2k4_8

This may work or may not, but here is what I would do. In order for them to void your warranty they must prove that the reason your motor is shot is BECAUSE you never changed the oil. They can't prove that you NEVER changed it, and if you didn't at that many miles the viscosity would probably be less than zero lol. You may be able to send oil in a specimin container to a lab (I forget which ones do it, google it) and prove that your oil is in satisfactory condition. Just a possible solution to the problem....

mac11

iTrader: (1)

You cant prove that you ever did.

You and everyone else is missing the point.

The viscosity or condition of the oil is not the question here. If by some miracle the oil lasted 35k miles and were still in good condition to not need to be changed that would still not be the issue. The issue is the owners manual says to change it and furthermore is says you must provide proof of it being changed at a certain interval for the part to be warranted.

The only way oil analysis would help in this situation is if you had sent the oil in for analysis at each oil change interval and had documented proof that the oil in the motor was fine at EVERY interval which is the reason it was not changed.

2k4_8

/blush I didn't realize it said I had to provide proof I changed the oil.

lone_wolf025

He's entitled to quality service which he is not getting regardless of what he can or cannot prove.

Needless to say I disagree with a lot more of what you said, but I'm not interested in starting a debate.

AlexCisneros

I think you are missing the point.

If my car's engine was a unique anomaly, or even a rare occurrence among the thousands of cars sold, I'd probably cavalier your point with as much gusto and one sidedness as you have.

But you see, it isn't a rare occurrence or unique event. Go do a search, you'll find a thread just on the "new motor club". This is a problem that is occurring with AT's and MT's. As someone else mentioned, it isn't a lack of oil changes.

And as to the R&D, listen. there are techs and there are sales people. They don't always see eye to eye. Agreed, this rendition of the engine may have better aspects than the previous version. These issues, however, are not indicative of a car whose every possible bug was addressed prior to releasing it.

and by the way, if you think I'm whining at least give me the stinky cheese to go with my wine instead of just the stink.

mac11

iTrader: (1)

he is not getting poor service. The dealership took his complaint and did work on the car to the point to which it was determined that they would need to get authorization from MNAO to do the work under warranty. After that it is out of the hands of the dealership. I agree that he should be able to be privvy to the reason unto which it was determined he needs a new motor but other than that I dont see how the dealership has not given quality service.

If you are saying he is getting poor service because they dont just go ahead and replace his motor regardless then you have expectations of things the realm of feasability.


I understand that there are engines getting replaced. The thing you either didn't do or didn't provide the information for in this thread was whether this is being handled under the "emmissions" recal. From what I read you just took the car in about a bad idle and stalling problem which is entirely different. If they are not doing things under the emissions recal then your car is treated as a single case not a part of the group of cars that may be effected.

And I'm saying you are a whiner. I understand being on the wrong end of a bad warranty claim. I just think in this situation you put yourself up ***** creak but not documenting your work. And now outside of doing something illegal there is not much you can do about it.

nycgps

iTrader: (1)

but they still cannot prove that any of us never did.

Even that we got all the receipt and oil analysis. they can still say you've never changed it, and the report was fake. since the report cant tell which car is coming from. Sure if we have those we have a stronger case. but come on.

This engine problem is giving Mazda (and rotary engine) another blow. I have a strong feeling that this has something to do with the 5w20 oil that the US spec use. I dont see any other parts of the world has as much *engine issues* as the us-spec 8 has. yes climate and other factors should be considered, or maybe we have a bigger Rx8 customer base than the rest of the world, but 5w20 is the most obvious thing.

PhotoMunkey

Conversely, in a court of law, the burden would be on Mazda to prove that there was insufficient oil in the engine at any time during the period of ownership.
Lawyer: "Did you test the oil in the engine every time it was in for a warranty issue or reflash?"
Mazda rep: "No."
Lawyer: "Was the engine full of oil when the customer delivered it to your shop for this stalling issue?"
Mazda rep: "Yes."
Lawyer: "Was this oil it decent condition?"
Mazda rep: "It appeared to be okay, but we didn't test it."
Lawyer: "Are you denying the claim because the customer doesn't have oil change receipts?"
Mazda rep: "Yes, as per the owners manual."
Lawyer: "Can you PROVE that the oil in the engine, at any point in time, was of insufficient quality or quantity?"
Mazda rep: "Um, no. Not really. But we didn't do the oil changes."
Lawyer: "But, based on the oil in the vehicle at the point the problem occurred, was the condition of the oil a factor in the engine's failure?"
Mazda rep: "We can't say because we didn't test the oil."
Lawyer: "My client has testified under oath that he changed his oil every 2000 miles. Based on the condition of his oil, at the time the problem manifested, can you prove that he didn't?"
Mazda rep: "Um, no. But we didn't do the oil changes."
Lawyer: And neither did you test the oil in the engine at the time of the engine failure, nor at any other time, am I correct on this?"
Mazda rep: "That is correct."
Lawyer: "So we'd be safe in saying that the engine oil, in quantity and quality, is not the cause in this engine failure?"
Mazda rep: "Um, that's not what I said."
Lawyer: "Either the engine oil was the cause, because the owner neglected it, and you immediately noticed it upon tear-down, and you have proof of this, or the engine oil was NOT a factor at all. Which is it?"
Mazda rep: "Um, we don't know, but we suspect the oil was old at some point in the past."
Lawyer: "How can you prove this to the court?"
Mazda rep: "Based on our past experience with other rotary tear-downs and replacements.
Lawyer: "There were other engines with similar problems with necessitated a tear-down and subsiquent replacement?"
Mazda rep: "Um, yeah. We have this recall checklist..."
Lawyer: "A recall? Do you mean this Emissions recall, issued by Mazda in September 2006?"
Mazda rep: "Yeah, that one."
Lawyer: "How many engines has Mazda NAO replaced under this recall."
Mazda rep: "Um, I don't know exactly..."
Lawyer: "But you're willing to conclude, based on your experience with other rotary tear-downs, on the basis of this emissions recall, that this particular engine had it's failre due to insufficient oil?"
Mazda rep: "Um, yeah."
Lawyer: "A recall which includes complaints similar to the one my client expressed to your service writers?"
Mazda rep: "Um, yeah."
Lawyer: "A recall which was initiated BY Mazda after seeing a rash of engine failures similar to my client's initial complaint? Are there any other components which could cause a similar engine failure?"
Mazda rep: "Well..."
Lawyer: "If the catalytic converter fails, or plugs up, could this cause a similar engine failure over time?
Mazda rep: "It can. But we can't test the catalytic converter unless the engine's running properly."
Lawyer: "So the real cause in this case could be the catalytic converter?"
Mazda rep: "It could be, but since the customer doesn't have his oil receipts, we're not under obligation to fix the engine."
Lawyer: "Can you PROVE right now that the catalytic converter is not the cause and the oil is?"
Mazda rep: "No."
Lawyer: "What's the warranty period on a catalytic converter?"
Mazda rep: "7 years or 70,000 miles per Federal Regulations."
Lawyer: "Was My. Cisnero's car within those limits?
Mazda rep: "Yes."
Lawyer: "Have you had other engine failures attributed to catalytic converter failures?"
Mazda rep: "Yes."
Lawyer: "Does the oil quality or quantity in any way affect the catalytic converter?"
Mazda rep: "No."
Lawyer: "Is it reasonable to assume, based on what you've told us here today that you, Mazda, have not fully examined all possible causes of this particular engine failure? After all, the engine had sufficient oil in both quantity and quality, though you didn't test the oil, and since you cannot test the catalytic converter, at this point can we assume that you cannot completely determine the truthful cause of this engine failure, regardless of whatever engine receipts Mr Cisnero can or cannot produce?
Mazda rep: "Well, technically-speaking that's true. But we didn't do his oil changes."
Lawyer: "Nor can you prove that oil was the culprit, or that the catalytic converter, a known issue, or the existing recall causes weren't the true reason why this particular engine failed, right?"
Mazda rep: "That is correct."
Lawyer, addressing judge: "Your honor, we request that, lacking any evidence that this engine failure is in any way my client's fault we move to have the court decide in favor of my client in the matter of the repair of this engine and all expenses pertaining to it, compensation for court costs and all related expenses, and compensation for lost wages due to time wasted at the dealership arguing with employees there who did not excercise all possible methods available to determine the root cause of the problem. We contend that fault lies not with the not only with the dealership, but with Mazda NAO's own diagnostic approval process, where final approval of engine replacement rests not on the observations of the technician performing the work, but on the shoulders of a man or woman at a desk on the other end of a phone line simply checking off boxes on a pre-authorized list. "

The warranty portion of the manual is NOT, repeat NOT a binding contract. Court issued rulings in the past have proven this time and again. Manufacturers ARE, however, required by LAW to warranty a car for a set period of time. Given that there are multiple possible causes for this engine failure, it's safe to say at this point Mazda's trying for the easy way out by claiming that, sans oil change receipts, they don't have to warranty the engine.

Mac11, Alex IS getting poor service because:
1. Every Mazda service department employee in every dealership in the country knows that there's an emissions recall which DOES include the words "customer complains of a lack of power, or stalling issues, or hard to start".
2. That dealership KNOWS he's had the car in for all available recalls and reflashes. He's NOT ignoring the car's maintenance.
3. Mazda NAO might suspect he's been running synthetic oil BUT cannot come out and state that the use of synthetic oil was the cause of apex or side seal failure due to excessive carbon. Synthetic oils currently meet ALL published standards.
4. If they had his receipts, and it SHOWED synthetic oil, they would again, automatically deny the engine repair.

I suspect that Mazda is again scrambling this spring due to a rash of failures once again and that they still aren't certain what the true cause may be. They're in a pickle because they can't claim for certain that synthetic oils are the cause because they oil suppliers would raise a fuss. If they DO still have a problem with apex and side seal failures and they KNOW there's going to be more (a reasonable assumption) then it is in their best interest to deny that there's a problem, or to insist that everyone produces oil change receipts.

I for one, will save all of my receipts and I DARE Mazda to pull this crap with me. I'll OWN a sizable chunk of Mazda NAO by the time I'm done if they do! This bullcrap with Alex is a perfect example of stepping on your own crank! Painful at first, and liable to cause yet more pain and problems down the road.

Alex, I think at this point it time to have a face-to-face chat with a Regional Service Representative and find out the real failure inside the engine. The burden of proof for denial of a warrantyable repair is on the MFG.

PhotoMunkey

BTW-I'm also running 5w-20 dino juice in my engine in the HOTTEST friggin' part of the country. Summer temps approach 120 with alarming regularity where I live, and coupled with long freeway drives (150 miles just to REACH a Mazda dealership!) in my commute to my "job", I find that checking and maintaining my own oil is a very real necessity, whether I own a rotary or piston engine. If there's an issue with the oil weight, I'm going to find it. Mazda says 5w-20 is sufficient for 100+ temperatures.

I rather suspect that for a great many engines "saved" by the recall flash that bumped up the apex and side seal lubrication, the damage has already been done. I think MNAO bumped up the warranty to avoid a class-action lawsuit, but has probably assumed that there will still be a certain percentage of failures down the road. This is born out by the fact they've estabilished their own rebuilding service!

In a court, Alex would be able to request copies of ALL of the diagnostic sheets used at the dealership level AND at the phone tech end to determine exactly when and why they determined that (A) his engine was bad and (B) that it wouldn't be covered under warranty. Interesting that they actually DID determine that his engine was bad BEFORE denying the repair. If I were Alex, I would take a camera to the dealership tomorrow and politely request to be shown my car, my engine, and I would photographically document EVERYTHING about the disassemby, if they've even gone so far as to tear it down. I'm willing to bet that they haven't. From what I remember about he recall checklist, there are no dealership tear-downs being authorized at all. In fact, I don't even think a single item is unbolted until the replacement engine arrives. That means all of the testing is done by the vacuum method (if the car passes the "hot driving test"). Since Alex's car obviously fails this test if it's stalling, that means they've parked it on a back lot with a number tag hanging in the window. If this is the case, I'd remove it from their possession immediately, as I'm sure they're not responsible for any theft or vandalism and, until he meets with a regional service representative, won't be getting the car repaired soon. I'd ask for the regional rep's office number, fax number, email address, and physical address, then I'd inform the regional rep that I was parking the car until the repair was complete and, since the ticket is still open at the dealership level, request a rental car. This will, of course, be refused, but if you document that you asked, and that it's necessary for you to continue to work, you've laid the groundwork for all of your "reasonable related expenses" to be compensated later.

I'll repeat this once again just so everyone understands it; As long as there's oil in the engine when it's delivered to a dealership with a problem AND that oil is determined to be of sufficient quality and quantity, a dealership or MFG CANNOT refuse a warranty repair unless THEY CAN PROVE ABUSE. The owner's manual is NOT A CONTRACT with you. It is a BLUFF meant to convince people to maintain their vehicles. Simple written records showing that the oil was changed, dates, and mileage is enough in a court to prove "reasonable care was exhibited by the owner" lacking any contrary evidence from the MFG or dealership. Having all visits to the dealership for recalls done in a timely manner also helps as it proves to a judge or arbitrator that you are a diligent owner.

There's no WAY that MNAO will let a single case go to court as ALL of their records regarding the total number of engines replaced under warranty and recall for related issues could be called in cross-examination of a "technical expert". They'll write a check to buy back the entire car before they'll allow it to go to court. They can't afford NOT to write a check.

two rotors

You may be right about the oil,on the other hand reading some of the bull in this thread it could also be due to idiot drivers in the US.

AlexCisneros

redeyes13

As an employee at Mazda I can tell you a couple of things.

1. Dealers do not deny anything that can bring money into the shop (if they do they would not be in business), dealers deny warranty jobs that are not going to be paid for by mazda. If Mazda wont pay and the customer wont pay, WHO WILL? Dealers are not at fault of poorly designed part or car, they dont build the vehicles.

2. It states right in the owners manual to keep all records of maintenance, you must have them at all times. You dont have to come to mazda but you better follow their guide lines if you want them to pay for something. You think mazdas bad then you have never owned any other car. GO buy a Hyundia and then complain. NOw thats a company that can really get you with their " BEST WARRANTY"

3. DONT BLAME YOUR DEALER. If you read your Owners manual like your are suppose to you would not be in this situation.

If you were to come to my dealer with the same problem, it would be the exact same out come. My DCSM (REP) would say ok to warranty this engine this is what we need, records of maintenance and possible causes. If you can produce even one oil change recpiet or proof of purchase of oil or filters (when you should have had 17 done), something is fishy.

On the same note, dont Blame Mazda becasue dealers report to mazda but mazda reports to Japan. Thats why there is Mazda and Mazda of North America.

Sorry for your loss

r0tor

iTrader: (1)

actually, thats NOT correct since its clearly written in the warranty information that succifient record keeping is required or else its a breech of warranty terms and conditions - thusly voiding the warranty

it sucks they will sink to that level, but it is pretty clearly written about the owners obligations for keeping the warranty.

nycgps

iTrader: (1)

I dont think MNAO needs to report to Mazda Japan for US-Spec car's repairs. MNAO can make their own decisions about warranty repairs.

We're not even sure what is the exact reason for the engine failure, it could be more than what Mazda's recall saids. but hey, this is a very known problem. and affects most of the *earlier* model. Just look at the way they *notify* the users, 2007 first, then 2006, then 05, and at last 04

Cuz I think they're expect the 04s to have the *most* problems first. so its better to save the ones that should be less effected (the later yr model group) than the severe group.

If I have any aftermarket parts that fuxk my car up, sure they can deny warranty because its clearly my own fault. but how can they just *assume* that you've never change your oil and deny warranty ?

What if Mazda one day saids that *whoever do 9K rpm shifts = race = deny warranty* ? Hey, that could happen, I think some people got the *we believed that you did race your engine, so bye bye warranty* oh and Abidd's posted about 100 mph and Mazda said he abused his engine. wtf ?

Fight for it Alex !

Nemesis8

iTrader: (3)

+1

PhotoMunkey

AGAIN, the manual is NOT a contract! Warranties are stipulated by the Federal Gov't. It really doesn't matter who MNAO reports to as that doesn't seem to be a factor in this case. A written maintenance log on one of the pages of the owner's manual is sufficient proof of diligent ownership if the MNAO cannot prove that the oil is at fault.

Again, the Gov't does NOT require you to have oil change receipts as long as you've kept some form of record.

BTW-It also says in the owner's manual that Mazda does NOT recommend synthetic oils, and to only use Premium fuel, and to never modify your car. How many of you are following all of those recommendations?

Alex, PM me with your contact information and I'll put you in touch with someone at MNAO who might be able to help.

two rotors

PhotoMunkey-I think you are full of sh*t!

Perhaps you could direct me to the place in the RX 8 owners manual where "Mazda does NOT recommend synthetic oil".

In my RX8 manual the only stipulation is that the oil be "certified for gasoline engines by the API" The ILSAC label is on all kinds of synthetic oils(castrol,mobil-1,etc).

Now if you look in your RX7 owners manual it is a different story -it specifically excludes the use of synthetic oils.

nycgps

iTrader: (1)

Errr .... altho I agreed with some of your stuff but ....

I cant find the dos not recommend synthetic oils and *only* use premium fuel part.

redeyes13

When you purchased the vehicle your buying a contract with a vehicle. They promise you that the vehicle will perform the way it should if......You do your Maintenance.

Mazda is not voiding the mans warranty. Mazda is saying look the vehicles engine is f***D up because it had no oil. They are stating, ok this vehicle failed because it did not have any oil, why did it not have oil?? Was maintenance ever done?? They turn to customer, sir did you do your maintenance? Yes! Can you give me the copys of your documented repairs? NO, Then I cant warrany your engine.

And Mazda reports everything to Japan, They even have Japen recall and US recalls. Repair times are set by the factory in Japen.

If Jackie Chan can change a light bulb in 12 mins then Chris Tucker needs 18 mins because he has bigger hands, Japan will laugh and say no no, 12 mins.

BUY CAR=Warranty starts, Maintenance Vehicle as Owners Manual states and problem occures in vehicle mazda covers, all maintenance done.

No Maintenance done and engine dies, where are you maintenance repairs, no proof of repairs, assumtion that nothing is done, warranty void.

Now if the kids head light went out or his seat back broke, mazda is not going to say hey we need all records of oil changes or we cant do it.

Mazda found that vehicle had/or lost oil and caused engine failure, why no oil or lost oil??

Best advice I can give, always go to your dealer because you can always bitch if something goes wrong because a service advisor gets paid to tell you recommended services.

Side note, if your automatic transmission quit working at 45,000 miles, mazda will ask what the fluid looks like, if the tech reports burnt, they will ask if transmission fluid had been changed and if not, why not? You dont do your maintenance, you pay later.

redeyes13

Synthtic oil will indeed **** up your apex seals

redeyes13

91 octane or better, they test these things to prevent failure. Dont use 87 or 89.

Side NOte: Anyone with CX-7, Speed6 or Speed3. Do not think you can get away with anything less becasue if you do and your problems start occuring a Mazda tech can now run a test which will tell them what octane fuel you have, anything less then 91, payment out of your pocket.

nycgps

iTrader: (1)

I want to know how. Not just coming out of someone's mouth.

my engine is still not **** up. I wonder why. oh yes I use Synthetic

Oh lets not make this into another synthetic vs dino again.

two rotors

Claiming a repair under the Emissions Warranty might fly in the US,but it would not in Canada-see attached.

two rotors

Oops

two rotors

Clearly you know nothing about rotary engines!!!