Joined
·
12,394 Posts
Good for them!
SO:Erik Latranyi said:Good for them!
Move the gas tank!! lol. There in lies the other thing. Just the prospect of potential options to correct vehicles up 20 years old. At 20 years old, large portions of the underbody have been subjected to quite a bit, and many vehicles would have a fair bit of rust. Just the logistics of this sound unreasonable. More over, I'd be willing to bet that given maintenance habits, there are people running these vehicles around with far more dangerous ailments than the insinuated issue at hand. The whole thing just seems a bit ridiculous - if there is really an issue, it wouldn't have taken 20 years and then suddenly become a problem.TripleT said:I am trying to figure out what the recall would be for, or the action that would need to be taken if now design or workmanship issue has been identified?
This completely depends on them. On one hand, they don't want to call too much attention to it. On the other hand, anything coming from NTHSA needs to be answered to. NTHSA has no leg to stand on in this particular incident. If this is worthy of a safety recall, it should never have taken 20 years. Especially because their claiming the problem is not because of a failure (I can understand unusual failures taking time to set in), but rather what is claimed to be a flawed design.John Rogers said:Of course question number two is how does Chrysler win this in the media? I'm glad Chrysler is "fighting city hall" I just hope they have a strategy to win.
Exactly, so while being armed with the truth is good. A message about how flawed the NHTSA analysis is, in away the people will grasp is more important. Think about how many mini-vans NHTSA and that insurance body's recommendations sell.BASONE88 said:...there is no end to the individuals and groups that would like nothing better than to see CGLLC go down.
Gas tank is still in the same place.Stratuscaster said:My mother-in-law called my wife today - concerned that my son's girlfriend's car might be affected by this alleged flaw.
All she heard on the news was "Jeep", "recall", "gas tank", and "fire."
My son's girlfriend drives my old 1995 Cherokee. Not a Grand Cherokee or a Liberty.
But thanks for checking.
It's all about the money and control. Chrysler was not supposed to survive as well as they have and they can't handle it. I agree, give me proof the fires are related to design. No proof, no fix needed. After 20 years of operation, there is an exponential increase of possibilities that a crash cause a fire.bumonbox said:This completely depends on them. On one hand, they don't want to call too much attention to it. On the other hand, anything coming from NTHSA needs to be answered to. NTHSA has no leg to stand on in this particular incident. If this is worthy of a safety recall, it should never have taken 20 years. Especially because their claiming the problem is not because of a failure (I can understand unusual failures taking time to set in), but rather what is claimed to be a flawed design.
It looks absurdly bad that they "just noticed"
exactly!dana44 said:It's all about the money and control. Chrysler was not supposed to survive as well as they have and they can't handle it. I agree, give me proof the fires are related to design. No proof, no fix needed. After 20 years of operation, there is an exponential increase of possibilities that a crash cause a fire.
Moreover........why now? Did Marchionne paying off the bank early tick someone off for loss of lots of ernest interest money..........or what? Pure government bureaucrat think. Can't really find a defect....don't know if it is a real defect..... spent lots of make work money on research to make it a defect.....no cause for a defect......... B U T.......... recall it anyway...... at YOUR expense, BTW.dana44 said:It's all about the money and control. Chrysler was not supposed to survive as well as they have and they can't handle it. I agree, give me proof the fires are related to design. No proof, no fix needed. After 20 years of operation, there is an exponential increase of possibilities that a crash cause a fire.