ASH8

https://www.rx8club.com/rx-8-discussion-3/8-years-100-000-mi-extended-warranty-147287/page5/

This is page 5 of the thread which shows the official letter from MNAO.

So, a reimbursement is also offered to RX-8 owners who have had a rebuild done out of warranty.

I WONDER IF MAZDA AUSTRALIA WILL DO THE SAME.

I THINK I WILL EMAIL DD at MA...
Stay Tuned..

ASH8

Here is a copy of email sent to DD Today at MA.

Dear Mr. Dickson,

Mazda North American Operations has just announced an extended engine warranty for all RX-8's.
This cover the rotary engine core for 8 Years or 160,000 km (100,000 Miles)

Below is a link to the RX-8 Owners Club in the USA, please scroll down to view the MNAO Official letter.

https://www.rx8club.com/showthread.php?t=147287&page=5

A reimbursement is also offered to all RX-8 owners who have had their engines replaced after
their original warranty period expired.

My Question to you is will Mazda Australia be offering the same/similar extended warranty to it's
RX-8 owners here.

Kind Regards
Ash
Adelaide.

enforcer

Good pick up Ash, let us know if they get back to you. However my strong suspicion is they'll stone wall us.....

ASH8

Well sometimes he replies, sometimes DD just hand ***** it Customer Services, But he has never ignored me.

As a policy though I think it would be in MA best interest to seriously consider ALL the implications of not implementing a similar scheme, after all it's not as if they don't have the profit margins in every new RX-8 sold here..

erx8s

There must have been considerable pressure from the US powers to get Mazda US to implement these conditions Mazda would not have done this on their own undertaking, however i highly doubt that Mazda Australia willl play ball.

If we dont get a positive response maybe the next move should be to send a copy of the Mazda USA Letter to all the Australian car magazines for their input , as to why we dont get these coditions in the Australian market

Anyone purchasing the version 2 RX8 in july should definetely insist on the new warranty conditions .

Cheers
Michael

alz0rz

iTrader: (41)

In response to your last statement I believe the reason Mazda NA did this was because they are finally comfortable with the updated PCM revisions in regards to engine lubrication. That coupled with the fact that the new Rev 2 RX8 will have ADDITIONAL lubrication injectors I hardly doubt they will stick this warranty with the new 09's.

This is of course assuming that poor engine lubrication was the reason for so many Renny failures, which at this point is pretty much fact.

The letter itself says the warranty is only covering 2004-2008 model years.

erx8s

alOrz

I get what you are saying however i would still not buy the version 2 RX8 on a 3 year 100,00km warranty from my experience i dont believe they have resolved all the quirky problems with the car .


Cheers
Michael

Revolver

Yeah, I saw that thread. I'm not holding my breath for MA to come to the party but I'm happy to be pleasantly surprised.

ASH8

Michael,
I posted a reply in the OZ Forums.

I actually asked DD a few months back if MA were going to increase their warranty period on ALL their cars.

I said my reasons were that all Koren made brands now offer a 5 year unlimited new car warranty.

His reply was NO.

However, this new engine warranty revelation is now a totally different issue.

Revolver, what are the legal implications if an owner or group of owners with the help of a legal brain submitted some form of litigation to have a similar policy adopted here, apart from the cost's what do you think the outcome would be?

Revolver

A verdict for the defendant with an order that you pay their costs.

I'm not kidding.

For starters what would your cause of action be? You contracted to buy a car with a 3 year warranty and that's what you got. If you haven't bought one, nobody's forcing you to. If you don't like the terms of the deal, buy something else. Mazda has no legal obligation to extend its warranty terms in any particular market.

That Mazda chooses to unilaterally offer more generous retrospective warranty conditions elsewhere is simply business - not a right of redress. "It's not fair!" doesn't get you very far in litigation...

erx8s

Dave i agree with you its not fair does not work in litigation however as pointed out by Ash8 in reponse to one of my threads in the au site there is an obligation by Mazda AUSTRALIA in meeting EPA emmission and catalyctic converter longevity .

Quote as posted by ASH8 in the au forum
Michael
I agree.. I believe MNAO along with MMC Japan have taken this position for a few reasons.
1. I think under US law all manufacturers have to guarantee their cars from an emissions point of view that their cars will maintain (within parameters) certified readings/results for a period of 10 years.
2. Without correct compressions in a rotary engine this is not a possibility.

So the short story is...unless the engine is in good operating condition Mazda would be in breach of US EPA Requirements...so they are forced to ensure their Rotaries are within specification.

Australia on the other had does not have to have catalytic converters that must last 10 years (like the US)..I think ours are 5 years...?
So, it will possibly be the case that MA are not obliged under law to do anything in the form of an extended engine warranty.

However, from a Customer and Brand reputation point of view I believe that it would be in MA's best interest to consider a similar warranty.

And yes, I agree that Bad Publicity locally would not go down well with MA. Like you said we have the ability to inform the motoring press.

I am not one for making threats to companies as I believe it can be counter productive, but, when ones backs are against the wall what other choice does one have...

Time will tell..

ASH8

Yes, this is my point, and I am more convinced that it is the US EPA regulations that have forced MNAO in offering this extended warranty, not just because they are good blokes.

Because their "vehicle park" of RX-8's in Northern America is approx 60,000 units they have established a MMC Trained Re-manufacturing Facility..to offset costs of importing completed engines from Japan like MA does here.

I look at it this way, it is obvious to all now that the engine failures in the US were due to an insufficient amount of oil metered by the MOP, and possibly the grade/type of oil used.

Revolver, to prosecute a case here in Australia I would be looking into these issues.

1. What is Australia's official requirements in regard to our emission laws (which do exist) pertaining to exhaust emissions and what are the average levels that must been maintained passed the catalytic converter and out of exhaust tail pipe.
2. Is there a possibility that older RX-8's may be in breach of these regulations due to poor engine compressions and or the vehicle failing Mazda Australia's vacuum test (which is the same as the US).
3. Therefore would there be a responsibility by MA and MMC to maintain an owners car within spec and for what period of time under our laws. In Australia does this manufacturers responsibility expire once the new car warranty has expired?.
4. Is it then the responsibility of the owner to maintain their car to the emission regulations and again for what period of time.


It would be interesting to find out these requirements as I can't remember and do not recall what they are, and obviously they have changed over the years.

I recall back in the mid 1970's when ALL new cars had to meet CO2 requirements had air pumps , EGR (Exhaust Gas Recirculation) valves and later Cats.
Mazda Dealers were forced to purchase expensive emission testers and all cars were checked at point of service and adjusted.
The word then was Governments were going to conduct roadside tests and fine owner/dealers and manufacturers if the cars failed these emission test!.

I don't know about the east coast but in SA this so called mandatory test during servicing fizzled out and I never heard of anyone ever being fined.

Perhaps wait and see what DD has to say from MA..
Somehow I think we (I) know what the answer will be.

ASH8

http://www.frli.gov.au/ComLaw/Legisl...A?OpenDocument

Here the regs are on a 270 page document!!!

I have a headache!

ASH8

http://www.frli.gov.au/ComLaw/legisl...einstrument-Ve

Above is the link for ALL Australian New Car Design Rules "ADR"(4 Pages)

Revolver

Hahaha, you'd make a very good little paralegal Ash. Now you know why legal bills can climb so high - it takes time to sniff this kind of stuff out.

I still reckon there's no cause of action though.

ASH8

Thanks Dave,
I charge $100.00 an hour as an assistant!!!

Anyway, We will wait and see if I get a reply email from the Commonwealth Law office regarding ADR rule 79-80.
And DD from MA.

It will be interesting to find out who is responsible in the maintaining of a new cars emission's devices, seeing the requirement is 5 years or 100,000KM since Jan 1, 2005.

As far as I am concerned if the internals (compression) of a rotary are compromised due to early failures (wear) which in turn effects the ability of all the on-board emission devices to control CO2 and Hydrocarbons at a level that is required under ADR Law then who is responsible, keeping in mind these devices are required to be durable for the 5 year period.

In Labby's case the Oxygen Sensor is a part that is part of the ADR's Design criteria to meet Australian Emission Standards.

It is also Interesting to note that the new RX-8 is not due for release until July which coincidentally corresponds to updated ADR Emission Regulations from 1st July,2008.

I also noted in the 270 page Design Rules Paper that much of the legislation refers (reference) to California and the EU (Europe's)
Regulations.

And Dave, I must say your earlier post in reference to the new car warranty and affordability appears to be a shot at me.
My interest in the subject is not only for myself but also for other Australian RX-8 owners.
I am not going to base my decision to buy a new 8 on Mazda's warranty policy which I already know of.
I have already made my mind up to go ahead with the purchase long before Labby's thread. I am just seeing if MA will looks at Australian owners with a similar extended warranty as good policy.

And yes I may even contact MMC Japan for a policy review, particularly if we can perhaps combine as a group of owners and present a united front..

United We Stand ....Divided We FALL...Well something like that!

ASH8

Just got an email response from ComLaw...

Good afternoon,

The ComLaw/FRLI website is responsible for publishing Commonwealth legislation and for making it available on the Internet. However, Helpdesk staff are not able to provide advice, particularly legal advice or interpret the legislation that is published on the website.

The Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government administers the ADRs and may be able to assit you with your query.

Thank you for your email,

ComLaw Helpdesk


So here we go..around in circles...

swoope

iTrader: (5)

probably more about avoiding a class action law suit..

beers

Revolver

No, not at all.

Sheesh, when are you people going to realise that when I decide to have a shot at someone they know ALL ABOUT IT! Subtle, I'm not. Ditto when I dispense advice - I do not waste time beating around the bush to make someone feel good. My long term clients appreciate it.

So relax Ash, I wasn't (and still not) having a shot at you.

Revolver

That's what I expected. You won't get free legal advice on what is by any measure a difficult issue. If you want to force Mazda's hand on this you'll either have to lobby hard or pay someone to take it on for you.

enforcer

If you're prepared to take a day off work we could cruise on mass to their head office! The RX8 community are sick and tired of it, and a strong message would be send if you could get everyone involved.

Think of it this way....if you could get 100 RX8s @ $50,000 = $5,000,000 worth of National representation, they would take notice....

ASH8

I wanted clarification on the design rules and where a manufacturers responsibility finished.

I have forwarded the information to the Federal Transport (Ministers) Department as directed by ComLaw.

It aint over yet.

ASH8

Well here is the response from DD who hand-balled it to Guess Who....John Read.

Dear Ashley,

My name is John Read and I am responding on behalf of Doug Dickson to your email yesterday .

We are not planning to offer extended warranty on selected RX-8 parts as outlined by Mazda North American Operations recently. We have no specific knowledge of their programs or the reasons for their offers.

Regards

John Read
National Customer Services Manager


Well I could say some expletives here but I will refrain...
as I said it ain't over YET.

ASH8

OK,
I have heard back from the above email to the Federal Infrastructure Dept ...RE: ADR Emission Regulations.
Here is their reply..

Thank you for both your emails Mr Przibilla and apologise for the delay - I have spoken to one of my colleagues who is seeking advice from Vehicle Safety Standards branch and hope to get back to you within the next few days.

Thought I would keep you guys up to date.
Ash

swoope

iTrader: (5)

good job ash. i hope you guys get this. you deserve it!!

beers