Whats Wrong with your FR-S/BR-Z?

What I was wondering after I read this whole thread is if this was brought to the insurance companies attention and would they still provide insurance for it? I know if I was an underwriter at a minimum I would demand a letter from the manufacturer stating that the "defect" in no way comprises the structural integrity of the car in any way. I am betting that the car is un-insurable in its current condition. I also would suspect that if the insurance company is not notified by the owner about the defect and an accident occurs then the insurance company can potentially walk on the premise that the car was defective and the owner knew about it but did not report it.

Yikes I can see this getting really messy. The manufacturer needs to nip this in the bud and quick. Give the owner a replacement car and take the hit for his out of pocket expense (tax title and tags and what ever else it cost him) Hell toss in a 3 day 2 night all expense paid weekend getaway some place. They need to remove that car from the public eye as quickly as possible.

At a minimum it is a potential PR disaster waiting to happen and if anything happens to anyone in that car in an accident it is a HUGELY expensive legal case that would also be very bad PR.

It looks to me like it's more of a bend than a tear. Anyways, why did you not give the car a good once over before you drove it off the lot? Where you that filled with excitement? Shame on the factory for not catching it. Shame on the technicians who did a PDI on the vehicle for not catching it. And shame on you for not inspecting the car yourself before you drove it off the lot. You should be putting your time and energy into having Toyota/Subaru taking care of this issue regardless of how significant or insignificant it is to the structural integrity of the unibody. Maybe call up the local Billboard/TV commercial lawyer to help you out?

Latest word from the person with the problem: Even after all this he does not seem to have lost his love for the product. Says something no?

Today, 01:50 PM You could get a defect like this on any batch of any car. the car itself has been incredible so far. I have 3 or 4 friends with an frs/ brz and none of them have had any of the issues people are claiming either. Is there a chirp from the engine? yes, welcome to high compression/ direct injection. The idling issues reported are minimal, and the majority of owners are problem free.

I will know the options they have for me on Friday, but it is sounding like the replacement vehicle is more than likely what is going to happen.

Keith wrote:

Strizzo wrote: In reply to Nashco: if they buy it back under the lemon law, they have to advertise that rather conspicuously when they re-sell it. there was an xterra with LEMON tags all over it when i was looking at nissans a while back.

Or they give it to one of the race teams that is pestering them for a free BRZ It's not worth trying to resell, that's a big PR hit. One of our cars started off as a normal Miata that was damaged in transit, and Mazda's not allowed to sell repaired cars that are damaged beyond a certain point.

You and I sir, think alike...

Joshua wrote:

Keith wrote:

Strizzo wrote: In reply to Nashco: if they buy it back under the lemon law, they have to advertise that rather conspicuously when they re-sell it. there was an xterra with LEMON tags all over it when i was looking at nissans a while back.

Or they give it to one of the race teams that is pestering them for a free BRZ It's not worth trying to resell, that's a big PR hit. One of our cars started off as a normal Miata that was damaged in transit, and Mazda's not allowed to sell repaired cars that are damaged beyond a certain point.

You and I sir, think alike...

Note to self:

Create race team. Begin pestering Toyota for a free BRZ...

What wrong with my FR-S?

Well, I think it's down on power - doesn't feel like it has all million HP or billion lbft of torque...

And the stock tires are kind of sucky not being able to pull 10g's...

And the fuel mileage is no where near 100mpg...

It must be defective; I knew I should have 'gone Clarkson' and gotten a Genesis or Mustang...

Seriously though, the Scion FR-S/Subaru BRZ structure should be considered a Subaru not a Toyota from a quality perspective...it is a Subaru chassis that was built and designed by Subaru after all. Looking at that picture of the trunk, yeah that's seriously messed up...how could that be missed- the piece is completely folded back on itself and sticking out like a sore thumb?! Should have not made it out of the factory. Issues are rare though and I have had no issues with mine other than it briefly threw a P0019 code and idled a little rough after one session when I Open Tracked it, but after code was cleared it hasn't reappeared ~ 2,000 miles later. Even so, it's still the best car I've ever had from a performance point of view, and if you've seen the Australian impact testing videos it performs excellent in that regards as well. Very protective of her occupants; she'll give up her life to save yours...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDi0pE8IRNg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHFToA14prU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_Eh_Hda4sk

No way a 2nd gen Integra would do that...it would be more like car origami...

The car countersteers itself in side impacts.

I'm wondering how many people went and read the post on hachiroku.net

I'm with the people that agree that Toyota should take the car back and give the buyer a new one, plus some comp, if for no other reason than the fact that this car is a great opportunity to study a defects on their line and in their Quality process.

This FR-S owner wrote: I gave my new point of contact a call to go through a few of the details in the letter. She was EXTREMELY nice to me and easy to talk to. I did not make any demands or additional requests, but only called to ask questions and gain clarification on the letter that I received yesterday. Here are the questions that I asked regarding the situation as well as what Toyota's resolution would be for each: Should I choose to keep the car and accept your compensation, what is the status of the vehicle history report? Because the car would be fixed through a National Toyota Entity, the work would be recorded on the vehicle's National History Report. Should I choose the option of vehicle replacement with a potential 120 day wait, what would I drive in the mean time? The vehicle purchased would maintain in my possession until the replacement transaction occurred. Because the vehicle was financed through Toyota Financial, they would look at a collateral change (so I don't have to have an entirely new account set up) and I would treat the current FRS as my normal vehicle until the replacement came. I was also told that in the 23 years she has worked in her position at Toyota, this is the FIRST time that she has seen vehicle replacement offered. She had already looked at availability, and I would have to order the car (which I would rather do than to take whats on a lot for some reason). She did say that the 120 day wait is the extreme condition though and they want to set the expectation though it wont always be the case (I can wait 120 days, especially if I am driving their car in the meantime). Point 3 in the letter (posted below) states that "You are required to pay all costs for additional accessories or options that were not on the original vehicle," Does this mean that the Clear Bra is not replaced along with the vehicle? This is somewhat of a CYA blanket statement. With items adhered to the vehicle (Bra/ Tint), the rules are different. It will be replaced, though who will do the work remains to be answered. Her responses led me to believe that whoever the dealership sublets their clear bra work to would do the job (which is A OK with me).

Thought I'd post what appears to be resolution.........

The letter doesn't say that they'll fix the car if he keeps it, but the Q&A indicates that they will.

I would personally lean towards letting them fix it, but is $500 and a service contract really enough to cover the "loss" on having a branded title/vehicle repair/repaint? If I was planning on keeping the car until it was essentially worthless anyway, then I'd do that.

The $500 was WAY too low in my mind. Also, no recognition for the hoops and anxiety. Trust me, this guy has sen some mental anguish, and I don't see so much as an apology.

In reply to Javelin:

I'd take the new car. It's a straight up replacement, and the offer of that should illustrate how serious Toyota considers this to be. And good for them to offer the replacement- that's not an easy thing to do.

(OTOH, by doing it like this, and keeping out of NTSHA's in box means that they probably wont have to issue a recall)

I'd take the new replacement car....no way I'd want a "new car" with metal and paint work.

I would take the new car, and hope I got to drive the old one for 'free' for 120 days. And (purely subliminally,) I would worry a lot less about properly breaking it in.

DirtyBird222 wrote: It looks to me like it's more of a bend than a tear. Anyways, why did you not give the car a good once over before you drove it off the lot? Where you that filled with excitement? Shame on the factory for not catching it. Shame on the technicians who did a PDI on the vehicle for not catching it. And shame on you for not inspecting the car yourself before you drove it off the lot. You should be putting your time and energy into having Toyota/Subaru taking care of this issue regardless of how significant or insignificant it is to the structural integrity of the unibody. Maybe call up the local Billboard/TV commercial lawyer to help you out?

Yes, this is all the buyers fault for not thoroughly inspecting a new car as if it were a 100k mile 10 year old car.

NOHOME wrote: The $500 was WAY too low in my mind. Also, no recognition for the hoops and anxiety. Trust me, this guy has sen some mental anguish, and I don't see so much as an apology.

Mental anguish has no value in court. There was no injury as a result of this bent or torn metal.

Greg Voth wrote:

NOHOME wrote: The $500 was WAY too low in my mind. Also, no recognition for the hoops and anxiety. Trust me, this guy has sen some mental anguish, and I don't see so much as an apology.

Mental anguish has no value in court. There was no injury as a result of this bent or torn metal.

I think you might be mistaken about that...

I obviously misspoke. For the parents of a child that was killed or injured by a defective crib it is a different situation. I was referring to a claim like this one.

For a defective product case like this it would absolutely have no place. Where was the damage done? He found a problem, presented a claim and appears to have been attended to promptly and fairly. I cannot fathom where a case could be made for mental anguish or pain and suffering.