Date line 2-7-07 FNA headquarters

To all parts managers,

Re: Use of Non-Genuine Aftermarket Parts


Following an increasing number of vehicle failures and customer complaints concerning the fitting of non-genuine aftermarket components, I wish to bring your urgent attention to some of the possible consequences.

FNA has observed more and more dealers becoming involved with the fitting of non-genuine aftermarket exhausts, different specification non-genuine wheels, Engine ECU "chipping" (i.e. re-programming), seat modifications, steering wheel changes and suspension ride height adjustments to name a few. Each of these has the potential not only to void a customer's warranty, but could also result in the dealer being held liable for possible product related issues.

Examples of such potential problems include loss of airbag due to steering wheel replacement. Engine failure or malfunction, check engine light illumination, damaged catalytic converters, due to engine ECU reprogramming and or the fitting of non genuine aftermarket exhausts. Suspension failure caused by the fitting of different specification non-genuine wheels. Fender damage, uneven tire wear and handling issues caused by changing ride heights. These are just a few examples...the list goes on.

As we have communicated to you previously. these modifications are strictly against Ferrari policy for cars under warranty. I am astounded that a dealer would carry out any of these modificationson any car of any age as the potential loss certainly outweighs the short term gain. The vehicles warranty book clearly states " The limited warranty does not cover misuse, negligence, overloading, or any type of modifications."

The issue of exhaust systems is becoming more common since model year 05 cars have even more stringent emissions requirements and the threshold for setting errors is very low. We have cases showing (e.g. 4 Tubi systems in California last week alone) that with any exhaust modification, an error can be set in the engine management system and a check engine light will be visable on the instrument cluster. The long term effects include, but are not limited to, excessive engine heat, catalyst failure, incorrect air/fule mixture, and possible engine failure.

This practice must stop immediatly. Any dealer fitting any non-genuine parts or accessory on a Ferrari that is under warranty will be held responsible for all consequential repair costs for that car for the remainder of the warranty period and Ferrari will also hold dealer responsible for any other related liabilities, e.g., accidents, personal and property damage, etc.

Sincerly

Adam Rowley
V.P. Technical Services
FNA

John J. Maggio
Director, Parts & Accesories Operations
FNA





I only brought it up because there is often questions about mods and their effect on warranty and FNA's attitude about mods to the cars.

 

you can tell they are pissed when the letter isn't speaking to a group but to YOU personally has John has done here.

WOW, just WOW

 

That's really tough love

That ought to send a message

 

Nothing new.

Just the latest.


And in their world it is always the dealers fault.

 

A subsequent follow up letter was sent from Ferrari SPA:

"All dealers are to instruct customers that changing the preset stations on their radios WILL void their warranty. We at Ferrari are astounded at the poor judgement exhibited by dealers who allow, even encourage, this to happen. Ferrari can not and will not be responsible for alternate wavelenghts hitting the interior of the car as this may cause:

The dash to shrink.

The fuseblocks to melt.

The differential to vibrate nonharmoniously causing sudden failure.

The headers to loosen and crack.

Windshield to delaminate.

And last but not least, it may slow down your alternator, affecting current and flow to the fuel injectors, causing loss of compression/poor leakdown, and random belt failures.

Any dealer who disobeys these commandments from upon high shall be let out in the cold and beaten with a broken timing belt until he sh*ts Shell 10/50 in quarts.

Sincerely,

Ferrari

 

Well...at least Bo can either spell or use spell check. What is FNA's excuse? Their letter has similar fit and finish to their cars. What a joke. Ferrari does not need my money but guess what...newsflash... I don't intend to be giving them any until they build a decent car. I guess my next Ferrari will be a Porsche?

 

Oh well. I guess they just won't make their quota then.

 

^^ wink.

 

These are some of the exact reasons why we put the aftermarket parts on to get rid of engine heat due to the excessive mass of the OEM equipment, etc.

What type parodi's are they smoking at FNA?

Obviously they feel they are not getting their $ cut of the aftermarket business so they try to scare everyone away from it.

We sure know the weight and size difference of the OEM muffler as opposed to one such as the Remus. And they talk about strain on OEM mounts!

 

You guys are too funny, your next car will be a Porsche? Mine will be a C6 Z06!

 

I really like the one about fender damage. They know a bone stock 360 with stock tires will damage the fenders.

THEY ARE JUST LOOKING FOR WAYS OUT OF THEIR RESPONSIBILITY.

 

Exactly! How many bone stock 360's develop the little kink at the top of the front fender arches??? Um, all of them.

 

And if the cars are not supposed to be lowered how come they have adjustable ride height?

 

Same reason brassieres have adjustable straps..........so you can raise it when it sags

 

Those straps go both ways.

 

A ferrari is such a cool car but everything around it just sucks!

 

Ya ever run across a gal that wanted to lower her boobs?

 

As a matter of fact I am test driving an S Cabrio Sunday. Thanks for reminding me. I better call Porsche NA Monday to make sure I can enhance the wheels!

No truer words were ever spoken.

So I suppose they think that the precedence of their silence as to prior year's improvements won't be effective as to them? Good luck.

Actually I did. They had gone to her "head"!!!

 

This whole thread is very funny. Thank you.

I just remind myself that the engine is Ferrari and as such, it is a pretty cool piece of hardware. For my money, the rest of the car is a Fiat.

 

This is the best laugh I've had in days, thanks to FNA. How can they put something like that out and expect to be taken seriously? Did they even run this through their own legal department?

"Examples of such potential problems include ... Engine failure or malfunction, check engine light illumination, damaged catalytic converters..."

"Each of these has the potential not only to void a customer's warranty, but could also result in the dealer being held liable for possible product related issues."

Are they talking about defective, factory-installed valve guides here? Bad headers? Faulty radiators? Is Ferrari admitting that the occurence of these types of defects results in liability!?! Woohoo!!! Maybe I can have a lawyer refer to this letter in getting Ferrari to reimburse my valve-guide job (at $15k) on my 2000 456 (still under Federal emission warranty, BTW).

I mean, if Ferrari warns dealers they're liable that fitting inferior parts can cause these types of problems, I think it's a slam-dunk that factory-installed defective parts causing the same thing is equally culpable. Geez, Ferrari is basically admitting liabilty here.

I'm serious, I think this opens a whole new option for a number of the expensive, factory-defects that plague various late model Ferraris.

 

What about Magnusson-Moss?

 

I can't recall the effect of this.

I have to look it up!

 

It does not give you the right to modify a car. We are not talking about replacing a 255-50/16 Michelin with a 255-50/16 Bridgestone. We are talking about replacing a 255-50/16 with a 295-35/18. Big difference.


The car builder can require you to stick to a specification. Like the muffler. The OE is a particular design. They cannot require you to use their muffler but they can require you to use one exactly like it. Midas does not make one and the Tubi/Capristo et al is most decidedly not built to the same spec as the Ferrari muffler. So it is the Ferrari muffler or nothing. In the case of exhaust manifolds. Using the 355 as an example the OE parts are junk. Tubi makes a clone of it but with better materials. Ferrari would have a very difficult time making a case that Tubi manifolds should invalidate warranty.

I do not agree with everything the letter says but some of it is very valid. I really only posted it so others could get a feel for Ferrari's attitude about modifications but maybe even more to illustrate Ferrari's interactions with their dealers. When someone here says Ferrari does this or they do that for the benefit of their dealers they are very out of touch. Ferrari's attitude towards their dealers is the same as their attitude towards the buyers of the cars "Screw them, theres more where they came from." Behind closed doors it is a very different company than most know.


Ferrari is about control. It is like a disfunctional marriage where the husband screams at the wife for putting the milk carton back in the refrigerator facing the wrong way.

 

Brian's correct, the Magnusson-Moss Warranty Act doesn't apply here. It's when Ferrari tries to require to use some Shell Helix from Pluto instead of any oil you want, etc.

As many of you know, modifications on these cars shouldn't be taken lightly. Rarely can you just "bolt on" something and have it work correctly. For example, using one of my own cars, I was the first person (according to Tubi) to put a TubiSytle exhaust on a 288 GTO years ago. The GTO is a simple system compared to the ones of today. I was told it would be a bolt-on system, no changes required. Right. To make a long story short, I ended up having to make a new wastegate to account for the different backpressure in the system. Once I did, the car ran like raped ape and has for years. With F40s, done properly, you have to mess around with the pulse modulation as well.

Not that I have any particular reason to defend Ferrari (as some of you know, I was an expert witness for the State of California against Ferrari years ago), but some of the items they mention are a legal problem for them. If someone starts messing around with any part of the car that is deemed emissions related, which is just about anything engine to exhaust, they can get in hot water with California and the Feds. If you do it on your own, and don't take the car to Ferrari for repairs, they're safe and you're not. But, if you modify the car, say the ECU, and you still bring it to them, they have a problem. They can refuse to work on the car. They can charge you to put to back to stock. They can report you (I don't think this has ever happened). But, if they work on the car, don't do anything about the modified parts, and then California (I use them because of my knowledge of the system here) gets a hair up their butt to do something about it, someone is going to pay the piper.

That all said, I modified my 512TR years ago with a Tubi exhaust, remapped ECU, main cats gone (a 512TR will pass a CA smog test (not visual of course) with just the pre-cats) and never had a problem for 75K miles (when I sold it). Also, Ferrari, in a fix to a cold running problem, disconnected pin 39 (I believe it was). What this did was put the 512TR into the European software map that solved the cold running problem. (Brian probably knows the correct pin number.) I do remember them telling me not to tell anyone about this fix. Just like they eventually put in old TR head gaskets to replace the new 512TR ones after the third time they failed under warranty. What's the big deal you say? The old TR ones had asbestos in the gaskets and were a no-no to use at that time. So, Ferrari doesn't mind bending the rules either when it suites them.

Steve

 

I find it interesting that FNA would take this position. They are opening themselves up to litigation. Here is a link to info on Magnusson-Moss. For those who don't want to read all 5 pages, it basically states that the dealer must prove that the non-OEM parts caused the failure in question before coverage can be denied. Blanket denial of coverage for ANY aftermarket part is asking for trouble. Guess FNA is above the law?

http://www.free-lemon-law-guide.com/the-magnusson-moss-act.php