FTC complaint filed about Chrysler ATF+4 licensing

Status
Not open for further replies.
Thanks Sin City,

I hope the ILMA wins this one.

This may put a damper on these Dealer Specific fluids that can't be duplicated or cross referenced.

In my view, it's restraint of trade and goes against prior (historical) practices in the industry.
 
I really hope that DaimlerChrysler gets burned on this one.
mad.gif


[ November 19, 2003, 05:16 PM: Message edited by: Sin City ]
 
You guys ever consider that DiamlerChryslers position may in fact protect the consumer?

They have had hideous problems with the transmissions that spec this fluid. The spec as far as I know was issued to try and correct them. DC probably wants control in this arena to protect themselves and consumers in warranty claims.
 
I am a diehard mopar fan. Have three of them right now.

I do hope they get burned on this however. After the rear wheel drive cars went away in 1989, the front wheel drive tranmisssions have been junk.

Too much lightening and below standard parts. They dont need good fluid to protect them and the consumer, they need engineers that can build powertrains and understand the difference in service life between plastic parts and metal parts.

The weak link in the old 727 or 904 trannies was the input shaft bushing that was plastic. Put a metal one in when its rebuilt and the tranny will last forever in normal driving.

When the current batch of engineers can build them like 727 or 904s again, they wont have to worry about protecting the consumer or themselves from warranty claims.

BUILD IT RIGHT THE FIRST TIME AND IT WONT COME BACK TO BITE YOU.

Dan

[ November 22, 2003, 01:04 PM: Message edited by: Dan4510 ]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top