Very well written reply and I agree with you. (Frankly I'd be very interested in finding out just how many 4.8is owners got a brand new engine as a result of the direct recall on their cars, but my guess is that very few, since BMW wouldn't have ever mentioned any issues until the car crapped itself out) Also keep in mind that the bean counters and their number crunching don't always produce the happiest results as BMW found out not too long ago from the class action lawsuit it lost brought on by E60 owners.
Anyway, your last example of the light bulbs is pretty far reaching since a light bulb failure doesn't have the potential of wiping out the engine engine and thus rendering the car undriveable to the owner. I'm sure you've read plenty of SIB's as have I and very few of them list "catastrophic engine failure" as a possibility if the fault should occur. In my book such a possibility should inevitably result in a preventative fix. Heck at least for people in the geographic regions where it is most likely to happen!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by JCL
Yes, it means that the BMW policy in this case is to repair after failure, not before failure. This is not a BMW-specific issue, it is common with all manufacturers.
An example of when a before failure policy is applied is if it is a safety issue (ie, mandated by law) or if the failure is likely to happen and the cost to the manufacturer is less to replace all of the affected parts so as to avoid the higher cost of post-failure repairs for the percentage that do fail.
An example of when an after-failure policy is applied is if the likelihood of a failure happening is low, and when the few that fail under warranty can be fixed (even if they have resulting catastrophic engine failures) for less money than if all the parts that never would fail were to be replaced.
All of this can be weighted and shifted by the 'cost' to the manufacturer of unhappy customers, but the math is still the same: if the failure is not likely to happen then the manufacturer will apply a post-failure policy unless required by law to do differently, after evaluating the cost of unhappy customers. BMW sales statistics suggest that this issue hasn't been getting in the way of vehicle sales.
The problem has been around for 10 years or so. BMW has had lots of time for the accountants to add up the cost of the small number that have frozen. They moved to heated lines on new production. However, replacing the old style valve would, for the vast majority of owners, have absolutely no benefit. Hence, the post-failure policy.
Why do they need to replicate the problem? We have seen that on this board recently. If an engine has a hesitation, it is immediately assumed that it is the separator, whether it is or not. Confirming that the separator is in fact the problem is very logical.
To make it a bit less emotional, think about lightbulbs in your home. Some are probably going to burn out this year. You could replace them all every January, and then you wouldn't be inconvenienced. But you likely don't, you wait until they fail because most of them aren't going to fail.
|
03-25-2008, 01:48 AM
Threaded Mode
