By on July 10, 2015

A recalled Chevy Cobalt ignition switch is seen at Raymond Chevrolet in Antioch

 

Two proposals for reforms to how the U.S. handles safety recalls and penalizes automakers are winding through a Senate committee.

A proposal backed by three Senate Democrats would make automakers include a recall warning light in the dashboard of new cars to notify owners of a safety recall and lift the cap on delayed recall fines and more. A less-aggressive proposal put forward by Republicans would require dealers to notify owners if their cars have been recalled, something most automakers already do but aren’t required by law.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimates that 25 percent of recalls are never completed.

The Democrat-backed bill may not have life beyond headlines, however. Included in the bill were sweeping proposals to empower NHTSA to expedite recalls, charge and prosecute auto executives for fatal safety flaws and grant NHTSA special investigative powers, according to the Detroit News.

The larger proposal would also require new- and used-car dealers to apply all recalls to vehicles before they’re sold. Currently, dealers are only required to perform recall fixes on cars that haven’t been sold yet.

Some of the measures may have legs beyond the bill’s demise, however. The Democrat proposal includes making mandatory crash avoidance systems and allow NHTSA to investigate people who hack vehicle electronics that could “endanger public safety.”

The Democrat proposal also lifts the 10-year cap on automakers’ responsibilities to pay for or fix defects in their cars. The Republican proposal doesn’t lift that cap.

The recall reforms are partly due to extremely public, and extremely embarrassing, recall issues with General Motors and airbag maker Takata.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

78 Comments on “Senate Bill Proposes Recall Warning Light on Your Dash...”


  • avatar
    manbridge

    And people wonder why classic car values are going through the roof.

    When I retire I’ll start a business removing all the nannyisms and make out like a bandit. First up, a giant centrifuge to remove ethanol from gasoline.

    These people can suck it.

  • avatar
    GermanReliabilityMyth

    Stupid policy makers are stupid. How can we expect people who rely on shuttles, chauffeurs and public transportation to come up with rational, realistic solutions for recalls?

  • avatar
    Volt 230

    The ultimate idiot light!

  • avatar
    Ion

    The democrat idea is so outlandish. How would it work? Wifi? Satellite? Of coarse when the bill fails they’ll run their usual smear campaign about the republicans and George bush are putting your safety at risk.

    • 0 avatar
      WhiskeyRiver

      There’s some alternative motive in play here. I wonder who in congress is involved in a company that would supply the technology?

      Somebody’s going to get rich on this.

      • 0 avatar

        It is all a ploy to sell more electrical tape. All those cars in your area that can’t shut off the check engine light ? They don’t go away, the dealer you just traded it to will auction it (despite the discount you took for the CE lite) and it will go to some state where no one will ever care.

    • 0 avatar
      WheelMcCoy

      >> How would it work? Wifi? Satellite?

      Policy makers will just make up policy (some good, some terrible), leaving it to the engineers to make it work.

      WIFI or cellular are reasonable solutions. I would prefer “pull” rather than “push” notifications. That is, I’d rather initiate the check with a push of a button instead of having the car scan the airwaves periodically to notify me.

    • 0 avatar

      This sounds unreliable. I bet there would end up being a recall on the recall light. And then how would they let people know about it?

    • 0 avatar
      Lack Thereof

      A lot of cars already have always-on internet connections via cell phone or satellite for Onstar/MBRace/internet radio etc. GM has an LTE wifi hotspot standard in almost their entire line (subscription required).

      This is a case of “well, if they’re going to be putting cars on the internet ANYWAY…”

  • avatar
    zbnutcase

    90% of recalls are not really needed. Worst case it might just help cleanse the gene pool by a bit. And a wee bit at that.

  • avatar
    Joss

    Probably a Detroit insider thing to lobby congress with. End result being a legal blame swing onto the private owner.

  • avatar
    Steve Biro

    I’m sure the idea involves all vehicles having some kind of OnStar or OnStar-alike system in order to activate the recall light. But what if don’t I don’t want any such system? Oh, that’s right – everybody wants that! And the truth is, most people do want that. So the rest of us will get it as well. Personally, if I couldn’t find a car without such telematics, I’d disconnect the anntena for it. And mandatory crash avoidance systems? God help us all. I was at my Subaru dealer recently and they were genuinely confused when I told them I refused to purchase any of their vehicles with EyeSight. And imagine the liability risk if you did disconnect any of this crap. It’s a losing battle. Which is why I’m not even sure if I’m an auto enthusiast anymore. Not too much to be enthused about.

    • 0 avatar
      matador

      I still look at myself as a car enthusiast, though I’m not interested in anything new at all. For the $30,000 that a nice, new car costs, I’d rather have my old Buick or Audi rebuilt. If this type of thing does happen, I’ll go with that strategy. We don’t have rust problems out here, so just keep buying parts, and anything will last forever.

  • avatar
    bullnuke

    The Ministry of Information will maintain central data for the government regarding recalls for the vehicles of citizens. Information Retrieval will keep the Ministry of Information database updated on citizens who own vehicles out of compliance. Central Services will be charged with maintenance and repair of the warning lights but must have the proper paperwork submitted by a citizen to perform any repairs to these lights. Form 27B/6 must be presented by Central Services before any work my be done. Rogue freelance former Central Services engineer Archibald Tuttle is not to be allowed access to perform maintenance/repair of these lights.

    • 0 avatar
      wmba

      Having read the hoops Honda have gone through to get people in to put in new airbags, something needs to be done. Having had some people on the phone twice, and they still refuse to make an appointment.

      I have to share the road with all these lazy oafs who just cannot be bothered to get up on their two hind legs and get the recall done. Airbag is one thing, what about other recalls that affect the safety of others?

      In a society where privacy is about zero, where Google needs access to my contacts list to allow me the privilege of downloading Google Earth, people driving around on purpose in public with defective cars is not acceptable.

      So, I’m in favor of getting after them to fix their darn vehicles.

      • 0 avatar
        hreardon

        wmba –

        I get your point, but how is this any different today than it was, say, 20, 50, 80 years ago? Defective parts make it into the production line, recalls are issued…not everyone performs them. Risk is an implication of being alive and interacting with other human beings. I’d posit that you’re just as likely to be killed by the person who has a sudden heart attack at the wheel of the car and loses control, the knucklehead 17 year old driver who turns without looking first, or the proverbial drunk driver.

        So, let’s say the gov’mint requires these dashboard lights: will said blinky light make people any more prone to having the recall performed? Just look at how many people drive around with their ‘check engine’ light on in full effect, never doing anything about it?

        Of course, the next step after the blinky light, in order to enforce compliance, is to either disable the car until said repair is performed, or to enforce annual inspections by the state.

        • 0 avatar
          Steve Biro

          The states, perhaps with rare exceptions, don’t want to do annual inspections anymore. Too much money. In New Jersey, the inspections occur every four years and are essentially for emissions compliance only, so federal funds aren’t lost.

          How about this? Pass a law that requires two things: 1) That any dealer or retailer ensure any outstanding recalls are taken care off before reselling a vehicle. 2) Any vehicle owner who fails to have the recall service completed within – What? Six months? One year? – is barred from any right to sue should he or she be injured or otherwise rendered not whole as a result of the recall issue.

          Hit people where they live – the wallet or pocketbook – and you’ll get compliance.

        • 0 avatar
          JNPeila

          Yeah agree here. Just another nanny-bit put in new cars to make some legislator feel important. On their next campaign ad they’ll be able to quote some study about all they lives they saved from lazy and greedy auto executives who feed on the flesh of faulty-car victims

    • 0 avatar
      manbridge

      My complication had little complication……

  • avatar
    APaGttH

    Can we put recall lights on senators.

    • 0 avatar

      I love you

    • 0 avatar
      OneAlpha

      I have a better idea.

      Let’s treat aspiring lawmakers and candidates for public office the way we treat prospective gun buyers. Allow me to elaborate.

      Let’s take lawmaking power away from Congress, regulatory agencies and the various state legislatures, then we go around confiscating every law we can and dispose of them.

      Only those laws which have a “legitimate” purpose should be allowed to exist, such as the Bill of Rights.

      Run comprehensive background checks on potential lawmakers, and subject them to strict licensing requirements (with grave penalties for violations) to ensure they aren’t given to totalitarian urges and fantasies about using Deadly Assault Laws to go on legislative rampages and murder dozens of innocent freedoms without reloading.

      Ban high-capacity subsections so that lawmakers can only prohibit one thing at a time.

  • avatar
    PentastarPride

    And this is a great example why cars have gone up in cost. All of these safety and environmental features are forced, not optional. And guess what? It will cost money. Say it isn’t so.

    Backup cameras are now a requirement. That adds probably around $300-1000 to the final cost of the vehicle. And, of course not, they have no decency to allow that forced cost as a tax deduction. And the fact of the matter is: how many years have people been driving without backup cameras?

    There’s a little something called the free market. Let the manufacturers decide what to sell and let the people vote with their wallets. Government gets to sit out on the whole process and only becomes involved if there’s a breach of contract or fraud. That’s how the free market works, but the liberal* nannies are too afraid of it.

    *Some of us who are conservative who label someone “liberal” really mean “quasi-liberals”. While “liberal” may be their title, their actions are the complete opposite: they find ways to restrict freedoms and increase government involvement and scope as much as possible. Most of those titled as liberals are tyrants. Ironically, many conservatives are more liberal if you really think about it (notwithstanding the RINOs, crony capitalists and those who want to impose their own morals and religion on others).

    • 0 avatar
      hreardon

      One of the selling points of the Honda CRV for my wife was the fact that it had a backup camera standard. She skipped over several other models at the time because they either didn’t have one as an option or it was bundled with a much more expensive package.

      The backup camera mandate is one that I always scratched my head on. I understand the tragedy that has befallen people, but I believe the annual death rate from backups is in the hundreds. If someone from the B&B has time to find the stats, please post them.

      Personally, I find blind spot monitoring systems to be FAR more effective driving tools to help keep me (and others) safe. I recently had a rental that included this system and I was sold on the value within minutes. I will definitely look into this feature for my next car – but I’m not looking for anyone to mandate it.

      • 0 avatar
        Pch101

        As far as I can tell, the backup camera legislation was the byproduct of the proverbial squeaky wheel. A pediatrician in New York ran over his kid, and it would seem that he had some pull with his local legislators who turned his idea into law.

        I suppose that it must be tough to look at oneself in the mirror and take full responsibility for killing ones own child. This way, he can shift the moral responsibility to the automaker and not feel quite as badly about himself.

        • 0 avatar
          OneAlpha

          I was just about to say that myself – I agree with you for once.

          Terrible that his son died, but it WAS entirely his fault.

          He should’ve been paying more attention and taken his responsibilities as a motor vehicle operator more seriously. That kid would be alive today if he had been.

          • 0 avatar
            WheelMcCoy

            I also don’t see a mandate as necessary; a rear camera is a popular option for many.

            I believe the pediatrician was on his way out and did a quick head count of the kids inside the house, and got the expected number. He didn’t realize a friend was over and hence, didn’t expect his child to be playing in the driveway.

            It’s terribly sad, and I can see him trying to make something good happen from a tragedy.

            Good people have mental lapses. Responsible humans can be distracted and make mistakes.

      • 0 avatar
        tubacity

        CRV is one of the models with terrible rear visibility. Backup rear camera is a great help. NHTSA in 2008 estimated 292 total annual backover fatalities. With such terrible rear visibility, and not very high cost, I believe mandate for standard rear backup camera is good. Yes, one could always walk to the back of the car to observe for kids hiding there. I routinely do. Kids and obstacles can move again behind the car in the time it takes to get in the car and start backing up.

      • 0 avatar

        I was in traffic a few weeks ago and realized that the Mercedes SUV in the lane next to me had a blind-spot warning system – a light would come on on the passenger side mirror when someone was next to them.

        So naturally, being the mature individual that I am, I kept pulling next to them so I could see the little light come on. Technology!

    • 0 avatar
      Pch101

      “Backup cameras are now a requirement. That adds probably around $300-1000 to the final cost of the vehicle.”

      Not even close. You’ve overshot by several multiples.

    • 0 avatar
      WheelMcCoy

      >> Backup cameras are now a requirement. That adds probably around $300-1000 to the final cost of the vehicle.

      That sounded too high so I did a search:

      http://www.autonews.com/article/20140405/OEM10/140409884/backup-camera-mandate-boosts-suppliers

      “NHTSA estimates that rearview cameras will cost $43 to $45 apiece by 2018, excluding the center-stack viewing screens.

      The cost of rear cameras has declined rapidly since the 1990s, when automakers began using them. Those first cameras cost $130 to $150 apiece, also excluding the screens.”

      • 0 avatar
        Pch101

        Personally, I think that the backup camera requirement is a dumb one, because it isn’t going to work. (Active safety doesn’t work because drivers will simply ignore the cameras.)

        But in real world terms, the requirement will cost next to nothing. With NAV screens now the norm in modern cars and digital camera components getting cheaper by the day, attaching a camera to an existing system won’t really cost anything at all.

    • 0 avatar
      OneAlpha

      I don’t need a backup camera.

      I walk all the way around my vehicle before I get into it, EVERY TIME, and I use these things I was born with called EYES to look around as I back up.

    • 0 avatar

      Rather than requiring backup cameras, I wish they’d require windows that enable a person to get a decent view in all directions. It IS true that it’s hard to see out the back of a lot of cars in ways that it didn’t used to be. And it’s very annoying. I took the headrests out of my Civic so that I could have better visibility.

  • avatar
    DeadWeight

    I believe this gen of new vehicles, when adjudged after being in service for 3 to 5 years, will be less reliable/durable than the 2002-2008 models that preceded them, with equivalent mileage.

    What has occurred is that due to overzealous CAFE standards, other governmental regs, and the automakers own inclinations, vehicles have now been overburdened with overly complex components, many of which are electronic, regulating or assisting primary functions, and all to try and eke out marginal economy or other gains/benefits, but at the price of far more complexity (that will inevitably result in more components problems and higher cost of diagnosis and repair).

    From EPS, to DSG and CVT transmissions, to small displacement turbocharged motors (with inadequate cooling), to lane departure and radar assisted safety systems (braking and otherwise), the newest gen of vehicles will be more problematic and less durable than the aforementioned 2002-2008 generation (and maybe even the 1995 to 2001 generation).

    • 0 avatar
      Volt 230

      10+

    • 0 avatar
      kvndoom

      You got that right DW! The next generation of folk will WISH they only had to deal with our version of “electrical gremlins!”

    • 0 avatar
      mike978

      DW, I see where you are coming from. But it us lazy engineering to go for the turbo or CVT. Mazda does you can get class leading EPA and real world fuel economy in compact cars, CUVs and mud size cars without going down that route.

    • 0 avatar
      Steve Biro

      I think we’re already seeing clear evidence that the current generation of vehicles is less reliable that the one that preceeded it. It’s a lot like the 1970s and early 80s when the automakers were attemping to use mechanical solutions for virtually all emissions and safety issues. The advent of reliable and relatively inexpensive electronics changed that – although we had to endure a teething period for electronics as well. It’s likely we’ll get past this as the latest technology matures. But it still doesn’t make me like a lot of what is trying to be accomplished.

    • 0 avatar
      OneAlpha

      And you know what? If the car’s going to be designed and manufactured to be essentially disposable, fine.

      Just let the price reflect that.

    • 0 avatar
      ihatetrees

      +1. I’m particularly annoyed that the Cruze, a very good car, is losing its NA engine…

    • 0 avatar
      Margarets Dad

      Cars are many multiples more complicated than they were in the 1960s, and yet they’ve been getting more and more reliable year after year after year. So this argument that adding more parts only makes a car more prone to failure simply doesn’t wash.

      • 0 avatar
        DeadWeight

        Read it again:

        “From EPS, to DSG and CVT transmissions, to small displacement turbocharged motors (with inadequate cooling), to lane departure and radar assisted safety systems (braking and otherwise), the newest gen of vehicles will be more problematic and less durable than the aforementioned 2002-2008 generation (and maybe even the 1995 to 2001 generation).”

        Problems with DSG & CVT transmissions, small displacement motors with FI, direct injection carbon fouling, electronic steering systems, assorted electronic gadgets, etc., in the latest generation of vehicles are already becoming very common and troublesome on new gen vehicles vs last gen ones they replaced.

  • avatar
    7402

    The net effect of this will be to keep car owners captive to the dealership for maintenance and repairs. If you have to take the car there every time the light comes on, since recalls must be performed and documented by a dealer, the ever-so-helpful service writer will suggest a plethora of other things you really ought to consider having done right now since you’re there already.

    It’s the independent mechanics who will suffer the most over the long run.

    • 0 avatar
      WhiskeyRiver

      7402: “The net effect of this will be to keep car owners captive to the dealership for maintenance and repairs.”

      1st clue as to who might get rich from this. Good job.

  • avatar
    VoGo

    I’m surprised by the negative reaction. If your mother’s car was found to have a problem with it that endangered her safety, why would a light on the dashboard that warned her to get it fixed for free be so troublesome to you? Does this really endanger a meaningful freedom you currently enjoy?

    • 0 avatar
      hreardon

      No, VoGo, the issue is: how much is enough? Let’s say they put the light on the dash: will a meaningfully large percentage of owners do anything about it? If the postal note, certified letter, email and phone call to you won’t do it, why would this have any more effect?

      • 0 avatar
        VoGo

        People move often, and don’t keep automakers up-to-date on their latest home address. Also, they sell their cars, and the automakers have no idea who the current owner may be. But an idiot light on the dash is foolproof.

        It’s also good for the automakers, because they can’t be accused of not informing the current owner of a recall. It just seems like common sense to me – certainly not something I would get worked up against.

        • 0 avatar
          Steve Biro

          The “people move often” argument doesn’t wash. A computer check of the VIN number should quickly reveal where the vehicle is registered.

          • 0 avatar
            VoGo

            It should, if the state maintains data well and shares it appropriately, if the manufacturer goes to the length of checking with every state for every recalled vehicle, and if the owner re-registers their car every time they move at the exact time they move.

            A lot of ifs here. I’m still not getting the hatred for the $2 idiot light.

        • 0 avatar
          JMII

          Every time there has been a serious recall, one affect safety (IE: this car bursts into flames) its on the news. I fail to see how someone can’t know about a major recall on their vehicle.

          The easy fix is you can NOT sell a car without getting some kind of certificate that says all recall work has been performed. This way the original owner can ignore things all they want, but the second owner will be buying a death trap.

          • 0 avatar
            VoGo

            I never watch the evening news, and I certainly don’t keep track of the recalls on every vehicle I might rent or wind up inside.

            Your easy fix only works for cars owned by well-informed, rational people looking to preserve resale value. That excludes the population most in need of this legislation.

        • 0 avatar

          I mean, it’s not like vehicles have to be registered with the government or anything where they would be able to know who owns it and where they are. Oh, wait, nevermind.

          • 0 avatar
            BuzzDog

            Bingo, and my hat’s off to you. You managed to express the gist of my earlier comment (see below) succinctly…a skill I’d love to have.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            Vehicle registration is a state matter. I wouldn’t presume that the federal government has the authority to dictate their policies with respect to confidentiality. Some states make ownership information readily available to third parties, while others don’t.

    • 0 avatar
      Drzhivago138

      It’s a proposal. What are the chances of it getting through the GOP-controlled Senate or House?

      • 0 avatar
        WhiskeyRiver

        You’d think it should be near zero chance.

        “We’ve got to pass the bill so that we can find out what’s in it” version 2.0 just might pass it though. It depends on exactly who in Congress is going to benefit from it (read “get rich from it.”)

    • 0 avatar
      Pch101

      Some of the comments are irrational and paranoid (which is to be expected — this is TTAC, after all), but I do share the concerns about obtrusiveness. The logical next step is to fine car owners for not attending to their recalls, which seems like overreach and a poor use of limited resources. (We don’t really need the FBI to be kicking down doors over airbags, now do we?)

      I would prefer to keep things simple: Provide a free public accurate database that allows used car shoppers to research whether recalls on individual vehicles have been addressed, and require used car dealers to provide that report without being asked. Let’s not overcomplicate things or have unreasonable expectations about what government can accomplish.

      In any case, I would think that insurance companies would have an interest in addressing this themselves — if their insureds end up killing or injuring passengers and others because of their failure to comply with recalls, then this exposes their company to losses. Let them worry about it, instead.

    • 0 avatar
      OneAlpha

      And who are you, VoGo, to decide what constitutes a “meaningful” freedom FOR ME OR OTHERS?

      Besides, you’re straying from the approved script. You’re supposed to use The Children as an excuse to attack liberty, not Mom.

      You’re running the risk of The Enlightened deciding you’re too independent-minded to be allowed to exist, and that you must be shoved down the memory hole.

      • 0 avatar
        VoGo

        I’m not making decisions about your freedoms, OneAlpha; you are. I just asked what the fuss was about.

        I don’t understand your allusions.

        Or illusions.

        • 0 avatar
          Pch101

          Alpha is a drama queen. For a supposed rugged individual, he sure whines like a little kid.

          • 0 avatar
            OneAlpha

            I’m just pointing out that I shouldn’t be forced to use anyone else’s cost-benefit analyses for my purposes.

            Way to miss the point again, Pch.

            If you think I’m wrong, try articulating your reasons instead of calling me names. Who knows, you might even convince me.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            Congratulations for proving that you don’t grasp the concept of a cost-benefit analysis.

            I know that you believe that yourself to be an exceptional person, but you aren’t. You’re just another cog in the statistical wheel (and not one of the smarter cogs at that.)

            I have news for you: Everyday, we have car wrecks caused by people who believe themselves to be above-average drivers who aren’t at fault for anything. People just like you.

          • 0 avatar
            ajla

            But how many accidents are caused by people inadvertently ignoring recalls?

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            The point here was about Alpha’s mistaken belief that he is some glorious exception to the statistical averages.

            Not only do all of us belong to the statistical pool by definition, but this particular poster goes out of his way to repeatedly demonstrate his place at the lower end of the bell curve. He isn’t smart enough to realize that he isn’t so smart.

    • 0 avatar
      kvndoom

      Not freedom, but further increase in costs. Now every car would have to have some sort of wireless communication to ensure the recall system is alerted.

      And in the isn’t yet another dash light that will get ignored?

      • 0 avatar
        WheelMcCoy

        Future cars will come standard with in car or vehicle to vehicle communications for other purposes. A recall system would just piggy back on existing technology.

        VINs are a pain to type in, and are easy to mis-type, so having a car automatically request that information would be convenient. Maybe this function could be tied in to gas stations or superchargers where wifi is available. Or as someone mentioned, during inspections.

        • 0 avatar
          BuzzDog

          Or why not make a recall check, and the clearing of open recalls, a requirement to renew the vehicle’s plate/registration in all states, DC, possessions and territories?

          I’m surprised no one has yet mentioned this. My state – hardly a rich, progressive one – mails me an annual notice a month or so before renewal, stating if my taxes are paid, and if they have record of current insurance. If those criteria aren’t met, you can’t renew until you prove otherwise.

          So why not add, “Unresolved manufacturer recalls? YES/NO” to the notice?

          Sure, it’s another hoop to jump through, but the states have the VIN, which can be used to check for recalls. The cost of the database should be nominal, and funded by the manufacturers at time of recall – the savings in mailing multiple notices to owners would offset the additional cost.

          And yes, I know it’s not a perfect solution – all states would have to agree (unlikely, unless perhaps tied to Federal highway funding), states make mistakes with the VINs in their registries, and some see anything and everything as an assault on personal freedoms – but this makes more sense than another light for drivers to ignore.

    • 0 avatar
      Margarets Dad

      VoGo,

      Thank you for injecting some much-needed common sense into these otherwise ludicrous comments. How many times have we heard this before? Mandate seat belts? Why, they’d just raise the cost, good drivers don’t need them, and without them, we’re “cleansing the gene pool” a little. Catalytic converters? Too expensive and complicated, and breathing a little smog never hurt anyone. Unleaded gasoline? It’ll ruin my valves. Air bags? Expensive, and just wear your seat belt, dummy. And on and on and on. There is a paranoid segment of American society that sees commies and libruls lurking behind every tree and under every rock just dying to take their so-called freedoms away and no amount of reason is going to sink in.

      By the way, I liked the “cleansing the gene pool comment” above. I always suspected there were closet Nazis hanging out on this site, and now they’ve crawled right out into the open. Beautiful.

  • avatar
    ktm

    This is just another in a recent spate of regulations that, while well intended, ultimately won’t do anything. They are trying to change people’s behavior by installing lights, cameras, alarms, buzzers, etc. This will be just another stimulus that will most likely be ignored like the TPMS or CEL.

    People will rationalize not going in to have the recall done for a variety of reasons. Can’t get time off work, don’t want to waste a Saturday at the dealership, already have plans all month, etc.

  • avatar
    87 Morgan

    Their is a way to solve this issue without the added telematics that would be required. I do not want a car that is linked/synced whatever the term to the mothership, whoever that may be.

    i would think something as simple as carfax could help with this. My concern is for when I buy the cars used, I want to know if it has any outstanding recalls. Currently I just call whatever dealer franchise, ask for service and give them the VIN. Typically they are happy to help as this is a potential R.O ticket plus it gives me negotiating leverage. If they haven’t done th free work, what else have they neglected?

    On a side note, I too am becoming a bigger and more frequent fan of the LS swap into whatever rig floats your boat. Complete reliability and ability to customize the car/truck to your preference. With the cost of new trucks and cars scratching 50k for anything that I would want, I can certainly build to suit for those dollars.

  • avatar
    DrGastro997

    Perhaps it is time to remove the name RECALL for cars requiring a relatively minor safety UPDATE. If your car is beyond a minor safety update then perhaps a flickering light in the shape of a lemon on the instrument cluster may be a bit more fitting.

  • avatar
    golden2husky

    Lot of worry from some about privacy concerns due to the wireless communication to the car, and rightly so. Yet so few seem concerned with the real privacy gorilla in the room: The EDR that rats you out. How many times does an insurance adjuster get to snoop in your OBDII port when they are appraising your car after an accident.

  • avatar
    Lorenzo

    I can tell you why 25% of recalls aren’t “completed”. It’s because the owners ran into the problem and had it fixed before the recall.

    That’s what happened to my 1965 Impala with the inadequate engine mount on a 283 engine. Mine broke and nearly put me in an accident, before the recall. Instead of paying a dealer $40 to install a metal bracket to prevent the engine from lifting up when the engine mount broke, I paid my mechanic $20 to replace the mount with one from an optional 396 V8 instead of the original 283 engine mount. Much later, I got a recall letter, and threw it away.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Matt Foley: In the mid-90’s, I worked with a guy who flew out to Phoenix with $1000 cash and said he was...
  • bullnuke: Great story, Corey. Well done.
  • PrincipalDan: I wish you well. It would be hard for me to get the 6 when 8 is available.
  • brettc: Very nice, congratulations on your find! I’m considering doing this to pick up either a southern 500...
  • sco: @Freedmike Thank you! Obviously drug users are not very controllable but employers of illegal labor are. Impose...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributors

  • Timothy Cain, Canada
  • Matthew Guy, Canada
  • Ronnie Schreiber, United States
  • Bozi Tatarevic, United States
  • Chris Tonn, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States
  • Mark Baruth, United States
  • Moderators

  • Adam Tonge, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States