Other Engine Info: Engine Info: Alum BLK, Sales Code: EWB
Other Restraint System Info: CGW ( Except LH)
Plant City: Detroit
Plant Company Name: Connor Avenue Assembly/ New Mack Assembly Plant
Plant Country: United States (USA)
Plant State: Michigan
Seat Belts All: Manual
Series: SR
Series2: S Series
Trim: RT/10 or GTS "coupe"
Vehicle Type: PASSENGER CAR
Model year
COMPONENT
Complaint
1994
ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING:EXHAUST SYSTEM:MANIFOLD/HEADER/MUFFLER/TAIL PIPE
CONSUMER WAS GETTING OUT OF THE CAR AND THE EXHAUST PIPE OUTSIDE BURNED CONSUMER SKIN ON THE LEG. *AK
2000
VISIBILITY:POWER WINDOW DEVICES AND CONTROLS
COPY OF REQUEST SENT TO ISO INTERNATIONAL; I HAVE SOME SERIOUS SAFETY ISSUES INCLUDING THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE FRAME SUPPORTING A DODGE VIPER. I HAVE CONTACTED THE REGISTRAR UL LABORATORIES, INCLUDING TODAY, ON 2 OCCASIONS REGARDING THIS PRODUCT. THE FIRST REQUEST FOR INFORMATION WAS IGNORED. THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OFFICES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT TELL ME WE LIVE IN A SELF REGULATING COUNTRY AND ARE UNWILLING TO INVESTIGATE THIS ISSUE. THE DEALER INFORMS ME THE MANUFACTURER CONTENDS THIS IS NOT A PROBLEM. THE MANUFACTURER SAYS THEY ARE HAPPY TO REPAIR ANY WARRANTY ISSUES HOWEVER THEY CAN SEE NO ISSUE. WHAT I HAVE OBSERVED IS VISUALLY THE WELDING ON THE FRAME AT HAND DOES NOT COMPLY WITH INTERNATIONALLY ACCEPTED WELDING STANDARDS. X-RAY TESTING OF THE FRAME REVEALS 7 OF THE 11 WELDS TESTED HAVE GROSS PEROSITY MEANING THE WELDS ARE NOT DONE PROPERLY THE FRAME SUPPORTS THE LOWER CONTROL ARMS WHICH HOLD THE WHEELS ON THE CAR. AS WELL AS THE MOTOR MOUNTS WHICH SUPPORT A 10 CYLINDER ENGINE. THE DOORS DO NOT OPERATE PROPERLY WHEN PARKED ON AN INCLINE AND A HARDTOP ROOF WEIGHING CLOSE TO 100 POUNDS FLEW OFF THE CAR ON THE HIGHWAY, A COUPLE OF DAYS AFTER IT WAS INSTALLED BY THE DEALER. I HAVE A LEGITIMATE REASON FOR CONCERN. HOW AM I, WITHIN YOUR SYSTEM, ABLE TO HAVE AN INVESTIGATION COMPLETED WHEN THE REGISTRAR WHO WAS ALSO RESPONSIBLE FOR THE INITIAL TESTING WON'T EVEN RESPOND TO MY INQUIRIES? I DON'T BELIEVE A COMPANY RECEIVING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS EACH YEAR FROM A MANUFACTURER FOR TESTING ITS PRODUCTS, CAN BE RESPONSIBLE FOR AN UNBIASED OPINION, WITH OBVIOUS REASONS TO BE BIASED. I ALSO REITERATE HOW CAN A COMPANY WHO IS DISJOINTED FROM THE END USERS BY A DEALER NETWORK, A NETWORK THAT HAS NO REASON TO CONFORM TO ISO STANDARDS, CLAIM TO BE ISO COMPLIANT. I SIMPLY WANT TO KNOW WHAT PROCEDURES ARE IN PLACE AT CHRYSLER FOR CONFLICT RESOLUTION. WHY IS IT SO DIFFICULT TO OBTAIN INFORMATION PERTAINING TO THEIR PRODUCTS.
