Re: RE: Re: Warranty/Pinging????

From: Dakota99BB@aol.com
Date: Thu Mar 04 1999 - 00:18:31 EST


Thanks, i totally agree I think they should foot the bill. I don't need to
pay $400
for headers that MIGHT take care of the problem. The main reason I posted the
thread was to find out if anyone had had similar problems and how they fixed
them.

Thanks,

DAKOTA99BB

In a message dated 3/3/99 4:01:40 PM Pacific Standard Time, bernd@texas.net
writes:

<< Subj: DML: RE: Re: Warranty/Pinging????
 Date: 3/3/99 4:01:40 PM Pacific Standard Time
 From: bernd@texas.net (Bernd D. Ratsch)
 Sender: owner-dakota-truck@buffnet4.buffnet.net
 Reply-to: <A HREF="mailto:dakota-truck@buffnet.net">dakota-truck@buffnet.net
</A>
 To: dakota-truck@buffnet.net
 
 If you have the problem with the vehicle, and it's a new (under warranty)
 vehicle at that...demand that the dealer find the cause and fix it at their
 cost. (Hell, if it means that they have to put headers on it...why not.)
 
 There are a lot of Dak's that came from the factory that don't ping so that
 tells me that there is a problem with the original configuration.
 (Aftermarket parts can fix these...but again, if it's new and under
 warranty, make them fix it. Why should you spend the money to fix their
 screw-up.)
 
 I don't agree with the "Warranty Rules"..hell, Edelbrock proved the C.A.R.B.
 and EPA wrong several years ago with a motor that they built...and it ran
 cleaner, more efficient, and a hell-uv-a-lot more power. It didn't go
 through though because the damn bureaucrats said "NO...It doesn't conform to
 the current smog/emissions laws". (A--holes!)
 
 Regards,
 
 Bernd D. Ratsch
 Pflugerville, TX >>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:13:03 EDT