I understand the Chevy Monza situation, my point is: How did Chevrolet and
the dealerships represent the engine size to the consumer? Perhaps my 351ci
substitition analogy in a modern Mustang is far fetched, but how would you
feel if you were told you were getting one engine and you got another
instead, wouldn't there be a huge liability issue present?- Hank
>>>>>>>>>>>>Hank;
-Good point from a liability standpoint. Wouldn't a customer have to
prove the mis-representation was detrimental to their purchase, even
though done as a conscious act? (Jay, please advise us all).
-I STILL make substitutions on the mfg. floor. As long as a Mfg. Engr.
signs-off on the substitution as an identical match or better in regards
to form, fit, or function, it's ALWAYS a go. If ANY cost-savings are
realized by the substitution, you're a "hero" and is so noted at yearly
review time. Believe me, this is an actual MRA for someone in my current
Purchasing position, and has been my whole career.
BOTTOM LINE: whatever you can do to make shipments/month-end revenue, you
do it.
POTENTIAL PROBLEM AREAS.
-1) you have a mat'l. & sometimes a labor variance to deal with on an
unit-by-unit basis.This affects your margins, both positively or
negatively.
-2) problems arise later in field service or warranty repair if the
substitute parts are not part of the re-furb. "loop" and are not noted
in any Service manual, etc., etc.
-3) if a sub. is made and cost-savings are in your favor, cool...but a
customer can call back at anytime for service for the ORIGINALLY spec'd.
part. Costs for it may have gone up, then your variance is now negative
and any previous savings are wiped out.Blah, blah.
MORAL: if I bought a TIGER new and it was supposed to have a 260 and I
got a 289 FOR THE SAME COST, I'd be pleased. If I got a 221 instead, I'd
"bitch" to the dealer to make it right,everything else being constant. I
believe ALL of us as savvy consumers do the same thing all the time.
Agreed?
Phil LeBrun
|