takahashi j

iTrader: (2)

A year ago at 89k miles, my car received a reman’d engine from dealership X. They told me that the warranty on the reman would be 1yr/12k miles. Yesterday I crossed the 100k mark on the commute in and went to dealership Y at 100,022 miles and asked them to do a compression test. Thinking that it was still under the 1yr/12,000 mile coverage, I wanted to be sure that my 2nd engine was within spec. The service manager comes back and tells me that the engine is not covered under warranty anymore because it is capped at 100k miles. I then proceeded to have them do the test anyways to see the viability of my engine. They thought I was being proactive about my car. They come back later and tell me that it is within tolerance but a little on the low side. At first they didn’t give me the hand written figures, but I asked for a copy of it for my records.
*
@ 250 RPMS (kgf*cm2)
R1 – 6.2, 6.3, 6.2
R2 – 6.7,6.6, 6.8
*
Not knowing the tolerance range, I checked the forums once I got home.
Standard compression: 8.5
Minimum compression: 6.9
*
I called mazda North America today and they said that since it’s an extended warranty, they cannot replace it under warranty. They even called dealership Y to have them verify that their diagnosis was correct (I have yet to hear from them…). Is mazda really not going to give me 22 miles? I was one of the first batches of RX-8s…

RIP IT!

I am sorry to hear your issues. If you have problems w/ Mazda and they will not help you I am slightly north of you and can help you out w/ a quality rebuild.

VOODOO8

Did you get a written warranty on the reman engine? I believe that warranty would be specific to the newly installed motor, not a hang-over on the defective part that was originally replaced. To make the point, lets say that the battery in the car failed prematurely and it was replaced under warranty. The new warranty would apply to the newly installed battery, not the residual warranty period that was left on the old battery.

nycgps

iTrader: (1)

Why don't you tell them what dealership X has told you ? and ask Dealership X directly ?

EDZRIDE

iTrader: (1)

Not true; the warranty on the "replaced" battery would be the remainder of the warranty period that was left on the old battery.

As far as the engine warranty goes, if the OP had purchased the replacement engine from the dealership, then he should have some warranty remaining; if not then he's stuck with the 8yr/100k warranty cap.

Wingznut

iTrader: (1)

As an ex-mechanic who worked in a couple dealerships, and dealt with more warranty claims than I can remember, I can say that EDZRIDE is correct.

takahashi... Do you have your original paperwork from the warranty engine replacement?

takahashi j

iTrader: (2)

That's what i originally thought. I thought i got another 1yr/12k miles from when i got engine reman #1, but apparently when i called Mazda North America, they said that whenever mazda extends an extended warranty, the final mileage cap takes priority. UGH

takahashi j

iTrader: (2)

i did but dealership X now claims there's a 100k cap too...the original service advisor i worked with at dealership X has since quit...

takahashi j

iTrader: (2)

Yes i do. I also had a chance to talk to the tech that did the compression test on my engine at dealership Y and they said that they plugged the compression figures into a "mazda computer" and that it came to the conclusion (based on the compression differences btw rotor 1 and rotor 2) that my engine was ok. Is there a 2nd set of tolerance specs that mazda has for reman'd motors?

He was also saying that I should add transmission fluid to premix in the gas...I was thinking, "dont you mean 2-cycle oil?"

And then he told me that Duralast does the reman'd engine rebuilds and that he doesn't trust the quality of those motors...since it's not directly from mazda...

VOODOO8

Sorry to hear that dude. When I had my first motor replaced it was at 52K. Got the same warranty as you, but I was well within the extended factory warranty period. Sorry for offering incorrect guidance!

VOODOO8

To my knowledge (already proven to suspect earlier in this thread ) I believe the answer to your question should be no. Otherwise, they have compromised the vehicle to the originally advertised specifications (which got a bunch of us early buyers a nice perk when they screwed up on the original horsepower ratings when the 2004 first hit the market). Don't think they would want to go there again...