have no business making ANY modifications to your car. According to Mercedes, even something as small as changing your exhaust can potentially "void" your warranty, nevertheless a tune.
Side note: If you are THAT worried about retaining your warranty, you have no business making ANY modifications to your car. According to Mercedes, even something as small as changing your exhaust can potentially "void" your warranty, nevertheless a tune.
This thread started with some people saying that piggyback tunes are not detectable and from everything I have read they are more difficult to detect than a flash, but it still can be done. Certainly you have legal recourse if MB voids your warranty, but for most people that would be a huge pain in the *** and potentially expensive proposition which may or may not lead to success so I would not let that possibility enter into my decision to get tune or not. If you cannot afford or do not acceot that you may be putting yourself on the hook for a potential repair, no matter how unlikely, you should not listen to people that say they cannot be detected or even if they do you can bring MB to court and likely win. In my opinion, that is not good advice, but everyone can make a decision in their own.
Thi
#40
MBWorld Fanatic!
I’m gonna wire 2 piggy backs together on top of my already tuned ESC.. it’s gonna do donuts faster than my mother in laws dirty underwear in her stinky dryer !!!
#42
MBWorld Fanatic!
All the "but this" and "but that" talk aside.... I will say this, I am not even slightly worried about having any catastrophic failures to either the power or drivetrains now that I am tuned. Main reason is that these are very very mild tunes compared to most. We are talking about an increase of psi from the turbos in the neighborhood of 20-25%. Or a max of what is it...13psi? That is not pushing it at all. These snails (with all appropriate mods/octane) could push 25psi all day long and barely break a sweat. And as far as the extra power stressing the drivetrain, not going to be an issue either. These cars like most, are over engineered to a great degree.
So yes, outlier issues do occur, and corporate will absolutely fight with everything they have to avoid paying for warranty work if they can prove otherwise. Hell, they will spend $20k on man-hours to deny your claim of $5k just to set the precedent... But I'm going to cross that bridge if I ever get to it. Until then, I'm not worried about it. So take that for what it is worth
So yes, outlier issues do occur, and corporate will absolutely fight with everything they have to avoid paying for warranty work if they can prove otherwise. Hell, they will spend $20k on man-hours to deny your claim of $5k just to set the precedent... But I'm going to cross that bridge if I ever get to it. Until then, I'm not worried about it. So take that for what it is worth
#43
Super Member
All the "but this" and "but that" talk aside.... I will say this, I am not even slightly worried about having any catastrophic failures to either the power or drivetrains now that I am tuned. Main reason is that these are very very mild tunes compared to most. We are talking about an increase of psi from the turbos in the neighborhood of 20-25%. Or a max of what is it...13psi? That is not pushing it at all. These snails (with all appropriate mods/octane) could push 25psi all day long and barely break a sweat. And as far as the extra power stressing the drivetrain, not going to be an issue either. These cars like most, are over engineered to a great degree.
So yes, outlier issues do occur, and corporate will absolutely fight with everything they have to avoid paying for warranty work if they can prove otherwise. Hell, they will spend $20k on man-hours to deny your claim of $5k just to set the precedent... But I'm going to cross that bridge if I ever get to it. Until then, I'm not worried about it. So take that for what it is worth
So yes, outlier issues do occur, and corporate will absolutely fight with everything they have to avoid paying for warranty work if they can prove otherwise. Hell, they will spend $20k on man-hours to deny your claim of $5k just to set the precedent... But I'm going to cross that bridge if I ever get to it. Until then, I'm not worried about it. So take that for what it is worth
#44
MBWorld Fanatic!
But what is the standard "full tunes" running in that regard? I've never been able to get a strait answer. I just base my 13 guesstimate off of what that bora (forget his exact username) guy is running on his 'tweaked' piggy-back as he seems to be putting down very similar track numbers to the other tunes and I'm pretty sure that's the PSI he's around at the moment.
#45
Super Member
Lol I'm sure yours are at least
But what is the standard "full tunes" running in that regard? I've never been able to get a strait answer. I just base my 13 guesstimate off of what that bora (forget his exact username) guy is running on his 'tweaked' piggy-back as he seems to be putting down very similar track numbers to the other tunes and I'm pretty sure that's the PSI he's around at the moment.
But what is the standard "full tunes" running in that regard? I've never been able to get a strait answer. I just base my 13 guesstimate off of what that bora (forget his exact username) guy is running on his 'tweaked' piggy-back as he seems to be putting down very similar track numbers to the other tunes and I'm pretty sure that's the PSI he's around at the moment.
3psi would be a Dinan Sport. Bora is adding 6-7psi of boost.
#46
MBWorld Fanatic!
But basing on my experience of many different car-guy friends from the past with B5 S4s with various turbos (the one with the 2.7l TT motor), I was guessing that my car was probably pushing around 14-15psi on this OE tune. But that is just a huuuuuge guess from looking at the size of the turbos and taking into consideration the motor's displacement, how the car spools, how it pulls, and the dyno/track numbers from others and then comparing to all the different stages of S4's I've ridden in in the past lol
#47
Super Member
Are you sure about the stg1 and stg2 numbers for AMR? As when I was shopping for my tune 1 year ago, AMR told me that the reason that their stg2 only adds about 10-15hp/tq over stg1 is because they don't change much between the two other than remove the CEL for emissions. He said that they pretty much pushed the stg1 to the absolute edge, cats or no cats. Maybe I'm wrong? Or maybe they changed this since then?
But basing on my experience of many different car-guy friends from the past with B5 S4s with various turbos (the one with the 2.7l TT motor), I was guessing that my car was probably pushing around 14-15psi on this OE tune. But that is just a huuuuuge guess from looking at the size of the turbos and taking into consideration the motor's displacement, how the car spools, how it pulls, and the dyno/track numbers from others and then comparing to all the different stages of S4's I've ridden in in the past lol
But basing on my experience of many different car-guy friends from the past with B5 S4s with various turbos (the one with the 2.7l TT motor), I was guessing that my car was probably pushing around 14-15psi on this OE tune. But that is just a huuuuuge guess from looking at the size of the turbos and taking into consideration the motor's displacement, how the car spools, how it pulls, and the dyno/track numbers from others and then comparing to all the different stages of S4's I've ridden in in the past lol
#49
MBWorld Fanatic!
Also, I know that AMR's 1 puts down much more power than OE's 1, but both of their stg2's seem to be pretty similar based on [limited] track numbers from customers. So it would suggest both are running similar PSI, no? Granted one could be running other areas more aggressive such as timing and other things but I'd doubt it. Are you getting the 20psi number from AMR or another member?