Chrysler refuses recall request

Complete and utter nonsense.

You are clearly clueless when it comes to blow outs.

Try it with a blow out.

b-pillars? i never said b-pillars. i said "cabin". regardless of semantics, if the headroom of the vehicle suddenly decreases 18", fatalities ensue. and such an event is not only entirely foreseeable, [especially if you've tested the vehicle and have found it to be unstable in other equally foreseeable circumstances] but completely avoidable.

i've had a dramatic civic blowout, but no instability ensued. as for dramatic handling, i've done a good deal more to personally research this situation and thus speak from experience than you sitting on your ass watching youtube.

So says the continually on-going king of unsupported, empty claims.

On 06/09/2013 08:58 AM, . bleated:

if i posted times, dates and gps coordinates, you's still say the same. why? because you're an empty shell that has nothing and does nothing except sit at home trying to bite ass.

He's many times been challenged by numerous posters to provide any documentation or support whatsoever for his empty claims. Yet the fraud's sole response is to always instead launch a feeble and pathetically impotent personal attack, a sorry approach that speaks volumes.

No, "jim".

1. EVERY vehicle with a lower than average ratio of track width to centre of mass heigh is going to more susceptible to rolling.
2. No reasonably built vehicle can be constructed that will NEVER ("completely avoidable") have the cabin crushed in a rollover.

kiss my hairy yellow ass, idiot.

The truth obviously hurt and ultimately angered the fraud.

Even if the A pillars of a convertible hold, there's simply nothing there structurally which is far less than something.

Did you yank the wheel and/or slam on the brakes?

I've actually experienced a blow while braking.

It *is* a truck, and if you buy a truck and expect it to drive and handle e xactly like a car, you're an idiot. The fault is with the buyers for purch asing what is clearly a truck and treating it as if it were a car.

I am following you, I just couldn't possibly disagree with you more. You'r e taking the Naderite argument that people need to be protected from their poor choices - to a point that is somewhat a valid goal for societal reason s, but when you try to stretch it to this degree, you are basically implyin g that manufacturers should have all responsibility for all uses of their p roducts, intended uses *and otherwise*, and that the consumer/end user has no responsibility whatsoever.

When people do not do basic maintenance like making sure their tires are pr operly inflated and wearing evenly and also drive a truck like a sports car , bad things happen.

So in every car crash the manufacturer is at fault?

I'd ask what a "pic" is but I really don't give a shit who you do and don't think is dumb.

nate

but it looked like, was marketed as, and sold to the car market.

so they're at fault because the public gullibly accept marketing bullshit? do you even /remember/ that bullshit - about how these "suv's" were "safer"???

that's because you're /not/ following me!

no. if a company TESTS a product and finds it to be a killer, then proceeds to production despite that knowledge, than there is a reason to "protect" against murder.

you clearly know nothing about product liability law. it you make ceramics and sell a decorated plate, then you are liable if the glazing is toxic. you don't even have to know it's toxic. you can't even claim that it's art and not a utensil. it's toxic and you have absolute and unavoidable liability.*

unless of course you're a huge corporation that shows up in d.c. with 5 lobbyists per every single representative to ensure that policy in the corporate interest is policy in the national interest, and thus legal liability is something best swept under the carpet.

• that's why you get thousands of lawyers make millions of dollars every year on asbestosis lawsuits for example - and why they advertise looking for potential victims.

tires are utterly and completely irrelevant - no vehicle should roll just because of a flat. no vehicle should crush its occupants just because it rolls. and CERTAINLY not go ahead with production AFTER it's found fatal in testing, from this perfectly normal occurrence.

not for a road collision, of course not, but this is not a road collision and you know it. it's a perfectly normal and foreseeable part of operations that turns out to be fatal, and that was tested to be so beforehand.

i already explained once - it's a penis inadequacy compensator. but it's also danish slang for "prick"...

that's clearly untrue because you jump so obligingly whenever anyone presses your buttons. and worse, you've been burning about this all week!

It most certainly doesn't look like a car. From the rear of the front door forward, it appears exactly like a Ranger.

That marketing bullshit was not explicit bullshit, it was more like Cheney trying to make an association between Iraq and Al-Qaeda without explicitly coming out and saying there was a connection because he knew he couldn't prove anything.

And yes, I don't have a whole lot of sypmathy for gullible people especially when it was fairly common knowledge that SUVs were more prone to rollovers than cars, certainly if not from the very beginning then after the whole kerfuffle with Consumer Reports and the Samurai.

Do you have any proof of your wild assertions?

But if a truck is used for a purpose for which it is not intended, does the manufacturer still have liability?

If I bought a new Sprinter, and then took it to an autocross, would I be able to sue M-B/Freightliner when it rolled over? That is only slightly more absurd than what you are suggesting.

Then don't buy an SUV. And by your logic, all SUVs should be outlawed. Again, I couldn't disagree more.

As is true for any similar SUV. The only fault of Ford was spec'ing recommended tire pressures too close to the safe minimum as determined by Firestone, but don't let facts get in the way of a good rant. And apparently if tires were maintained properly, failure rates were in line with industry averages; it was only when tires were checked infrequently or not at all (as is sadly typical) that we started to have issues.

Amusingly this might be a non-issue today with the proliferation of TPMS systems on new vehicles. Had Ford spec'd higher pressures or equipped the Explorer with TPMS we might not be having this discussion.

Mm. I must have missed that gem.

Actually, I've just had enough stuff to do over the last week that I finally bothered to come back to RAT to see if it anything intelligent had been posted. It hadn't, but that doesn't seem to stop you.

nate

well, wonder of wonders....

washington* at its finest - by the time fiat realized how many palms were out waiting to be greased to make this problem go away, they figured the recall would be cheaper. but it'll be an expensive decision in the long run though - the sharks smell blood, and they'll get paid one way or another. it'll be cheaper to pay squeeze and be done with it rather than do the recall and then still end up paying squeeze later.

• or should i say, "chicago"?

Of course my vehicle is not covered... and I just spent a lot of time fighting with old fasteners to install a trailer hitch.

The proposed "fix" makes a lot more sense now, the stock bumper is made of poop and fail. But wouldn't this "issue" occur with any pickup sold without a rear bumper which is completely legal?

nate

The whole thing is the media hysteria/media circus effect combined with the complete ignorance on the part of the public (and the media) about statistics. Back when Ford Explorers were being vilified as rolling over death traps the actual accident rates showed that several Mercedes Benz cars had higher rollover fatality rates then the explorer did. Also that several other SUV's had higher rollover fatality rates then the Explorer. The American public has never let facts interfere with their irrational emotional responses and the media has never let an opportunity pass where they can fan the flames started by the idiots.