[ZTWsquared]

OAC_Sparky,Mar 29 2006, 05:49 PM Wrote:The premature wear is for a specific reason in the TSB. ie poor clamping tension between parts.

If it is found that this was the cause, then yes, it would qualify.

I can GUARANTEE that I can wear out a clutch inside 5000 km and a few weeks without totally frying it (obvious abuse), you just have to ride the heck out of the clutch.
[right][snapback]177888[/snapback][/right]

Point taken (and good that you're giving the other POV) ... and as I mentioned before we must also acknowledge that a TSB is something that Ford undertakes on their own -- it is not a recall -- and it is applied at their discretion.

It's been my personal experience, however, and also told to me in a "don't quote me" kind of a moment; that in terms of AWA matters Ford of Canada is really skewing the decision making criteria away from customer satisfaction and more towards the bottom line -- a sign IMO of the harsh fiscal reality in the Ford world today.

I think the fact that they revised all those parts suggest they were underspec'd to begin with. So, if customer satisfaction were the aim here on Ford's part (as I think it should be) the default should be to do this TSB in all cases where abuse wasn't proven.

If I were Tiketz, and really believed that I didn't cause this problem myself, I would take it to CAMVAP or even to small claims court. My lawyerly instincts tell me he would win by virtue of Ford's tacit admission contained within the TSB itself.

Just my .02.