Bill

Is anyone familiar with the lemon law process?

We purchased a 2000 VW Beetle that has now worn out 4 sets of rear tires, a set every 10,000 miles. The fronts are original. The car has been to the dealership three times for repairs. The last attempt VW AG approved a complete replacement of the rear trailing arm assembly. 10,000 miles have passed and the brand new factory tires are again worn. This time the dealership checked the alignment and stated that it was within specifications. My comment was that the tires do not lie. The service manager stated that there is nothing more that they can do. Has anyone gone thru this process? Do I need to contact a lawyer?

Ag951

Depends on the state:
<a href="http://www.lemonlawamerica.com/" target="_blank">http://www.lemonlawamerica.com/</a>

944S2NUT

Sounds like it was lowered. get the rear back to stock hieght.

adrial

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">Originally posted by 944S2NUT:
<strong>Sounds like it was lowered. get the rear back to stock hieght.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">If the alignment is within spec, how does lowering effect it?

I think the dealer wouldn't have bothered in the first place if the car was lowered...

Bill, do you have the alignment specs?

Bill

Car is 100% stock, and has been 100% maintained by the dealership.

Factory Alignment Spec:

Camber:
Front -0* 30', Actual: Front L 3* 29' R 6* 50'
Rear -1* 27', Actual: Rear L 0* 11' R 0* 05'

Caster:
Front 7* 40', Actual: Front L -18*0' R 0*.05'

Toe:
Front 0* 00', Actual:Front 0* 00'
Rear 0* 10', Actual: Rear L 0* 11' R 0* 05'

Total toe:
Rear 0* 20', Actual: Rear 0* 16'

Thrust angle:
Rear 0* 00', Actual: Rear 0* 03'

According to the dealer test, as you can see, the front alignment is way out. And the rear is fine. But as I stated the front tires are original with 50k+ miles. The rears are new with 10k+ miles. The rear tires wear completely out on the inside half with a lot of tread on the outside half, like there is way too much camber.

My thought is the car is bent and is throwing everything out of wack. The service manager can not figure it out. And after replacing the entire rear end under warranty, is unwilling to do anything more.

adrial

How are the tires wearing in the rear?
Evenly or more on the inside?

EDIT:

oops I need to learn to read...

1.5 deg neg camber sounds like a whole lot...
the 951 factory alignment calls for around -0.5...and the 951 needs all the camber it can get...

I would bring the alignment to -0.5 neg camber in the rear...and see what that does...

Have you tried another dealer?

Steve Lavigne

Bill, ask your daughter if she knows what a handbrake turn is!



EDIT: Look, my avatar matches the graemlin!

Tom R.

i know in NY they get i think three chances to fix it, then they have to replace the car.

I know it is posted on the ny attorney general's web site. im not sure about californias.

i wrote a letter to the president of GM, and the president of the UAW about a motor they rebuilt under warranty that burned a quart of oil every 700 milles. I started the letter with something to the effect

"the union is forced to make concessions, the working man is suffering because the people in customer service are chasing away customers. it is ok to make a mistake, it is not ok to deny the mistake and shift the burden to the customer."

A buddy of mine played Uboat commander with a 300 ZX in 1984. After the motor was rebuilt under warranty and the dealer and nissan usa took the position your dealer is taking, he traded the car in. with another dealer of course. he said he wanted leather when he traded it for another 300zx. a few weeks after he traded the car in he got a call from someone saying they found his card in the car. he was 20 and didnt have business cards! he told them the car was 100%. he said nissan said the car was 100%. end of story!

how much would you loose on a trade in? the resale is still pretty high. dump the problem back on VW.

944smitty

Go here:
<a href="http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/brochures/fast_facts/ffvr26.htm" target="_blank">http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/brochures/fast_facts/ffvr26.htm</a>
Scroll down to Lemon Law, there's CA state info, contacts, and a pdf file to download for further info.

Re: alignment, I remember reading the specs were changed at some point. Think it was here:
<a href="http://forums.newbeetle.org/" target="_blank">http://forums.newbeetle.org/</a>

Good luck,
944smitty

944S2NUT

OOps its a 2000 bealte. I thought is was an old school one.

Danno

"The rear tires wear completely out on the inside half with a lot of tread on the outside half, like there is way too much camber."

Are both of the rear tires worn out on the inside identically? Both have the same wear patern? If so, I'd say you want to increase the toe and reduce camber a little?

" 10,000 miles have passed and the brand new factory tires are again worn. This time the dealership checked the alignment and stated that it was within specifications"

Check out the boyfriend's driving!!!

Tabor

tons of guys on audiworld have gone through this, it alawys sounded relatively painless.

Bill

Thanks for the comments guys.

The rear assembly HAS NO ALIGNMENT ADJUSTMENTS! Hard to believe. So when you say "change the camber to" it is not possible. That is why the entire assembly was replaced under warranty.

Danno, Yes both rear tires have the same inside wear pattern.

Bill

944Smitty,

Great link.

It describes the process "Lemon-Aid" completely. Looks like my next step is to call and request free arbitration.

Thanks mucho!

As usual, this board and its members rock!

944smitty

You're welcome, Bill.
Hope it works out for you.