I've only found one dealer in this area I had any (not a lot, but they at
least tried) faith in. It was a Chrysler Plymouth dealer and they're long
gone. Looking back to the sixties at how dealers and manufacturers have
treated their customers I'm thinking there was a marked change in the late
'70's and early '80's from we sure want you to be happy to "who cares."
I can't document this because I heard it on a radio show, but the story
goes Ford used to go out of their way to take care of customers including
out of warranty claims to keep their customers satisfied. But a study
showed they weren't rewarded with cusomer loyalty so they quit. If I
remember right this would have been in the '80's or early '90's.
my understanding of the situation was that dc simply with held the
lp's for two reasons. first, they wanted to be sure that if they
replaced a lp, the truck was checked for mods. the bombed engines had
a whole lot more lp failures than the stock ones. as a result, the lp
had to ordered when actually needed, dealers couldn't stock them. the
other reason was that the lp's were being upgraded constantly and dc
wanted to be sure that only the latest version was put on as a
warranty repair rather than one that a dealer stocked that was an
earlier version. also, they wanted the old ones back because the
supplier was taking them apart trying to figure out what needed to be
fixed on them.
not saying that stock trucks didn't have problems with lp's, just that
the bombed ones had a lot more issues. the bombed trucks put too much
stress on a "weak" part. personally, i knew a lot of people with
those engines. i had a '01. i didn't know anyone personally that
ever had to replace a lift pump, but none the less, i know it was a
weak part of the fuel system from other peoples postings. it was
never bad enough for a recall and i think that mike is right when he
says is has been over stated by many. i know the service guy at the
dealership. he said it wasn't that bad out here, they replaced some
bad lp's but not that many. dc told him that fuel quality played a
part in it too. fuel out here is pretty good. i don't know how true
that is, but that is what he was told. anyway, the latest versions of
the lp supposedly were pretty solid.
On Tue, 17 Oct 2006 22:33:43 -0600, "Nathan In Montana"
well............if the 17% figure is accurate.............and i have
to assume at this point that it is............then that would qualify
in my book as rampant. now, my book isn't very official but never the
less, one out of five would be rampant to me. as i said before, it
seems like that should have set off a recall. i remember some folks
on tdr talking about a class action suit at one time several years
ago, over the lp problems. they researched the failure rate there and
never could come up with a figure, other than an unofficial poll on
tdr. the poll's are probably still there if someone had a membership
and the time to search several years of posts. it would be
interesting now to see what their poll showed as a rate and compare it
the 17% figure. a pretty "fair share" of the tdr trucks are bombed so
it would be fun to see if there was a significant increase there.
abyway, i digress. several of the members contacted their dealers and
dc to get a failure rate and were pretty much just blown off as i
recall. it really would be intersting to revisit those old threads
I actually find this funny. I just got a recall for my Chevy, due to a
"safety issue" to have them replace the damn tailgate straps. DC however
doesn't find it needed for a recall on this problem. Hmm!
you're right as i said in my post after the one you are referring to.
that is a huge number. this is the first time that i have ever seen a
definitive figure placed on the failure rate. i assume that the
article is pretty accurate, there would be no reason for the people
quoted in it to bend the truth. seems like that high a figure would
(or certainly should) trigger a recall on the parts, or at least an
extension of the warranty for that part. it never did though and all
through the period that they were having lp problems i read several
articles where dc said the problem was very small and isolated. one
out of five isn't isolated. i don't know though, im not a mechanic
and maybe there was more to it.
on the bombed truck, that wasn't my point. my point was simply that
the lp's weren't backlogged, they were just held at the main parts
distribution center because for a while at least, dc felt that bombing
was a major reason behind this taking place and they wanted to be sure
that the dealers checked for mods before sending out a new lp. whether
or not those denied warranty claims are included in the 17% figure, i
have no idea......... but i imagine you are probably right. at the
start of the problem though, the bombed trucks were being covered on
warranty, so some of them undoubtedly are included in the figure. the
lp fiasco, if you will, is what really fired dc up about mods and
bombing because they were convinced, as i said at first, that that was
the root of the lp problem. or at least that is what i have heard
from my dealer service guy.
In the mean time I'm standing there with my truck on it's ass waiting for DC
to release a lp after they determined my truck wasn't bombed. WTF!!! Glad
you can follow that logic. <G>
There was a time that the regional warehouse couldn't get them. Hopefully
the in the tank one will hold together, cause these will suck to change. The
old one's were 15 minutes and you were done. Listen to me, I'm talking about
repairing a new 40+K truck like it is a okay deal. It is friggin' crazy what
dc has us trained to put up with. I must be loseing it.
roy.........i am not arguing dc's case and i don't disagree with your
outlook as a consumer. i was just trying to pass on the info as to
why dc made the decision to do it that way. not defending it, just
telling why they did made the decision to do it. if mine had gone out
and i had to wait i would have been just as pissed as you or the
others, especially when i don't bomb my truck and im not willing to
wait because dc wants to penalize me for what some other people have
you REALLY think people are stupid enough to believe this? or is it that
you believe your own spin?
what about the 1 in 5 of valid warranty claims from unmodified trucks? even
if you do discredit all modified trucks, 1 in 5 is a rampant issue.
....but you cannot acknowledge it. that would require something else you
dont have. integrity.
Nathan in Montana
I don't think "bombs" had much to do with lift pumps, VP-44's for sure. As
long as the engine is running, the lift runs at it's perdetermined rate,
it's not responsive to fuel demands so it's not overworked. Remember the
VP-44 is fuel lubricated, lots of fuel is returned to the tank. This is the
way I understand it and could be wrong. I'm sure I'll be corrected if I am.
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.