Quote:
Originally Posted by theDreamer
The point to using this is that if I install a Stillen intake, they cannot void my warranty because another part broke, unless they show that the intake was the cause (We know they will not warranty the new intake). No one is going to argue that if you throw on a turbo and blow a piston that Nissan will have to warranty it, the turbo obviously caused it.
|
OK, I'll play devils advocate...
Lets say you install a Stillen Intake.
Nissan denies the claim because the increased power gained from the intake was not part of the original design specifications and caused damage to XYZ component, and that an intake is an indicator of competition use, of which the car is not designed for, or warranteed.
You're left holding the bag...and getting an attorney who will gladly take a lot of your money only to lose the case if it goes to court. Nissan might, if you're lucky, offer to settle it - basically paying your attorney fees...
Imagine if you put on a bigger set of brakes...the tie-rod breaks. Competition use. Exceeded design specifications...
Now, imagine if you put in 5w-30 dirt-cheap oil, but stuck to the manfucaturer's recommendations on oil changes and engine maintenance and something goes wrong....THEN you'd have a chance at a winning case. Even installing a K&N air filter could be risky, since it's not the same type of air filter originall installed in the car (pleated paper vs paper (or open-cell foam) + oil)...
That's not even taking into account of "where is the line drawn" between adding a turbo/blower/nitrous/etc and changing it to a cold-air intake.
Remember, law has no "common sense" - and, the burden of proof is on the one who brings it to court, not the defendant. You have to prove to a judge that installing XYZ component couldn't have possibly caused ABC item to break. The Act only provides provisions to prevent required tie-in sales to maintain a warranty.