Tire FEATHERING: FYI
11-09-2004, 07:03 AM
#3201
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: United States of America
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ronny I would like to get 15K quiet miles out of the fronts and could live with another 5K miles of increasing noise until I replaced at 20K miles. Anyone with the new designed Brigstones getting this type of mileage after alignment and replacement????
11-09-2004, 08:14 AM
#3202
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Dayton OH
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Ronny
Bottom line is, there are hundreds (or more) 350Z drivers out there who would jump up and down if they could get 20,000 miles out of their fronts; or even 15,000 quiet miles.
Bottom line is, there are hundreds (or more) 350Z drivers out there who would jump up and down if they could get 20,000 miles out of their fronts; or even 15,000 quiet miles.
I have ~14k miles on the original RE040s (2003 enthusiast). I expect to get ~20-22k out of them. I've had the tire-swap and TSB alignment done at 8k for feathering. Feathering is subsiding and some road noise remains. I expect to do an alignment again in the spring. Maybe switch to Nismo suspension also.
My friend has a 2001 Honda S2000 he gets ~15k on back and ~25k on front.
Another friend has a 2001 Honda S2000 with ~15k miles tires all four tires are bald.
Last edited by pulpz2; 11-09-2004 at 08:34 AM.
11-09-2004, 12:38 PM
#3203
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Bay, California
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a little over 28K on my car currently. Dealer replaced the front tires with plenty of good tread since they were feathering around 17-18k. Have 10k on the new fronts so far. okay so far but expecting that feathering again sinc eI read this thread. My original rear tire has tread left with 28 k on it. will easily make over 30k with it.
11-17-2004, 11:35 AM
#3204
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
just for you guys to know, my dealer said they could not do anything about the 04's tire feathering, well.. just got off the phone with Alita from 1800nissan1, who was VERY helpful, she gave me a ref #, a dealer address and number who is known for great customer service, she asked for the names of the serv tech's at Gwinnett place nissan who did not help one bit, and she said my car would be adjusted in all depths, if the tires were too bad they would be replaced, if re-feathering occurs the car will be re-adjusted and tires replaced as often as they need to be until i have 0 feathering,cupping,roaring whatever, i suggest everyone call 1800nissan1 who has a problem, be formal well-mannered, be sure to say you are dissapointed in nissan, and scared to even drive your car... and they will do us justice
11-17-2004, 03:44 PM
#3205
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1-800-NISSAN1 has done NOTHING for me
Originally posted by InItIaLD
just for you guys to know, my dealer said they could not do anything about the 04's tire feathering, well.. just got off the phone with Alita from 1800nissan1, who was VERY helpful, she gave me a ref #, a dealer address and number who is known for great customer service, she asked for the names of the serv tech's at Gwinnett place nissan who did not help one bit, and she said my car would be adjusted in all depths, if the tires were too bad they would be replaced, if re-feathering occurs the car will be re-adjusted and tires replaced as often as they need to be until i have 0 feathering,cupping,roaring whatever, i suggest everyone call 1800nissan1 who has a problem, be formal well-mannered, be sure to say you are dissapointed in nissan, and scared to even drive your car... and they will do us justice
just for you guys to know, my dealer said they could not do anything about the 04's tire feathering, well.. just got off the phone with Alita from 1800nissan1, who was VERY helpful, she gave me a ref #, a dealer address and number who is known for great customer service, she asked for the names of the serv tech's at Gwinnett place nissan who did not help one bit, and she said my car would be adjusted in all depths, if the tires were too bad they would be replaced, if re-feathering occurs the car will be re-adjusted and tires replaced as often as they need to be until i have 0 feathering,cupping,roaring whatever, i suggest everyone call 1800nissan1 who has a problem, be formal well-mannered, be sure to say you are dissapointed in nissan, and scared to even drive your car... and they will do us justice
Glad the phone call worked for you and wish I could say I have had results with 1-800-NISSAN1. Here is my experience in a nutshell...
I called 1-800-NISSAN1 on Nov 9th (Tues) and spoke with a lady. Reported my problem (front tires worn almost to the belt on the inside at 14,500 miles). Never had a chance to ask for anything before she wanted to forward me to another department. Then she told me there would be a long wait so I should hang up and they would call back WITHIN 48HRS! I called back on Nov 12th (Fri) and dialed the extension of the lady I first spoke with and got her voice mail. Left her my file #, name, phone # but still no reply. I call 1-800-NISSAN1 Nov 15th (Mon) and speak to a new lady at the same level as the first. They made a mistake and my file and phone number were never forwarded to the regional person (whatever that means) so she will forward file and I will receive call WITHIN 48HRS! Well, it is 7:30pm my time on Nov 17th (Wed) and still no call. Nine days and I can't get a call back???
I have owned Nissans since '93 (I'm only 33) and I currently own 2 Pathfinders and the Z. In all the years I have owned Nissan I have never called and asked for one thing. But I guess since I have a 2004 and not a 2003, I just have to sit back and plan on spending $$$ on tires every 6 months.
Thanks for letting me vent and add at least one perspective to this tire issue.
11-17-2004, 05:14 PM
#3206
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: .
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: 1-800-NISSAN1 has done NOTHING for me
Originally posted by WNC350ZR
I have owned Nissans since '93 (I'm only 33) and I currently own 2 Pathfinders and the Z. In all the years I have owned Nissan I have never called and asked for one thing. But I guess since I have a 2004 and not a 2003, I just have to sit back and plan on spending $$$ on tires every 6 months.
Thanks for letting me vent and add at least one perspective to this tire issue.
I have owned Nissans since '93 (I'm only 33) and I currently own 2 Pathfinders and the Z. In all the years I have owned Nissan I have never called and asked for one thing. But I guess since I have a 2004 and not a 2003, I just have to sit back and plan on spending $$$ on tires every 6 months.
Thanks for letting me vent and add at least one perspective to this tire issue.
11-21-2004, 10:23 AM
#3207
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Calgary Alberta Canada
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by GaryK
Regarding the solution to the problem:
These cars have a few issues related to the amount of caster in the front end. In my opinion, the problem will continue to exist until a way to adjust caster is implemented.
A few things to note...
1. The amount of caster most of these cars have is a lot compared to other passenger cars, even sports cars.
2. The allowed caster range specified by Nissan is very large considering the supposed/expected quality of the vehicle. Most cars in this class do not allow such a large spread from min to max.
3. The allowed cross caster specified by Nissan is very large, again, considering the supposed/expected quality of the vehicle. Cross caster is the difference in caster from the left to the right side. The typical passenger car allows only half as much cross caster.
You might be wondering why these points are significant. They suggest that caster adjustment, allowing enough movement to a less positive setting, would be the solution. Well, as I demonstrated at my hearings, excessive caster is one of the most likely causes of 'heal-toe' tire wear. I won't go into detail about this, but it is true as shown by several sources including alignment shops.
Sidenote: 'Heal-toe' wear is the type of wear I'm seeing on my car, and I believe is what others are actually seeing. It is not 'feathering' as Nissan calls it. More on this later.
So there is likely too much caster on the cars with the problem. This could be considered a design problem, as even with fixed alignment the problem wouldn't exist if they had designed less caster into the car. Also, it seems that maybe Nissan allows such large ranges to account for production tolerances. Why would they need to do this? There's NO CASTER ADJUSTMENT. By making sure most cars fall into their specified ranges, it prevents people like me from coming up with a bulletproof case by showing the fixed alignment to be out of range.
Nissan is pulling a lot of tricks here, making the real problem seem to not exist at all:
1. They call the problem 'feathering', which is a problem that is normally caused by incorrect toe settings. Its no coincidence that they call it 'feathering', as the toe adjustement is the only one available. If they called it by its true name, it would be obvious that they couldn't fix it with a simple alignment since the parameter that needs to be adjusted is not adjustable!
2. They "step up to the plate" (as the NNA rep kept repeating at the last hearing) by extending the warranty on the tires to 24 months from the original 12 months. Well guess what....in many states the Lemon Law statute of limitations runs out by that time. By taking this step, Nissan has pushed many trusting owners out of the Lemon Law period, and after that the owner has no recourse. Nissan says, "sorry, your tires are now out of warranty" even though the problem persists. And the owner is left to pay for this out of pocket now.
3. They start putting these 'new' RE040 tires on problem cars. To make a long story short, if you have these new tires on your car, then it will never show 'feathering' as it is to be checked by Nissan's latest TSB (April '04). This is because the measurement of the 'feathering' is to be done strictly on a certain portion of the tread blocks. What a coincidence...that portion is the portion that has now been modified to be solid rubber. It can't 'feather' there! It can still develop the abnormal wear patterns, but they avoid having to replace the tires because they don't show 'feathering' by their Nissan's definition. Nissan reps claim that Nissan didn't initiate the change to the tire design. I can't say for sure, but its quite a coincidence if Bridgestone decided to do it without any prodding by Nissan.
4. Nissan makes claims to many owners about the life expectancy of these tires. Numbers range from 5000 to 8000 miles as claimed by Nissan. Bridgestone says they sould last at least 15k. Why is it that this car should only get a half as much life, or less, out of the tires?
5. The alignment parameter ranges allowed by Nissan help to cover up the fact that a lot of these cars have really screwed up alignments. If your car happens to fall outside of the ranges specified by Nissan, then its easy to show an irrepairable fault with the car. But, since they allow such wide ranges, its easy for them to say "hey, there's nothing wrong with the caster or the alignment...its all within our specs".
Anyway, I just moved so I had all this on hold for a bit. I think I'm now inspired to further pursue this. I did manage to find a couple LL experienced attorneys that I think can win this case if its possible. By the way, for those that don't know this: In Virginia (not sure about other states), the Lemon Law statute of limitations is extended if you go through an informal dispute resolution process, such as the BBB program. You get 12 months after the manufacturer's last action in the dispute.
Regarding the solution to the problem:
These cars have a few issues related to the amount of caster in the front end. In my opinion, the problem will continue to exist until a way to adjust caster is implemented.
A few things to note...
1. The amount of caster most of these cars have is a lot compared to other passenger cars, even sports cars.
2. The allowed caster range specified by Nissan is very large considering the supposed/expected quality of the vehicle. Most cars in this class do not allow such a large spread from min to max.
3. The allowed cross caster specified by Nissan is very large, again, considering the supposed/expected quality of the vehicle. Cross caster is the difference in caster from the left to the right side. The typical passenger car allows only half as much cross caster.
You might be wondering why these points are significant. They suggest that caster adjustment, allowing enough movement to a less positive setting, would be the solution. Well, as I demonstrated at my hearings, excessive caster is one of the most likely causes of 'heal-toe' tire wear. I won't go into detail about this, but it is true as shown by several sources including alignment shops.
Sidenote: 'Heal-toe' wear is the type of wear I'm seeing on my car, and I believe is what others are actually seeing. It is not 'feathering' as Nissan calls it. More on this later.
So there is likely too much caster on the cars with the problem. This could be considered a design problem, as even with fixed alignment the problem wouldn't exist if they had designed less caster into the car. Also, it seems that maybe Nissan allows such large ranges to account for production tolerances. Why would they need to do this? There's NO CASTER ADJUSTMENT. By making sure most cars fall into their specified ranges, it prevents people like me from coming up with a bulletproof case by showing the fixed alignment to be out of range.
Nissan is pulling a lot of tricks here, making the real problem seem to not exist at all:
1. They call the problem 'feathering', which is a problem that is normally caused by incorrect toe settings. Its no coincidence that they call it 'feathering', as the toe adjustement is the only one available. If they called it by its true name, it would be obvious that they couldn't fix it with a simple alignment since the parameter that needs to be adjusted is not adjustable!
2. They "step up to the plate" (as the NNA rep kept repeating at the last hearing) by extending the warranty on the tires to 24 months from the original 12 months. Well guess what....in many states the Lemon Law statute of limitations runs out by that time. By taking this step, Nissan has pushed many trusting owners out of the Lemon Law period, and after that the owner has no recourse. Nissan says, "sorry, your tires are now out of warranty" even though the problem persists. And the owner is left to pay for this out of pocket now.
3. They start putting these 'new' RE040 tires on problem cars. To make a long story short, if you have these new tires on your car, then it will never show 'feathering' as it is to be checked by Nissan's latest TSB (April '04). This is because the measurement of the 'feathering' is to be done strictly on a certain portion of the tread blocks. What a coincidence...that portion is the portion that has now been modified to be solid rubber. It can't 'feather' there! It can still develop the abnormal wear patterns, but they avoid having to replace the tires because they don't show 'feathering' by their Nissan's definition. Nissan reps claim that Nissan didn't initiate the change to the tire design. I can't say for sure, but its quite a coincidence if Bridgestone decided to do it without any prodding by Nissan.
4. Nissan makes claims to many owners about the life expectancy of these tires. Numbers range from 5000 to 8000 miles as claimed by Nissan. Bridgestone says they sould last at least 15k. Why is it that this car should only get a half as much life, or less, out of the tires?
5. The alignment parameter ranges allowed by Nissan help to cover up the fact that a lot of these cars have really screwed up alignments. If your car happens to fall outside of the ranges specified by Nissan, then its easy to show an irrepairable fault with the car. But, since they allow such wide ranges, its easy for them to say "hey, there's nothing wrong with the caster or the alignment...its all within our specs".
Anyway, I just moved so I had all this on hold for a bit. I think I'm now inspired to further pursue this. I did manage to find a couple LL experienced attorneys that I think can win this case if its possible. By the way, for those that don't know this: In Virginia (not sure about other states), the Lemon Law statute of limitations is extended if you go through an informal dispute resolution process, such as the BBB program. You get 12 months after the manufacturer's last action in the dispute.
Gary K, would you mind sharing the context of your argument, I am about to go to arbritation and need all the help I can get (Anybody else, feel free to comment!). My position is that Nissan shipped all 2003's and some 2004 with a design flaw (Re-designed for Europeon Market???). If one reads all of the posts and different solutions that have been tried (I have), it seems quite evident that something is not right! The trick is to be able to prove this!
11-21-2004, 02:37 PM
#3208
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1-800 NISSAN worked well for me. Dealer denied claim on mine initially due to the fact that the tires were completely bald on the inside rather than feathered. Both of us called and his point to them was if I'd come in earlier that they wouldn't even be having the conversation. His point was that you shouldn't punish people because of a flaw and that they didn't bring it in soon enough to quality. The defect is the same, irregardless of the result. Nissan agreed and I go in tomorrow for my new tires.
11-21-2004, 04:21 PM
#3209
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: .
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by HokieZ
1-800 NISSAN worked well for me. Dealer denied claim on mine initially due to the fact that the tires were completely bald on the inside rather than feathered. Both of us called and his point to them was if I'd come in earlier that they wouldn't even be having the conversation. His point was that you shouldn't punish people because of a flaw and that they didn't bring it in soon enough to quality. The defect is the same, irregardless of the result. Nissan agreed and I go in tomorrow for my new tires.
1-800 NISSAN worked well for me. Dealer denied claim on mine initially due to the fact that the tires were completely bald on the inside rather than feathered. Both of us called and his point to them was if I'd come in earlier that they wouldn't even be having the conversation. His point was that you shouldn't punish people because of a flaw and that they didn't bring it in soon enough to quality. The defect is the same, irregardless of the result. Nissan agreed and I go in tomorrow for my new tires.
11-21-2004, 05:58 PM
#3210
Registered User
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Big Canoe, Georgia
Posts: 178
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: End of the line
Originally posted by Sooooie
I received my 2003Z Track on October 15, 2002, VIN # 1766. I am now on my third set of front tires in 24,000 miles due to the cupping, feathering, whatever $%!@ tire issue. Prior to having the third set put on, I wrote my required Lemon Law letter to NNA. They asked me to take it in to the dealership so NNA tech people could inspect and approved me for yet another set of tires, with the service manager swearing once again that this would absolutely fix it. Well, no suprise to any of you, it didn't. There is NO fix, believe me. After about 6,500 miles, the roar is getting worse and the cupping is now on both the inside and outside tread blocks. I am preparing to demand that NNA repurchase my car this time. Has anyone pressed NNA on the buy-back issue and won or lost? I am interested to hear the results people are getting. Since I am an attorney and a litigator, I am prepared to file suit against them if necessary and have one of my partners prosecute it for me. I am just interested in other experiences in pressing Lemon Law claims on this vehicle and how much NNA is agreeing to pay or being made to pay to buy them back.
Thanks.
I received my 2003Z Track on October 15, 2002, VIN # 1766. I am now on my third set of front tires in 24,000 miles due to the cupping, feathering, whatever $%!@ tire issue. Prior to having the third set put on, I wrote my required Lemon Law letter to NNA. They asked me to take it in to the dealership so NNA tech people could inspect and approved me for yet another set of tires, with the service manager swearing once again that this would absolutely fix it. Well, no suprise to any of you, it didn't. There is NO fix, believe me. After about 6,500 miles, the roar is getting worse and the cupping is now on both the inside and outside tread blocks. I am preparing to demand that NNA repurchase my car this time. Has anyone pressed NNA on the buy-back issue and won or lost? I am interested to hear the results people are getting. Since I am an attorney and a litigator, I am prepared to file suit against them if necessary and have one of my partners prosecute it for me. I am just interested in other experiences in pressing Lemon Law claims on this vehicle and how much NNA is agreeing to pay or being made to pay to buy them back.
Thanks.
Lew
11-21-2004, 07:32 PM
#3211
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: .
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Re: End of the line
Originally posted by lew f
I filed LL and won. it took nine months. the Service manager and Dealership were great to work with. Early on I would have settled for a new car (Maxima), Nissan never offered.
Lew
I filed LL and won. it took nine months. the Service manager and Dealership were great to work with. Early on I would have settled for a new car (Maxima), Nissan never offered.
Lew
11-23-2004, 01:02 AM
#3212
Registered User
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Big Canoe, Georgia
Posts: 178
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Re: Re: End of the line
Originally posted by mxpx_8
I have filed and my lawyer says we are in the 'disovery' phase now. I have yet to hear anyone lose a case.
I have filed and my lawyer says we are in the 'disovery' phase now. I have yet to hear anyone lose a case.
11-23-2004, 03:18 PM
#3214
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I noticed the alignment issue about 6 months (3K miles) after I bought the car (October 2002) and have been avoiding taking it to the dealer based upon what I have read in this I don't drive the car hard, so the performance issues were not that major to me. However, I now have about 17K miles on the car and the road growl is really excessive. When I received the notice from Nissan that they would replace the tires, I finallly broke down and took my car into the dealer. That was in early October...at that time, he said they would cover replacement of the tires and said he would let me know when they arrive. It have been over 6 weeks and they are still on back order.
Is anyone else experiencing this kind of delay?
Based upon recent information noted above, do you think Nissan is backing off of the tire replacement and moving to another option?
Is anyone else experiencing this kind of delay?
Based upon recent information noted above, do you think Nissan is backing off of the tire replacement and moving to another option?
11-23-2004, 07:29 PM
#3216
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Dallas Texas
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I have passed the 11K mark with my "new style" RE040's and have no problems whatsoever. Even treadwear across both fronts and no noise at all. With the first three sets and alignments I was lucky to get 3K before the roar started. If you haven't had the new RE040's installed I would highly recommend it.
11-24-2004, 11:13 AM
#3217
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Jacksonville, Florida
Posts: 414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have no fear....
It took my 7 months to LL my Z. If you have your papers together, plenty of printed back up and of course the (3) TSB's. I came with 85 pages of info and if you go back through the posts, I pretty much detailed my entire process. I bought the Z on 1/28/3 and the problems first surfaced in June of '03. By Nov. '03 I filed with the BBB and the rest is history.
Keep up the faith guys and stick it to Nissan. I got 90% of my money back and drove her for free for (2) months.
Keep up the faith guys and stick it to Nissan. I got 90% of my money back and drove her for free for (2) months.
11-24-2004, 09:45 PM
#3218
Registered User
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Watts - LAW firm is in this huge thread
Originally posted by SKYPLACE
IS THERE A CLASS-ACTION LAWSUIT OR RECALL BY NISSAN OUT THERE TO TAKE CARE OF THE FEATHERING PROBLEM?
IS THERE A CLASS-ACTION LAWSUIT OR RECALL BY NISSAN OUT THERE TO TAKE CARE OF THE FEATHERING PROBLEM?
It Goes
http://autoweek.com/cat_content.mv?...t_code=09711778
For you who do not know the name, Mikal C. Watts
is the attorney who litigated Ford/Firestone in the Explorer/Tire
problem.
His Bio
http://www.wattslawfirm.com/bio_watts.html
http://www.wattslawfirm.com
mcwatts@wattslawfirm.com
His Telephone Number is - 361-887-0500
Just mention Nissan 350Z - Class Action
By the way my 350Z - Had a freak Driver Side Caliper Lock up -
ABS Failure that caused my car to be Totaled.. I should call Mr. Watts up and recoupe the $11,500 I lossed as results of the Nissan Brake Failure.. See link below in sig.
Cheers Amy -
In relation to the Tire Feathering / Cupping problem:
May I get compensated for all the 23 350Z wheels/tires for testing, and research?
Cheers Amy
-
Last edited by AmyCroft; 11-24-2004 at 09:52 PM.
11-24-2004, 10:01 PM
#3219
Registered User
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Also This was Stated Watts Lawfirm
Date 7/28/2004 in this Post
Contains Text from Above post =
http://www.aliceechonews.com/ALICEE...&P=1016376&md=v
Type "Nissan" in search field.
See attached - a Class Action was filed in TX.
I wonder if those who have settled though the LL process can recoup the "off-set" out of this suit. Doubt it - but nice to know though.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Class action lawsuit filed against Nissan
Christoper Maher
Alice Echo-News Journal
Suit alleges defect
in front end of
car causes tire wear
A class action lawsuit was filed in the 79th District Court of Jim Wells County Friday against Nissan Motor Company, Ltd. and Nissan North America, Inc., in connection with an alleged defect in the 2003 and 2004 Nissan 350ZX sports cars.
The suit, filed by Mark Salinas “individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,” alleges that a defect in the front end of the vehicle causes the car’s tires to wear out too quickly.
The suit states, “The vehicles were designed and manufactured in such a manner that the front end and suspension of the vehicles are misaligned, causing premature, accelerated and irregular front tire wear. This condition has resulted in the vehicle’s tires having to be replaced at a highly accelerated rate.” The suit alleges that “thousands of Nissan 350ZX owners have complained of this problem; some owners have gone through three sets of tires within 12,000 to 14,000 miles.” An additional problem alleged is that when the tires wear down or “feather,” loud road noise, described as a “roar” can be heard.
According to the suit, Nissan has issued three separate bulletins addressing the problem, but none of them have worked. The first attempt to fix the problem involved switching the front tires, a process that involves removing the tires from their unidirectional rims. Dealers were then instructed to align the car to a new specification. “Unfortunately, this is only a temporary fix, one which will require the tires to be replaced again in a short period of time,” the suit says. “In fact, many customers have reported that within 3,000 miles of having the tires swapped and the cars aligned, the problems have reappeared to an even greater extent.”
Salinas believes these bulletins indicate, “Nissan has, in effect, admitted that there is a design defect in the Nissan 350ZX.”
Because of the alleged defect, the suit brings three causes of action against Nissan. The first, “breach of implied warranty of merchantability,” by selling vehicles that are “unfit for their ordinary purposes due to their defective front end alignment.” The second count, “breach of implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose,” contends that Nissan was responsible for not selling “a proper front end alignment,” and that the customers were relying on Nissan’s expertise in car manufacturing to select the proper equipment. The third count is brought under the “deceptive trade practices-consumer protection act,” and alleges that Nissan’s violations were “knowing and/or intentional.”
In the suit, Salinas seeks compensatory damages, “consisting of the cost of replacement of the 2003 to 2004 Nissan 350ZX vehicles and loss of use of the vehicles during the time of replacement.” The cost of the loss of the vehicle use is not to exceed $500. He also seeks interest on the judgement, attorney and court fees, additional damages not to exceed $74,500 per individual and “other and further relief this court deems just and proper under the circumstances.”
Calls to Mikal C. Watts, who is representing Salinas in the suit, and to Nissan Automotive were not immediately returned Tuesday. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Web site lists 163 complaints filed on the 2003 350-ZX. Over 120 of those relate to problems with tire wear and misaligned front end suspensions of the vehicle.
Cheers Amy -
Contains Text from Above post =
http://www.aliceechonews.com/ALICEE...&P=1016376&md=v
Type "Nissan" in search field.
See attached - a Class Action was filed in TX.
I wonder if those who have settled though the LL process can recoup the "off-set" out of this suit. Doubt it - but nice to know though.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Class action lawsuit filed against Nissan
Christoper Maher
Alice Echo-News Journal
Suit alleges defect
in front end of
car causes tire wear
A class action lawsuit was filed in the 79th District Court of Jim Wells County Friday against Nissan Motor Company, Ltd. and Nissan North America, Inc., in connection with an alleged defect in the 2003 and 2004 Nissan 350ZX sports cars.
The suit, filed by Mark Salinas “individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,” alleges that a defect in the front end of the vehicle causes the car’s tires to wear out too quickly.
The suit states, “The vehicles were designed and manufactured in such a manner that the front end and suspension of the vehicles are misaligned, causing premature, accelerated and irregular front tire wear. This condition has resulted in the vehicle’s tires having to be replaced at a highly accelerated rate.” The suit alleges that “thousands of Nissan 350ZX owners have complained of this problem; some owners have gone through three sets of tires within 12,000 to 14,000 miles.” An additional problem alleged is that when the tires wear down or “feather,” loud road noise, described as a “roar” can be heard.
According to the suit, Nissan has issued three separate bulletins addressing the problem, but none of them have worked. The first attempt to fix the problem involved switching the front tires, a process that involves removing the tires from their unidirectional rims. Dealers were then instructed to align the car to a new specification. “Unfortunately, this is only a temporary fix, one which will require the tires to be replaced again in a short period of time,” the suit says. “In fact, many customers have reported that within 3,000 miles of having the tires swapped and the cars aligned, the problems have reappeared to an even greater extent.”
Salinas believes these bulletins indicate, “Nissan has, in effect, admitted that there is a design defect in the Nissan 350ZX.”
Because of the alleged defect, the suit brings three causes of action against Nissan. The first, “breach of implied warranty of merchantability,” by selling vehicles that are “unfit for their ordinary purposes due to their defective front end alignment.” The second count, “breach of implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose,” contends that Nissan was responsible for not selling “a proper front end alignment,” and that the customers were relying on Nissan’s expertise in car manufacturing to select the proper equipment. The third count is brought under the “deceptive trade practices-consumer protection act,” and alleges that Nissan’s violations were “knowing and/or intentional.”
In the suit, Salinas seeks compensatory damages, “consisting of the cost of replacement of the 2003 to 2004 Nissan 350ZX vehicles and loss of use of the vehicles during the time of replacement.” The cost of the loss of the vehicle use is not to exceed $500. He also seeks interest on the judgement, attorney and court fees, additional damages not to exceed $74,500 per individual and “other and further relief this court deems just and proper under the circumstances.”
Calls to Mikal C. Watts, who is representing Salinas in the suit, and to Nissan Automotive were not immediately returned Tuesday. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Web site lists 163 complaints filed on the 2003 350-ZX. Over 120 of those relate to problems with tire wear and misaligned front end suspensions of the vehicle.
Cheers Amy
-
11-24-2004, 10:08 PM
#3220
Registered User
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Statement of Fact about Crash / ABS Failure
This is my sworn statement of fact:
This was posted in the Baddayatblackrock link
---- Today 11/24/05 ----
See Post for Day of Statement...
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by gq_626
I am really concerned about this locked up caliper issue. Is this a freak thing, or is there a real issue we should be concerned about.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well Sharif...
I know that it had happened... on Wld350Z car going to Buttonwillow May of 2003... Nissan finally replaced the Left Front Caliper on Tony's Z
(and Spilled Brake Fluid on the Left Front Fender.. ( Repaint ) then back the Car into a pole Right Rear Fender Repainted.. Then Curb rashed both front Rims - Replaced .. ) In one repair session.
But I digress.... The PUZ Z car never showed any brake abnormality.. Until the above test drive.. She went wide and was by Jeff 350NOW description.. in the right hand lane near curb..
He looked out the right window and she was near the curb.. as he brought his head up -- as she used the brakes - Caliper locked.. that took the car off to the left at a 45 degree angle passed an empty lane and across the center line. In the photo's
you can see one skid mark from front left tire....
Less than 30 MPH at impact.. It looks like the Blazer was rolling to a stop.
The Caliper was still locked when the Tow Truck removed the car from Tony's driveway... GQ it may have been a Valve in the ABS unit stuck in place... But no autopsy was done by Insurance Company.. I guess the could go out to the wrecking yard and inspect it.. I advised the Insurance of the mechanical failure...
You may want to add the StopTech Big Brake Kit and Steel Lines.. Motul 600 Fluid... To hedge your bets...
Now - "If" it was an ABS failure - then we all would be doomed... The Bosch ABS unit is used in a wide range of cars.... Replacement Cost $2300 U.S.D.
After the Caliper replacement on Tony's Car there was a time that the ABS unit ws making a Gutiar String sound at low speed.. That lasted about a week.. After the "Boing" went away the car has shown no problems in the brake system..
The described brake Caliper are on 350Z, Altima, Maxima, G35 and G35 Coupe, I35, FX35 and FX45, M45 and a few other Nissan cars..
We users have no way to examine the number of Complaints and Caliper Replacements.. Only Nissan would know....
My car has/had no VDC only TCS
GQ - Hope you get your car back soon.. We will see you during your next trip to So Calif..
Cheers Amy -
---------- End of statement ------------
Cheers Amy -
This was posted in the Baddayatblackrock link
---- Today 11/24/05 ----
See Post for Day of Statement...
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by gq_626
I am really concerned about this locked up caliper issue. Is this a freak thing, or is there a real issue we should be concerned about.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well Sharif...
I know that it had happened... on Wld350Z car going to Buttonwillow May of 2003... Nissan finally replaced the Left Front Caliper on Tony's Z
(and Spilled Brake Fluid on the Left Front Fender.. ( Repaint ) then back the Car into a pole Right Rear Fender Repainted.. Then Curb rashed both front Rims - Replaced .. ) In one repair session.
But I digress.... The PUZ Z car never showed any brake abnormality.. Until the above test drive.. She went wide and was by Jeff 350NOW description.. in the right hand lane near curb..
He looked out the right window and she was near the curb.. as he brought his head up -- as she used the brakes - Caliper locked.. that took the car off to the left at a 45 degree angle passed an empty lane and across the center line. In the photo's
you can see one skid mark from front left tire....
Less than 30 MPH at impact.. It looks like the Blazer was rolling to a stop.
The Caliper was still locked when the Tow Truck removed the car from Tony's driveway... GQ it may have been a Valve in the ABS unit stuck in place... But no autopsy was done by Insurance Company.. I guess the could go out to the wrecking yard and inspect it.. I advised the Insurance of the mechanical failure...
You may want to add the StopTech Big Brake Kit and Steel Lines.. Motul 600 Fluid... To hedge your bets...
Now - "If" it was an ABS failure - then we all would be doomed... The Bosch ABS unit is used in a wide range of cars.... Replacement Cost $2300 U.S.D.
After the Caliper replacement on Tony's Car there was a time that the ABS unit ws making a Gutiar String sound at low speed.. That lasted about a week.. After the "Boing" went away the car has shown no problems in the brake system..
The described brake Caliper are on 350Z, Altima, Maxima, G35 and G35 Coupe, I35, FX35 and FX45, M45 and a few other Nissan cars..
We users have no way to examine the number of Complaints and Caliper Replacements.. Only Nissan would know....
My car has/had no VDC only TCS
GQ - Hope you get your car back soon.. We will see you during your next trip to So Calif..
Cheers Amy -
---------- End of statement ------------
Cheers Amy
-