This makes the situation even more frustrating. Ford has a definition in which they refer to racing in the context of motorsport, but the ESP cant use that definition? So the arbitrator uses "functioning at top speed," which has an example of "people racing for safety" & "mind was racing," not even a motorsport example. So the top speed of the car is X and you were a few mph under, you weren't technically at top speed were you? So unless you hit the limiter in 6th gear, shouldn't they approve you claim because you weren't at "top speed?"
OP I'm sorry that you got the crap end of this. My entire opinion of Ford has changed drastically after this ordeal. I think my Mach1 may be my last Ford vehicle.
I couldn’t agree more with youUnhinged by the decision?
Children, I have been around racing for way too long...blown engines wrecked vehicles are the norm..you all know it.........there is no free lunch, but you DID in the past get SOME repairs out of Ford.
Gas Ronda used to go thru trans all the time.
What gets me, is the very notion that you thought that you believed that you bought an unbreakable slot car, with bulletproof armor......and that Ford was the Pillsbury dough-boy, and you found a way to go racing for free.
People buy HP vehicles all the time and have for 60 years..............and some just profile on the streets. I lived thru the muscle car era of the 1960's........
Stuff breaks, always has, always will.
Drag race much? Rally autocross much?
It is a very high perf vehicle and I have driven one on track..........risky risky..........$$$$
That is why I now have a "disposable" Track car I break it at my expense.
Get a track car.
My very first failures on my new '68 Torino GT 4 speed back in '69 was the 9" rear...changed them a few times more. Warranty denied.
My '87 Mustang GT lost the rear 2 times under warranty, but the last fix ..I had buy the new gears and kit..they did the labor.
In between 1964 and 2024.. people have been fixing HP vehicles themselves as normal.
The old ten year 100,00 mile warranties of the '70's were a joke.
Except Mag-Moss clearly states that the manufacturer must prove an aftermarket part caused the failure being claimed under warranty. So, yes, consumers do have a backstop they can rely on there.Aside from OPs issue, this thread should be mandatory reading for geniuses that throw the might Magnusson-Moss act thinking Ford has to prove something when they're tuned / modded car goes to shit. Sure they do. LOLOL.
I don’t have a problem with your opinion and obviously you haven’t been following along as to the purpose of this thread or you wouldn’t have word vomited useless stuff.Unhinged by the decision?
I have been around racing for way too long...blown engines wrecked vehicles are the norm..you all know it.........there is no free lunch, but you DID in the past get SOME repairs out of Ford.
Gas Ronda used to go thru trans all the time.
What gets me, is the very notion that you thought that you believed that you bought an unbreakable slot car, with bulletproof armor......and that Ford was the Pillsbury dough-boy, and you found a way to go racing for free.
People buy HP vehicles all the time and have for 60 years..............and some just profile on the streets. I lived thru the muscle car era of the 1960's........
Stuff breaks, always has, always will.
Drag race much? Rally autocross much?
It is a very high perf vehicle and I have driven one on track..........risky risky..........$$$$
That is why I now have a "disposable" Track car I break it at my expense.
Get a track car.
My very first failures on my new '68 Torino GT 4 speed back in '69 was the 9" rear...changed them a few times more. Warranty denied.
My '87 Mustang GT lost the rear 2 times under warranty, but the last fix ..I had buy the new gears and kit..they did the labor.
In between 1964 and 2024.. people have been fixing HP vehicles themselves as normal.
The old ten year 100,00 mile warranties of the '70's were a joke.
I'll say it, v guy is an ass.Unhinged by the decision?
Children, I have been around racing for way too long...blown engines wrecked vehicles are the norm..you all know it.........there is no free lunch, but you DID in the past get SOME repairs out of Ford.
Gas Ronda used to go thru trans all the time.
What gets me, is the very notion that you thought that you believed that you bought an unbreakable slot car, with bulletproof armor......and that Ford was the Pillsbury dough-boy, and you found a way to go racing for free.
People buy HP vehicles all the time and have for 60 years..............and some just profile on the streets. I lived thru the muscle car era of the 1960's........
Stuff breaks, always has, always will.
Drag race much? Rally autocross much?
It is a very high perf vehicle and I have driven one on track..........risky risky..........$$$$
That is why I now have a "disposable" Track car I break it at my expense.
Get a track car.
My very first failures on my new '68 Torino GT 4 speed back in '69 was the 9" rear...changed them a few times more. Warranty denied.
My '87 Mustang GT lost the rear 2 times under warranty, but the last fix ..I had buy the new gears and kit..they did the labor.
In between 1964 and 2024.. people have been fixing HP vehicles themselves as normal.
The old ten year 100,00 mile warranties of the '70's were a joke.
You’re 100% right ,manufacturers should be more upfront about which activities are covered or not and to which pointI don’t have a problem with your opinion and obviously you haven’t been following along as to the purpose of this thread or you wouldn’t have word vomited useless stuff.
No one is wanting a free lunch and I am not looking for someone to change my diaper. However yours might be need a tending to if this thread triggers you.
The issue here isn’t me or anyone else that purchased these cars or with anyone who purchased a service plan.
If manufacturers don’t want to offer certain components to be covered by using it at the track or they want to limit how the car is to be used then just state that. It really isn’t more complicated than that. Just list the exclusions. Simple really.
In my experience running with various hpde groups most people that attend do not have a fully dedicated track car UNTIL something either breaks or they got a deal on something or they sunk a bunch of money in their car fixing it.
The people I have run with over the years are all pretty laid back. However if you show up to an scca or nasa event that has a race or time trials and hpde on the same day then that is different crowd than the chin, trackdaze, track attack, etc. I prefer the latter as going to the track is relaxing for me.
I do hpde because I enjoy driving the car without the fear of hurting someone or going to jail. I have zero interest in racing and your rant is exactly why I avoid those types of drivers on track and avoid events where people think they have something to prove to themselves or someone else. That’s not a sneak diss at you we are just there for different reasons and go to the track for different reason. Neither of us are wrong.
I am not looking for people to agree or disagree I am merely sharing my experience. You are free to draw your own conclusions but try to keep it on topic so people don’t have to filter through trash. The dislike button is your friend.
You are also missing the point. Hindsight is always 20/20 and I have learned from this experience and I am hoping other people do as well. I am not looking for condolences or accolades. This was a principal of the matter for me.You’re 100% right ,manufacturers should be more upfront about which activities are covered or not and to which point
They simply don’t do it because it would not be to their benefits or advantages.
it’s simply the way most businesses do business.
that is as old than commerce has existed, centuries ago, Roman even coined a phrase about it : Caveat Emptor
In your case that would mean asking , in writing, before buying the esp, if the type of activity (driving at a high rate of speed on a racetrack, that you wanted to do was covered or not.
and obviously doing that through text or email to get a written answer
You assumed that it was covered…
You have been really a gentleman through all this thread and i feel bad for you but you do bear some responsibility for not applying the Caveat Emptor principle
Except many years ago a person drove into a MacDonalds drive thru for a cup of HOT coffee and proceeded to put it between her legs while driving away and when it spilled and burned her, she sued and WON. What idiot puts a cup of hot coffee between their legs while driving and thinks they will not get burned when it spills.I couldn’t agree more with you
You have to pay to play and there not such thing as a free lunch
While i feel bad for the op, it’s a bit naive to believe that you can track your car on somebody else dime
Yes ford and the esp are a bit deceptive but no different than comparing the perfect, mouth watering mc donald burger in an advertising picture, to what you get when you order one
And btw, was a recent lawsuit about the burger/picture and guess who won?
Not the customer
I just reread her story again and she was the passenger so she had both hands free.Except many years ago a person drove into a MacDonalds drive thru for a cup of HOT coffee and proceeded to put it between her legs while driving away and when it spilled and burned her, she sued and WON. What idiot puts a cup of hot coffee between their legs while driving and thinks they will not get burned when it spills.
Guess who won, the customer.
BD