Fitting parts - responsibility

More I think about it...

...the more I realise how simple this is to fix.

Nothing will bind if you just drill the mounting holes on the turbo a tiny little bit.

Little bit of grinding to port match the turbos and manifolds and presto all fixed.

But you'd need to do the same to both left and right manifolds... such a small issue really.

Still shitty quality really, but it's a small issue. Not worth the hassle to send them back... port matching them perfectly to the turbo makes them pretty decent in the end.

 

But the point is it was manufactured wrong .. Everything needs a little match porting but studs not lining up is wrong .

Lol at Mungyz
Just quoted Eric's post In US saying the poll here is on his side

What's wrong with this drama queen? :rofl:

 

OK for comparison, here is how I deal with things in the computer industry:

I install a new hard drive into a customers computer.
2 months later the hard drive fails (12 months warranty).
There is no mishandling of the drive and the customer hasnt done anything to cause the failure (ie dropping the computer, spilling water on it, etc).
I replace the drive off my back, then follow it up with my supplier, who should then follow it up with the manufacturer. In the event that its a part straight from the manufacturer, I follow it up with them directly.

Car industry shouldnt be any different.

In the event that something has an obvious flaw and I missed it, then its the manufacturers responsibility to replace it, but my responsibility for the lost time.

 

You need to be careful converting manufacturer RTB (Return To Base) warranties to on-site at your expense.

Depending on your pricing structure, the customer should pay for your time to execute the RTB warranty, reloading windows/data recovery and for providing a swap out part whilst the HDD is replaced, assuming its outside of DOA period.

Many guys in the computer industry will do the lot at their expense like its there responsibility, I think it comes from other similar warranty type claims, a failed tyre you would not expect to be charged for refitting.

But to go on-site replace/reload and provide the advance part is several hours and the cost of a hard drive, say $400. What happens when the hard drive comes back as warranty void power surge damage ?

I would like you try and get that bill paid, dont do it, as long as your offer free blow jobs people will take you up on it.

Its an opportunity to explain the possibility and that on-site warranty is available for a cost, in the event something happens.

 

If I modified the part, its my responsibility, should check for faults before modifying especially.

As for the reload data stuff, this would all depend on the various circumstances, but in a computer environment, if a HDD was blown due to a surge, there would be other problems as all 12v parts share a common rail and the board among other things would be blown.

Its obviously a case of determining where the problem originated, which should be a normal part of assessing whether its even a warranty claim to begin with.

Im talking straight forward stuff in general though, obviously no matter what the procedure there will be exceptions and grey areas.

 

I dont agree, if you modified a case for lights/fans whatever, then found the internal drive bays were spot welded too narrow to take a drive, I would be asking who is paying me to remodify the replacement case.

Your modifications were a natural step before building the PC where the point of discovery occurred, the modifications have nothing to do with the fault, the product was never saleable, your actions did not alter that.

Who is paying me to modify the second case ?

 

If the customer supplied the case, and they want it fixed, then they can pay for me to modify it. If I supplied it, and didnt check for compatibility before modifying it, that's my responsibility.

You cant get tell a customer something will work, then order it in, not check it and just assume, start modifying it and realise its not right then turn around and change your mind.

Part of duty of care is to check these things BEFORE you go voiding the warranty.

If Id modified the case in a reversible way, then it should be honoured under warranty still but if Ive cut holes in it...too bad.

 

That sounds good in theory, are you suggesting that the manifolds should of been test fitted before modifying them ?

A manifold was ordered to suit a certain flange size, that was not provided.

There is reasonable expectation the products meets the specifications as ordered, and are warranted against faulty workmanship and materials.

Does a sandwich lose its warranty if you cut it in half ?
Hey ! there is no cheese on this sandwich !
Sorry mate you cut it in half !

Some processes are required to prepare a product for use, it is unreasonable to expect that a product may not be altered before discovering an issue.

Your opinion comes from experience in other markets, returning an electrical item as faulty for a refund can be a problem if you have carved your initials in the side of it.

Whereas if you had returned a CB antenna with a faulty base and you had SWR/tuned its length, would you not be disappointed if they said sorry mate you have trimmed the antenna no warranty on the base ?

 

No Mungyz, this is where you're wrong. Your post was inspired by this issue. You are wrong here, this is not the shop's fault. This is not the customer's fault. This is 110% AMS's fault. Those manifolds should have never left their facility, the should have been returned to the manufacturer as non-conforming material.

I'll even do their QA work for them (not that they'll listen). All that's needed to prevent this in the future is a simple go/no-go gauge. You place the manifold on a jig which has the holes in the proper locations and an extrusion to enter the port. If the manifold fits, it goes. If not, it gets returned. A process which would take 30 seconds per set.

But why bother adding quality control which would further cut into your profits when you can blame the installer and send a second set out? Oh wait, the second and THIRD sets all had the same issue. I'd go so far as to say these manifolds are all shipped directly from China to the reseller, and AMS never sees them in house. Yay, who need's quality?

Glenn, I know it will be a hit for your ENORMOUS ego, but you have to admit you're wrong here. You are, and everyone can see it. Blaming the customer or the installer in this case is unprofessional, irrational and in your case, immature. Too many spin lessons from your buddy Vuk.

Oh, and lastly, don't tell me (or Doc) to stay out of your thread if you can't stay out of the US forums.

 

This is the cut and dry of the matter - the customer smoothed the outer surface of the manifold and just went a little further taking off the logo.

Another set of pics that help to show the above. It wasn't a question of if the parts could be made to work...

http://www.300zxclub.com/showpost.php?p=2335444&postcount=2745

 

The manifolds would have fitted, the problem is the customer and the tuner decided to change their level of quality expectation, they paid for cheap, they got cheap, then they wanted quality of expensive = FAIL never going to happen.

The flaw in the manifold is not significant and would never have any serious effect on the performance or operation of the part or the engine.
Especially considering not the tuner nor the customer took the effort to port match the manifold to the head or the turbo - something I personally consider a must for ANY performance build.

They were happy enough to slap it all together and then when they had slight trouble fitting the turbo they threw a tantrum and it went all wrong from there, trying to source parts from another supplier, going public without resolving the issue, withholding information in an attempt to make things look worse than they are.

I didn't want all this Ash Vs AMS crap here, I wanted a general opinion as per the first post, the people who dragged all the details across have now just shat on Ash just as much as they have AMS - all in another attempt to have a go at me.


Sometimes mouth shut is far better option.

 

There is hope, you are learning...:thumbup:

 

We will let the poll speak for itself, seeing as you guys have corrupted the poll in an attempt to sway the numbers it'll be very interesting.

Funny by NZ law if that part had its installation finished (as it very nearly did) and then it failed guess who would be liable for all the labour to repair the job = Ash
I'm not 100% certain but I think it's the same in Aus?

You might THINK one thing but the law here and in your own country actually says another. Mechanic fits parts supplied by the customer, parts fail, customer can still sue the mechanic - this information is on 3ZC in clear as day writing, there has already been an argument over this and the outcome was it's a fact.

The mechanic MUST check the parts before fitting them end of story, it doesn't mater if you love him to bits he still apparently did not check the parts before altering and fitting them = failure.

You can't spin it any other way, no mater how much you hate me and insult me and talk crap that is a fact.

Just like doc reporting on AMS product failures I have come across an Ashspec procedural failure and have made mention of it in public - thems the brakes.

By the way - poll - not looking good for you so far is it...........

 

IMO AMS products are entry level / base level products, I don't think I've ever argued any differently, you get what you pay for and everyone knows there are some issues with some products from time to time.

It's buyer beware IMO and if you want to aim for cheaper products then you take everything that comes with that.
AMS are VERY good at standing by their customers and IF you get a crap part they WILL work to resolve the problem, this could cause delays in a build or what ever but hey there are plenty of examples of top quality parts and workmanship going pear shaped CORRECT!?

It's actually fairly amusing how parts of the Z32 community are so damn precious over AMS, rather than bashing on AMS they would be better off promoting the brands they like maybe???

It's also amusing how all this keeps getting swung back at my opinion or what I have done or what I said somewhere, All I did in that thread was raise a flag that denoted a stuff up from the fitter as well - nek minnit WAR! :rofl:

 

Oh ya real good at it... after my second pair of AMS pads I was blamed saying my brake system was faulty...

No offense but I've had autozone/partstore parts last longer than AMS(canada) parts. AMS is not entry level, AMS is cheaper than entry level for the stupid person on a budget.

It gets swung back at you because you don't let it die. You continue on and on on a defensive stance and don't give up. If you QUIT posting you'd quit getting flak. Quit feeding the flames? This thread for example.. wasn't needed, but you made it anyways.

 

No it was never any doubt in my mind or in my posts that the part was faulty, it's only drama queens that try to spin it that way.

AMS buys a part from a company and sends it out without checking it or at least catching the fault.

Ash receives the part in his shop and it is modified and then fitted without catching the fault.

Same same both made the exact same mistake in that they didn't check the part before it moved to the next stage.

I've only quoted posts from here because a certain person continues to say no one agrees with me - evidentially he is wrong, plenty of people have a very similar if not the same view on this. And people keep adding this same view even now most of the specifics for this particular incident are here for all to see.

 

You've misquoted me mungy - a very misleading tactic that you have been using to keep this argument going.

No matter how many polls or hypothetical situations you create, the statement I made will remain 100% factual - forever! I didn't post that no-one in the world will ever agree with you, I wrote that no-one in the thread agreed with you.

I can only be held responsible for what I have said, not what you may think I've said nor for what you interpret my words to mean.

To eliminate any misunderstanding due to the language barrier you have brought up a few times, I will only evaluate the situation using your explanation of the law - by your own words mungy, the part has to have "its installation finished and then" fail for the installer to be responsible.

Since the installation was not finished and there was no failure, the law as you've explained it does not apply to this situation.

That being the case, your argument is moot. Unless you have a different reason for pursuing your crusade. I'm of the opinion that you have unresolved animosity toward Ash (and Nick, when he worked there) from the intake and boost piping argument, and are using this as an opportunity to take shots at him. If there is another reason that you have gotten so worked up over a simple disagreement about who is responsible for what, please explain.

You asked me why I don't take your word as a man? Because of the above, as well as past dealings, one of which is noted below.

 

i have bought and been waiting 9 weeks for a set now i'm sad...hope they fit...