300 Whp tranny problems
300 Whp tranny problems
duh ?
Guest
Posts: n/a
ya, I have a 1000 hp, nitrous fed 2.5l with 245's and I can't fiqure out why I keep blowing my tranny. Those a holes a SOA have only replaced it under warranty twice and now they say I'm SOL. I think they should replace it weekly because it is a weak POS. I'm going to sue everybody in the world until someone replaces my clutch for free. Anyone know Jonny Coccrans phone number. Power to the people, viva la France, and all of that other stuff.
Registered User
iTrader: (12)
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 18,369
From: Reno, NV
Car Info: 1993/2000/2001 GF4 mostly red
Originally posted by krishna
They won't cover me entirely and I only have a turbo back exhaust, air intake, and pulley. They'll only cover parts and not labor. This blows. I'm not ever buying another Subaru...
They won't cover me entirely and I only have a turbo back exhaust, air intake, and pulley. They'll only cover parts and not labor. This blows. I'm not ever buying another Subaru...
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 268
From: Cupertino, Duh?
300whp on which dyno? 
I've got somewhere between 251-262whp on the Dyno Dynamics and 296whp on HKS's Dynojet. Stock Tranny + Stock clutch, all original +35K miles on them. I've only drag raced it for 2 events, SCC and Autoweek beat up on it for about 1-2 days each and I've got a little over 20 HPDEs in it. Still running like a champ ... all I can say rev-match = good thing.
Steve
I've got somewhere between 251-262whp on the Dyno Dynamics and 296whp on HKS's Dynojet. Stock Tranny + Stock clutch, all original +35K miles on them. I've only drag raced it for 2 events, SCC and Autoweek beat up on it for about 1-2 days each and I've got a little over 20 HPDEs in it. Still running like a champ ... all I can say rev-match = good thing.
Steve
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by BAN SUVS
Intakes are grounds for complete voiding of the powertrain warranty. Consider yourself lucky.
Intakes are grounds for complete voiding of the powertrain warranty. Consider yourself lucky.
* Modification of your vehicle
Caution
Your vehicle should not be modified. Modifications could afect its performance, safety, or durability, and may even violate governmental regulations. In addition, damage or performance problems resulting from modification MAY not be covered under warranties.
First of all, an intake should not cause a transmission to blow or not work properly. It's not like I added 100 hp where I would put tons of stress on the transmission.
Second, c'mon, did they really expect that people wouldn't modify their cars (notice how they used the word May not be covered) with at least minimal parts that have been recognized by SEMA to be an improvemente over stock parts?
Third, they should stand by their product specially considering it's been known to have problems and be weak.
I don't consider myself lucky to have to pay over $400 to get a weak transmission fixed. If it was so wrong to put performance parts, why would they even cover half of it? I think they realize their product is not what they claimed it was.
Registered User
iTrader: (12)
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 18,369
From: Reno, NV
Car Info: 1993/2000/2001 GF4 mostly red
Originally posted by krishna
This is what I found in the Owner's Manual under Warranites:
* Modification of your vehicle
Caution
Your vehicle should not be modified. Modifications could afect its performance, safety, or durability, and may even violate governmental regulations. In addition, damage or performance problems resulting from modification MAY not be covered under warranties.
First of all, an intake should not cause a transmission to blow or not work properly. It's not like I added 100 hp where I would put tons of stress on the transmission.
Second, c'mon, did they really expect that people wouldn't modify their cars (notice how they used the word May not be covered) with at least minimal parts that have been recognized by SEMA to be an improvemente over stock parts?
Third, they should stand by their product specially considering it's been known to have problems and be weak.
I don't consider myself lucky to have to pay over $400 to get a weak transmission fixed. If it was so wrong to put performance parts, why would they even cover half of it? I think they realize their product is not what they claimed it was.
This is what I found in the Owner's Manual under Warranites:
* Modification of your vehicle
Caution
Your vehicle should not be modified. Modifications could afect its performance, safety, or durability, and may even violate governmental regulations. In addition, damage or performance problems resulting from modification MAY not be covered under warranties.
First of all, an intake should not cause a transmission to blow or not work properly. It's not like I added 100 hp where I would put tons of stress on the transmission.
Second, c'mon, did they really expect that people wouldn't modify their cars (notice how they used the word May not be covered) with at least minimal parts that have been recognized by SEMA to be an improvemente over stock parts?
Third, they should stand by their product specially considering it's been known to have problems and be weak.
I don't consider myself lucky to have to pay over $400 to get a weak transmission fixed. If it was so wrong to put performance parts, why would they even cover half of it? I think they realize their product is not what they claimed it was.
The word 'may' indicates that coverage or lack thereof is at the sole discretion of SOA. Yes, they expect a few people to modify those cars. No, those people should not automatically expect to be covered under warranty once they do so. Hope yes, demand no.
Recognized by SEMA as superior to OEM? Do you not realize that SEMA is merely a collection of aftermarket parts manufacturers and distributers, and that it exists solely for the purpose of improving hte aftermarket industry's bottom line? They have no authority for making such determinations.
As for realizing their product isn't what they claimed... no. Stock WRX transmissions, driven propoerly, will have less than a 1% failure rate. This exceeds industry norms. The transmissions are capable of withstanding stock power levels.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by BAN SUVS
Intakes do not cause transmission failure, They cause detonation under full boost and engine load. That is what I meant by voiding your powertrain warranty.
The word 'may' indicates that coverage or lack thereof is at the sole discretion of SOA. Yes, they expect a few people to modify those cars. No, those people should not automatically expect to be covered under warranty once they do so. Hope yes, demand no.
Recognized by SEMA as superior to OEM? Do you not realize that SEMA is merely a collection of aftermarket parts manufacturers and distributers, and that it exists solely for the purpose of improving hte aftermarket industry's bottom line? They have no authority for making such determinations.
As for realizing their product isn't what they claimed... no. Stock WRX transmissions, driven propoerly, will have less than a 1% failure rate. This exceeds industry norms. The transmissions are capable of withstanding stock power levels.
Intakes do not cause transmission failure, They cause detonation under full boost and engine load. That is what I meant by voiding your powertrain warranty.
The word 'may' indicates that coverage or lack thereof is at the sole discretion of SOA. Yes, they expect a few people to modify those cars. No, those people should not automatically expect to be covered under warranty once they do so. Hope yes, demand no.
Recognized by SEMA as superior to OEM? Do you not realize that SEMA is merely a collection of aftermarket parts manufacturers and distributers, and that it exists solely for the purpose of improving hte aftermarket industry's bottom line? They have no authority for making such determinations.
As for realizing their product isn't what they claimed... no. Stock WRX transmissions, driven propoerly, will have less than a 1% failure rate. This exceeds industry norms. The transmissions are capable of withstanding stock power levels.
Well, I've never run my car full boost and I have never even raced my car. I have taken my car for long trips but I would not expect a car with 29000 miles to have a transmission brake.
Yes, you are right is their discretion. But I didn't demand. If I did, I would have done what Silver Stone suggested. I do consider that there is no consistency when it comes to them deciding what gets fixed and what doesn't under warranty. Example, Silver Stone mentioned he got 2 brand new trannys. I have no where near the hp he has and yet he was able to get 2. I'm barely getting parts and it was after repeated calls to the Service guy to follow up with the Subaru rep. I don't think that's right either by the way. You should offer a better service or get more damn reps. But I digress, they should either not cover anyone who modifies their car, or structure it differently (specially in the light of the fact that they do expect people to modify their engines).
Yes, SEMA looks out in the best interest of aftermaret manufacturers but the point is if something is proven to better than stock (not just words, but tests), then it really should not affect the warranty of your vehicle.
1% failure? Now who made that claim? Subaru by chance???
I take responsibility for any action that I might have taken that would have caused my car to not funcion as it should, I just feel that what I did to my car does not warrant Subaru not paying for the full transmission repair. I think they are cutting corners with people who were previously willing to be loyal. I was thinking about buying the STi, but not anymore.
Registered User
iTrader: (12)
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 18,369
From: Reno, NV
Car Info: 1993/2000/2001 GF4 mostly red
Originally posted by krishna
Well, I've never run my car full boost and I have never even raced my car. I have taken my car for long trips but I would not expect a car with 29000 miles to have a transmission brake.
Yes, you are right is their discretion. But I didn't demand. If I did, I would have done what Silver Stone suggested. I do consider that there is no consistency when it comes to them deciding what gets fixed and what doesn't under warranty. Example, Silver Stone mentioned he got 2 brand new trannys. I have no where near the hp he has and yet he was able to get 2. I'm barely getting parts and it was after repeated calls to the Service guy to follow up with the Subaru rep. I don't think that's right either by the way. You should offer a better service or get more damn reps. But I digress, they should either not cover anyone who modifies their car, or structure it differently (specially in the light of the fact that they do expect people to modify their engines).
Yes, SEMA looks out in the best interest of aftermaret manufacturers but the point is if something is proven to better than stock (not just words, but tests), then it really should not affect the warranty of your vehicle.
1% failure? Now who made that claim? Subaru by chance???
I take responsibility for any action that I might have taken that would have caused my car to not funcion as it should, I just feel that what I did to my car does not warrant Subaru not paying for the full transmission repair. I think they are cutting corners with people who were previously willing to be loyal. I was thinking about buying the STi, but not anymore.
Well, I've never run my car full boost and I have never even raced my car. I have taken my car for long trips but I would not expect a car with 29000 miles to have a transmission brake.
Yes, you are right is their discretion. But I didn't demand. If I did, I would have done what Silver Stone suggested. I do consider that there is no consistency when it comes to them deciding what gets fixed and what doesn't under warranty. Example, Silver Stone mentioned he got 2 brand new trannys. I have no where near the hp he has and yet he was able to get 2. I'm barely getting parts and it was after repeated calls to the Service guy to follow up with the Subaru rep. I don't think that's right either by the way. You should offer a better service or get more damn reps. But I digress, they should either not cover anyone who modifies their car, or structure it differently (specially in the light of the fact that they do expect people to modify their engines).
Yes, SEMA looks out in the best interest of aftermaret manufacturers but the point is if something is proven to better than stock (not just words, but tests), then it really should not affect the warranty of your vehicle.
1% failure? Now who made that claim? Subaru by chance???
I take responsibility for any action that I might have taken that would have caused my car to not funcion as it should, I just feel that what I did to my car does not warrant Subaru not paying for the full transmission repair. I think they are cutting corners with people who were previously willing to be loyal. I was thinking about buying the STi, but not anymore.
Last edited by Kevin M; May 16, 2003 at 01:10 PM.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by BAN SUVS
'Full boost' means 14.5 psi. If you've never reached that, you haven't reached 3500 rpm. I'm sorry you are so disillusioned about warranties and their purpose. But since you took Silver seriously, I can see why.
'Full boost' means 14.5 psi. If you've never reached that, you haven't reached 3500 rpm. I'm sorry you are so disillusioned about warranties and their purpose. But since you took Silver seriously, I can see why.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 527
From: Glen Rock, PA
Car Info: 95 Impreza coup, green, 5speed 1.8l awd
well if there tranys really did suck then even more plp would be on the internet complaining and subaru would have a class action law suit against them already
just try a different dealer most plp have a misfortune of bad dealers near them and then try a different dealer and poof the problem is resolved
just try a different dealer most plp have a misfortune of bad dealers near them and then try a different dealer and poof the problem is resolved
Guest
Posts: n/a
I can't give you an exact number of how many people are having problems but I know a signifcant amount from what I can gather in other postings. I myself don't have the time or the resources to sue, but would not be surprised if someone did. And I think it's pretty hypocritical that these dealers install aftermarkets parts that they themselves sell and then Subaru fully aware of it then decides to decline full warranty. But in answer to your other suggestion to take it to another dealer, it has nothing to do with the dealership. Once the Subaru rep decides what they will cover, it gets entered into the computer and no matter where else you take it, they will have your info and what they authorized to cover. I know, I tried.