|
Yeah, I've got to say that, having owned my own business, I have to side with Ford here. If your rear end went south, etc I would be singing a different tune but the truth of the matter is you just can't expect a manufacturer to replace wear items on a car you are arguably subjecting to the n'th degree of it's intended use.
I love firearms, particularly the 1911, but if I regularly shoot hot loads through one I know and expect that the factory is going to expect me to assume more of the responsibility for wear and tear than they might otherwise....it's just common sense.
If these companies let the consumer decide what parts should always last to the expected service interval no matter how the vehicle is treated they would go broke I assure you. I largely blame this on the modern 'the customer is always right' philosophy that effectively insinuates everything should be 100% bullet-proof now matter how it's used and, if it isn't, the manufacturer should replace it.
Frankly that is a ridiculous argument and if things were designed in that manner you couldn't afford them. Manufacturers only bought into that philosophy because they believed the positive effect of the marketing would outweigh the expense created by returns and repairs, largely because they believed that most folks wouldn't abuse the component and that, even if they did, they would forget about the warranty, sell the part/item before they needed the warranty, etc, etc.
Now manufacturers are backing away from the 'guaranteed no matter what' ethos because it was bankrupting them.
|