Below Nav Bar Ad Module

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Radiator swapping fluid with transmission - expensive repair

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Radiator swapping fluid with transmission - expensive repair

    I have a 2000 NM auto Pajero - 7 years old but only 125,000ks. There is a pipe from the radiator which in turn contains an inner pipe from the transmission to cool the oil. The inner pipe cracked, thus allowing coolant into the transmission and vise-versa. Result new radiator and rebuilt transmission.

    Has anyone else had this problem? As this is an internal fault I had no control over it - servicing etc. I therefore feel this should be paid for by Mitsubishi as an Implied Warranty should apply for a vehicle with only 125,000ks.

    Other forums show the Falcon BA has frequent problems of this nature.

    Any comments or advice please?

  • #2
    This is the first time I've heard of it on a Pajero...
    Cheers, John.
    LC200 V8 goodness

    MY12 LC200 GXL 4.5Lt V8 twin turbo, GVM upgrade, ARB bar, Warn winch, Outback Acc rear bar and dual carrier, TJM sidesteps, Bushskinz, Long Ranger 180Lt tank, Black Widow drawers, cargo barrier, Polaris Awning, +++
    Ex - NM auto, 2"Kings, Bilsteins, Buckshots, Wildcat headers, 2.75" Mandrel bent exhaust, Injected LPG, Smartbar, Scraper bar, Bushskinz, Custom steps, Dual Batteries, Breathers, Black Widow drawers, Polaris Awning.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Peter Vincent View Post
      As this is an internal fault I had no control over it - servicing etc. I therefore feel this should be paid for by Mitsubishi as an Implied Warranty should apply for a vehicle with only 125,000ks.

      Other forums show the Falcon BA has frequent problems of this nature.

      Any comments or advice please?
      You would need to be able to prove that it occurred as a result of a manufacturing fault.... If MMAL accept it is you may get some form of restitution else you will end up having to make a civil claim .... either with or without a lwayer depending on whether you can go through the "small claims" court .... you need to weigh up the cost versus the benefit ...and there are the intangible costs like your time etc ....

      Comment


      • #4
        I dont think you have any chance at all - this is something that would be effected by age more then k's, out of the hundreds of ppl on this forum, its never had a mention before which means its prolly safe to assume its not a common problem.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by simoncurly View Post
          You would need to be able to prove that it occurred as a result of a manufacturing fault.... If MMAL accept it is you may get some form of restitution
          To which I add, in a suit MMAL would favour making the owner appear negligent for not actively checking that a fault was not occuring and activating a course to rectify the problem or minimalise damage to any other associated components beyond the known contact (warranty period) with MMAL and that the owner contributed to the component failure by continuing to drive the vehicle for whatever reason.

          Also MMAL was in no control of the situation or aware of any fault with the vehicle in question prior to the problem report. Therefore they could say the owner was not following scheduled servicing protocol during or post warranty through MMAL and was using the vehicle at the time for a purpose for which is was not intended which lead to the fault.

          For example I don't know where anyone lives but let's say

          the owner had completed the factory warranty and not applied for extended warranty and had the vehicle serviced elsewhere to Patti Mitsubishi. The owner was also know to be driving up Toowoomba Range every day for the life of the vehicle and did not continue the modified servicing frequency to suit the condition of use with the new service agent (which would effectively cut any tie to Patti Mitsubishi).

          In the view of a court MMAL provided at the time a servicable vehicle through and up until a reasonable period after the expiration of the warranty. MMAL would claim anything beyond that becomes the responsibility of the owner through general wear of the components within the vehicle or usage outside the design. So MMAL would walk out of court without liability and you'd be left paying for costs.

          The impression I get of a car manufacturers view is consumers buy their 'luxury featured' 4WD vehicles to rarely drive in situations for which they were designed for the purpose of investment and become the family heirloom. They are not meant to be driven as their branding implies, off road is parked on the lawn, 4x4 refers to long term storage of up on blocks 4 wheels x 4 inches off the ground awaiting rise in value.

          The impresson I get is a consumers view is purchasing a vehicle with warranty means the vehicle has this magic blanket so that everything broken regardless of how is fixed at the manufacturers cost. A vehicle should not wear gradually but drive like new until it colapses in a heap of steel at some point beyond 500,000km as it's traded in at top dollar change over for another with new car warranty.

          I reckon you're on your own.... the five years is up of warranty, MMAL gave you what little they do but they gave you the warranty in faith that the vehicle was of suitable standard.

          Lemme put it this way

          How common a fault is it to hear any of the V6 being pulled down on the basis of cracked heads.

          I don't know occassions of MMAL mentally losing it and sticking up their hand stating "Yeah look, we're all feeling rather guilty around here because the motors aren't lasting 300,000km like we thought they would before the heads crack so as a gesture of good business MMAL will be repairing all V6 pajeros with cracked heads under 300,000km and allowing it to be rectified under warranty".

          You can imagine if everyone who has a V6 rocked up at the Local Mits dealer claiming cracked heads under reviewed and implemented warranty expiration. The guy from MMAL will be locked in home, business just doesn't work like that.

          Actually !! .......... hang on!!..... all that happened then ...... nah.... MMAL dithering customer service skills would look after that and keep them safe from financial bleeding if that happened.
          'No Princess' - NJ LWB - Modded 2.8TD

          Comment


          • #6
            Thanks for the replies. I don't really expect too much at all. I was mainly hoping some others may have had the same problem (not maliciously), as I believe manufacturers contract out many/most of the individual part supply.

            I thought there may have been a slight chance the first run of the NM may have had the radiators made by a contractor who took short cuts and therefore there would be others showing up now. (The car has been ideal in every other way)

            I will try to follow up as best I can the story with the BA Falcons as another forum shows at least one owner is taking the matter to Court as there appears plenty of BA's with this problem. Some Falcon mechanics apparently suggest owners disconnect this part of the cooling system and replace it with an external oil cooler.

            I suppose even if others with similar problems turn up, any possible liability would go all the way back to the radiator maker - which equals: forget about it.

            Maybe I bounced over one rock too many, but it has been a fair while since I have been off road and everything has been fine until now.

            Just as an aside and probably everyone but me realised - all four wheels need to be aligned, not just the front. I managed to scrub smooth the inside of one of the rear tyres within about 5 thousand ks. The alignment didn't cost much, pity about the tyres!

            Comment

            Matched content

            Collapse
            Working...
            X