okieiggies

I have an 05 automatic that I purchased used with 31k miles in spring of 08. In summer '09 I started having problems with the Coolant light coming on when I reached speeds of 65 mph even though there was ample coolant levels. Occasionally, the car would stall on me at a stop sign when the weather was extremely hot. When I took it in to the dealership, they said they could find no reason for the engine stalling, but replaced the tank so the coolant light would stop coming on. Had no problems after that was done.

Fast forward to this crazy hot summer...46k miles on the car, Coolant light starts coming on at 65+ mph again and car starts stalling in the afternoons when it gets really hot. The dealership says engine is failing all tests and has gotten approval to replace the engine under warranty, but they say the tank replacement would not be covered and want me to pay $300. When I mention that they just replaced it a couple of years ago (less than 10k miles) their reply was that they have changed the way it is being made and I should not have to replace it again after I pay for this one. My initial reaction is that I am not going to pay $300 so that I don't have to look at a faulty sensor light and that's what I told them.

After thinking about this, I really think that Mazda should pay for the tank replacement, since they have already replaced it once and pretty much admitted that they know there was a problem with it and have changed the design. The last one was put on less than 15k miles ago and it seems to have cropped up at the exact same time that the engine problems did that is being taken care of under warranty.

What I would like to know is Am I out of line to pursue this with Mazda to get them to pay for the 2nd tank replacement as well? Any thoughts on this are appreciated. Thanks!

RIWWP

iTrader: (2)

Legally, Mazda only accepts liability with failures within their warranty period. The tank would fall under the Bumper to Bumper, which was 3 years 36,000 miles for the 2005s. So yeah, they are well within their rights to refuse to cover it under warranty.

Sure it sucks, but it's reality.

Either way, I wouldn't pay their price unless it's the cheapest one you can find. Check with Mazmart for his price (almost always vastly cheaper than dealers, all OEM parts), and local junkyards for a wrecked 8. The tank should have survived most collisions unless it was a severe front end hit.

okieiggies

Thanks for the feedback. The 2005 warranty was 4 years/48k miles. Even though I only have 46k miles, I know that this problem is outside the original 4 year warranty. If it was under the actual warranty, I would not be having this dilemma. I have already told them I will not pay the $300 and will definitely check out Mazmart if I don't pursue this with Mazda.

It just seems to me that since they have already replaced the tank less than 15k miles ago and they pretty much told me that they have changed the design so there should not be ANOTHER problem, it's almost like they are admitting that there was a problem they found and now fixed, but want me to pay for it. I have no way to prove that this problem is in anyway related to the engine problem, but it is weird that both times I have had them, they have occureed together. If it WAS caused by the engine difficulty, then it SHOULD be covered under the extended warranty they are providing for the engine.

Also, just realized that I think I posted this under the wrong thread, but not sure how to move it.

RX8Soldier

iTrader: (24)

I'm gonna agree with RIWWP. It sucks, but the reality is that that's how stealerships work. You could fight it, but you'll likely lose.
Just order a new one from Mazmart, or disconnect the sensor and check your fluid often.

As for the wrong forum, contact a mod and ask them to move it to the S1

RIWWP

iTrader: (2)

Playing with trying to get the liability to fit just doesn't work here. Go ahead and see if you can get them to pay for it, but expect to lose.


Yes, they are "admitting there was a problem", it's called improvements. Happens all along the way with everything. Same thing with the taillights. 04's and 05's didn't seal well enough, 06's and onward do, because they updated the design. Doesn't mean 04's and 05's get free 06 taillights. They could if theirs failed within the warranty period, but not outside of it.

Same thing with the 04 and 05 starter. Same thing with the S1 vs S2 engine (though S1 will always get S1 engine, they aren't swapable), etc...

On Facebook for a while, there was a guy that would post on Mazda's page every single day, ranting and raving at Mazda that they weren't covering his transmission failure after only 31,000 miles. But it was in a 1999 something. The guy failed to see reason that he was outside warranty period, and Mazda legally could decline assistance.

In a world where more and more manufacturers are offering 100,000 mile warranties, people have come to expect that things will never fail. They are more and more failing to realize what a warranty actually is.

It is a manufacturer saying "things on the car should last X miles, or X time period, whichever comes first, after that, we are not confident that they will last, and will not accept the liability for their failure."

Think about our Powertrain warranty. Our engine was only guaranteed to last 60,000 miles. Mazda was not confident that it would last longer from the very start, before the failures started. The voluntarily extended it to 100,000 as a public relations move ONLY, accepting the liability for failures up to 100,000 miles.

okieiggies

Thanks again for your replies. the Service Advisor that helped me yesterday was not my normal SA and I think the way he told me everything yesterday had me questioning the issue. I spoke to my regular SA today who is now back from vacation. Between him and the fact that noone else has repsonded that they had both of those problems in conjunction with each other, I do believe it was just pure coincidence that both times the problems just happened to crop up at the same time.

My regular SA did give me a different story from the one yesterday and said that he is not aware of any updates they have made to correct this problem so there is still a chance if I replaced it, that it could happen again. Said he had a few customers who have had to replace theirs a couple of times. I think I will wait awhile before replacing to see if anything new arises.

okieiggies

Interesting update. Got my car back with the new engine (rman). Did not have them replace the tank with the sensor, but the Lincoln Memorial (coolant light) is no longer lighting up when I hit 65-70 mph. So I was right in thinking that the problem with the light had something to do with the engine problems.

RIWWP

iTrader: (2)

Generally unlikely, unless the problem with the engine was a coolant seal leak or something like that. I could see a few crazy scenarios where they could possibly be linked. It's also simply possible that during there removal of the prior engine, draining and refilling with new coolant, and unplugging and replugging connectors, that one of those items was your problem.