Class action suit against Ford for Gt350 moves forward.

[Royal Tiger]

It’ll be interesting to follow to see if the courts grant relief to owners who can’t read. I’m actually with Ford on this one. It clearly states in the manual not to subject non track pack cars to extended track use.

[Envious_Ivy1LE]

Originally Posted by Royal Tiger

It’ll be interesting to follow to see if the courts grant relief to owners who can’t read. I’m actually with Ford on this one. It clearly states in the manual not to subject non track pack cars to extended track use.

I feel pretty confident the GT350 was marketed as being a track monster and the R was marketed at being even more dedicated for track use.

regardless of what the manual says I feel they owe at least some sort od compensation for those first couple of years for false advertising.

[Modernmusclecar]

Originally Posted by Chevelle vs Camaro

I get it but guys who track their SS’s or nicer might not start up at the track after running hard and heating up stRter. And that’s ALL Camaro’s not just one model...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My buddy with 18 1le is in a Camaro club with alot of guys that run autocross. He has done so for the last 3 years. Including some fast 5th gens. Those claims are very rare....these guys run all day at these events. They just dont gave major mechaical failures. They run hard and strong. Even the Gt350 owner who is also a buddy commented on it. It is what it is.

[Royal Tiger]

Originally Posted by Envious_Ivy1LE

I feel pretty confident the GT350 was marketed as being a track monster and the R was marketed at being even more dedicated for track use.

regardless of what the manual says I feel they owe at least some sort od compensation for those first couple of years for false advertising.

There are car ads where they fly. You filing a lawsuit on that too? Bottom line is read the manual. It doesn’t always stop the dumb lawsuits like the one that sued because she was asleep in the passenger seat fully reclined and the manual says not to, hell common sense says not to, but I’m sure Chrysler just paid to make that go away. We all pay because of these stupid lawsuits.

[Envious_Ivy1LE]

Originally Posted by Royal Tiger

There are car ads where they fly. You filing a lawsuit on that too? Bottom line is read the manual. It doesn’t always stop the dumb lawsuits like the one that sued because she was asleep in the passenger seat fully reclined and the manual says not to, hell common sense says not to, but I’m sure Chrysler just paid to make that go away. We all pay because of these stupid lawsuits.

if you can show me an ad of a car flying without a disclaimer that says not to expect this then yeah, I'd love to start a class action on it. saying to not buy something without reading a manual, that you frequently won't have access to until buying it, is dumb.

I'm not sure which "Chrysler asleep in the passenger seat" lawsuit you're talking about, but if it's real then the Chances are they lost the lawsuit specifically because the manual lacked a warning. that's why products have stupid warning labels like "not to be used in a bathtub" on a toaster.

"we" also wouldn't be paying for these lawsuits because companies should have an expense budget that includes miscellaneous expenses. am I saying we should all go out and sue every company over every little thing, no. of course not. Am I saying companies should be held responsible to their marketing promises, yes. if Ford outright said "you need the R for heavy track use" I'd say it was a non issue but that's not the case.

[Royal Tiger]

Originally Posted by Envious_Ivy1LE

if you can show me an ad of a car flying without a disclaimer that says not to expect this then yeah, I'd love to start a class action on it. saying to not buy something without reading a manual, that you frequently won't have access to until buying it, is dumb.

I'm not sure which "Chrysler asleep in the passenger seat" lawsuit you're talking about, but if it's real then the Chances are they lost the lawsuit specifically because the manual lacked a warning. that's why products have stupid warning labels like "not to be used in a bathtub" on a toaster.

"we" also wouldn't be paying for these lawsuits because companies should have an expense budget that includes miscellaneous expenses. am I saying we should all go out and sue every company over every little thing, no. of course not. Am I saying companies should be held responsible to their marketing promises, yes. if Ford outright said "you need the R for heavy track use" I'd say it was a non issue but that's not the case.

The Chrysler lawsuit HAD a warning in the manual. They still ended up paying. As for Ford I don’t recall ads where they said race this car it’s fine. As far as warnings you are able to ask questions at the dealership. To me it’s a ridiculous lawsuit. Anyone that buys a car and tracks it should be reading the manual and prepping the car which includes researching what equipment you should have to do so. Shame we have to protect ourselves from common sense. I wouldn’t track my SS off the showroom floor.

[Envious_Ivy1LE]

Originally Posted by Royal Tiger

The Chrysler lawsuit HAD a warning in the manual. They still ended up paying. As for Ford I don’t recall ads where they said race this car it’s fine. As far as warnings you are able to ask questions at the dealership. To me it’s a ridiculous lawsuit. Anyone that buys a car and tracks it should be reading the manual and prepping the car which includes researching what equipment you should have to do so. Shame we have to protect ourselves from common sense. I wouldn’t track my SS off the showroom floor.

we're not going to see eye to eye on the issue but please provide me a link of the Chrysler lawsuit because the only lawsuit I even recall being real is one involving cruise control and an RV.

any why not track your SS. it's covered under warranty. unlike any I4 or V6. 1LE package or not.

[Royal Tiger]

Originally Posted by Envious_Ivy1LE

we're not going to see eye to eye on the issue but please provide me a link of the Chrysler lawsuit because the only lawsuit I even recall being real is one involving cruise control and an RV.

any why not track your SS. it's covered under warranty. unlike any I4 or V6. 1LE package or not.

The Chrysler lawsuit was real. Off the top of my head I’d say around 1996 or so as my professor filed a brief. I was also personally involved in a suit against VW after a rear middle seat passenger became paralyzed because she had a lap belt, which was legal the year that Jetta was built. I hate overpaid corporate executives almost as much as I hate overpaid lawyers. Suing because a car I bought but didn’t research it’s asinine. I accept your opinion but frankly no one bought a GT350 that knew nothing about the car or the track pack. Not being familiar with Corvettes, does both the Z06 and ZR-1 have heavy duty coolers? If not should people be suing GM? It is what it is. Personally if I had a 1LE and tracked it I’d be putting higher quality parts on it as I’ve done with my SS. I have zero trust in GM or their engineers. These cars are made to a price point. Far better aftermarket parts are an easy fix. I have very few stock parts left in mine.

[Royal Tiger]

Envious I do have a follow up question for you.

Have you been following the uproar over the Gladiator off road issues? A female owner sunk it deep enough to get mud inside the alternator, yet are suing jeep saying they advertise it as being an off road vehicle. What are your thoughts on that one?

We can have different opinions and still have good conversations.

[Envious_Ivy1LE]

Originally Posted by Royal Tiger

Envious I do have a follow up question for you.

Have you been following the uproar over the Gladiator off road issues? A female owner sunk it deep enough to get mud inside the alternator, yet are suing jeep saying they advertise it as being an off road vehicle. What are your thoughts on that one?

We can have different opinions and still have good conversations.

I typically don’t follow much “news” these days because it’s all fear driven or political and I’d rather go on about my life without worrying about that stuff.

But by the sounds of it I’d say it’s probably owner negligence unless for some reason the alternator is located at the very bottom of the engine, which is unlikely. Judging by a wrangler I found on YouTube it’s at the very top of the engine bay

Should be pretty easy to prove how far the vehicle was submerged and I’m sure they have some sort of disclaimer about how high the vehicle can be submerged safely.