Dodge Challenger Forum banner

1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
47 Posts
I asked that same question when I bought my car. My sales guy is a good friend of mine so I trust him. He told me that it wouldn't. He said a tuner could void the warranty and a few other things but I forget what they were. hope that helps.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
672 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Good to hear. People are telling me those two mods will void the warranty. I've never heard that before, so I just wanted to clarify!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,658 Posts
I asked that same question when I bought my car. My sales guy is a good friend of mine so I trust him. He told me that it wouldn't. He said a tuner could void the warranty and a few other things but I forget what they were. hope that helps.
Don't make decisions based on a salesman, he has no say in the service dept. Many in service have different opinions on the same topics and mama Dodge can say different from them.
mopar makes their own cai so if they can put one on so should you.
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
12,553 Posts
cat back and cold air intake should never affect warranty, the only thing i would avoid is any filter that requires oil.....Chrysler really frowns on those

headers, mid pipes, any type of tuning, any type of force induction(turbos or superchargers), any internal engine modifications(camshafts, pistons) will affect your warranty and most likely restrict it

voiding is a big word, restricted means have to jump thru many hoops to get it covered, if covered,

also the burden of proof is always on the customer, im sure many will argue the point, however once a dm or field engineer has made the decision to restrict and deny, it will be on you to proove in a court of law.....

im not trying to scare people from modifications, simply trying to alert them to real world situations

Luke
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
423 Posts
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but does the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act not specifically state that "a warrantor cannot, as a matter of law, avoid liability under a written warranty where a defect is unrelated to the use by a consumer of “unauthorized” articles or service." And just a little further on "nor does it preclude the warrantor from denying liability where the warrantor can demonstrate that the defect or damage was so caused."

That last line says the burden of proof is on the warrantor to show that the aftermarket part is what caused the damage. Or am I just misreading that?

Code of Federal Regulations - Title Section 700.10 - Section 102(c).
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top