|
Re: SURPRISE ! 440 Source damper is crap
[Re: MR_P_BODY]
#201437
01/23/09 12:14 AM
01/23/09 12:14 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 27,347
Today? Who Knows?
1_WILD_RT
Management Trainee
|
Management Trainee
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 27,347
Today? Who Knows?
|
From the Fluidamper site
Fluidampr products have a 90-day warranty from the date of purchase. This warranty covers manufacturer defects in material and workmanship.
From the ATI website
ATI warrants to the original retail purchaser that all of their products will be free from defects in material and workmanship for a period of 90 days from the date of purchase. ATI will repair or replace, at their option, any part, assembly, or portion, after ATI's examination discloses it to be defective. ATI must be contacted to discuss a possible solution to the problem before the return can be processed. ATI dampers that have been installed are not returnable. Dampers must have their SFI sticker intact. Repairs or problems should be directed to ATI. ATI dampers are honed to fit OEM crankshafts and may not fit aftermarket crankshafts.
TCI only 30 days..
TCI Automotive products are warranted to be free from defects in workmanship and materials for a period of 30 days from the date of purchase on racing equipment, and a period of 90 days from the date of purchase on street/strip equipment. In addition, TCI Automotive will not warrant any of the following: Any product that has been physically altered, improperly installed or maintained, used in improper applications or abused, made defective due to accident, neglect, or unauthorized repair, or if proper cooling and/or fluid levels have not been maintained.
|
|
|
Re: SURPRISE ! 440 Source damper is crap
[Re: 1_WILD_RT]
#201440
01/23/09 12:55 AM
01/23/09 12:55 AM
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
some years ago we used to deal with a company named "professional products". they make what some like to call "affordable" sfi dampers. one of the dampers we sold had failed. it was way past the warranty date but i made a phone call to the company and got it taken care of for the customer. they supposedly had some sort of problem on the assembly line for a short run but it was found quickly and corrected. they said unfornuately that some managed to slip past Q.C. we looked closely at the damper and realized how poorly constructed they were. at that point we stopped selling that line of products. since that time i've heard of dozens of those things failing. i'm glad we made the decision we did,early on.
i wonder if the problem with your damper is an isolated incident or yet another failure among many?
unfortunately, defects happen all the time in manufacturing. it's easy to get angry with the company that sold the part, but that anger may be misplaced. call the manufacturer and tell them about your problem. it can't hurt.
|
|
|
Re: SURPRISE ! 440 Source damper is crap
[Re: dthemi]
#201442
01/23/09 01:12 AM
01/23/09 01:12 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,278
Mission BC
10sec440
pro stock
|
pro stock
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,278
Mission BC
|
Quote:
The SFI thing is an interesting issue. I'm sure SFI is very proud of what the rating means, so maybe send it to them for a re-evaluation. I know from getting things UL approved that the parts tested are sometimes not what gets made after a while though the rating stays the same. Things made far away can be more vulnerable, and it can happen without the company knowing it.
I think this hits the nail on the head. SFI has a very high standard to uphold and they might want to know that a product they certified failed in this way. If I were Brandon I'd want the old one back at all costs so SFI doesn't get a hold of it.
Having said that you get what you pay for and I think a balancer is not a place to save money.
|
|
|
Re: SURPRISE ! 440 Source damper is crap
[Re: moparniac]
#201445
01/23/09 06:31 AM
01/23/09 06:31 AM
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 21,345
Marysville, O-H-I-O
70Cuda383
Too Many Posts
|
Too Many Posts
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 21,345
Marysville, O-H-I-O
|
why are you so quick to bash 440 source? let me get this straight...2 years ago, 3,000 miles on what is probably a fairly well built engine making a great deal more HP than it did stock. and you're complaining because they won't extend their 90 day warranty out to 720 days, just for you, because you think it failed pre-maturely. ...yet their warranty is in line with several other companies. I wonder what Edelbrock would say if I called them up and said "hey, I bought your heads for my 383 stroker that's making over 500 hp, a year ago, and put 3,000 miles on them since then, and I just dropped a valve. I think you owe me a new head" what do you think the American compay, with American made parts, is going to say to me? We are in this hobby to have fun. we spend lots of money to build high HP machines to go play with on the street and at the track. we push these machines to the edge of the envelope, and parts are going to break. I learned that when I cracked a cylinder wall after 200 miles on a fresh engine build. it sure sucked, but I didn't go blaming any parts manufacturers. For awhile, I felt like the machine shop that did my work was to blame, but maybe not...could have just been a weak spot in the wall. what'd I do? fixed it, put it all back together, and continued to have fun. but, maybe that's because I'm not a crusty, grumpy old man.  
**Photobucket sucks**
|
|
|
Re: SURPRISE ! 440 Source damper is crap
[Re: BeEtLeJuIcE !]
#201446
01/23/09 06:34 AM
01/23/09 06:34 AM
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 21,345
Marysville, O-H-I-O
70Cuda383
Too Many Posts
|
Too Many Posts
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 21,345
Marysville, O-H-I-O
|
Quote:
IMO ....an item like this should never "fail". How many 35 year old PLUS OEM dampners have you seen be loose? ... or even move ??... I have seen many a Mopar engine and have only seen ONE dampner "move" ..and it was because the guy soaked it in solvent for a couple of days.
I think a part like this should have a lifetime warranty on it.... unless it was physically damaged.
but how many "gurus" and books out there, say to NOT use your 35 year old, OEM dampner, on a performance engine build, and to upgrade to something of higher quality?
was this a stock rebuild? stock cam, low compression, exhaust manifolds, etc. or is the compression bumped up, larger cam, headers, better heads, etc?
**Photobucket sucks**
|
|
|
Re: SURPRISE ! 440 Source damper is crap
[Re: 70Cuda383]
#201447
01/23/09 06:36 AM
01/23/09 06:36 AM
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 6,295
U.S.
moparniac
master
|
master
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 6,295
U.S.
|
I really dont think he is "bashing" 440source..... 440source should look into the problem though..... and it is a needed post stating a balacer issue so people who bought one also double checks theirs  what is the guy suppoesed to say ??? my hakamuchiojosara balancer is crap ???
Mopar Performance
|
|
|
Re: SURPRISE ! 440 Source damper is crap
[Re: moparniac]
#201448
01/23/09 06:40 AM
01/23/09 06:40 AM
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 21,345
Marysville, O-H-I-O
70Cuda383
Too Many Posts
|
Too Many Posts
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 21,345
Marysville, O-H-I-O
|
well, that may be, and if that's the case, then I mis-intrepreted the thread title, with the "SURPRISE!" it seemed to reeking of sarcasim. and the "brandon won't help me at all on this" also adds to why I mis-understood his message, because there was a whole paragraph about how Brandon's customer service is lacking, and how he won't warranty a part thats well beyond it's 90 day period, and then there was just one line at the bottom that said "oh yea...if you have one, check yours too to make sure it's ok" 
**Photobucket sucks**
|
|
|
Re: SURPRISE ! 440 Source damper is crap
[Re: moparniac]
#201450
01/23/09 08:56 AM
01/23/09 08:56 AM
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,091
Col. Ohio
The Avg. Valiant
super stock
|
super stock
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,091
Col. Ohio
|
Im not sure this guy is a racer, budget minded yes, racer probably not. He at best is a STREET/strip guy, hence the 3000 miles. It would take me many many years to put 3000 miles on my race car. As for the balancer, ive heard other companies(not just 440source) having problems with balancers. People say they put thing on the "correct" way, businesses say theres no way you did. Its a he said she said kind of thing. Im guessing that the summit, jegs, 440source balancers all come from the same place, they all look the same at least. Im not sure I would go cheap here either, but im not bashing 440source for a part with 3k miles on it. Ive seen "good" rocker arms not make it 10 runs before causing some serious damage on a motor and they werent cheap either. Ive seen "good" engine shops who are sponsors of the site build motors that didnt make it 3 passes. [Edited by Moparts - Keep it clean] happens, then we move on and rebuild, right?
|
|
|
Re: SURPRISE ! 440 Source damper is crap
[Re: 70Cuda383]
#201451
01/23/09 10:52 AM
01/23/09 10:52 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,943
San Angelo, Texas, U.S.A.
1968RR
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,943
San Angelo, Texas, U.S.A.
|
Quote:
Quote:
IMO ....an item like this should never "fail". How many 35 year old PLUS OEM dampners have you seen be loose? ... or even move ??... I have seen many a Mopar engine and have only seen ONE dampner "move" ..and it was because the guy soaked it in solvent for a couple of days.
I think a part like this should have a lifetime warranty on it.... unless it was physically damaged.
but how many "gurus" and books out there, say to NOT use your 35 year old, OEM dampner, on a performance engine build, and to upgrade to something of higher quality?
was this a stock rebuild? stock cam, low compression, exhaust manifolds, etc. or is the compression bumped up, larger cam, headers, better heads, etc?
I've had an OEM damper ring "slip" on a street/strip 383. I didn't notice that it had come loose 'til I put it on my 440.
Admittedly it had seen lots of abuse, but the OEM ones slip too.
That's not going to stop me from using a factory damper when I don't need an SFI one though...
"When I'm in a slump, I comfort myself by saying if I believe in dinosaurs, then somewhere, they must be believing in me. And if they believe in me, then I can believe in me." - Mookie Wilson
|
|
|
Re: SURPRISE ! 440 Source damper is crap
[Re: DaveRS23]
#201452
01/23/09 11:10 AM
01/23/09 11:10 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 12,100
Benton, IL.
DaveRS23
OP
Special needs idiot
|
OP
Special needs idiot
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 12,100
Benton, IL.
|
I don't want my posts to come off like a rant or a bash. I am surprised and disappointed. But not so much because they didn't ante up on a replacement damper. But because it failed so quickly and they are not interested in why. Had they of wanted it back for inspection would have gone a long way with me to indicate that they cared about the product. And had they offered some modest amount of help (should they have determined that the damper failed and wasn't damaged by me) would have gone along way toward making this repeat customer feel like I had value.
The lesson here is about quality control and customer value, not extended warrany. While I am not a large volumn customer, 440 Source would have been money ahead with me to have been interested in the reason the part failed and to have written off a small amount of money to keep this repeat customer. That small effort would have bought a good vendor review here for their customer service. But I still would have advised other owners of their dampers to look them over. Dampers are not an item I have ever been inclined to inspect regualarly. And I wouldn't have caught this problem if it wasn't for the rust poping the paint off enough to get my attention.
To be truthful, although the price was attractive, I didn't think this was an inferior piece due primarily to the SFI certification. While I understand the limits of that certification, I guess I thought that it would indicate that the damper was on par with it's more expensive counterparts.
Now, which damper would you recommend to replace this one on my 500" RB that sees about 6,200 max and gets a little street time?
Master, again and still
|
|
|
Re: SURPRISE ! 440 Source damper is crap
[Re: DaveRS23]
#201454
01/23/09 11:28 AM
01/23/09 11:28 AM
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 407
Great White North Werst coast
runya
mopar
|
mopar
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 407
Great White North Werst coast
|
I agrree....there is a difference between a good company selling cheap or affordable parts and a cheap company selling cheap or affordable parts.
One gives you good service and the other "services" you good if you know what I mean.
Last edited by runya; 01/23/09 11:32 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Holley my A$$. Anyhow, I'm a little surprised Brandon did not offer some consolation. Maybe he has not heard about the balancer problem, just his employee? Very good fortune you caught it. Let's hear it for Aeromotive fuel pumps 
