Go Back   Corvette Forum > C5 Corvettes, 1997 - 2004 > C5 Tech
Sign in using an external account
Register Forgot Password?
Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ Vendor Directory
Search
C5 Tech
Corvette Tech/Performance: LS1 Corvette Technical Info, Internal Engine, External Engine, Tech Topics, Basic Tech, Maintenance, How to Remove & Replace Sponsored by
Karl Chevrolet

Welcome to Corvetteforum.com!
Welcome to Corvetteforum.com.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, join Corvetteforum.com today!


Corvette Store
 
 
C7 Parts & Accessories
C6 Parts & Accessories
C5 Parts & Accessories
C4 Parts & Accessories
C3 Parts & Accessories
C2 Parts & Accessories
C1 Parts & Accessories
Wheels & Tires
Sponsored Ads
 
 
Vendor Directory
  
Reply
 
 
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 08-26-2006, 08:33 AM   #1
qwkz06
CF Senior Member
 
qwkz06's Avatar
 
Member Since: Aug 2006
Location: Orlando Fl
Default DTC 492 Dealer denies warranty claim

I am not sure if this is the proper forum for this post but here goes. I did do a search on 492 and it looks like some get the code with a FIPK kit which I do not have.
The car is an '04 Z06 with long tube headers and Bassani exhaust from the headers back. The car also has a Vinci installed cold air intake, cooling upgrade and tune as well. All of the mods were done ~3000 miles ago and the car has run great. Last week I got a check engine light. It turns out the code was 492 which apparently is somewhat odd. Bank 2 secondary air intake i.e. air valve. I checked with a chevy tech before I took the car to the local dealer and he indicated the code usually shows up after the car has sat for a while and some rust from water vapor triggers it and it has nothing to do with the headers etc.
The car has 7400 miles on it so I took it to the dealer for the warranty repair. Guess what? Surprise, surprise. Oh we can't fix that unless the car is taken back to completely stock. I'm thinking Magnuson Moss Act violation. Anyway, have any of you guys had this problem? 492 I mean..I can deal with the dealer once I show the code is not header related. Do you replace the "air valve"? Sorry for the long post and thanks.
qwkz06 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2006, 08:59 AM   #2
cruisemon
CF Senior Member
 
cruisemon's Avatar
 
Member Since: May 2000
Location: Brentwood TN
Default That pinching, somewhat uncomfortable feeling you have is...

Quote:
Originally Posted by qwkz06
I am not sure if this is the proper forum for this post but here goes. I did do a search on 492 and it looks like some get the code with a FIPK kit which I do not have.
The car is an '04 Z06 with long tube headers and Bassani exhaust from the headers back. The car also has a Vinci installed cold air intake, cooling upgrade and tune as well. All of the mods were done ~3000 miles ago and the car has run great. Last week I got a check engine light. It turns out the code was 492 which apparently is somewhat odd. Bank 2 secondary air intake i.e. air valve. I checked with a chevy tech before I took the car to the local dealer and he indicated the code usually shows up after the car has sat for a while and some rust from water vapor triggers it and it has nothing to do with the headers etc.
The car has 7400 miles on it so I took it to the dealer for the warranty repair. Guess what? Surprise, surprise. Oh we can't fix that unless the car is taken back to completely stock. I'm thinking Magnuson Moss Act violation. Anyway, have any of you guys had this problem? 492 I mean..I can deal with the dealer once I show the code is not header related. Do you replace the "air valve"? Sorry for the long post and thanks.
the dealer holding you by the short hair and associated dangling parts. Reading the warranty, it looks like modifying the engine lets them off the hook. Maybe a legal eagle can render a more informed opinion, but meantime you might ask the dealer to use a 1/4 X 28 rather than a 1/4 X 20 as I understand the finer thread isn't quite as bad when you're getting screwed.

Charlie
cruisemon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2006, 10:22 AM   #3
see5
CF Senior Member
 
see5's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jan 2001
Location: Hobart, WI
Default

I have a very cooperative dealer who has warratied some really questionable stuff. It is up to the dealer and his attitude toward you and your car.. The factory would have no problem but you have to get thru the dealer filter.
Having said that I would just pull all that crap off and the pump too. It is useless and will not be missed other than you will need to edit out codes.
see5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2006, 11:04 AM   #4
qwkz06
CF Senior Member
 
qwkz06's Avatar
 
Member Since: Aug 2006
Location: Orlando Fl
Default

Thanks folks. I am an attorney so the legal part is no problem. The factual part is what I am trying to confirm. If headers set a 492 code (which I am sure they don't) wouldn't we all get the code? It apparently is pretty rare. Also 3000 miles for it to start setting a code. That also sounds very unlikely. As far as the warranty issue is concerned they can only deny warranty repairs if the part that failed can directly be attributed to the modification. That is one of the items that the warranty act was designed to prevent. Any others with this code?

I really find it interesting from my search on the forum that dealers are using intake mods to deny 492 warranty claims also. Intake, exhaust, clutch widgets, throttle clutches...dealers will say anything won't they? This is why I need help proving that the code is not from the headers.
qwkz06 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2006, 12:21 PM   #5
_Will_
CF Senior Member
 
_Will_'s Avatar
 
Member Since: Mar 2005
Location: Somewhere between mild insanity and complete psychosis
profile.php?id=100003508426727 _Will_Bridges_ williamsbridges Boosted C5 Boosted_C5
Default

Clear out the DIC.
_Will_ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2006, 12:37 PM   #6
SpinMonster
Tech Contributor
St. Jude Donor '08-'09-'10-'11
 
SpinMonster's Avatar
 
Member Since: Mar 2003
Location: Prototype Human Augment John 3:3
Send a message via AIM to SpinMonster
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by will82
Clear out the DIC.
, clear the code, it was probably just a fluke and it wont give you and issue. Where are you located?
SpinMonster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2006, 01:12 PM   #7
see5
CF Senior Member
 
see5's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jan 2001
Location: Hobart, WI
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by qwkz06
Thanks folks. I am an attorney so the legal part is no problem.
Are you sure you don't want to rephrase that?

http://www.gearchatter.com/viewtopic10679.php
see5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2006, 01:23 PM   #8
muncie21
CF Senior Member
 
muncie21's Avatar
 
Member Since: Mar 2005
Location: NE OH
Default

From reading the explanation of the DTC codes, it does appear that your headers *may* be contributing/causing the issue. If your O2s are reacting quickly enough it looks like they may be able to set the DTC.
muncie21 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2006, 04:34 PM   #9
qwkz06
CF Senior Member
 
qwkz06's Avatar
 
Member Since: Aug 2006
Location: Orlando Fl
Default

Thanks again. I am in Orlando. Like I said, if the mods are causing the problem then factually the dealer is correct. I just find it very hard to believe that no code for 3000 miles and then all of a sudden it throws a code and it is not related to the sensors performing improperly but heh, if that is the deal then so be it and I will figure out how to remedy it outside of warranty. Like I said it is the factual part I need the help with.
Intake and exhaust causing the code? Seems odd. Check this post out.
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/show...&highlight=492
qwkz06 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2006, 09:52 PM   #10
RoadRebel
CF Senior Member
 
RoadRebel's Avatar
 
Member Since: Mar 2003
Location: Macomb MI
Default

The dealer has every right to deny the claim based on the header install and quite frankly correct in his assessment.

The Mods installed significantly impact the AIR system and hence the code and problem.

Phil
RoadRebel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2006, 10:40 PM   #11
qwkz06
CF Senior Member
 
qwkz06's Avatar
 
Member Since: Aug 2006
Location: Orlando Fl
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RoadRebel
The dealer has every right to deny the claim based on the header install and quite frankly correct in his assessment.

The Mods installed significantly impact the AIR system and hence the code and problem.

Phil
Well Phil, I sure would like to hear your basis. Explain a year and 3000 miles with no code and then it throws a code. HMMMMM...maybe something other than the headers? faulty sensor perhaps. I would also like to hear the explanation as to why this code isn't thrown every time somebody does a header install. Much less 3000 miles earlier. Facts please. Thanks
qwkz06 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2006, 10:55 PM   #12
'VETTE PHASE
CF Senior Member
Cruise-In VIII Veteran
 
'VETTE PHASE's Avatar
 
Member Since: Aug 2006
Location: Powell TN
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by qwkz06
Thanks folks. I am an attorney so the legal part is no problem. The factual part is what I am trying to confirm. If headers set a 492 code (which I am sure they don't) wouldn't we all get the code? It apparently is pretty rare. Also 3000 miles for it to start setting a code. That also sounds very unlikely. As far as the warranty issue is concerned they can only deny warranty repairs if the part that failed can directly be attributed to the modification. That is one of the items that the warranty act was designed to prevent. Any others with this code?

I really find it interesting from my search on the forum that dealers are using intake mods to deny 492 warranty claims also. Intake, exhaust, clutch widgets, throttle clutches...dealers will say anything won't they? This is why I need help proving that the code is not from the headers.
It is not up to you to prove the code was not caused by the headers, it is up to the dealer to prove to you that what you did caused the code, per Magnusson-Moss Act of 1975.

"The Magnusson-Moss Warranty - Federal Trade Commission Improvement Act of 1975 protects consumers from such fradulent activity by new car dealers. Under this Act, aftermarket equipment that improves performance does not void a vehicle manufacturer's original warranty, unless the warranty clearly states the addition of aftermarket equipment automatically voids your vehicle's warrany or if it can be proven that the aftermarket device is the direct cause of the failure. The easiest way to check this is to look in your owner's manual under, "what is not covered". Under Magnusson-Moss Act a dealer must prove, not just vocalize, that aftermarket equipment caused the need for repairs before they can deny warranty coverage. If they cannot prove such claim-or offer an explanation- it is your legal right to demand compliance with the warranty. The Federal Trade Commission (202.326.3128) administers the Magnusson-Moss Act and monitors compliance with warranty law."
'VETTE PHASE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2006, 08:02 AM   #13
qwkz06
CF Senior Member
 
qwkz06's Avatar
 
Member Since: Aug 2006
Location: Orlando Fl
Default

2000, I agre, but in practice if I just want the car fixed the burden, as you know, kind of shifts. Likely, another area dealer will be glad to fix it under warranty and this dealer will lose my business forever. We will see but thanks for the help.
qwkz06 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2006, 10:36 PM   #14
qwkz06
CF Senior Member
 
qwkz06's Avatar
 
Member Since: Aug 2006
Location: Orlando Fl
Default

For those trying to claim that the dealer was right in denying the warranty claim for fixing this issue, you were way off as I thought. The problem was a valve in the air system that was not functioning properly. Warranty item! It was fixed by a local dealer with great employees who know what they were doing. The other dealer had a
"Master tech" who was either incompetent, too lazy to properly troubleshoot or simply lacks the common sense to figure out that a problem which arose 3000 miles after the header install was not related to the headers. In any case, the dealer who has the folks that know enough and took the time to help has a new happy and loyal customer.
qwkz06 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2006, 10:45 PM   #15
C5XTASY
CF Senior Member
 
C5XTASY's Avatar
 
Member Since: Oct 2000
Location: Monticello MN
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by qwkz06
For those trying to claim that the dealer was right in denying the warranty claim for fixing this issue, you were way off as I thought. The problem was a valve in the air system that was not functioning properly. Warranty item! It was fixed by a local dealer with great employees who know what they were doing. The other dealer had a
"Master tech" who was either incompetent, too lazy to properly troubleshoot or simply lacks the common sense to figure out that a problem which arose 3000 miles after the header install was not related to the headers. In any case, the dealer who has the folks that know enough and took the time to help has a new happy and loyal customer.
C5XTASY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2006, 11:34 PM   #16
MYCoupe
CF Senior Member
 
MYCoupe's Avatar
 
Member Since: May 2003
Location: Rutherford NJ
Default

Glad to hear that you got the issue resolved. There are still some good dealers out there, but the trick is to find them.
MYCoupe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2006, 11:56 PM   #17
Mike Mercury
CF Senior Member
 
Mike Mercury's Avatar
 
Member Since: Apr 2001
Location: S.W. Ohio. . . . . . NRA Life Member
Default

Quote:
It is not up to you to prove the code was not caused by the headers, it is up to the dealer to prove to you that what you did caused the code, per Magnusson-Moss Act of 1975.

"The Magnusson-Moss Warranty - Federal Trade Commission Improvement Act of 1975 protects consumers from such fradulent activity by new car dealers. Under this Act, aftermarket equipment that improves performance does not void a vehicle manufacturer's original warranty, unless the warranty clearly states the addition of aftermarket equipment automatically voids your vehicle's warrany or if it can be proven that the aftermarket device is the direct cause of the failure. The easiest way to check this is to look in your owner's manual under, "what is not covered". Under Magnusson-Moss Act a dealer must prove, not just vocalize, that aftermarket equipment caused the need for repairs before they can deny warranty coverage. If they cannot prove such claim-or offer an explanation- it is your legal right to demand compliance with the warranty. The Federal Trade Commission (202.326.3128) administers the Magnusson-Moss Act and monitors compliance with warranty law."
the words are fine & dandy. But it real life... you'll have to prove that the aftermarket equipment did not cause the need for repairs. The dealer only needs to suspect - and they get out of it. Just like the post originator found. It's easier to keep trying different dealers in hopes of finding one that is mod friendly - then to pay a lawyer to get the rights promised in the MMWA.
Mike Mercury is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2006, 08:47 AM   #18
'VETTE PHASE
CF Senior Member
Cruise-In VIII Veteran
 
'VETTE PHASE's Avatar
 
Member Since: Aug 2006
Location: Powell TN
Default

Congrats on finding a dealer you can deal with, sometimes you just have to look around. When I bought my F-250 diesel truck, one of the questions I asked was how they felt about chips, and mods in general. One dealer told me, no problem, and he would even install the chip for me. I bought the truck from him right then.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Mercury
the words are fine & dandy. But it real life... you'll have to prove that the aftermarket equipment did not cause the need for repairs. The dealer only needs to suspect - and they get out of it. Just like the post originator found. It's easier to keep trying different dealers in hopes of finding one that is mod friendly - then to pay a lawyer to get the rights promised in the MMWA.
Hey Mike, he is a lawyer, but you're right, it's not worth the trouble. Even if they were to have to fix the problem, you never know what happens to your vehicle when you aren't looking.
'VETTE PHASE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2006, 03:33 PM   #19
qwkz06
CF Senior Member
 
qwkz06's Avatar
 
Member Since: Aug 2006
Location: Orlando Fl
Default

It is just nice to find a good honest dealer with folks you can trust with your car. It is a plus when they are corvette people. While I am an attorney I sure don't need to fight over something this minor. It is just a pain in the rear to deal with some of the ignorant folks at some of the dealerships. This is why I do most of my work on my cars myself. Thanks again for the comments of those that understood the problem.
qwkz06 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2006, 03:43 PM   #20
cruisemon
CF Senior Member
 
cruisemon's Avatar
 
Member Since: May 2000
Location: Brentwood TN
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2000C-5
Even if they were to have to fix the problem, you never know what happens to your vehicle when you aren't looking.


My granddaddy told me there were two people you NEVER wanted to pi$$ off. One is the guy fixing your car unless you're going to stand there and watch EVERY move. The other is a waiter or waitress unless you are going to go into the kitchen and watch the food being prepared and escort the server back to your table.

About 40 years ago, I had a friend who worked at one of the national restaurant chains that served a variety of meats and vegetables. He chewed tobacco. There were no spittoons in the kitchen. I still will NOT eat mashed potatoes at Shoney's.

Charlie
cruisemon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2006, 03:43 PM
 
Go Back   Corvette Forum > C5 Corvettes, 1997 - 2004 > C5 Tech
Reload this Page DTC 492 Dealer denies warranty claim
 
 
 
Reply

Tags
dealer, denies, dtc492, time, warranty


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Click for Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:39 PM.


Emails & Password Backup

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2