DaveGS4

iTrader: (2)

Doesn't matter. That car was built to go on track, even comes with a free track day where the owner could have taken it well beyond that speed. It has speed rated tires to go well beyond that mph.

SW17LS

The warning in the manual is related to tires. It doesn't say "operation of the vehicle above 85 MPH is grounds for warranty exclusion", it just says "If you're going to drive it over 85 MPH make sure it has the right tires". If driving 114 MPH once is enough to make the car spontaneously combust down the line, that is also a problem lol

As to why would Toyota pay out? When insurance companies pay out, we all pay out. All the people who have insurance coverage with that carrier pay. What it will result in is higher premiums for everybody, especially owners of that vehicle. This has already happened with Hyundai vehicles...

If this truly is Toyota's fault as it appears it is, then we should all want them to foot the bill not an insurance company.

Toys4RJill

It believes it absolutely does matter. In this case the request was made and Toyota told the owner that he was flagged going 114MPH. They never said where. So what if it is on a side street for fun. Does that count as street racing? No idea what the manual in a Toyota says, but I doubt it’s truly track ready. Marketed for sure. Accidents void warranties too, the owner had that on its file as well


Even Mercedes AMG has this disclaimer.



Can be interpreted many different ways. Not on the side of the owner.


edit: just looked up Toyota GR



Anyways. I’ve said enough

Striker223

Meanwhile Porsche covers track use......

mmarshall

Yes, we all end up sharing in higher insurance bills, but, if we are going to buy a Toyota or Lexus product, that's also the case if and when a company itself is hit with a huge settlement-bill. They just raise the prices of their new vehicles and their replacement-parts.

DaveGS4

iTrader: (2)

So you are absolutely sure about that? I'd 100% say Porsche is more likely to cover a track related warranty item than Toyota, but that is their heritage and higher involvement in motorsports. But it absolutely not a given. I personally know several instances in recent years where they did not.

Meanwhile a quick google shows similar Porsche warranty language to Toyotas https://files.porsche.com/filestore/...nty-Manual.pdf

RNM GS3

How many Ferraris and Lambos have burned down lol

Its very hard to honor as a warranty unless Toyota knows its a defect.

Small turbo engines don’t last too long unfortunately.

RNM GS3

114mph is NOT a lot in car that is marketed as a performance car doing track days and driving on the Nurburgring.

The cooling system should be overbuilt on these cars.
Turbo performance cars require a LOT of cooling especially since these are manual and tend to be modded.

Striker223

As for track use, unlike previous models, the 991 GT3 is explicitly covered for track use and a booklet explaining the additional service intervals that must be followed is included with the rest of the documentation that comes with the car. No doubt there are circumstances where Porsche might refuse to cover a car used in competition, but for normal DE's or autocross, for example, there should be no problem.

They cover track use on cars for tracks. Like the GR tried to claim it's for.....apples to apples, if Toyota was honest with what the GR actually is I would be more lenient.

The Germans provide TRACK USE maintenance requirements for models they feel you will track, as does GM and Dodge for their relevant offerings. Toyota does not but they pretend that GR and F are on the same level as M/RS/AMG/Z06/ACR etc....

SW17LS

But we can choose not to purchase a Toyota or Lexus product, don’t always have the ability to get away from insurance cost.

My point is the fact that there was an insurance payout doesn’t mean the manufacturer should not be held responsible.

FrankReynoldsCPA

If you're in a car accident and the other driver is at fault, your insurance company will cover you and go after the other guy and his insurance company to be made whole.

So the insurance company here should absolutely go after Toyota since this is their fault.

mmarshall

Agreed, but that will probably have to be done in court and/or convincing a judge or jury....particularly under the circumstances that led to the fire.

SW17LS

They typically settle this kind of thing out of court.

spwolf

you are talking specifically about GT3, not about any Porsche. Even there, they warn about modfying it, I am sure, it has to be 100% stock.

Generally speaking, most manufacturers will often have a problem with this, and none will actually cover anything if they expect it is modified at all.

I mean if you purchased the car for racing, you would not expect your warranty to cover it. That would be super nice, ha.

Margate330

I've been thinking a lot about this thread and I have to take Toyota's side on this.

Reason why is Toyota will need to do a full investigate before taking any blame.

If they are at fault, make it right.
But until it can be determined that the cars were bone stock and it's not user error, they need to reject the warranty claims.