You got that right.
Yeah, I know. That's why I said it.
All my statements in this post are in Navy Blue. CM
If you are referring to my statement then you need to read it again. I said that any brand can have a bad day. The big difference is how the brand responds to their goof up. You sell me a new tractor that has to be split after 20 hours and treat me bad, then OF COURSE I'm going to change brands. That isn't ridiculous, its simple common sense.
I was referring to statements made throughout this thread to date. Those who jump to the change brands theme BEFORE the dealer has done anything to remedy the problem are way ahead of themselves, including you, if you think that is a reasonable means of dealing with this situation. What gets me more than the ridiculous cry to change brands is how is one realistically supposed to do that when the OP's tractor is broken and yet to be repaired? Trade it in for a different brand broken? What exactly is the logic in dumping a brand new tractor before the dealer or the manufacturer have had a chance to make it right?!
Sure. It can happen. The response is the issue. And I love your term "partial disassembly". You sound like a service rep. ;-)
I owned an independent foreign auto repair and sales facility for over ten years. I never worked in a dealership, nor was I trained by one, never worked in a gas/service station, etc. I was self taught and had a business partner who had a trade school training background. I worked on every foreign brand known to man, and some rare exotics from all over the world too. And one thing is clear; what goes together comes apart. Sometimes well, sometimes better than it came into the shop. But in order to fix anything that is broken it must be inspected, a diagnosis of likely failure made, a course of action created, and a partial to complete disassembly of the suspect system performed to repair the problem in question.
No one said it did.
Regarding splitting the tractor making it useless that's inferred by those who 'cry', different brand as the solution to every problem.
Of course. The concern is what the consequences will be. And all of us have been around long enough to know that such a procedure is not risk free and represents an obvious opportunity for the sorts of mistakes you listed above.
That doesn't mean the outcome is going to be less than satisfactory. Qualified service technicians, with factory training, working to repair a tractor can and do everyday repairs that entail, among other tasks, splitting tractors to access defective or incorrectly installed parts, with no adverse outcome as the end result.
Those who think the outcome will be worse than what is the case currently are wrong. The tractor, according to the OP is leaking 4 gallons/hour and not getting fluid to the rear end. A properly performed repair will render that situation non-existant; and if it entails a new rear end/transmission, or whatever it ends up needing, the tractor will be fine.
I'm sure you are correct. But that does not change how the consumer will feel about your brand.
It's the OP's brand, and he will feel whatever he feels about it at the end of this saga.
Incorrect. I've experienced if first hand. Ford F150 head problems. Ford fixed it and extended warranty. Maybe it won't happen in the tractor world, but don't act like someone is an idiot for suggesting it.
I'm not acting like anything. I'm just stating what is real world experience with tractors, Kioti in particular. A Ford head being given an extended warranty for that bogus part is NOT the same as a tractor having it's warranty extended, especially prior to any actual work being performed to determine what the problem actually is.
There is no fluid in the rear of the tractor. It is potentially a major issue regardless of how simple the fix is.
It is potentially an issue that will be addressed in the course of the tractor repair. It is premature to jump to conclusions about the tractor's final outcome without even a diagnosis in place by the dealer/manufacturer. It is jumping to conclusions based on facts not in evidence, and that does not follow the logic of troubleshooting a problem, then fixing same.
If the OP had had any confidence that this would be the outcome he would not be here asking about it. Again, I feel sure that is what will happen but it is simply nuts to suggest that that is the only possible outcome.
It's not nuts to suggest that the only reasonable outcome is one in which the dealer and manufacturer stand behind their product and give the antsy consumer a satisfactory outcome. Anything else in terms of expectation is unrealistic, and unwarranted. People in general today expect too much from what they purchase. Fitness and merchantability are what one should expect, it's all that is intended to be delivered from the get go. Anything else is dreaming that the manufacturer owes a buyer more than the product they purchased.
The one thing that is clear is that there is quite a divide on how people here, on this website, see this problem. For most people who sacrifice to fork over the money for a $30k tractor, who aren't mechanics and don't have years of experience bodging tractors together, having your new tractor split just to find out what is causing it to leak large amounts of fluid and not send fluid to the rear end is a real big deal. Any mechanic, service rep, dealer, factory rep or pal who doesn't get that is missing the point. No amount of "chill out, it will all be fine" is going to help.
Maybe not, but that doesn't change a thing. Instead of being paranoid about all kinds of possible bad outcomes, one needs to rely on their dealer network and the manufacturer to come through for them. In essence, one does need to chill out and wait on the diagnosis and repair results. THEN, if there is a problem still present, no matter what it may be, deal with it at that time. No need to jump to exaggerated worse case scenarios in advance of them happening. It serves no one well to get wound up prior to having something to be would up about. Again, that is why new equipment comes with a warranty- to allow the manufacturer/dealer to fix problems.
And again, my MAIN point is not about new tractors or changing brands or not splitting the tractor: it is about how this dealer and this brand respond to this consumers problem. In this situation he deserves to be blown away with courtesy, the dealer/brand's ownership of the responsibility and doing everything they can, as fast as they can, to making his tractor consistent with and with the life expectancy of a new tractor with 20 hours on it. Anything short of that is unacceptable. And sometime the real world, realistic expectation and outcome is, in fact, unacceptable. I continue to expect this situation to be handled properly by Kioti. I'm very curious to see how it plays out.
