I just received a message from one of my fellow SCCA Solo2 racers about Honda's warrantee. The message (except for the name) is

"Also, we found out at Freezeout last weekend that __ & ___ ____
had the warranty on their Honda 2000 cancelled because they race with SCCA.
(Shows a lot of confidence on Honda's part for the quality of their cars,
doesn't it?) Anyway, they had the sixth gear synchro go out, took it in for
work under the warranty and found out that the warranty specifically
prohibits warranty repairs for people who drive in SCCA events, and they're
monitoring scores on websites to back it up. (Makes you wonder about all the
ads they have portraying how fast their cars are, doesn't it?) I think we
should make people aware of it. "

Have others had this issue? I can't imagine that Solo2 would involve the 6th gear synchro, so this must be a pretty broad exclusion.

 

My 2

 

Not to call BS...but that message sounds remarkable like the one dealing with Mitsubishi and their EVO warranty claims.

I have never had an issue with warranty work done at my Honda Dealership. They know I autoX, hell my mechanic there races too. I think it comes down to what type of relationship you have with the dealer.

 

Granted, the dealership relationship is key here, but I believe the warranty specifically states that they will not warranty a part that was damaged AS A RESULT OF racing.

If my headlight shorts out, they cannot deny my warranty claim because I race. Of course, if the diff. goes out, that is another story.

With that in mind, there have been cases where AHMC and the dealers knew the car had been raced, and possibly was damaged during and/ or due to a racing event, and they still covered it. It's hit/ miss and differs from case to case.

My question:
Why doesn't Honda provide the support that Mazda and Subaru provide for racers? The civic is probably the most popular car at the drags and SCCA, the S2000 is dominating B stock at the Autcrosses, and many are being prepped for the track. Then there's the NSX, Integra/ RSX. I guess what was posted in another thread is true. We're going to race whether Honda supports it or not. If they can reap the rewards without shelling out a single dime, then they feel it's a win-win situation for Honda.
(makes me want to buy a Mazda or Subaru, but unfortunately there's nothing comparable to the S2000 out there, unless you go to Porsche or BMW [+$15G])

 

Remember New S2000's used to come with an invitation to join the SCCA - there was a thread that had the brochure scaned on this site awhile back!

 

http://www.autoweek.com/cat_content.mv?por...t_code=02612566


It seems like Ford may be the only company that is o.k. with DE/auto-x.

Why would anyone buy a GT3 or 996TT and not track or auto-x it? Disappointing to read the comment from Porsche.

 

I read that article, and it looks like pretty much all the manufacturers said (in a more or less diplomatic way) "If something breaks, we'll evaluate whether racing contributed to the failure. If you break something due to racing, you have to pay for it; otherwise it's still covered."

It seems like a pretty reasonable policy to me. Where it could turn ugly is if a dealer stretches what can be attributed to racing.

 

BMW certainly doesn't seem to have a problem with racing. They sponsor autocross series across the country, hold a host of track events, an their regional newlsetters are filled with BMW racing success stories.

It's good to see at least one manufacturer put its money where its mouth is.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Orthonormal
I read that article, and it looks like pretty much all the manufacturers said (in a more or less diplomatic way) "If something breaks, we'll evaluate whether racing contributed to the failure.

 

I'm the Michael Miller quoted in the autoweek article. The claims made by the Mitsubishi spokesperson (Janis Little) are BS. Here's a copy of the email I sent to Janis Little ... I also copied Andrew Luu the writer of the article.

Ms. Little:

I'm puzzled by the disparity between the 18-June-2004 Mitsubishi Press Release, your statements in the 30-June-2004 Autoweek article written by Andrew Luu and the specifics on Mitsubishi's handling of my situation.

My Mitsubishi customer service file number is: 351806.

I'd appreciate your clarifications on the disparity between the following Mitsubishi statements and Mitsubishi's handling of my warranty situation.
- "We give the benefit of the doubt to everyone..."
- "If a Lancer Evolution is brought to Mitsubishi Motors dealer for a diagnosis as to a possible warrantable condition and the dealer determines that modifications were made that may have caused the problem"
- "The dealer and if necessary, MMNA staff, investigate each case, always giving the owner the benefit of the doubt."
- "Adds Mitsubishi