Airbox changes and CEL

Um, I did not tell them about the removal of the bottom of the airbox. They covered it and are replacing the MAF.

It was kinda amusing--they said they fixed it by tightening the MAF (I didn't loosen it, but they tried to say I did) and as they're driving it up for me to pick up at the door, the CEL came back on and they are overnighting another MAF to be installed tomorrow morning. At this rate, I hope that's it.

I also have K&N on my side wanting the original MAF for testing at an independent lab...this could get interesting...stay tuned...

Daniel
 
Um, I did not tell them about the removal of the bottom of the airbox. They covered it and are replacing the MAF.

It was kinda amusing--they said they fixed it by tightening the MAF (I didn't loosen it, but they tried to say I did) and as they're driving it up for me to pick up at the door, the CEL came back on and they are overnighting another MAF to be installed tomorrow morning. At this rate, I hope that's it.

I also have K&N on my side wanting the original MAF for testing at an independent lab...this could get interesting...stay tuned...

Daniel

Well fat chance of mazda giving you the sensor. Under warranty they have to return that to get paid. Even then mazda may deny the claim when they see k&n oil on it and the the dealer will eat the cost of the repair.
 
Then there is the fun part about how an auto maker (like Mazda) must allow other brands that are established to make replacement parts for their cars (like the airfilter.) They are not allowed to require you to use Mazda only parts. If there is any part on a car that is designed to be replaced regularly (filters, as a primary example), they must allow the aftermarket to make products that work. If they deny aftermarket companies the ability to do this, then Mazda would have to supply you for FREE the replacement parts for life.

So, K&N, fully knowing this, builds filters that should replace OEM parts, per this design criteria. If this part causes failure in the car, then K&N must step up to the plate. Which, BTW, it sounds like they are doing. Especially if you just dropped the filter in. INTERESTING, and slightly convoluted.

Good luck, and post some results and lets get some data on this issue.
 
Then there is the fun part about how an auto maker (like Mazda) must allow other brands that are established to make replacement parts for their cars (like the airfilter.) They are not allowed to require you to use Mazda only parts. If there is any part on a car that is designed to be replaced regularly (filters, as a primary example), they must allow the aftermarket to make products that work. If they deny aftermarket companies the ability to do this, then Mazda would have to supply you for FREE the replacement parts for life.

So, K&N, fully knowing this, builds filters that should replace OEM parts, per this design criteria. If this part causes failure in the car, then K&N must step up to the plate. Which, BTW, it sounds like they are doing. Especially if you just dropped the filter in. INTERESTING, and slightly convoluted.

Good luck, and post some results and lets get some data on this issue.

No dry oem replacement Wix, Kem, Napa, Carquest, Autozone, Pepboys and all the others know that. K&N is not a stock replacement. K&N is a wet type filter which is not stock. The dealer could have just cleaned his maf element but he is getting a new one that he has to wait for. I don't know I would just want my car back faster with a clean maf.
 
No dry oem replacement Wix, Kem, Napa, Carquest, Autozone, Pepboys and all the others know that. K&N is not a stock replacement. K&N is a wet type filter which is not stock. The dealer could have just cleaned his maf element but he is getting a new one that he has to wait for. I don't know I would just want my car back faster with a clean maf.

They did not offer to "just clean" the MAF. Granted, this could have worked, but they did not put this up as an option. What they insinuated was that the MAF was totally dead...I pretty much had no choice but to leave the car.

Daniel
 
If I were you I'd insist they find a repair. Codes dont just come up for no reason, there's ALWAYS something wrong if a code comes up. It might be a simple reason, but it's never just a fluke. I also seriously doubt the air filter itself caused it, but it might have been something you bumped (that you might not even realise you bumped) when changing the filter. Heck, it could have even been caused by a mouse eating some wires (they love copper for some reason) or something boucing up off the road and hitting some wires underneath. I see it all the time.

btw... are the dealers you guys go to for warranty work also kia and chevy dealers? I asked what the loaners are at our local dealer and they lend volvos or mazdas only... I'd actually be pretty pissed if I had to be without my $25k car because of a warranty or recall repair and they gave me some $5k cavalier to drive. I'd at least want a base model 3.
 
Dear K&N Consumer:

K&N Engineering, Inc., is informed that some automobile dealers and manufacturers are telling their customers that the factory warranty on their motor vehicles is void, if an original equipment (OE) replacement air filter, manufactured by K&N, has been installed on their vehicles. K&N finds such instances disturbing, and while it does not purport to give legal advice, K&N would like to refer you to the federal Consumer Product Warranties law, often referred to as the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, which states, in part, in Title 15, United States Code, Section 2302, subdivision (c), as follows:

No warrantor of a consumer product may condition his written or implied warranty of such product on the consumer's using, in connection with such product, any article or service (other than article or service provided without charge under the terms of the warranty) which is identified by brand, trade, or corporate name; except that the prohibition of this subsection may be waived by the [Federal Trade] Commission if

(1) the warrantor satisfies the Commission that the warranted product will function properly only if the article or service so identified is used in connection with the warranted product, and

(2) the Commission finds that such a waiver is in the public interest. The Commission shall identify in the Federal Register, and permit public comment on, all applications for waiver of the prohibition of this subsection, and shall publish in the Federal Register its disposition of any such application, including the reasons therefor.

Under this federal statute, a manufacturer, who issues a warranty on your motor vehicle, is prohibited from requiring you to use a particular brand of air filter, oil filter, or other service or maintenance item, unless such item is provided, free of charge, under your warranty or unless the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) waives this prohibition against the manufacturer. K&N is unaware of any exemption or waiver granted by the FTC to any motor vehicle manufacturer, which pertains to air filters or oil filters.

K&N interprets this law to also prohibit the motor vehicle manufacturer from restricting your use of a particular brand of air filter, oil filter, etc. K&Ns interpretation of this law is consistent with the interpretation given it by the FTC, the government agency responsible for the interpretation and enforcement of this federal law.

The rules and regulations adopted by the FTC, to govern the interpretation and enforcement of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, are set forth in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 16 - Commercial Practices, Chapter I - Federal Trade Commission, Subchapter G - Rules, Regulations, Statements and Interpretations Under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, Part 700 - Interpretations Under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act. Contained within these rules and regulations is Section 700.10, which states, in relevant part (with specific language highlighted by K&N), as follows:
(c) No warrantor may condition the continued validity of a warranty on the use of only authorized repair service and/or authorized replacement parts for non-warranty service and maintenance. For example, provisions such as, "This warranty is void if service is performed by anyone other than an authorized 'ABC' dealer and all replacement parts must be genuine 'ABC' parts," and the like, are prohibited where the service or parts are not covered by the warranty. These provisions violate the Act in two ways. First, they violate the section 102(c) ban against tying arrangements. Second, such provisions are deceptive under section 110 of the Act, because a warrantor cannot, as a matter of law, avoid liability under a written warranty where a defect is unrelated to the use by a consumer of "unauthorized" articles or service. This does not preclude a warrantor from expressly excluding liability for defects or damage caused by such "unauthorized" articles or service; nor does it preclude the warrantor from denying liability where the warrantor can demonstrate that the defect or damage was so caused.

We think this FTC rule is pretty clear and unambiguous. Please note that the FTC requires the warrantor (this would, generally, be your motor vehicle manufacturer) to demonstrate that the defect in or damage to your vehicle was caused by your installation or use of a K&N air or oil filter, or other unauthorized part, before a warranty claim can be denied. We contend that this requires credible proof as to the cause of a failure and not merely your dealers guess, speculation or unfounded opinion as to the cause.

Therefore, K&N considers any threat to void your factory warranty, or the actual voiding of your factory warranty, solely for the installation of a K&N replacement air filter or oil filter, to be a violation of federal law.

The foregoing addresses only your rights and protection under federal law. Of course, you may have greater rights under the consumer warranty laws applicable in your state.

If you have encountered a motor vehicle dealer, who has failed and refused to demonstrate or prove, as federal law requires, that your K&N air filter necessitated a repair for which warranty coverage has been denied, or a manufacturer, who refuses to perform warranty repairs on your vehicle, merely because you have installed a K&N replacement air filter or based on inaccurate information from your dealer, then we ask that you request that the dealer or manufacturer set forth, in writing, the warranty denial, together with a written statement as to the specific reasons for the denial of warranty repairs, and that you send a copy of this written statement to K&N. We also ask that you direct your dealer and manufacturer to the federal law quoted above. K&N assists consumers in this situation through the K&N Consumer Protection Pledge. For details please go to the K&N website at KNFilters.com or contact our customer service department at 800-858-3333.

Please keep in mind that a motor vehicle dealer is, generally, not the warrantor of your vehicle. Your dealer may be assisting you as much as possible in getting the manufacturer to cover repairs of your vehicle under warranty, but the factory may still refuse to cover the repairs. If this happens, then there may be nothing further that the dealership can do, and it should not be blamed for the actions of your vehicles warrantor. A dealerships control over the approval of a warranty repair is usually limited to properly diagnosing and reporting the cause of the repair. K&N only takes issue with those dealerships who advise consumers that the mere installation of a K&N air filter on a vehicle voids the factory warranty, or they convey to the manufacturer an unsubstantiated opinion or conclusion that a K&N air filter caused an engine or component failure, without any objective proof to support such a statement, which results in the denial of a legitimate warranty repair.

Sincerely,

STEVE ROGERS,
President & CEO
K&N Engineering, Inc.
 
LOL...That is exactly what I said before....

fourthmeal said:
Then there is the fun part about how an auto maker (like Mazda) must allow other brands that are established to make replacement parts for their cars (like the airfilter.) They are not allowed to require you to use Mazda only parts. If there is any part on a car that is designed to be replaced regularly (filters, as a primary example), they must allow the aftermarket to make products that work. If they deny aftermarket companies the ability to do this, then Mazda would have to supply you for FREE the replacement parts for life.

K&N Statement said:
Under this federal statute, a manufacturer, who issues a warranty on your motor vehicle, is prohibited from requiring you to use a particular brand of air filter, oil filter, or other service or maintenance item, unless such item is provided, free of charge, under your warranty or unless the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) waives this prohibition against the manufacturer. K&N is unaware of any exemption or waiver granted by the FTC to any motor vehicle manufacturer, which pertains to air filters or oil filters.


I just de-legalfied it. Except I put for life, and in reality it is only while under warranty. Close though.
 
Oh by the way...

Uncorking the intake on the MS3 will result in boost spikes. Folks with CAI see this all the time, especially in the higher gears. I experienced it myself as well spiking all the way to 20 psi. On the MS3 w/ stock intake the boost spikes to 16-17psi. Make a large reduction on intake restrictions and the boost will spike even higher and with it the engine error codes will come.
 
If I had to extrapolate all the data from all the CAI results...I'd say the reason for the spiking in the aftermarket CAI systems come from the fact that they are not 100% exactly the right diameter at the MAF housing, changing the calibration that the OEM MAF housing and MAF have.

CPE seems to be the only ones who have nipped this.
 
If I had to extrapolate all the data from all the CAI results...I'd say the reason for the spiking in the aftermarket CAI systems come from the fact that they are not 100% exactly the right diameter at the MAF housing, changing the calibration that the OEM MAF housing and MAF have.

CPE seems to be the only ones who have nipped this.

The ECU on the MS3 controlls the boost pressure in two ways:

#1 It does not allow the throttle body to go wide open while you are buidling boost.
#2 It controls the duty cycle of a selenoid that sends boost pressure to the wastegate actuator.

If you reduce intake and or exhaust restriction the boost curb on the car changes. Unless the ECU learns how the car builds boost the compressor will spool too quickly causing a boost spike. If the spike stays around for more than a second or two the car will do a soft fuel cut. It appears that the MS3 does not re-adjust the gain on the wastegate boost solenoid. Otherwise the car would learn the new boost curb and avoid the spikes -but the boost spikes never go away...

Folks w/ CAI and boost gauges record boost spikes all the time in the higher gears. This has been well documented. It's not so much a factor of whether the CAI inner diameter for the MAF is 1/16" more or less than the stock air-box ID -It's more a result of reducing the restriction on the intake.
 
I am definitely considering your point, but I think it all stems from a slightly inaccurate flow count from the MAF. If the MAF is accurate, then the computer's computations will be accurate compared to current situations. The computer modulates those two parts you mentioned, no doubt about that. But I think that it is forced to modulate them when the MAF sensor is giving false information.

There is one way to verify this, naturally. Get a MAF adaptor that is exactly the same size as the factory one, and get a nice highflow filter attached. From there, we should be able to sample the results.
 

New Threads and Articles

Back