ASM2 Gearbox Failure

[mikey k]

Impasse said:

Look at it from Gaydon's point of view. A customer has a problem with their gearbox (bear in mind the power output of their engine has been uprated). Instead of leaving it to their group of franchised repair centres, it was taken to an independent outfit whereby the box was removed and partially dismantled for investigation. The owner was aware this would invalidate any warranty offered by the factory.

So now the box is away from any of Gaydon's control and they no longer have any financial interest in it. Also, it could turn out to be a litigious minefield for them as it's now a complete unknown if they did get involved. If the box had been left within the franchise network it would have eventually been replaced as a complete unit under warranty and for the owner, this would have been the most cost effective way of solving the initial problem

Sure, there would have been no pleasant side effects of the upgrades that have been carried out on the various components, but these are a luxury to the owner and aren't deemed necessary for every other production AM using that box.

Some key FACTS for you

1) The box was failing well before BR touched the engine (I know of 4 other S's which have had similar issues)
2) BR DID NOT remove the box to investigate a problem, they did it to fit the cooling AM removed in "upgrading" to ASM2, in trying to fit that they found these issues (thankfully or they would have gone unnoticed until a catastrophic failure)
3) Gaydon has used parts and gear boxes they could provided as good will with no liability (a compromise I'd have been OK with)
4) along with this box failure it also needed two new rear hubs as the bearings had failed at 13k miles.

You clearly have faith the factory and the franchised dealers have your best intentions at heart - good luck
My experience (read my other thread for the myriad of other issues I've had on my two cars) and others recently suggests otherwise.

My intention with this thread is three fold;
1) enlighten people to potential issues with ASM2 (whilst they still have a warranty?)
2) state some facts about how a loyal customer has been treated
3) give others that have this happen out of warranty an alternative to paying AM £15.5k for a new gearbox that may well do the same

[Impasse]

Neil1300r said:

Are you deliberately not reading what Mike posted and others have re-iterated or are you just trolling? We all get AM not paying for a replacement, but stopping Mike buying from the gearbox manufacturer replacement parts? Really you cannot see what is wrong with that? Especially as the manufacturer had accepted an order, AM found out and got them to stop.

Re customer loyalty, Mikey didn't buy another manufactuers car, he got some upgades and probably would have bought another AM. AM don't offer performance upgrades.

Not trolling at all, no. I'm simply trying to demonstrate the factory's thought process in this individual matter. I've been involved in the motor industry for almost thirty years in various roles. I know how manufacturers think, I know where suppliers' priorities lie and I know how customers usually have unrealistic expectations.
If the all of their interests coincide for a while then a sale is normally made. It's only when a subsequent problem arises that their fundamental differences come to the fore. It's these differences I'm trying to highlight amongst all the "It's An Outrage" comments.

The factory are displaying the same amount of loyalty towards this individual issue as they see was displayed by the owner.

mikey k said:

Some key FACTS for you

1) The box was failing well before BR touched the engine (I know of 4 other S's which have had similar issues)
2) BR DID NOT remove the box to investigate a problem, they did it to fit the cooling AM removed in "upgrading" to ASM2, in trying to fit that they found these issues (thankfully or they would have gone unnoticed until a catastrophic failure)
3) Gaydon has used parts and gear boxes they could provided as good will with no liability (a compromise I'd have been OK with)
4) along with this box failure it also needed two new rear hubs as the bearings had failed at 13k miles.

All of this heartache could have been saved if you had allowed the warranty to instigate repairs. I'm not pulling you up on this as it was your choice to throw money at the car. However, to expect Gaydon to ship out repair parts for a component they only ever supply as built-up unit is unreasonable.

[mikey k]

Impasse said:

All of this heartache could have been saved if you had allowed the warranty to instigate repairs. I'm not pulling you up on this as it was your choice to throw money at the car. However, to expect Gaydon to ship out repair parts for a component they only ever supply as built-up unit is unreasonable.

Well not really
It had been at the dealers prior for its first service - they missed the noise, the gearbox issue (dropping the oil would have highlighted it) and the two dying wheel bearings
Also swapping the box under warranty is no guarantee the second will be any better
That gearbox and the wheel bearings could have gone at any time - Outside lane of the motorway? half down a mountain? Out of warranty?
I accept I made a choice to throw time and money at the car and risk warranty claims getting rejected. I don't accept AM couldn't have free issued (or sold?) some used parts they have at Gaydon rather than insist I pay £15.5k for a new box with no guarantee it would be any better and then use underhand and spiteful tactics to prevent me buying the required parts.

My grandfather taught me as a youngster - treat people the way you want to be treated

[Quinny]

Impasse said:

All of this heartache could have been saved if you had allowed the warranty to instigate repairs. I'm not pulling you up on this as it was your choice to throw money at the car. However, to expect Gaydon to ship out repair parts for a component they only ever supply as built-up unit is unreasonable.

Ehh? How could the warranty instigate repairs when the so called service experts at the dealers, had failed to identify that there was a problem in the first place??

The bottom line is that AM in attempting to cut costs by eliminitaing the oil cooler, have compromised the reliability of the gearbox...

[yeti]

Impasse said:

The usual rot as found on every thread

Answer one simple question with your in-depth knowledge of the motor trade.

Do you think AM were right to call up Graziano and forbid them to sell Mikey/BR the gearbox component despite the fact they'd placed and been accepted for the order? That's the only thing in question here. Warranty is what it is, that was accepted.

I think your answer will provide your actual agenda here; let's see if you will defend the indefensible.

[mikey k]

Impasse said:

The factory are displaying the same amount of loyalty towards this individual issue as they see was displayed by the owner.

now I know you are having a laugh!
My 2nd Aston left the factory with issues.
They reluctantly did a lot of work on the car (6 dealer visits) and left several unresolved issues
(ironically most now sorted by you know who!)
They washed their hands of the gearbox issue at the first opportunity
And I was still happy to ordered a V12VS

Exactly who had shown more loyalty there
More over loyalty, much like respect, is hard earned and should not be taken for granted.
(another lesson from my Grandfather that has helped pay for a new Aston )

[yeti]

IMHO AM's motive was clear, they wanted people to be put off by what might happen if you dare modify your car. Pure spite.

But happily, it shows that no matter what, BR get their customers out of any situation. The engineering work on that gearbox is awesome, dealers/Works couldn't have done it.

[mikey k]

yeti said:

IMHO AM's motive was clear, they wanted people to be put off by what might happen if you dare modify your car. Pure spite.

But happily, it shows that no matter what, BR get their customers out of any situation. The engineering work on that gearbox is awesome, dealers/Works couldn't have done it.

Quite

[Impasse]

mikey k said:

Well not really
It had been at the dealers prior for its first service - they missed the noise, the gearbox issue (dropping the oil would have highlighted it) and the two dying wheel bearings
Also swapping the box under warranty is no guarantee the second will be any better
That gearbox and the wheel bearings could have gone at any time - Outside lane of the motorway? half down a mountain? Out of warranty?
I accept I made a choice to throw time and money at the car and risk warranty claims getting rejected. I don't accept AM couldn't have free issued (or sold?) some used parts they have at Gaydon rather than insist I pay £15.5k for a new box with no guarantee it would be any better and then use underhand and spiteful tactics to prevent me buying the required parts.

My grandfather taught me as a youngster - treat people the way you want to be treated

Then you move your concerns further up the dealership chain. A few phonecalls or letters/emails would have led you to a satisfactory solution.


Consider this scenario from the viewpoint of being liable for the costs:

In six weeks you decide to sell the car back to the dealership. The new owner then suffers a failure of your gearbox which was rebuilt using spare parts found lying around someone's workbench at Gaydon. For the sake of argument, we'll assume it's a casting problem with the casing causing flex and subsequent bearing failure rather than any insinuation of shoddy workmanship of anyone involved with taking a spanner to your car.

The box is replaced under warranty for the new owner and the broken unit sent back to the supplier. The supplier dismantles the broken box to do some reliability R&D and discovers someone has already split the gearbox previously - which goes completely against their agreed contract with AM.
They then refuse to issue a credit note for this box and AM are out of pocket which they then attempt to pass on to the dealership. It's a lose, lose, lose situation for everyone involved in trying to make a profit out of your car's existence. And making a profit is any company's sole reason for being in business.

[Quinny]

Graziano are also partly to blame....they should have just sold the required parts.....what could AM do?? Other than redesign the complete range of cars to accept a gearbox from another manufacturer

[Speculatore]

yeti said:

Impasse said:

The usual rot as found on every thread

Answer one simple question with your in-depth knowledge of the motor trade.

Do you think AM were right to call up Graziano and forbid them to sell Mikey/BR the gearbox component despite the fact they'd placed and been accepted for the order? That's the only thing in question here. Warranty is what it is, that was accepted.

I think your answer will provide your actual agenda here; let's see if you will defend the indefensible.

Did he answer this???

[DB9VolanteDriver]

yeti said:

Answer one simple question with your in-depth knowledge of the motor trade.

Do you think AM were right to call up Graziano and forbid them to sell Mikey/BR the gearbox component despite the fact they'd placed and been accepted for the order? That's the only thing in question here. Warranty is what it is, that was accepted.

I think your answer will provide your actual agenda here; let's see if you will defend the indefensible.

As an interested observer...

Why does this surprise anyone? Car manufacturers, as well as many other manufacturers, typically have agreements with their suppliers to not sell repair parts unless through the prime. This is the case in the aerospace industry and in the car industry. Of course it doesn't apply to every single part, but to many of the high value items. Primary motive is to retain the sales in house with all the attendant markups and profit. Sometimes it's even for the small stuff. To wit, A DB7 air filter is ridiculously priced from Aston, but the OEM (Donalsdon in the USA) absolutely refuses to sell directly, citing contractual agreements with Aston.

What is not 'right', IMO, is that AM wouldn't sell the part so repairs could be effected, even if the part was not normally separately sold (only GBs in their entirety). As good will, they should have ordered the part from Graziano and then sold it on to the car's owner.

[Impasse]

Speculatore said:

yeti said:

Impasse said:

The usual rot as found on every thread

Answer one simple question with your in-depth knowledge of the motor trade.

Do you think AM were right to call up Graziano and forbid them to sell Mikey/BR the gearbox component despite the fact they'd placed and been accepted for the order? That's the only thing in question here. Warranty is what it is, that was accepted.

I think your answer will provide your actual agenda here; let's see if you will defend the indefensible.

Did he answer this???

Yes. But quite why some seem to think that a simple insight into how manufacturers go about their trade is suddenly a personal attack on them or their favourite tuner is a mystery to me. But still they distribute their aggressive persona - for what reason, I don't know.

I have no financial or emotional involvement in this gearbox. Therefore I can see both sides of the situation and have attempted to give a viewpoint from a side which doesn't really have a recourse to reply. What people choose to do with that information is up to them and I don't really care. But the childish big man posturing is ridiculous. As usual.

[mikey k]

Quinny said:

Graziano are also partly to blame....they should have just sold the required parts.....what could AM do?? Other than redesign the complete range of cars to accept a gearbox from another manufacturer

There is more to it than that, they tried their best and were hobbled by a certain person at Aston, I suspect quoting T&C's with veiled threats.
Remember they also use a higher spec version of this box in Ferrari's and Maserati's
A fair bit more engineering and software goes in to those though
(like decent coolers, shot peening and polishing? )

[mikey k]

DB9VolanteDriver said:

As an interested observer...

Why does this surprise anyone? Car manufacturers, as well as many other manufacturers, typically have agreements with their suppliers to not sell repair parts unless through the prime. This is the case in the aerospace industry and in the car industry. Of course it doesn't apply to every single part, but to many of the high value items. Primary motive is to retain the sales in house with all the attendant markups and profit. Sometimes it's even for the small stuff. To wit, A DB7 air filter is ridiculously priced from Aston, but the OEM (Donalsdon in the USA) absolutely refuses to sell directly, citing contractual agreements with Aston.

What is not 'right', IMO, is that AM wouldn't sell the part so repairs could be effected, even if the part was not normally separately sold (only GBs in their entirety). As good will, they should have ordered the part from Graziano and then sold it on to the car's owner.

I see this in our business and understand the strategy
I also understand there are compromises that can be made to encourage brand loyalty

Edited by mikey k on Thursday 3rd July 20:58

[tonyhall38]

You should write into watchdog .....get the iron maiden onto it....good old Annie.....

[mikey k]

tonyhall38 said:

You should write into watchdog .....get the iron maiden onto it....good old Annie.....

I'd far rather Bruce Dickinson got involved

[tonyhall38]

You would have to get him between spray tan sessions....

[mikey k]

tonyhall38 said:

You would have to get him between spray tan sessions....

Wrong Bruce Dickinson - Iron Maidens lead singer

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_Dickinson

[woolders]

Impasse said:

Then you move your concerns further up the dealership chain. A few phonecalls or letters/emails would have led you to a satisfactory solution.


Consider this scenario from the viewpoint of being liable for the costs:

In six weeks you decide to sell the car back to the dealership. The new owner then suffers a failure of your gearbox which was rebuilt using spare parts found lying around someone's workbench at Gaydon. For the sake of argument, we'll assume it's a casting problem with the casing causing flex and subsequent bearing failure rather than any insinuation of shoddy workmanship of anyone involved with taking a spanner to your car.

The box is replaced under warranty for the new owner and the broken unit sent back to the supplier. The supplier dismantles the broken box to do some reliability R&D and discovers someone has already split the gearbox previously - which goes completely against their agreed contract with AM.
They then refuse to issue a credit note for this box and AM are out of pocket which they then attempt to pass on to the dealership. It's a lose, lose, lose situation for everyone involved in trying to make a profit out of your car's existence. And making a profit is any company's sole reason for being in business.

You do imply that Mikey' has embarked on his project on a bit of a whim, which since I have been contributing, or not to the forum, is not the case. It appears that every deliberate decision that he has taken has been discussed with BR after a considerable amount of thought.

Maybe Luddite would be a better tag for you