Chrysler to offer LIFETIME power train warranties

[Syringer]

http://www.autoblog.com/2007/0...e-powertrain-warranty/

Chrysler today leapfrogged every other car maker by extending its powertrain warranty on every new car and truck it sells to the life of the vehicle. The warranty will apply to the entire powertrain including the engine, transmission/transaxle, drive shafts, and axles. The new warranty goes into effect today, July 26, 2007 and applies to all new 2007s that are on the dealer lots as well as 2008 models.

The warranty covers all parts and labor as long as the owner brings the car in to a Chrysler dealer at least once every five years for a free powertrain inspection. Apparently, the only fly in the ointment is that the new warranty applies to the original owner and is not transferable. If the car is sold within the first three years, the warranty reverts to the previous 3 year/36,000 mile coverage for subsequent owners. The press release is after the jump.

Wow, is this going to be the new precedent?

 

[boomerang]

Life of the vehicle. I wonder how that will be determined?

 

[GoatMonkey]

The life of the vehicle is until something in the power train breaks.

 

[CrackRabbit]

Chrysler has done stuff like this before, remember the 7/70k they offered a few years ago?
Sales dropped after they stopped offering it. Though the craptacular cars they offered at the time didn't help much either.
With the new lineup they hope this will boost sales, and I see it working at least to a degree.
May have to check out a Caliber.

 

[RU482]

Smart move. really, how many people that buy brand new cars actually drive them until they wear out? On the other hand, I guess this type of warranty would encourage that type of buyer

 

[amish]

it covers jeeps too. :shocked:

i wonder how they are going to determine what a normal use is for a jeep.

 

[steppinthrax]

Originally posted by: redly1
Smart move. really, how many people that buy brand new cars actually drive them until they wear out? On the other hand, I guess this type of warranty would encourage that type of buyer

I'm that kind of person. These are things American Car manufactures are trying to do to make their cars appear as reliable as foreign cars (i.e. gm's 5yr 100K warranty). The orginal owner clause is the catch. They must have some statistics somewhere to show these vehicles are transfered more then usual. Why don't they just make more quality vehicles rather then trumping it up with a large warranty do infer quality.

 

[DougK62]

Crap. Guess I should've waited to buy...

 

[DougK62]

Originally posted by: steppinthrax

Originally posted by: redly1
Smart move. really, how many people that buy brand new cars actually drive them until they wear out? On the other hand, I guess this type of warranty would encourage that type of buyer

I'm that kind of person. These are things American Car manufactures are trying to do to make their cars appear as reliable as foreign cars (i.e. gm's 5yr 100K warranty). The orginal owner clause is the catch. They must have some statistics somewhere to show these vehicles are transfered more then usual. Why don't they just make more quality vehicles rather then trumping it up with a large warranty do infer quality.

Every time you post in a car thread I'm inclined to tell you to not do it again.

 

[iamwiz82]

Dodge's site is getting hammered. I cannot even build a vehicle.

 

[Arkaign]

Huh? It sounds great, but financially impossible. Are there limits to how many times they will replace something like a motor? I had a Neon that died (head cracked) before it had 70k miles on it. I imagine if they have to keep servicing the vehicle several times for major problems over a five year period, that it would end up costing them big time.

 

[thedarkwolf]

Something like that might get my dad into a Challenger. He puts a ton of miles on his car and having a warranty the whole time would be nice. His 02 mustang GT is pushing well over 200k miles and he will be wanting something new here soon.

 

[SarcasticDwarf]

Originally posted by: Arkaign
Huh? It sounds great, but financially impossible. Are there limits to how many times they will replace something like a motor? I had a Neon that died (head cracked) before it had 70k miles on it. I imagine if they have to keep servicing the vehicle several times for major problems over a five year period, that it would end up costing them big time.

Not necessarily. They are taking short term gains in the hope that the financials of the company will have gotten much better by the time these start to be used (3 years from now).

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: steppinthrax

Originally posted by: redly1
Smart move. really, how many people that buy brand new cars actually drive them until they wear out? On the other hand, I guess this type of warranty would encourage that type of buyer

I'm that kind of person.

Then why did you just buy a used Camry instead of a new one to drive until it wore out?

ZV

 

[jdoggg12]

Originally posted by: Arkaign
Huh? It sounds great, but financially impossible. Are there limits to how many times they will replace something like a motor? I had a Neon that died (head cracked) before it had 70k miles on it. I imagine if they have to keep servicing the vehicle several times for major problems over a five year period, that it would end up costing them big time.

The catch is that its for the first owner only. Im sure relatively few buyers of ANY manufacturer keep the car long enough to make this something to really hurt Chrysler.

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: jdoggg12

Originally posted by: Arkaign
Huh? It sounds great, but financially impossible. Are there limits to how many times they will replace something like a motor? I had a Neon that died (head cracked) before it had 70k miles on it. I imagine if they have to keep servicing the vehicle several times for major problems over a five year period, that it would end up costing them big time.

The catch is that its for the first owner only. Im sure relatively few buyers of ANY manufacturer keep the car long enough to make this something to really hurt Chrysler.

I just don't quite agree with that. Sure, maybe 50-70% of people only keep a car for it's first 30-100k miles, but a lot of people will drive something until it's dead/severely dying.

To add problems, their cars are just terrible, for the most part, in terms of longevity.

If it's true, though, that they'll keep fixing it forever, I wouldn't mind buying one and putting 500k-1000k miles on it

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf

Originally posted by: Arkaign
Huh? It sounds great, but financially impossible. Are there limits to how many times they will replace something like a motor? I had a Neon that died (head cracked) before it had 70k miles on it. I imagine if they have to keep servicing the vehicle several times for major problems over a five year period, that it would end up costing them big time.

Not necessarily. They are taking short term gains in the hope that the financials of the company will have gotten much better by the time these start to be used (3 years from now).

So, it's a gamble? If you look at the probable huge costs of replacing tens/hundreds of thousands of engines/transmissions, in parts/labor/inventory transportation/storage, it just doesn't seem like a good long term idea. I actually think this could sink the company if they can't keep their numbers in the black.

Think of it this way, say they have a $20k retail vehicle. The total production/delivery cost is $15k (pure example figures). Then tally up two engine rebuilds, one transmission overhaul, and a bunch of other minor maintenance. It'd eat up and surpass the income pretty quick.

 

[caboob]

I like the move.
i can now consider the caravan and town and country minivans as possible choices when we purchase soon. I would never have considered them because of long term reliability concerns.

 

[boomerang]

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf

Originally posted by: Arkaign
Huh? It sounds great, but financially impossible. Are there limits to how many times they will replace something like a motor? I had a Neon that died (head cracked) before it had 70k miles on it. I imagine if they have to keep servicing the vehicle several times for major problems over a five year period, that it would end up costing them big time.

Not necessarily. They are taking short term gains in the hope that the financials of the company will have gotten much better by the time these start to be used (3 years from now).

So, it's a gamble? If you look at the probable huge costs of replacing tens/hundreds of thousands of engines/transmissions, in parts/labor/inventory transportation/storage, it just doesn't seem like a good long term idea. I actually think this could sink the company if they can't keep their numbers in the black.

Think of it this way, say they have a $20k retail vehicle. The total production/delivery cost is $15k (pure example figures). Then tally up two engine rebuilds, one transmission overhaul, and a bunch of other minor maintenance. It'd eat up and surpass the income pretty quick.

You'll find that the majority, if not all of these waranteed components are made by vendors, not Chrysler Corp. itself. These warranty costs will be put on the backs of these suppliers. Chrysler will incur administration fees.

Will this put suppliers under the gun. Yes
Will this put suppliers out of business. Yes.

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: boomerang

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf

Originally posted by: Arkaign
Huh? It sounds great, but financially impossible. Are there limits to how many times they will replace something like a motor? I had a Neon that died (head cracked) before it had 70k miles on it. I imagine if they have to keep servicing the vehicle several times for major problems over a five year period, that it would end up costing them big time.

Not necessarily. They are taking short term gains in the hope that the financials of the company will have gotten much better by the time these start to be used (3 years from now).

So, it's a gamble? If you look at the probable huge costs of replacing tens/hundreds of thousands of engines/transmissions, in parts/labor/inventory transportation/storage, it just doesn't seem like a good long term idea. I actually think this could sink the company if they can't keep their numbers in the black.

Think of it this way, say they have a $20k retail vehicle. The total production/delivery cost is $15k (pure example figures). Then tally up two engine rebuilds, one transmission overhaul, and a bunch of other minor maintenance. It'd eat up and surpass the income pretty quick.

You'll find that the majority, if not all of these waranteed components are made by vendors, not Chrysler Corp. itself. These warranty costs will be put on the backs of these suppliers. Chrysler will incur administration fees.

Will this put suppliers under the gun. Yes
Will this put suppliers out of business. Yes.

Ouch. I'm all for standing behind your product, and I think it's reasonable to expect a carmaker to provide a decently priced vehicle with 100-200k drivetrain backing, but I can't quite see how a lifetime warranty will work in the real world.

I'm almost suspicious that this is a move to drive up stock prices temporarily, so that a few movers and shakers can pump and dump. It'd be awful if this move eventually kills the Chrysler motor company.

 

[boomerang]

Life of the vehicle folks. Read that slowly and comprehend it fully.

It means you're going to have to read the fine print. Know what you're getting into beforehand. I'm not bashing american cars here, I work for an american car company.

 

[iamwiz82]

Originally posted by: boomerang

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf

Originally posted by: Arkaign
Huh? It sounds great, but financially impossible. Are there limits to how many times they will replace something like a motor? I had a Neon that died (head cracked) before it had 70k miles on it. I imagine if they have to keep servicing the vehicle several times for major problems over a five year period, that it would end up costing them big time.

Not necessarily. They are taking short term gains in the hope that the financials of the company will have gotten much better by the time these start to be used (3 years from now).

So, it's a gamble? If you look at the probable huge costs of replacing tens/hundreds of thousands of engines/transmissions, in parts/labor/inventory transportation/storage, it just doesn't seem like a good long term idea. I actually think this could sink the company if they can't keep their numbers in the black.

Think of it this way, say they have a $20k retail vehicle. The total production/delivery cost is $15k (pure example figures). Then tally up two engine rebuilds, one transmission overhaul, and a bunch of other minor maintenance. It'd eat up and surpass the income pretty quick.

You'll find that the majority, if not all of these waranteed components are made by vendors, not Chrysler Corp. itself. These warranty costs will be put on the backs of these suppliers. Chrysler will incur administration fees.

Will this put suppliers under the gun. Yes
Will this put suppliers out of business. Yes.

It's not really any different than before. OEMs have always come down on Suppliers.

 

[boomerang]

Originally posted by: iamwiz82

Originally posted by: boomerang

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf

Originally posted by: Arkaign
Huh? It sounds great, but financially impossible. Are there limits to how many times they will replace something like a motor? I had a Neon that died (head cracked) before it had 70k miles on it. I imagine if they have to keep servicing the vehicle several times for major problems over a five year period, that it would end up costing them big time.

Not necessarily. They are taking short term gains in the hope that the financials of the company will have gotten much better by the time these start to be used (3 years from now).

So, it's a gamble? If you look at the probable huge costs of replacing tens/hundreds of thousands of engines/transmissions, in parts/labor/inventory transportation/storage, it just doesn't seem like a good long term idea. I actually think this could sink the company if they can't keep their numbers in the black.

Think of it this way, say they have a $20k retail vehicle. The total production/delivery cost is $15k (pure example figures). Then tally up two engine rebuilds, one transmission overhaul, and a bunch of other minor maintenance. It'd eat up and surpass the income pretty quick.

You'll find that the majority, if not all of these waranteed components are made by vendors, not Chrysler Corp. itself. These warranty costs will be put on the backs of these suppliers. Chrysler will incur administration fees.

Will this put suppliers under the gun. Yes
Will this put suppliers out of business. Yes.

It's not really any different than before. OEMs have always come down on Suppliers.

Oh yes.

At least some of the Domestics let suppliers engineer and manufacture the components. My employer has the habit of telling the supplier how to both engineer and manufacture it. Then they hold the supplier wholly responsible for the product. Niiiiice.

They're changing their ways. They've run so many out of business that they've found that suppliers won't even consider doing business with them. Won't even talk to them.

They're learning - in an agonizingly slow fashion.

Bet you can guess who I work for, eh?

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: Arkaign
I just don't quite agree with that. Sure, maybe 50-70% of people only keep a car for it's first 30-100k miles, but a lot of people will drive something until it's dead/severely dying.

Demographically those types of people don't buy new cars. Those types buy cars that are 2-3 years old with low miles so that they can take advantage of the depreciation.

ZV

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: Arkaign
I just don't quite agree with that. Sure, maybe 50-70% of people only keep a car for it's first 30-100k miles, but a lot of people will drive something until it's dead/severely dying.

Demographically those types of people don't buy new cars. Those types buy cars that are 2-3 years old with low miles so that they can take advantage of the depreciation.

ZV

That's smart, but wouldn't logic follow that those same types of people would now choose to buy a new Chrysler and then drive it for 10-20 years?