Toyota Warranty

I was replying to @yuber814. Your issue is obvious.

 

I have said this many times, do not mod your Tacoma while it is under warranty as they will use it as a excuse not to cover it. Just saying it again.

 

Another thing worth saying is, if you have a Tacoma with an automatic transmission, don't put a supercharger on it.

 

Oddly in the last decade or so most manual transmissions are rated for less torque than their auto counter part.


But the driver would definitely have more control to reduce shock and wear.

Ideally with an auto you would change the converter and valve body upgrade to increase line pressures.

 

Who cares what "most manual transmissions" are rated for; the transmission in the Tacoma has a pretty good reputation for being able to take a lot of abuse. As for upgrading a torque converter and valve body in an automatic transmission; pretty much irrelevant. Why? The upgrades will do nothing to upgrade the strength and heat tolerance of the clutch mechanisms, and they will fail if too much torque is pushed through the transmission.

 

It’s discussion. I’m not attacking you.

Line pressure is key to preventing clutch wear on a trans with higher torque out put. The same idea as a heavier pressure plate.

Both suffer from the torque after the clutches obviously. But most auto failures are slippage related and temperature related. It would reduce this.

 

I have to (mostly) disagree, while extra pressure can help a little, it will not be any where near enough to deal with the torque of a supercharged engine.

 

I feel like if the OP pushes the dealer to do something he may end up in worse shape than he is now.
If they agree to do a full diagnosis, it will likely involve pulling the trans and tearing it down. Then they’ll likely come to the same conclusion, that the supercharger caused the issue. There will be much back and forth, but in the end the truck is at the dealer, with a transmission in pieces, that needs either a replacement or a rebuild. And that will come with a hefty bill, and it’s not likely going to be a 2-3 day process. I’m thinking weeks to months, so the OP is paying for a rental, or making car payments on a vehicle that can’t be used during that time.

 

That's the safest way to go for sure. Problem is that then you won't be doing anything to your truck for the first 60k miles of it's life until the powertrain warranty runs out. Also, you can mod it as long as it's a Toyota authorized mod, like the TRD lift kit, TRD skid plate, etc. The Magnuson is a warranty killer on any powertrain component for sure.

 

Id keep my tacoma stock, and I were a 4X4 enthusiast Id grab a 2500 dollar wrangler or something similar and beat the snot out of it. Sorry but these trucks can't handle the stuff you young bros do to them. They break and when they do , they do it good. You can all start flaming me if you wish.

 

Why? you are right my friend. And then they crab that their trucks are junk and warranties suck.Price to pay for modifying and Toyota loves them for that as they use these as excuses when it comes to warranty issues. Live and learn I say.

 

Can you find a driveable 4WD jeep for $2,500?

Great, thanks! You're a douche nozzle

 

Funny you wrote this, my son needs a vehicle to beat on and just found a 1995 F150 4x4 with the 4.9 straight six, manual transmission, an eight foot bed, and dual fuel tanks for that price.

 

From I what Ive seen and read, when these trucks/ and other brand trucks are truly used for serious off road roading they shit the bed. Thats the facts.

 

Or instead of the Trd shocks with a 12 month warranty, you can use actual Bilstein 5100’s for a lifetime warranty . Toyota is not going to bounce you for replacing shocks, unless the installation was bad . In that case the factory warranty wont cover either one. The dealer or the installation shop who botched the job must cover it. Hell I had a whole snowplow drilled into my Tacoma frame and never had any warranty issue from the dealer. They even replaced the frame on my old 2nd gen for rust. Recalls are different I understand, but I had ujoints and carrier bearings replaced under warranty. You would think they would blame the snowplow use, but they didn’t. It all depends on the cause of failure and your relationship with the dealer.

 

So you modified the power train, it broke, and now you want them to fix it for free?

 

nah.

the manufacturer might be on the hook to prove that a suspension modification had some impact on a drive train failure. no one - no court - is going to require that they prove an aftermarket supercharger contributed to a trans failure.

i mean... d'uh.

 

The original post I responded to stated:

“Magnuson Moss act applies to items that maintain OEM specifications”

And that’s just completely untrue. That was my point. D’uh. You’re still covered by the Act with modifications *as long as they did not cause the failure*.

That kind of post makes people scared to make basic modifications while under warranty because they think anything aftermarket will invalidate their whole warranty, even things that are obviously unrelated to the mod.

The Act does clearly state that if the modification caused the failure, the Act no longer provides you with protection. There’s no argument there. The sentence I quoted above is what was in error. It’s dead wrong to anyone who can read US Code. Or if you don’t believe me, read any automotive or law firm web site’s summary of the Act regarding aftermarket modifications.

If OP went to court would he have a case? I have no idea, I have no opinion on that, because I’m not a transmission expert and I’m not an attorney. Unless you’re an attorney who specializes in this type of law, with the advice of an expert in the mechanical details, you’re merely speculating about what the outcome might be. And it doesn’t matter, because as we all agreed numerous times in this thread, litigation in this situation is a fool’s errand.

 

the post you responded to isn't a legal document. i think we're all pretty clear on the context of "OEM specifications" in this specific discussion. the relationship between a supercharger and a transmission failure is entirely germane.

 

Never said it was a legal document, but words mean things. It’s a statement that doesn’t correctly describe when the Act does or doesn’t require warranty coverage.

The last para in the post alludes to the same misunderstanding. “it doesn’t matter if the supercharger is or is not the cause”. The person who posted that doesn’t fundamentally understand the basic premise of the Act. They’re stating that deviating from stock automatically removes warranty coverage, whether the mod caused the failure or not.

It’s one of many posts across this forum where people quote M-M and then say, you have to stay stock. And those posts give rise to this unnecessary fear of losing all warranty coverage for any mod. People on here say it all the time: don’t mod until your warranty period is up, or expect not to have any coverage. It’s worth knowing that that’s not necessarily the case. Simple as that. There’s no difference between correcting this and correcting someone posting a wrong torque value, it’s important that people have the right information. That’s one of the prime reasons to have a forum in the first place.