Does anyone have any knowledge as to what G.M. is offering customers
with this problem? A friend (not me) has an 2001 Buick with 45,000
miles and the seals went out. He complained to the Atty. Gen. and
G.M. is offering to go half of the $750 repair cost.
It would be helpful to know if G.M. has cut deals for more, or a
percentage more representative of the miles driven.
Some links about the problem are:
e-mail: d boland 9 (all 1 word) at fastmail period fm
Brent, and others,
I really appreciate your feelings and anger, but what I need is
settlement information for negotiating with G.M. I'd appreciate it if
we could confine the discussion to that topic. Once we have a
settlement with G.M. I'll post the amount so it may help some of you.
A good newsgroup response is one that is truly helpful
and sticks to the subject. All the rest is just useless
When ours failed, GM offered nothing at all. The car was out of warranty.
The local dealer decreased his price for repair to a shade over US$300,
in order to compete with the local independent shops. It was dealer
goodwill, zippo from GM
Actually, if it's a design defect...
My brother had a car where the clutch master cylinder failed out of
warrantee. The dealer said it 'shouldn't have failed' made some calls
and it was covered.
My motorcycle had an electrical failure, out of warrantee. Granted, it
wasn't that big a deal, but I when I went to buy the parts to do the
repair myself, I was given the parts for free.
Both times, the company was Honda.
Granted, that's the extreme in the other direction.
Look at it this way. How would you feel about the question from the
post above if this same issue came up when GM was at 12/12000
warrantee? Or 24/24000?
But in the original posters case, here's a KNOWN defect that leads
to a LIMITED SERVICE LIFETIME of the vehicle. It would be
the kiss of death for used car values if it were mandated that at
warrantee end you KNEW you had a big repair expense. Something
that seems to be very close to reality with certain makes and models...
There really IS a perception of value here when the problem turns out
to be a known defect that has turned into a common occurrence. That's
why there's a lot of 'secret warrantees' out there.
So called "design defects" because they are wide spread were actually the
result of governments mandates, such as gasket and paint problems, that
where the result of not allowing gasket and paint manufactures sufficient
time to develop and test proper replacement material. There are in fact not
design defects but product defects, that are covered under the warranty.
Warranties have limits however, and many of the problems occurred long after
the warranties had expired. Many did not show up while still owned by the
original owner, should a manufacturer offer extended coverage on a high
mileage vehicle to somebody who may have not even purchased the vehicle from
one of its dealers? Every manufacture suffered the consequences, not only
GM and not only domestics, and they had to spend many millions to retain
some of their customers or to "buy" the customers back.
What is a secret warranty? If there were indeed 'secret warrantees' out
there, how would anybody ever know of them?
If I could get a decent price reduction to buy a vehicle without a warranty,
I would do so. I have not purchased a vehicle that had any problems in over
thirty years, back to when new vehicle warranties were for only 1000 miles
or thirty days ;)
Of course another school of thought is that the Japanese mfgs like Toyota
and Honda avoided these problems altogether, while still complying, and
typically exceeding, the very same government standards. Many of these GM
intake gasket leaks were fixed under warranty, but even the fixes are now
leaking. Anyway you look at it, it is a manufacturing defect, either in
design or in the materials specified, or both. And to the best of my
knowledge, it has not been corrected to this day.
I imagine most of us are well aware of the paint mandates, but in what way
did the government induce GM to turn out all of these engines with
inadequate gasket sealing? And then not correct it year after year after
year? Sounds like more Stay The Course BS to me. If the government ever
starts counting leaking DexCool as an emission, GM will be in non
'99 Alero 3400 V6, ready for it's 2nd lower intake gasket operation at
Where do you get the idea Japanese manufactures avoided gasket problems?
Toyotas head gasket problems occurred much sooner that did the gasket
problems for GM. There gasket manufactures used four different martial to
replace asbestoses. Two worked fine, two did not. Of the two that failed,
one went quickly the other lasted longer. Toyotas head gasket were going
around 20K when the cars were under warranty. Those that were repaired
with the original gaskets, failed again while under warranty. Toyota did
not cover gasket problem after the warranty expired.
I was not until it became apparent years later that the asbestos replacement
material was the problem that the other two good materials were adopted by
the gasket manufactures world wide. GM gasket supplier used a material that
lasted longer and failed after the warranty expired and thus the problem.
It was not until Ford won an out of court settlement with the gasket
manufactures that requires them to pay 80% of the total repairs caused by
the gasket material, that Ford and other manufactures extended the warranty
on their gaskets.
The gasket manufactures argued that engine failure do to gaskets was a
maintenance problem. Head gasket failure indeed were not catastrophic, but
failed over time, as I testified in my deposition in the Ford case since we
in the fleet service business were first to report premature gasket failures
in Toyotas. The gasket manufactures pointed out that we were replacing
gasket BEFORE any engine damage occurred and if owners were properly
maintaining their vehicles they should have discovered a "weeping" head
gasket and replaced it, long before any engine damage occurred, as well.
The court did not buy that argument and the gasket manufactures settled.
If you recall Toyota at first blamed "improper maintenance" as the cause of
their sludge problem, until it became apparent that something else was
amiss when the "Gelling," as they referred to the sludge, began turning up
in engines serviced properly at their dealerships. We in the fleet service
business were the first to discover a problem when we started to submit
warranty claims after seeing sludge in some of their engines,
Naturally you are entitled to your own opinion and free to believe what ever
you chose, but everything I said in that post was correct. You are
misinformed if you do not know GM extended the warranty for gasket failures
based on time and mileage. ;)
With these engines, you never knew when it would happen, or how much damage
be done.. Damage could be nil, or considerable, when these let loose.
Now, if anyone (but Mike Hunter, of course) were going to buy a car with a
known ticking time bomb like this, it would probably make a big difference
in price, or possibility of selling the
Mike keeps his cheerleading panties on all the time (but they are beginning
to get ragged)
I have yet to hear of anyone getting more than a 50% consideration for
this problem from GM, even though just about every engine of that design
and vintage seems destined for this failure. GM knows full well about
the screw up and it "managing" the consequences of it.
In our household them managed us right into the arms of Honda, after
having purchased our previous three new vehicles from GM.
I once had an engine oil seal blow. The vehicle was still under warranty.
I had to engage an attorney to get the engine replaced. The manufacture
wanted me to prove the proper grade of oil was used when the oil was
changed, since the service was not performed at one of their dealerships.
That manufacturer was Honda
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.