Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
HomeAnnouncements
Discussion Groups
By Brand
BMWChevroletDodgeFordGMHondaLexusMercedes-BenzNissanPeugeotToyotaVolkswagenOther Brands
By Topic
4x4 CarsRVsDrivingMaintenance & RepairCar AudioCollectible Cars
Country Specific
Australian ForumsUK Forums
ArticlesAuto InsuranceBuyingCars & TechnologyMaintenanceMiscellaneousSafety
DMV Resources
Related Topics
MotorcyclesBoatsMore Topics ...

Car Forum / Subaru Cars / July 2006

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Tire Pressure Monitor - Catch-22?

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
bcx - 30 Jun 2006 23:41 GMT
I ran into this problem and wondered if anyone else has hit it too:

Had 4 new tires put on my 2005 Outback wagon, LLBean model so it has
the tire pressure monitors on each wheel. Tire dealer was very specific
about having appropriate equipment and training to deal with the TPMs
so it seemed like it would be easy. Picked up the car and drove for 1/2
hour - TPM light came on. Took it back to tire dealer - no light, no
problem. Finally took it back with the light on and they called me in
to the owner's office to explain the problem.

Seems that their equipment for TPM (Schraeder) was sold as being able
to deal with any cars with TPM. However, they've just found out that
Subaru (and Nisson, maybe Toyota) use proprietary equipment, not
available outside the dealership. So I now have to go to the Subaru
dealer to get the TPM system set correctly - at a cost of $18.  Subaru
delaer confirmed it and provided the price.

So - despite buying tires at a place that provides free rotations for
life, I have to take the car to the dealer following each rotation to
get the TPMs reset. An interesting situation, since it's technically
illegal for the tire dealer to release the car with the system
malfunctioning. The only way to avoid this is to have all tire work
done at a Subaru dealer!

Starting in 2007, all cars must have TPMs and at least in NY, a
functioning TPM system becomes part of the inspection. It seems like
something is wrong here, but the only person to suffer is the consumer.

Are there any other options to get around this?
Carl 1 Lucky Texan - 01 Jul 2006 00:41 GMT
> I ran into this problem and wondered if anyone else has hit it too:
>
[quoted text clipped - 25 lines]
>
> Are there any other options to get around this?

I would expect Schrader, and others will alter their equipment soon.
When the auto companies tried to hold their customers hostage from indie
mechs by withholding CEL codes, the g'mint made them share. Quite likely
something similar would happen with the TPM equipment - not sure though.

interesting issue

Carl

Signature

to reply, change  ( .not)  to  ( .net)

Phil Marshall - 01 Jul 2006 13:49 GMT
...snipped...

An interesting situation, since it's technically
> illegal for the tire dealer to release the car with the system
> malfunctioning.

> Starting in 2007, all cars must have TPMs .....

Where did you get this info from?  I read all the car magazines
and have never heard anything about this mandate of all new
vehicles requiring a TPM.

~~Phil~~
Blair Baucom - 02 Jul 2006 01:46 GMT
Long ruling by the NHTSA due to blowouts on Explorers to protect us from
under inflated tires in the United States.

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/rulings/TirePresFinal/

Blair

> ...snipped...
>
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>
> ~~Phil~~
bcx - 04 Jul 2006 01:42 GMT
> Long ruling by the NHTSA due to blowouts on Explorers to protect us from
> under inflated tires in the United States.
>
> http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/rulings/TirePresFinal/
>
> Blair

Thanks for pulling that reference out - I would have looked forever.

bc
Jim Stewart - 02 Jul 2006 03:07 GMT
> I ran into this problem and wondered if anyone else has hit it too:
>
[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
> malfunctioning. The only way to avoid this is to have all tire work
> done at a Subaru dealer!

It's also technically illegal for someone
to confiscate my property against my will.

> Starting in 2007, all cars must have TPMs and at least in NY, a
> functioning TPM system becomes part of the inspection. It seems like
> something is wrong here, but the only person to suffer is the consumer.
>
> Are there any other options to get around this?
Michael Pardee - 02 Jul 2006 05:24 GMT
> It's also technically illegal for someone
> to confiscate my property against my will.

That is true, and it is more than technical. The service agency has no power
to enforce anything - it can only report the condition to DOT (or the local
police/sheriff in case the condition is truly critical, like inoperative
brakes or an intoxicated driver). This was a common situation I faced when I
was service manager in an avionics shop, ca 1980. Planes that were destined
to be grounded rolled out of our hanger with no more than a call to the
local GADO inspector.

Mike
Gerald Simonowits - 02 Jul 2006 09:56 GMT
> > It's also technically illegal for someone
> > to confiscate my property against my will.
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>
> Mike

One woud think it would depend on the local laws/reg's ? It's illegal
for a bar to "release" more alcoholol to you if you are drunk, no matter
if you've paid for it in advance or not.
Michael Pardee - 02 Jul 2006 17:48 GMT
>> > It's also technically illegal for someone
>> > to confiscate my property against my will.
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
> for a bar to "release" more alcoholol to you if you are drunk, no matter
> if you've paid for it in advance or not.

The alcohol belongs to the bar. If a patron brings in alcohol (which
*really* ticks off bar owners) the tavernkeeper may not confiscate it. If a
patron has paid in advance the tavernkeeper has the responsibility to refund
the amount overpaid.

The stickiest implementation of the policy is when a customer tries to take
merchandise from the store. Here in Arizona (still the Wild West, where a
law had to be passed recently to forbid people bringing guns into banks and
bars) a store owner may not legally detain a shoplifter or even stop them
from taking the merchandise out the door, but hired guards from licensed
security companies can.

Mike (Arizona state motto: "Yeehaw!")
bcx - 04 Jul 2006 01:40 GMT
> It's also technically illegal for someone
> to confiscate my property against my will.

I actully didn't intend to start a political debate with this comment.
>From my perspective, it's one of the very few weapons I have as a
consumer to fight this: the threat of taking the Tire dealer to court.
I keep hoping (stupidly, it seems) to arrive at a reasonable financial
agreement over the value of free tire rotations for the next couple of
years. So far, the tire dealer hasn't offered anything other than to
pay for the first "reprogramming" of the TPM - a whopping $18.

And of course, it's not illegal to conficate your property against your
will.  Happens all the time. And is getting worse.
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.