JonBoy

I'm in the middle of a move to British Columbia - I have better things to do than worry about what someone thinks about Acura (especially when I'd only buy an MDX or NSX from them, anyways)...

TheDonEffect

I'll take it.

JonBoy

Shelby GT350 Owners Sue Ford for Overheating on the Track | News | Car and Driver | Car and Driver Blog

Not sure what to think. Seems to me that if you wanted a car for the track, you'd at least buy the "Track Pack" for the car (ie, owners are/were dumb to not get it). It may not help Ford that all GT350s now have the Track Pack as standard, perhaps due to overheating issues at the track (maybe Ford was dumb for saying they're track ready, regardless of trim or spec level)?

Ford owner's manual RECOMMENDS that Base or Tech models should have upgraded coolers for regular track use and that the "vehicle has electronic controls to reduce power and/or limit RPM to reduce powertrain temperatures if required." (ie, it won't hold up to track use). That's an implicit comment (at the end) but even the fact that they recommend it is not exactly a hard stance.

Thoughts?

Moddiction

Yeah a lot of people bought the tech package or base which is not really made for the track. It still shouldn't have these over heating issues imo though.

TheDonEffect

Agreed, but then other manufacturers also sold performance machines that over heat under track conditions. I dunno, I think they coveted their but enough by offering a track pack. But like moddiction said still shouldn't overheat.

mosesbotbol

My buddy got a call from Ford on his car and his take; it's not a big deal and will just bring to the dealer for spring service.

LUV2REV

I didn't even consider the Tech package when I bought my GT350 even though my car will likely never see a track as I do not have one nearby. I bought the Track Pack as it better instills the true spirit of the GT350 IMO (sans the R which I could not justify paying $40K over MSRP for). I had no need for navigation, stereo with more speakers, etc. I can't imagine the GT350 without the Recaro's either.

If Ford ends up compensating the owners who bought Tech cars, are they also going to compensate Track Pack owners who paid to get the diff./transmission coolers ?

rob-2

I really want the 350 or 350R. In the 350 I'd want the tech and track pack.

Interesting legal matter here. Track modes, cars used on the track and for non-timed events. I think technically the warranty applies unless it calls out particular use cases that are not coverage. Most are 'racing' which is defined as a position or time for an event.

Mr.E.G.

Bear in mind that I'm distilling a very complex area of the law into a watered-down explanation here --and also keep in mind that I haven't read the POP, though I suspect I'm right on the money as to what they're alleging-- but this is probably a lawsuit based on Ford supposedly breaching an implied warranty of fitness for a particular use (AKA an implied warranty of suitability for a particular use). For a good example, consider what happened to me last summer.

My wife wanted new cabinets, but I was feeling handy, so we elected to paint our existing cabinets. I used an automotive paint gun and sprayed on a thin layer of paint, because it was my intention to let the wood grain shine through from beneath. This was all stuff I had done before, so no issues. Where I ran into trouble was when I applied a clear coat. I went to the paint section of Lowe's and asked to talk to their paint guru. I told the guy what I had done and what I hoped to do, and he recommended what he felt would be the most appropriate clear; a spray-on high gloss that came in a conventional spray paint can. I took him at his word and went home and sprayed everything in one fell swoop. By the time I made it back around to the first cabinet door I painted to apply a second coat, I noticed that something was going horribly wrong. The clear reacted with the paint and caused it to peel. It ruined my 40+ hours of labor and I had to sand it all down and start over.

Theoretically speaking, I could argue that Lowe's breached an implied warranty of fitness for a particular use (bear in mind, I'm not petty enough to have pursued such a claim, even if I thought I had a chance at success, which I didn't). Their agent represented to me that the paint would be good for what I was trying to accomplish, I relied upon his recommendation, and everything went tits up (that's a legal term of art, see the US Constitution for details ;-) ).

I strongly suspect this is the basis on which this lawsuit against Ford is being pursued. They spread the word far and wide that the car was capable of being tracked, people purchased the car based in part on that promise, and the car proved unable to deliver. The reason Ford could get sued for this and, say, Brand X doesn't get sued when their Whatever Model Whosits Type R also overheats is that Brand X didn't ever say it was a track-ready car; they never created the implied warranty of fitness.

Ford's ability to defend itself will be based, first, on whether or not such an implied warranty was created and, second, on whether or not it disclaimed any such warranty conspicuously enough. My paint misadventure really falls on me, because the can says to test an inconspicuous area. But had they stuck that warning underneath the cap or a provided a disclaimer link that says, "For more information, please visit our disclaimer website," that probably wouldn't save them.* My best guess based on the very limited info about this issue is that Ford's suggestion that you get the track pack on page 341 of a 500 page manual is probably not enough to save them outright. That is to say, whether such a disclaimer is adequate is a genuine controversy that would be decided by a jury.




*A retailer can create an implied warranty that is distinct from any such warranty created by the manufacturer, but I didn't feel like delving that far into the minutiae.

Mr.E.G.

I doubt it. Again, I haven't read the lawsuit (if anyone cares just say the word and I'll take a peak and then get more specific), but if they are being sued in the manner I described in my last post, then they haven't breached an implied warranty made to the purchasers of the track pack (the track pack solves the overheating problem, right?).

Unless, of course, they also sue for diminution of value, which is to say, suing on the basis that the value of everyone's GT350 has lost market value now that this info has come to light. But those are tricky cases. We have a case right now where a guy bought a .22 LR AR-15 pattern rifle and the gun fired without a finger on the trigger and with the safety engaged. Our client ended up getting shot a few times consecutively due to this issue. This particular rifle is starting to become known as an unsafe firearm that several prominent gun ranges won't allow them on their premises. Well, we have a pretty straightforward products liability case against the maker of the gun, but there may end up being a class action (not by our firm) on the basis that the manufacturer's screw ups have turned thousands of rifles into paperweights, thereby resulting in a loss of value that owners can sue for.