SAN JOSE, Calif.--June 18, 2004--On Monday, a Santa Clara County Superior Court judge awarded $75,000 in attorney's fees to Subaru of America, Inc. under California's Consumer Legal Remedies Act. In awarding the attorney's fees the court found the evidence was overwhelming the plaintiff had attempted to defraud Subaru in bringing the action, and plaintiff's attorneys had an obligation to and should have determined that either when they filed the suit or during investigation and discovery.

The case involving an allegation of a defective transmission in a 2002 Subaru Impreza WRX was brought under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act and the CLRA. The court further found that because of their conduct in litigating the case, the plaintiff's attorneys had caused Subaru of America, Inc. to incur unnecessary attorney's fees of at least double the amount defense of the breach of warranty case should have cost. The court's award of the $75,000 represented the amount over what the court estimated were reasonable attorney's fees for defending the case.

Mendez v. Subaru of America, Inc. (Case No. 1-02-CV808407).

Plaintiff was represented by the Kinsey Consumer Law Center, Soquel, California;

Subaru of America, Inc was represented by Barbara J. Frischholz, Bowman and Brooke LLP, San Jose California.

SOURCE: www.theautochannel.com.

whats the detail? what did he claim was wrong with hsi tranny? more details please!

man thats sad

Yeah, what was actually wrong with the transmission?

I am curious about the 'attempts to cause SOA to incur excessive legal fees.'

from a post on this board, the dude said: "my lawyers want to milk them". I am sure the defense got a hold of this and used it in their obvious benefit to win.

i'm on my 2nd trans on an 02 wrx and they told me not to even bother calling soa if i have another problem. kinda bogus if ya ask me

while the outcome of this case might have been justified, it also sets precedence for other subaru owners. now the fight against SOA might be a little harder. outside of our personal issues with SOA, a court victory woud've at least given us some indicator of the court's sentiments. it's too bad that this case never got to that; we will have to wait until a legitimate case gets ruled on....

Well, I don't know the details, but it sounds like there was EVIDENCE of abuse, not merely a failed transmission.

As far as the WRX transmission goes, people keep clowning the WRX tranny, but what about the majority of owners with no issues... who will NEVER have an issue?

My tranny is fine, but I'd bet I could make it fail with abusive launches.

On this board and NASIOC, the warranty was originally denied, but when served a subpoena SOA offered to replace the trans under warranty at which point the plantiff claims his lawyer wanted to pursue the lawsuit and "milk" them. Dude should have just accepted the tranny. Going for more than the replacement could easily be perceived as "an attempt to defraud SOA" the judge could have ruled in the plantiffs favor had they not gotten greedy.... my 2 cents

the fact that the majority of WRX owners have no transmission issues can not be used to disprove that there ARE wrx transmission issues for a small segment of owners. by this, i mean owners who did not abuse their transmissions.

while most of us have no problems, that doesn't rule out the possibility of factory defects; if we blindly hold to the supposition that transmission failures are caused by abuse, i feel that we have done an injustice to our fellow board members who are experiencing issues without flagrantly abusing their transmission or the SOA warranty.

my interest in this case is the outcome of the archetypal "private party vs. big conglomerate". i love my WRX but i think that the passion we have for our cars as well as our admiration of subaru products have clouded our judgement in accepting the remote chance that subaru might be at fault to some degree. again, i don't know if they are...but a court ruling would be an indicator of that, in which case we could not get from this trial b/c of the circumstantial technicalities that prevented further scrutiny.

what was wrong with the tranny was people who dont know how to use the wrx tranny and abuse it, breaking it then saying it was subaru's fault. lot of cases of people breaking it then calling it a glass tranny when in fact its the driver who launches it like an 8 year old's toy.

There is a TSB that states that ALL transmissions opened up for warranty inspection that have broken gears are to be considered abused. So SOA is saying that ALL of their gears are PERFECT, that there is NO WAY that they could fail due to any other reason.... I don't know about you, but nothing is perfect...

Subaru is selling a car that appeals to just the sort of crowd that abuses cars. The 16-24 year olds out there which represent a LARGE percentage of their market are not all reasonable in their driving manors. I'm not saying that all trannys are perfect, but it's more likely a case of people crying wolf. If 80% of all the claims really ARE abuse, it makes it really hard for the other 20% to get their problems fixied!!!

67000 total miles and 2000+ track miles and my tranny's perfect.

my dad's 02 wrx had to have the 1st and 3rd gears replaced, and he did not abuse it. its his daily driver, and he babied it. subaru did that on warranty no problem.

ouch.

the point is not if the tranny was abused or not.
subaru offered a replacement tranny.
he wanted more ($$ money $$ on top of the free brand new tranny) and sued them.

gotta pay the price for being greedy, i guess

^^
Ditto, I mean sh*t Subaru offered to replace the tranny, take the tranny and get your car fixed, don't be greedy, the man brought this on himself in this case and deserves what he gets.

I just wish SOA would honor their warranty w/ me. All I want is for my transmission to be replaced under warranty as it should. This guy and his lawyers were just greedy and deserve the outcome.

But unfortunately, greedy people like this one who got slapped by the courts make it even more difficult for legitimate claims to be honored.
I applaud the court for fining this guy. He was working the system, and that costs everyone money.

I got 5th gear, thrust bearing, and my clutch and flywheel replaced because of a whining sound under warranty. No abuse...

In my experience, if you go into court expecting more than you are due then you are abusing the power of the court and judges tend to get really pissed if they think they are being used. The fact that the plantiff bragged to the general public about his attempt probably did not sit well! It amazes me that people will post their attempts to defraud SoA (i.e. "After I take off the mods I'll go to the dealer") or act illegally ("I was driving 105 in a school zone and the cops were mean to me".) I mean, would anyone post a message "I went to the local subie shop late at night and stole a transmission out of a car, pretty smart on my part!" and not expect to get their butt in a boatload of trouble? Although I would not want to see this, the moderators of these board would do many (stupid) people a favor, and limit SoA's ability to find out about alleged fraud, by deleting posts in which persons admitted they were attempting to defraud SoA.

I would guess the plantiff's attorneys were also pretty p.o.'ed when they discovered in court that their own client was acting against his self interest.

Now that this has happened, do you think SoA is checking boards such as this looking for evidence of fraud?

It seems to me that the warranty was not in question - since SOA offered a replacement transmission that would have solved the problem - but the real crux of the matter is that the plaintiff refused the warranty and went for a cash settlement.
We will have to wait for an "honest" court case to get a good response from Subaru and the courts on whether or not the transmission is a lemon.

He was foolish and should've accepted new one.

Lets face it...most of us are greedy.

Its the greedy and dishonest that eventually get shut down. One way or another.

I think there was an real court case. SOA tried to do the right thing and warranty the tranny. It became a farce when this plaintiff got greedy by trying to pull one over on SOA, then he got stupid by opening his mouth. If what we read is accurate then he deserves what he got. People are way to sue happy if you ask me. As far as these boards go the only way I think it could have an ill effect on a warrany case is if SOA found a post from the actual person that they did warranty work for admitting fraud. It's unlikely, but to post or attempt warranty fraud is really stupid none the less. I don't think that SOA would judge us all on what a few bad apples have done. Also from what I understand SOA were never pushovers about warranty work anyway. They will scrutinize the problem closely and not just give away warranty work. Anyway JMHO.

Now that this has happened, do you think SoA is checking boards such as this looking for evidence of fraud?

what makes you think that they haven't done this already? :|

I would guess the plantiff's attorneys were also pretty p.o.'ed when they discovered in court that their own client was acting against his self interest.

Now that this has happened, do you think SoA is checking boards such as this looking for evidence of fraud?

If what the plaintiff said was true - that he could not use his car for more than 30 days, the attorneys should have gone after a lemon law settlement. The plaintiff would have got his money back and would have been done. IMHO, both the plaintiff AND his attorney's used poor judgement.

And I thought it was pretty common knowledge that SoA has been perusing boards like this since Gore invented the internet! LOL

I think there was an real court case. SOA tried to do the right thing and warranty the tranny. It became a farce when this plaintiff got greedy by trying to pull one over on SOA, then he got stupid by opening his mouth. If what we read is accurate then he deserves what he got. People are way to sue happy if you ask me. As far as these boards go the only way I think it could have an ill effect on a warrany case is if SOA found a post from the actual person that they did warranty work for admitting fraud. It's unlikely, but to post or attempt warranty fraud is really stupid none the less. I don't think that SOA would judge us all on what a few bad apples have done. Also from what I understand SOA were never pushovers about warranty work anyway. They will scrutinize the problem closely and not just give away warranty work. Anyway JMHO.

First off, I think alot of people have the story wrong and like to assume!!!

From what I know...and I do know more than most of you on this forum....that Stevens Creek (Bay Area knows about Stevens Creek) denied the warrany after REPEATED attempts to get the tranny fixed. They even had the car for several months and they REFUSED to fix the tranny. Then because the car was on thier lot for so long...the dealership threatened to put a "lien sale" on the car. They even tried to charge large amounts of storage fees...even though nothing was signed for or arranged.

The customer only wanted to get the tranny fixed since it was a warranty issue, but the dealership refuse and continued to cliam "abuse", also coming up with many different excuses as to why the tranny broke. Not one of the many stories did not match, and they didt make sense.

It was only after all this, that the customer filed a lawsuit against SOA. The car was completely stock with 3K miles, with NO visible signs of abuse on the clutch, flywheel, or engine. If the customer did what they "say" he did...there would be visible signs on these parts. The tires were still in new condition...no flat spots or scuffs.

Dont you think if you went through this for over 2 yrs...you might want a little more than just your tranny fixed?? Maybe all your car payments and insurance fees back? Or something I am sure. Ofcourse Lawyers want money...thats how they make a living!! Everyone knows that.

So, please next time you want to pass judgement, and assume things...make sure you know what your talking about.

-freddie

you were all owned (if his story is correct)

First off, I think alot of people have the story wrong and like to assume!!!
Dont you think if you went through this for over 2 yrs...you might want a little more than just your tranny fixed?? Maybe all your car payments and insurance fees back? Or something I am sure. Ofcourse Lawyers want money...thats how they make a living!! Everyone knows that.

So, please next time you want to pass judgement, and assume things...make sure you know what your talking about.

-freddie

I wouldn't have waited that long before filing a lemon law suit, as I posted above. It would have been appropriate for the plaintiff to file suit for a new car, re-imbursement of actual rental car expenses and reasonable attorney fees. He would have won the case. However, that is not what he did, according to the accounts I have read. He came on a public forum and bragged about his lawyers trying to "milk" somebody. I do feel for him, but both he and his attorneys used poor judgement and wound up pissing off the court.

I'm just glad my tranny hasn't broken and I'm glad that I know the horrors of Stevens Creek Subaru.

My understanding of the Lemon Law is the same issue has to happen 3 times in a certain time frame to even be conidered. How could he have the same issue 3 times if they wouldn't replace the first issue?

Also, if the dealer has you car for X amount of days w/o fixing the car, then it is considered a lemon.

I wouldn't have waited that long before filing a lemon law suit, as I posted above. It would have been appropriate for the plaintiff to file suit for a new car, re-imbursement of actual rental car expenses and reasonable attorney fees. He would have won the case. However, that is not what he did, according to the accounts I have read. He came on a public forum and bragged about his lawyers trying to "milk" somebody. I do feel for him, but both he and his attorneys used poor judgement and wound up pissing off the court.

I'm just glad my tranny hasn't broken and I'm glad that I know the horrors of Stevens Creek Subaru.


Actually I think he did file sooner, but the whole process has taken over 2 yrs.
As far as posting about the lawyers trying to "milk" SOA, yeah...maybe he shouldnt have posted that...but that doesnt mean he was "Guilty" of abusing the car. And I dont think he has ever posted about doing anything to the car.

Now, on lemon law...I dont know if it works if they calim "abuse". Only if the car has been fixed 4 or more times with the same issue, or been there OVER 30 days. But again...if the dealership says that it cant leave because of "abuse" and they need more time, I dont think lemon law will work. Not 100% on that one.

-freddie

So what about this phantom TSB that I hear so much about that states broken gears are to be considered abused? I have seen it posted so many times, but havn't actually seen a copy. Has anyone seen it or have a copy to post or is it just BS??

In my experience, if you go into court expecting more than you are due then you are abusing the power of the court and judges tend to get really pissed if they think they are being used. The fact that the plantiff bragged to the general public about his attempt probably did not sit well! It amazes me that people will post their attempts to defraud SoA (i.e. "After I take off the mods I'll go to the dealer") or act illegally ("I was driving 105 in a school zone and the cops were mean to me".) I mean, would anyone post a message "I went to the local subie shop late at night and stole a transmission out of a car, pretty smart on my part!" and not expect to get their butt in a boatload of trouble? Although I would not want to see this, the moderators of these board would do many (stupid) people a favor, and limit SoA's ability to find out about alleged fraud, by deleting posts in which persons admitted they were attempting to defraud SoA.

I would guess the plantiff's attorneys were also pretty p.o.'ed when they discovered in court that their own client was acting against his self interest.

Now that this has happened, do you think SoA is checking boards such as this looking for evidence of fraud?

I don't blame subaru for what they are going through. Too many people are trying to fraud them, in the end the legitimate people with claims are getting screwed...My friend is one of them...

So what about this phantom TSB that I hear so much about that states broken gears are to be considered abused? I have seen it posted so many times, but havn't actually seen a copy. Has anyone seen it or have a copy to post or is it just BS??

It's not BS, I got a copy of it from a dealer. It has pictures of broken gears and basically states: If the gears look like this, SOA will not cover the repair under warranty as it is considered abuse. The document that I received is with another party right now, but I will go get a copy made of it and post it up here if you like.

Yes, please do. If SOA is universally denying warantee repairs regardless of the circumstance, its the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard.

I don't blame subaru for what they are going through. Too many people are trying to fraud them, in the end the legitimate people with claims are getting screwed...My friend is one of them...


Me too.

hey guys,

i am going thru a similar situation with subaru of america and my opinion of it
is there is a lot of coercion, extortion, and fraud going on .
i am reading a lot of cases of warranties being denied because of the word
"abuse", and unless everyone stands together and fights this company
no one is going to win.

people, we all have rights!!! are we going to give up our rights as americans?

if someone is going to accuse you of abuse, they need to prove it.
i am an individual who can honestly say, I did not abuse my car and the
transmission went out on mine. the car is stock, and i am suppose to sign a
goodwill agreement to pay for the cost of labor and a paper stating that
i will not take subaru of america to court. I dont think so!!!!!

GOOD!!!!!!
FINALLY SOA wins one!!!

Go SOA!!!!

That's for all of who think modifying your car beyond factory specs and having warranty covered your stupid mistakes is ok.

GOOD!!!!!!
FINALLY SOA wins one!!!

Go SOA!!!!

That's for all of who think modifying your car beyond factory specs and having warranty covered your stupid mistakes is ok.


I would read the whole post before making comments

In my experience, if you go into court expecting more than you are due then you are abusing the power of the court and judges tend to get really pissed if they think they are being used. The fact that the plantiff bragged to the general public about his attempt probably did not sit well! It amazes me that people will post their attempts to defraud SoA (i.e. "After I take off the mods I'll go to the dealer") or act illegally ("I was driving 105 in a school zone and the cops were mean to me".) I mean, would anyone post a message "I went to the local subie shop late at night and stole a transmission out of a car, pretty smart on my part!" and not expect to get their butt in a boatload of trouble? Although I would not want to see this, the moderators of these board would do many (stupid) people a favor, and limit SoA's ability to find out about alleged fraud, by deleting posts in which persons admitted they were attempting to defraud SoA.

I would guess the plantiff's attorneys were also pretty p.o.'ed when they discovered in court that their own client was acting against his self interest.

Now that this has happened, do you think SoA is checking boards such as this looking for evidence of fraud?

SoA has and will be checking boards.
And not just SoA, but dealer personnel.

People, please...can you stop thinking that SoA and the dealers you take your vehicles to for repairs are totally unaware and stupid?

Thanks...

I am glad this guy got slammed for attempting to abuse the system. Greedy people and shady lawyers really hurt this country.

However, there have been enough broken trannies that there may indeed be a manufacturers design defect (the WRX now has a well known reputation for having a weak transmission). Subaru should own up to that. There are plenty of performance cars out there in which the transmission holds together just fine with plenty of mods and spirited driving. Categorically denying repairs without properly investigating the situation is wrong of Subaru, and I wish someone would take them to court for their improper behavior regarding this issue. There may even be enough cases to go for a class action suit.

Also,
Under the comsumer protection laws, just because you have modified your car is not grounds for automatic warranty denial (as many dealers do). The dealer, by law, must prove that your modifications caused the failure. This would be acceptable with a heavily modified car, but denying someone because they have a few simple mods like a catback is rediculous.

He should have been made to pay back 100,000 as more of a punitive damage. He not only hurt himself, but he hurt each and every other person that may need some sort of warranty work completed. SOA is probably sitting back saying "If he tried it, then everyone is trying it to some extent or another".....it's really all just sad....

i think its really funny for the people who dont understand how much tension the awd trannies are under. its not that the subaru tranny is weak, its the fact that there is a lot of horsepower in the car. the clutch is made to grip no slip like in NA subarus. so if the clutch doesnt slip, and the wheels dont brake traction, whats left???? THE TRANNY. 95% of the time a bad tranny is due to the driver. i am glad that guy got caught!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

i think its really funny for the people who dont understand how much tension the awd trannies are under. its not that the subaru tranny is weak, its the fact that there is a lot of horsepower in the car. the clutch is made to grip no slip like in NA subarus. so if the clutch doesnt slip, and the wheels dont brake traction, whats left???? THE TRANNY. 95% of the time a bad tranny is due to the driver. i am glad that guy got caught!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

How can you say..." i am glad that guy got caught"??

He got legal advise and took it...anyone would have if the same, if this crap happened to them. So he posted that the lawyers were going to "MILK" them. Thats doesnt mean they were trying to. That could have meant, get his tranny fixed + a little more....no one knows. I mean how much total do you think one could get from the suit? $1,000,000.? That would be "MILKING" them!!!.

That still doesnt mean that he "abused" the car. People say alot of things on the internet....doesnt mean they are true. He never said he did anything to the car. So, again...although his choice of word were not wise....it doesnt mean he did anything wrong with his car. He could have been one of those few that have had tranny problems without doing anything to them...I have another friend that had issues with his 03 wrx tranny and he knows how to drive. He ofcourse took it to a "better" dealership, and got it fixed.

Just because the court didnt see it his way...does that mean he has been lying all this time?? How many times have we seen or heard of cases where people WERE TRULY innocent...but locked up? You all are doing the same thing here. Saying "he got what he deserves"...but infact you all dont even know this guy, nor were you at the court hearings!! So, because you dont know what really happened...you should just move on to a better thread, and quit posting nonsense remarks.

Its funny how BS threads get on the front page.

-freddie

i think its really funny for the people who dont understand how much tension the awd trannies are under. its not that the subaru tranny is weak, its the fact that there is a lot of horsepower in the car. the clutch is made to grip no slip like in NA subarus. so if the clutch doesnt slip, and the wheels dont brake traction, whats left???? THE TRANNY. 95% of the time a bad tranny is due to the driver. i am glad that guy got caught!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I do realize how much stress AWD trannies are under, but the fact of the matter is that the WRX tranny is underbuilt. The STI, EVO, GSX eclipse, Skyline, etc don't have reputations for glass trannies - and you can't say the Skyline doesn't have a lot of power.

I'm not a lawyer, but maybe people (with unmodified cars)would win abuse cases by defining the word "abuse" more clearly to the court and to SoA. If I got in this boat (PS SoA no mods on my car until the warranty runs out, I never redline it) I'd bring in lots of pictures of WRX on closed courses with professional drivers (SoA's own adds) and say that this style of driving must not constitute abuse since they demonstrate this capability in thier advertisment and that is a reason I purchased the product. This (maybe) would leave SoA in the position of needing to prove I drove more aggressively than the drivers pictured in the adds or the drivers who can go from 0 to 60 mph in 6 seconds (or whatever) as they claim the car will do. Imagine them trying to claim that I, on the street, drove more aggressively than the driver's in the adds on a closed course! ( of course if I had three or four "exhibition of excessive speed" citations I may be SOL).
Unfortunately for all of us, a national publication has printed a story of a person who moded his car and appeared to get two warranty motors when he blew up his motors and this and other sites are filled with persons who admit to warranty fraud. People who have a "I got mine" mentality with regard to demoding a car to get it repaired were once applauded in posts, I suspect the worm has turned now.

hey guys,

if someone is going to accuse you of abuse, they need to prove it.
i am an individual who can honestly say, I did not abuse my car and the
transmission went out on mine. the car is stock, and i am suppose to sign a
goodwill agreement to pay for the cost of labor and a paper stating that
i will not take subaru of america to court. I dont think so!!!!!

The law is on YOUR side on this one, Theresa. By law, they need to prove abuse. Asking you to sign something that says you will not sue them is inappropriate. If I were in your shoes, I would very calmly and professionally explain to the dealership that you are not comfortable signing the waiver. If they insist (they likely will) call the SOA number and tell them that you have no other choice than to retain legal counsel and that you will be expecting SOA to re-imburse you for your reasonable legal expenses, a rental car of similar type to your broken car, and the repairs, unless of course, they can PROVE you abused your car. You will probably still have to sign something that says you are responsible for the cost of the work if, and only if, it can be proven that you abused your car.

Good luck, it is an unfortunate hassle. Legal BS takes time and patience, and it's too easy to get emotionally involved - that's where this guy went wrong.

Well I currently have a warranty issue with my WRX. I drive it on the street, I drive it to and from work, and I red-line the engine in a street drag race sometimes. I took the car to the dealer yesterday and the only response I got was "What kind of gas do you put in it??" I Said "93 octane only." The reply "Well you should always put premium gas in it." When I dropped the car off, I told them my valve-train needs to be looked at because my valves start clacking at 6300-6500 rpm's . Now because of this Jacka$$ I have to wait for some subaru rep. to come to town and try and convince me I'm an idiot.

Its funny how BS threads get on the front page.


Huh? This is the first lawsuit of this kind that we became aware of. This thread was not meant to make you take sides, but rather inform you of things that happen.

My personal opinion on this, is that warranty abusers get what they deserve. Some get caught some get away. In the end, its the people with legidimate claims that suffer.

Well I currently have a warranty issue with my WRX. I drive it on the street, I drive it to and from work, and I red-line the engine in a street drag race sometimes. I took the car to the dealer yesterday and the only response I got was "What kind of gas do you put in it??" I Said "93 octane only." The reply "Well you should always put premium gas in it." When I dropped the car off, I told them my valve-train needs to be looked at because my valves start clacking at 6300-6500 rpm's . Now because of this Jacka$$ I have to wait for some subaru rep. to come to town and try and convince me I'm an idiot.

The car requires a minimum of 91 octane - as stated in the manual. Most of us on the west coast would kill for readily available 93 octane, instead we get the 91 octane piss gas. What does that dealer expect you to do, run 100 octane race gas?

Also, if subaru is calling racing a car abuse then why are they sponsoring your first year of SCCA membership with purchase. They are basically telling you to race and then not backing up their product if it is not up to the task.

Now because of this Jacka$$ I have to wait for some subaru rep. to come to town and try and convince me I'm an idiot.]

sorry man, but thats what they always do for this kind of repair. I had to do it too, and so did my other friend. So it's not this guys fault you are waiting!! I had to wait about 3 months for the rep to come and look at a paint problem I had...it was denied. I am a painter and know that it should have been covered under warranty...but again it wasnt...oh well.

-freddie

My personal opinion on this, is that warranty abusers get what they deserve. Some get caught some get away. In the end, its the people with legidimate claims that suffer.


you are correct...I agree...but people see this and automatically think this guy abused his car...and they start bashing him personally. Not in general. He had a "legidimate claim"...he suffered...now who do we blame that one on?


-freddie

We don't and wont know if THIS guy abused his car. Thats not the point. The point is that Subaru is fighting back. That is good. Sure, this guy might have been in the right. It sucks then. However, stuff like this will make the REAL scammers think twice before "putting the car back to stock after a long weekend of street drag racing on 87 octane" and claiming warranty on their engines and/or transmissions.

We don't and wont know if THIS guy abused his car. Thats not the point. The point is that Subaru is fighting back. That is good. Sure, this guy might have been in the right. It sucks then. However, stuff like this will make the REAL scammers think twice before "putting the car back to stock after a long weekend of street drag racing on 87 octane" and claiming warranty on their engines and/or transmissions.

great!! I am glad that we finally came to the point of this thead. Lets keep it going that way....instead of saying "he got what he deserves"....assuming that he is a "scammer".

Lesson to all those would-be scammers!!!

-freddie :)

I do realize how much stress AWD trannies are under, but the fact of the matter is that the WRX tranny is underbuilt. The STI, EVO, GSX eclipse, Skyline, etc don't have reputations for glass trannies - and you can't say the Skyline doesn't have a lot of power.


wrx trannies are not underbuilt to the extent that you cannot use th pwower the motor provides. even the STi tranny will fail if you dont know how to launch or drive it correctly. there was a guy on MSN.com in the car section that gave an STi a 2.5 out of 10 because he went through 2 trannies within a year. you think thats because of tranny issues or the driver? the guy also said the quality of the STi was no different than his grandmas cavalier.

ITS THE DRIVER.

wrx trannies are not underbuilt to the extent that you cannot use th pwower the motor provides. even the STi tranny will fail if you dont know how to launch or drive it correctly. there was a guy on MSN.com in the car section that gave an STi a 2.5 out of 10 because he went through 2 trannies within a year. you think thats because of tranny issues or the driver? the guy also said the quality of the STi was no different than his grandmas cavalier.

ITS THE DRIVER.

In the case of your STI example, I fully agree it was the driver - the STI transmission is a solidly built transmission. But saying all failures are the driver is incorrect. I know a number of people who have had their trannies fail at or near stock power levels. One of these drove his car like a grandma - the other autocrossed it, but has many years of autocrossing experience and raced his car properly (rev matching, heel toe downshifting, etc.). Fortunately their dealer was good enough to honor their warranty and at the time I applauded Subaru's stance of backing up the car that they sell, advertise as a sport car, and even include a paid first year of SCCA membership. The fact that they have changed their mind and are categorically denying warranties is wrong and gives SOA a big black eye in my mind.

The fact of the matter is that the WRX has a MUCH higher failure rate for its transmission than other AWD vehicles. If the problem was the driver than I guess people who don't know how to drive AWD vehicles only drive WRXs

I have to disagree, Every one I've met with DSM Stealth/3000GT Have had problems with their trannies too, not just the AWD version either... Maybe we Americans are just a bunch of ripped off Idiots and the japanese are just selling us the lower grade junk that didn't pass the JDM inspection..hmmmm...Geez I hope that is not the case. What was I thinking??

No offense Super D, but what advantage does it give you to admit in public to street racing your WRX while your in a warranty dispute with SoA?

wow

I think it's funny that Alex posted a diagram of a 4EAT with this thread. :p

you can make ANY part of any car fail if you drive it hard enough... so even if you did get a beefier transmission that could handle all the power, youd probably start *****ing about the differentials and the driveshaft that you snapped etc etc etc.... if they TRUELY made a bogus product then dont you think the grannies driving the wrx's would have the same problems as people with 30 mods who say they baby their tranny (if even infact they do).
like everyone has said 300 million times...
dont dump the clutch if you want to drive your car past 15,000mi
and the other familiar one... 'youve gotta pay to play'