And it appears that there is at least one (if not more) engines met criteria 1-3 and not 4, and still got replaced under goodwill (per kawasaki).
Also, if IIRC automobile manufacturers are exempt from claims that a part or design that is changed/improved from an older part does not automatically constitute an "admission" that the older part/design was faulty. I did some research into this when my differential bolt snapped (covered under warranty).
Quote:
Originally Posted by catpat8000
What do you think we have concluded here? As far as I understand it, we have concluded that in the course of the 6 year S65 production run, BMW changed the connecting rod bearing parts and the new parts differed from the old ones. OEMs do running changes to cars ALL THE TIME. And why? TO FIX PROBLEMS or TO INCREASE DURABILITY.
Even if we assume that this bearing change was in part to help ameliorate a bearing clearance concern, what are you going to assert in the lawsuit? That they changed a clearance to benefit owners by making engine problems less likely?
Lawsuits need to show economic damage before they can recoup money. The only people who have suffered damage are people who:
(0) had their engine blow up
(1) after the 4 yr/50K warranty period
(2) and who had not supercharged their engines
(3) and had not applied aftermarket tunes
How many people like this (fulfilling all 4 categories) are there? 10?
Pat
|