Tesla denied warranty for Upper control arms because of Aftermarket Suspension

[CKwik240]

The ball joint still rotates differently at different heights. I'm not saying they are actually causing increased wear. I'm saying that a modified suspension changes the kinematics and dynamics of the system. The mgfr has every right to believe that played a role in the failure.

It will simply change the nominal position of the ball. But as the ball is spherical, there is no difference regarding loads on the assembly. It's another thing altogether if it's reaching the limits of articulation, but if it's going that far, you have much bigger problems.

I've already said all I need to say regarding warranty further up in the thread. My comment is purely about the ball joint.

Ball joints are functionally quite simple. But lubrication is a tricky task, and I'm not expert in that regard, but having attended engineering meetings with one of our ball joint suppliers regarding lubrication issues, nowhere in any of those discussions did position come up except for when it hit the limits of articulation. It's unlikely even a slammed M3 is going to be close. You'll likely run into damper limits well before then. You can use fancy words like kinematics and dynamics all you want. I've studied and applied both. I fail to see how lowering a vehicle will place any stress on the ball joint outside of it's designed specifications...

 

[nate704]

My contention is that there is the same likelihood they will fail whether the suspension is modified or not. Just look at all the posts on this site where non-modified UCA failed. I realize it’s a small sample, but seems to be a pervasive issue.

People who had issues and posted here are actually super minority in terms of total number of M3 owners out there, so it is very limited. You don't know how they drive their cars, road condition, any prior impact/damage, etc.

 

[nate704]

The only bending forces the arm will experience is from forward and aft loads (during acceleration and braking). The up and down loads placed on the wheel are not transferred into the upper arm at all. Therefore the change in spring/damping rate will have no effect on the upper ball joint from a suspension movement perspective.

As the loads aren't going to change during compression or rebound, I don't see how changing out springs and/or dampers are going to have any appreciable effect... Lower control arms would see load changes in this regard, but we aren't having an issue with those.

simply not true at all. If the UCA has no up/down load, why would they put the ball joint? Having ball joint means those parts get load/force from every direction.
When you change out the spring with different height and spring rate, it will impact everything. Force exerted to the UCA will be different in terms of range, amount, direction, etc. That's why a lot of "ricers" with lowering springs experience early wheel bearing failures (I was one of them with my Civic, LOL). The lowering spring will eventually kill the OEM shocks/dampers prematurely.

Even if (big if) the loads are not changing during compression/rebound, the force/load exerted will be different rate, different angle/moment, different speed, etc. which will cause premature failure or accelerate the failure.

 

[Gauss Guzzler]

It will simply change the nominal position of the ball... I fail to see how lowering a vehicle will place any stress on the ball joint outside of it's designed specifications...

Correct. The ball joint is essentially unaffected by any changes to the nominal ride height (or damping/spring rates). It could be affected by changes to the suspension travel limits but that's not being discussed here.

Could've been the install wasn't done properly, or the mods themselves did the damage.

Correct. All Tesla knows is that some jackass ripped the suspension apart, slapped it back together, and now the FUCA is suddenly FUBAR. Are they gonna come clean and say: "look, we really jacked up this ball joint design and they fail all the time so I'm pretty sure this was our fault."? Or are they gonna say: "look, most people's control arms hold up just fine, seems like it was probably something you did."?

And the fact is, many "car modding enthusiasts" don't even know how to lower a car correctly (e.g. resetting rubber bushing positions) so surely we can't expect Tesla's factory service techs to know the difference in causation between a ball joint failure and a rubber bushing failure - all they know is that modding the suspension sometimes causes parts like the FUCA to fail.

 

[21TM3P]

So I’m in the camp that’s had really good experiences with my Tesla service - both mobile and the local service center.

I’ve also had suspension issues. Also they were AFTER I modified my suspension. In my case, the after market sway bar end links I had were rattling.

While troubleshooting the noise I went to the service center to see if they could help identify locate the issue. The tech spent a couple hours on my car going through everything in the suspension and found the end links to be the culprit. They could have simply looked at my springs, sways, and links and told me to pound sand, but he spent the time and effort to help even though it was aftermarket.

In the end, I was charged $80 for diagnostic services. I would have happily spent hundreds more for the same level of support. Just my experience…

 

[kessel_run]

Modify your suspension that COULD void your warranty on suspension parts.
Modify your frunk with a power frunk and now you have electrical problems then that COULD void your warranty.
Use a module that unlocks your rear motor to performance levels when not a P, that COULD void your motor warranty.

Basically, any modification done to a particular area that is not a factory part COULD void your warranty.

</thread>

 

[CKwik240]

simply not true at all. If the UCA has no up/down load, why would they put the ball joint? Having ball joint means those parts get load/force from every direction.
When you change out the spring with different height and spring rate, it will impact everything. Force exerted to the UCA will be different in terms of range, amount, direction, etc. That's why a lot of "ricers" with lowering springs experience early wheel bearing failures (I was one of them with my Civic, LOL). The lowering spring will eventually kill the OEM shocks/dampers prematurely.

Even if (big if) the loads are not changing during compression/rebound, the force/load exerted will be different rate, different angle/moment, different speed, etc. which will cause premature failure or accelerate the failure.

A ball joint only experiences load based on the directions of force applied and the reaction force it provides. As the upper control arm will not resist an upward or downward movement, it will not apply a force downward. In other words, if you disconnect the spindle from the ball joint, the upper arm will dangle and it will be easy to move out up and down save for any friction at the inner bushings. The lower arm does not freely move with the spindle disconnected as the spring/damper assembly is hiding out in place. As with all physics, you only get forces where forces applied. Ball joints don't experience loads in all directions just because it's a ball joint.

They put a ball joint because it allows for pivot in the up and down position as the arm is moved up and down, and it allows rotation as the front wheel is turned. It's a far more elegant solution than a pin at the outer joint and a king pin to allow for steering.

Lowering a car will change the load angle to a small degree, but in the case of the UCA, the lateral loads still travel through the arm in the direction of the arms. But the socket will still see the loads on the inner or outer surfaces. The load on the ball will be at a different angle, but it's a ball so it doesn't care. The stem attaching to the arm will have a different load angle, but only slightly and this would not affect the operation of the ball joint itself.

Wheel bearings when lowered are subjected to sustained thrust loads and can wear out sooner as a result. Dampers can wear out prematurely because the spring rate has changed and may produce higher piston speeds (particularly in rebound) and cause cavitation. Additionally, lowering too far can cause the damper to bottom out which will damage the damper as well. But neither of these have any direct affect on the upper ball joint.

 

[White Shadow]

My contention is that there is the same likelihood they will fail whether the suspension is modified or not. Just look at all the posts on this site where non-modified UCA failed. I realize it’s a small sample, but seems to be a pervasive issue.

That's an assumption. And it may be a very good assumption, but it's still an assumption. But the point that has been made over and over again here is that modifying the suspension automatically means that the manufacturer can deny warranty repairs on suspension components. I'm not even sure why this is a debate.

 

[White Shadow]

Always put car back to stock before taking to a dealership has always been the way.

For scammers, yes. Dishonest people who don't want to pay to repair their own vehicle....

I tuned my car. My clutch failed about 4,000 miles later. My car was still within the factory warranty period. I replaced the clutch myself and didn't even try to scam the dealer into doing it as a warranry repair. Did the tune on my car cause my clutch to fail? Maybe. Maybe not. It can't be proven either way. But I know that my car is making quite a bit more power tuned and there's a good chance that the extra power is more than the original clutch was intended to handle. So I purchased a new clutch (designed to handle more power) and installed it myself.

 

[White Shadow]

The only bending forces the arm will experience is from forward and aft loads (during acceleration and braking). The up and down loads placed on the wheel are not transferred into the upper arm at all. Therefore the change in spring/damping rate will have no effect on the upper ball joint from a suspension movement perspective.

As the loads aren't going to change during compression or rebound, I don't see how changing out springs and/or dampers are going to have any appreciable effect... Lower control arms would see load changes in this regard, but we aren't having an issue with those.

I've seen so many poor installations of lowering springs that cause issues with the suspension. A lot of people apparently don't know that suspension components like control arms shouldn't be torqued until they are sitting at proper resting ride height. But most guys just crank them down while hanging and this causes bushing failure in the control arms.

But hey, everyone is an expert mechanic these days because they watched a YouTube video of someone who probably doesn't even know what he's doing either. Sad fact, but so true.

As for your bending forces theory----keep in mind that lowering springs ALWAYS change the angle of the upper control arms. For just that reason alone, the manufacturer can simply say that the modification made took the suspension out of normal parameters.

 

[CKwik240]

Correct. All Tesla knows is that some jackass ripped the suspension apart, slapped it back together, and now the FUCA is suddenly FUBAR. Are they gonna come clean and say: "look, we really jacked up this ball joint design and they fail all the time so I'm pretty sure this was our fault."? Or are they gonna say: "look, most people's control arms hold up just fine, seems like it was probably something you did."?

Legally speaking, they can't make such an argument unless they can actually show the workmanship was as issue. Let's say a customer took the vehicle to an independent shop that replaced with dampers with Monroe brand dampers. They can't simply assume shoddy work.

And the fact is, many "car modding enthusiasts" don't even know how to lower a car correctly (e.g. resetting rubber bushing positions) so surely we can't expect Tesla's factory service techs to know the difference in causation between a ball joint failure and a rubber bushing failure - all they know is that modding the suspension sometimes causes parts like the FUCA to fail.

They also know by now that the FUCAs are prone to making noise. They are simply using it as an excuse not to pay.

 

[CKwik240]

As for your bending forces theory----keep in mind that lowering springs ALWAYS change the angle of the upper control arms. For just that reason alone, the manufacturer can simply say that the modification made took the suspension out of normal parameters.

But it does not change the direction of the forces through the UCA. Tesla is using it as an excuse, but that doesn't mean there is any technical validity. Proving them wrong would prove costly

 

[whisperingshad]

For scammers, yes. Dishonest people who don't want to pay to repair their own vehicle....

I tuned my car. My clutch failed about 4,000 miles later. My car was still within the factory warranty period. I replaced the clutch myself and didn't even try to scam the dealer into doing it as a warranry repair. Did the tune on my car cause my clutch to fail? Maybe. Maybe not. It can't be proven either way. But I know that my car is making quite a bit more power tuned and there's a good chance that the extra power is more than the original clutch was intended to handle. So I purchased a new clutch (designed to handle more power) and installed it myself.

Not really, the dealerships are the scammers... Took my Prius prime in for service and they said my air filter was dirty(i changed it the night before)

 

[White Shadow]

But it does not change the direction of the forces through the UCA. Tesla is using it as an excuse, but that doesn't mean there is any technical validity. Proving them wrong would prove costly

I'd argue that it's not an excuse. Tesla designed and built a car and they provide a warranty for that car. You buy the car and modify it. When a related component fails, Tesla is not obligated to honor the warranty repair for that part. You can call that an excuse if you want, but I call that following the warranty as it's written.

Again, if it turns out that the component in question was defective and a recall is eventually issued, then Tesla will indeed replace the component in question, hopefully with an upgraded design.

 

[White Shadow]

Not really, the dealerships are the scammers... Took my Prius prime in for service and they said my air filter was dirty(i changed it the night before)

I agree....dealerships can absolutely be scammers. But you're no better if you remove your modifications in order to get warranty repairs done. That makes you a scammer too. I choose not to be that guy. If I'm paying for modifications to my car, then I'll pay to repair it if something goes wrong. I'm not going to try to scam the dealership just because I think they are scammers themselves. Why complain about dealerships if you're just as dishonest?

 

[nate704]

People just want to come up with their own theory to justify this aftermarket modification. No matter how you sugar coat it, Tesla is not responsible for your action.

 

[Occhis]

Yes. This is a design issue and a high percentage will eventually fail regardless of mods. If this is not the case, why do we have people on this board had Tesla replace the opposite side gratuitously as a preventative measure when only one side is failing? Not hard to figure out.

 

[drpheta]

Yes. This is a design issue and a high percentage will eventually fail regardless of mods. If this is not the case, why do we have people on this board had Tesla replace the opposite side gratuitously as a preventative measure when only one side is failing? Not hard to figure out.

Tesla SC is often nice. I get free bolts from time to time as I tinker with my car. They replaced my entire charging system when it was found the grounding bolt/nut wasn't fully secured upon delivery. They did so to be sure there wasn't anything wrong with it. When the heat/pump issue came about, they replaced the entire HVAC system from intake vent to blower. They only needed to do the critical components, but did that mean my blower was crap?

I could see them just preemptively replacing the contralateral side out of an abundance of caution. That said, do you realize how small the vocal groups are, yet they'll easily be the loudest? You can't state without a shadow of doubt that is a major/rampant issue. It's just that those who have had problems are vocal about it, while those who aren't haven't said a lick. There are 100,000s Model 3s on the road, and you count what you can on your hands and feet as a major issue? This forum is less than 1% of the M3 drivers in the US and Canada. Until the NHTSA gets wind of a major percentage of those 100ks of Model 3s and Ys having FUCA issues, chances are it isn't as problematic as you think.

BTW, I drive my car in the nasty NE, and at 15k miles when I swapped out my FUCAs they looked brand new. No tears on the boots, no play in any bearings or ball joints. I put in MPP FUCAs, and I know full well that any suspension issues are coming out of pocket.

 

[White Shadow]

Yes. This is a design issue and a high percentage will eventually fail regardless of mods. If this is not the case, why do we have people on this board had Tesla replace the opposite side gratuitously as a preventative measure when only one side is failing? Not hard to figure out.

I understand that and I'm sure it's true. But that doesn't change the rules of warranty protections. I think that's the big hangup people are having. Let's say that Tesla redesigned the upper control arms and replaced them free of charge under a recall on every Model 3 ever built. And some months later, your lowered car, while still within the warranty period, had lower control arm failure. Would you expect Tesla to replace those lower control arms under warranty? Or would you just accept that Tesla would not have to honor the warranty on the lower control arms because your car is lowered. Ask yourself that question.

 

[Occhis]

I do understand the numbers. You may very well be right. A large percentage of M3 sales have been in the 2021/22 model years. Units purchased 2019 & 2020 have fewer than average annual miles b/c of Covid. It will be interesting to see how this settles out in the next couple of years.