RichardJensen Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 (edited) Cutting the warranty 40% is an easy way. But are they really cutting the warranty 40%? Think about it: The amount that they're cutting the warranty is the average amount by which the average driver exceeds 60,000 miles in the 5th year of ownership. If the average owner has put 75,000 miles on the car by the time their 5 year anniversary hits, then GM is really only reducing the warranty 20%. Edited March 16, 2015 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerM Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 Not at all. When Hyundai introduced their 10 year warranty they were bad. Honda was the best and they had the shortest warranty. The only difference is the cost to the mfr. Hyundai had to build in more cost to cover their 10 yr warranty than Honda did. It's true that there is a cost difference to the mfr depending on number of expected claims but again that just goes into the base cost. Honda gets to keep more of their per vehicle profit than Hyundai does due to lower warranty claims, but it's still just a cost issue. That's what they want you to believe, but it's not true. I don't say (and tried not to infer) the warranty is the only metric. In the case of Honda (and now Hyundai/Kia), are they spending the money up front making a good vehicle, or as in the case of Mitsubishi are they simply desperate for sales? I can use my brain (enough) to tell the difference between confidence and desperation. Pre-2002 VW had the same 10/100K warranty. Based on my observations, they eliminated it because claims were eating them alive. There is no VW/Audi/BMW vehicle I would keep beyond its warranty 2002-present. But are they really cutting the warranty 40%? Think about it: The amount that they're cutting the warranty is the average amount by which the average driver exceeds 60,000 miles in the 5th year of ownership. If the average owner has put 75,000 miles on the car by the time their 5 year anniversary hits, then GM is really only reducing the warranty 20%. I was only doing a quick-and-dirty of 100K dropped to 60K. I ignored the number of years entirely. The point was it's easy to decrease the warranty period as many owners either don't consider it, or don't use it as many lease the vehicle in the first place and GM didn't want to cover second owners (not that I know they did anyway, since Hyundai/Kia doesn't) I'm the exception nowadays, I guess. I buy my vehicles new with the intent of keeping them well beyond payoff and 100K miles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan1 Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 I don't recall when Ford went to 5/60k, but it's always good when a manufacturer stands behind their product. My Ranger was 3/36k. Drivetrain Warranty: Ford went to a 5 year / 60,000 miles for the 2007 MY. GM countered with a 5 year / 100,000 miles for the 2007 MY. Ford stays firm. GM goes bankrupt in 2009 and gets a bailout. GM goes back to a 5 year / 60,000 miles for the 2016 MY. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 How long do manufacturers have to guarantee the engine's emission compliance? is it 60,000 miles or 100,000 miles or neither? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron W. Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 If I remember correctly for emission only it's 8-80 for federal and 10-100 for California vehicles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4d4evr-1 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 I don't say (and tried not to infer) the warranty is the only metric. In the case of Honda (and now Hyundai/Kia), are they spending the money up front making a good vehicle, or as in the case of Mitsubishi are they simply desperate for sales? I can use my brain (enough) to tell the difference between confidence and desperation. Pre-2002 VW had the same 10/100K warranty. Based on my observations, they eliminated it because claims were eating them alive. There is no VW/Audi/BMW vehicle I would keep beyond its warranty 2002-present. I was only doing a quick-and-dirty of 100K dropped to 60K. I ignored the number of years entirely. The point was it's easy to decrease the warranty period as many owners either don't consider it, or don't use it as many lease the vehicle in the first place and GM didn't want to cover second owners (not that I know they did anyway, since Hyundai/Kia doesn't) I'm the exception nowadays, I guess. I buy my vehicles new with the intent of keeping them well beyond payoff and 100K miles. Dr. Deming and many others have proven that higher quality costs less than low quality with more reworks.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.