Warranty warning

[jocko]

yup, they can, I have never seen it happen but I would guess if u go in with a big chip on ur shoulder,they will help u knock it off, In theory at least. Just sayin

[Planedude]

So, if I Magnaport my 2001 built K9, my warranty may void???

That's cool, wasn't going to use it anyway. Modifying firearms is always going to be a "on your own" deal as there are waaaay too many lawyers out there.

I have a Taurus PT1911 with "safety lock" hammer. One day at the range the hammer locked in the cocked position (it not suppose to be able to do that) and I had left the key at the house. Hey, I unlocked the hammer upon receiving it from the previous owner and I wasn't ever going to lock it again.
That convinced me it was time to replace the trigger guts in the gun with some parts that work together. Called Cylinder & Slide to ask about their hammer and sear kit. I was also thinking at that time of doing some other mods and so I asked pricing on sending the gun to them for the kit to be installed and the slide to be dovetail cut for different sights.
They said they could replace everything but the hammer as it was a safety device and C&S could not disable it...
I believe this was in response to my telling the guy that the hammer had failed cocked and that it worried me enough to want it out of there. Maybe he thought I was an undercover agent trying to trick them... or.... something, but I was really surprised at how fast they went to "NO" when I brought up doing away with the STUPID, NON WORKING safety feature.
This kind of thinking is industry wide. We just have to be smart about our Mods and deal with it all.
Peace.

[CJB]

I thought the Magnusen-Moss Act made it such that a manufacturer had to prove that the consumers actions actually contributed to the product failure to void the warranty. The classic example is a car that has a warranty, and the consumer adds an aftermarket (whatever), or modifies the car in some way. That does not void the warranty, even thought modifications are expressly forbidden in the warranty statement.

This is the classic example of what can be said, vs what can be enforced

[Longitude Zero]

Enforcement of the Act is a fools errand in most cases and companies know that and take advantage. In your car analogy if you change the rear end gearing and it blows up the tranny it is obvious there is a causative connection and thus a denial. Now if you replace the radio and the power steering craps out they are on the hook. Having relatives in the car business I get to know the ins and outs of that thoroughly dishonest endeavor.

[jocko]

the troulble with

I thought the Magnusen-Moss Act made it such that a manufacturer had to prove that the consumers actions actually contributed to the product failure to void the warranty. The classic example is a car that has a warranty, and the consumer adds an aftermarket (whatever), or modifies the car in some way. That does not void the warranty, even thought modifications are expressly forbidden in the warranty statement.

This is the classic example of what can be said, vs what can be enforced

that CJBis that if a dealertells you it is not under wqarranty coverage, and u dispute it, then u have to pursue the legla end of it and more than likely 99% will not spnd that moneyand time to prove otherwise.

I do thiunk most makers of any pr9oduct will bend over 80% of the time to d the right thing. I have been on this forumsince day 1 and I can't remember readng where a owner sent in an out of warranty gun and was charged for sumpin that jus5t "went wrong. sur ethey might hav eto pay the postage etc. Not to sure if a car beaks down under warranty that GM has to pick up the tab to get the car to a dealer. al;ot depends on the circumstances and they will all be different.

A dealer has to be careful of doing warranthy that is iffy at best by the maker for they may determine it was not a warranty issue and the dealer cold be then out the part anbd service.... I have no doubt that some dealers have milked the makers of a product for warranty sh!t that was not needed so today many of the car makers might just call the dealer and requst that "defective " that they just fixed under warranty to be sent in to ythem and it damn well better be bad or that dealer will be back charged.

To many techs in these car places just replace parts until the thing starts to work again,but not knowing which part they put in did the fix either and then they expect the car maker to stand behind all of those parts. Doesn't work that way today, to many checks and balances in the system. Basically IMO honesty is the best policy....

[garyb]

Soooo, how do we know for sure what Kahr will do with a functionally modified gun...as far as warranty work? Surely someone out there has returned a Kahr that has been modified functionally (springs, porting, etc...) and has either had the warranty work completed or rejected by Kahr. Anyone?

Kahr would need to be careful on this. If one customer's warranty work was rejected because of a functional mod and that customer found out that Kahr completed warranty work on another customer's gun that had the same mod, there could be a real problem....possibly discrimination.

Anyway, I suspect that someone has sent in their functionally modified Kahr for warranty work and had it completed OR rejected. Anyone? It would be interesting to know if the factory would do as they say and NOT complete warranty work on a functionally modified Kahr.

[jocko]

possably discrimination??? that would be a stretch, and again would u want to pursue legal action for a repair to your gun and pay the costs etc to prove ,, what??? Everyone who sends in a gun that has had some modificatrion to it risks certain things.

My point is gary and I hope I am wrong is that it seems to be that your trying to prove a point that at best if they did sumpin for ol jocko free gratus on his highlyt modified pMJ9 and not anutter person that we should go after kahr over it, and then IMO the end results from kahr would simply be,,,, well fokk um, anyone who sends in their gun no matter what if we find one minute thing not factory thast we will not fix it, so there fore everyone now gets punishged. Personally I see nuttin to gain

My opinion, let a sleeping dog pee on himself. Just sayin

[garyb]

HaHa.

No. I am really not trying to make any issue at all Jocko. Honestly. I wouldn't go after Kahr over something like that. Besides, my gun is stock...so no reason to anyway. It works great...no reason to make any issue against Kahr. No point to prove. Honestly, just a dialog. Kind of threw that discrimination issue out there....so many people do that you know. Anyway....

I was only looking to see if anyone has had warranty work that had functionally modified their Kahr. That's all. Not going after anything. Honestly. Just looking to see if kahr is sticking to what they are telling me. That's all.

[jocko]

I'm cool with it. My poihnt andI would bringit up again. Rolex watch company will not repair any watch that has been altered, beit a after market band which maye has nuttin to do with u sendingit in tothem for loose time badly etc. Maybe a rolex dealer willfix it andcvharge u for it bu rolex in NY and Texas willl simply return it. Again I would think it is their choice to so such a thing. certainly in all these years Rolex might have crosse3d the line and did such and such a thing otherwise.

What I think kahr might do if they found out your functionally did sumpin to your gun is fix it by replacing it back to stocki and charging you for it, but I don't see them fxing sumpin that I altered that actually hindered the reliable operation of the gun. I do think they wold over look any grip stipplying , but again it is there callto make not mine. I would think it would be sh!tty of them to refuse to fix a gun you sent it in that was modified and just send it back that way. I don't see that happening.

Somewhere i had stated that when I owned akeltek 380.I had the barrel and slide ported by APW cogan , a highly reliable andf custom service busness. The recoil spring ate right through the front of the slide. This had nuttin to do with what APW did to the slide, and kel tek replaced it with a new slide and barrel NO CHARGE but basicaly said I was out the porting work cost. They kbnew it was not the porting company's work that caused it, as at that time they had a rash of these defective slides coming back with the same issue...

[garyb]

[QUOTE=jocko;270911]I'm cool with it. My poihnt andI would bringit up again. Rolex watch company will not repair any watch that has been altered, beit a after market band which maye has nuttin to do with u sendingit in tothem for loose time badly etc. Maybe a rolex dealer willfix it andcvharge u for it bu rolex in NY and Texas willl simply return it. Again I would think it is their choice to so such a thing. certainly in all these years Rolex might have crosse3d the line and did such and such a thing otherwise.

What I think kahr might do if they found out your functionally did sumpin to your gun is fix it by replacing it back to stocki and charging you for it, but I don't see them fxing sumpin that I altered that actually hindered the reliable operation of the gun. I do think they wold over look any grip stipplying , but again it is there callto make not mine. I would think it would be sh!tty of them to refuse to fix a gun you sent it in that was modified and just send it back that way. I don't see that happening.
QUOTE]

Good point Jocko. That's kinda where I was coming from too....Kahr may charge the owner for warranty work on a functionally modified gun.

I was reading threads that folks thought Kahr would do the warranty work even if the gun was functionally modified. Kahr says "NO". However, some owners feel that Kahr will do the work for free anyway. I am wondering if anyone has experience with Kahr on a warranty issue on their gun that was functionally modified. Perhaps Kahr did the work...perhaps not and they got charged for the work. Just wondering how things worked out for them. At this point, from what I've heard from Kahr, I am guessing that Kahr will do the warranty work to get the gun functional again, but at a cost to the owner. But we still have not actually heard from anyone who went through this functionally modified warranty scenario. I'm simply trying to learn what the reality is. Please understand, my gun is stock and works great. I have no axe to grind and am not trying to make any trouble. We learn from each other here on the forum. Folks here have expressed that they feel Kahr will cover the warranty work on a functionally modified Kahr gun. Kahr says they won't and you are likely to be charged for the work/parts. What's the reality? Just like you point out Jocko, there are a number of companies out there who will charge you for warranty work if you have modified their product. That's what we're trying to find out from folks here on the forum who have actually had experience with this scenario.

[jocko]

wellIcan tellyou I had to sendmy jP380 back,one of the first 250 made with issues, but before that I had it grip stippled, Kahr fixed the reliability issue and never even mentioned anything about the grip work.. and on their dime to postage both ways.

[garyb]

Probably not considered a functional mod? More cosmetic...would you think?

[jocko]

don't ask, don't tell,... Just sayijn