more info on recall 998 & 999

[luc]

I just got the Dealer Service Instructions for Safety Recall 998 and 999.

998 is 73 pages long and applies to cars built between 1996 and March 1 1999 (MDH 030110) and involve about 4700 cars.

999 is 37 pages long and applies to car built between March 1 1999 and October 2 2000 (MHD 030111 to MHD 102XX) and involve about 2200 cars.

999 is not too bad and involve some welding,grinding and drilling about 11 holes 1/4 diameter,as well that removing some brackets and putting new ones.
If rack brackets need to be replaced,a wheel alignement is needed.
They need to apply some primer and black paint,so be carefull with over spray.

998 is a different story,especially for the GTS.
On the GTS they need to cut all of the forward section of the trunk to be able to remove the fuel tank,a messy job for sure.
A replacement panel need to be riveted afterward.


998 is a MAJOR hard and dirty job and is a no win situation for both DC and Viper'owners since it is going to cost a lot of $ to DC and there is no way that the car can look as good than a new one with all the grinding,cutting,welding and painting that is involved.

If you need to have you car done,I will suggest that you take a lot of color pictures of the repair areas involved before the work is done.

I don't know how to put the full Safety Recalls on the VCA site but will be willing to fax some copies if someone REALLY want/need it.

Luc.00GTS

 

[Bugeater]

Can I assess which (if any) of these recalls I need by my VIN#?

I have a 2000 GTS, and want to know when it was built...I have the VIN in front of me, but the car is back home (I'm out of state)

 

[Y2K5SRT]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bugeater:
Can I assess which (if any) of these recalls I need by my VIN#?

I have a 2000 GTS, and want to know when it was built...I have the VIN in front of me, but the car is back home (I'm out of state)
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Judging by what I have seen, you will need the latter of the recalls (#999). The 2000's were built between 10/99 and 9/00 approximately (may have been 8/00 for the last 2000's). There were no 2000's built during the scope of #998 (which ended with the 3/99 builds of the 1999 model year) and the recall doesn't mention the 2001's. Sounds like the very late 1999's and all of the 2000's escaped #998 (differential). For once I am glad I waited for the cast pistons!

Chris

 

[Russ M]

Wow just ran into the garage to check my build date 8/99, thank God for little favors. Recal 998 looks like a seriously bad situation, and I feel horible for all those people that will be living it in the very near future.

 

[Performin Norman]

Yuk, I get the 998. Bummer

 

[Tom Sessions]

The 998 Recall is not that bad if no cracks are present.You only need to remove the fuel tank if welding in needed.And if there are no cracks than only the brace kit needs to be installed and this is held in with rivits.Owners please inspect your car with the tech before they cut your car open.And have them show you the cracks.Times are slow in the service depts right now and some dealers may see this as a easy way to make money.I'm working with the carolinas region to get things set up for this recall to be done correctly with the least amount of pain for the owners.

 

[Henry Cone]

Just to make sure that it is 100% clear - 998 IS ONLY A BIG DEAL IF YOU HAVE WELD CRACKS!!! Don't panic if your car build date indicates that 998 applies to it - if you read through all of the information on the other thread 998 involoves inspection for cracks before any work is done. Only if weld cracks are found does the recall get really involved. And I believe that 98+ % of the cars to which Recall 998 applies will not have weld cracks and will only require the addition of the reinforcing pieces....

 

[Bugeater]

Hey Tom,

Times werent slow in the service department when I came down a couple weeks ago....

Wanted to thank you again for the work, and letting me help along the way. I hope you didnt get into too much trouble with the wife and ma-in-law!

John.