Nostradamus
SILVER Star
I'm a mechanical engineer by trade (used to hold a Florida Professional Engineer (PE) license) and used to work on the space shuttle. Happy to lend my support in any way.
I take issue with this part of their reply:
"your filter was subjected to a physical and dimensional evaluation, and was found to have the correct conformation to its engineering design”
That reads to me like they used some calipers to measure it's external dimensions and can confirm it's within spec. Who cares? The failure mode in this case is not related to exterior dimensional tolerances or some sort of a case or seam rupture. The most likely cause is the anti-drain-back valve - either via a manufacturing process fault during assembly resulting in mis-positioning, or becoming misaligned during operation. Neither of those are due to your oil selection and are not the owner's fault.
That "misapplication" is bogus as well, as you have rightly pointed out.
Since you surrendered the filter to them for analysis, I'd ask for the full report of what "analysis" was conducted, specifically:
It's not clear to me to what extent NAPA is positioned to test something like this that they sell under license, and which is made by another company (WIX in this case IIRC). Back in my days at Home Depot, the house brand product (Rigid, Ryobi, etc.) manufacturers were ultimately liable for product failures/recalls, etc. Home Depot handled the initial customer service concerns, but if the product was defective and resulted in legal damages, the manufacturer was on the hook. Sounds to me like NAPA is trying to close the door on this issue with their dimensional conformance response. At the end of the day, a full engineering analysis needs to be conducted to determine the root cause of the failure. May have to swim upstream to WIX to get that done, but it's NAPA's responsibility to do so.
Keep pushing, and LMK how I can help. Lazy engineering and shoddy manufacturing chap my ass, but not as much as people who run from their obligation to make things right when their products fail.
Other poor man's methods I've used to get traction include writing to the BBB in NAPA's HQ city, which will require a response from NAPA. Also many states have a consumer protection division of some sort. My favorite is sending a physical letter to the CEO's office outlining your concerns and lack of redress, along with another series of letters that you intend to send off to the Chamber of Commerce, BBB, Editor of the local newspaper and the consumer protection / scam reporter at your local TV affiliate if progress is not forthcoming.
Mentioning how many MUD members who could view this thread might help as well.
I take issue with this part of their reply:
"your filter was subjected to a physical and dimensional evaluation, and was found to have the correct conformation to its engineering design”
That reads to me like they used some calipers to measure it's external dimensions and can confirm it's within spec. Who cares? The failure mode in this case is not related to exterior dimensional tolerances or some sort of a case or seam rupture. The most likely cause is the anti-drain-back valve - either via a manufacturing process fault during assembly resulting in mis-positioning, or becoming misaligned during operation. Neither of those are due to your oil selection and are not the owner's fault.
That "misapplication" is bogus as well, as you have rightly pointed out.
Since you surrendered the filter to them for analysis, I'd ask for the full report of what "analysis" was conducted, specifically:
- Ask for a written copy of their failure analysis procedure (is it NAPA's or WIX's). Do they have one (they should)? Was this filter tested using the procedure? Was the complete procedure followed, or just the external dimensional analysis? If they skipped steps in the procedure, why? Who authorized it?
- Was the filter flow tested? If not, why not? If so, did the flow test "conform to the engineering design?"
- Ask them to explain the non-standard anti drain back valve position as seen from the picture you provided vs a known good filter
- Was the filter disassembled as part of the analysis? If so, where are the pictures? If no pics were taken, why not?
- Does their procedure call for a root cause or failure mode analysis (they should have this in place as a closed loop mechanism for their design process)
- Ask to speak to the engineer or technician who conducted the analysis, and Mike HUffstetler whose name is on the rejection letter (I'd be happy to join that conference call with you, BTW)
It's not clear to me to what extent NAPA is positioned to test something like this that they sell under license, and which is made by another company (WIX in this case IIRC). Back in my days at Home Depot, the house brand product (Rigid, Ryobi, etc.) manufacturers were ultimately liable for product failures/recalls, etc. Home Depot handled the initial customer service concerns, but if the product was defective and resulted in legal damages, the manufacturer was on the hook. Sounds to me like NAPA is trying to close the door on this issue with their dimensional conformance response. At the end of the day, a full engineering analysis needs to be conducted to determine the root cause of the failure. May have to swim upstream to WIX to get that done, but it's NAPA's responsibility to do so.
Keep pushing, and LMK how I can help. Lazy engineering and shoddy manufacturing chap my ass, but not as much as people who run from their obligation to make things right when their products fail.
Other poor man's methods I've used to get traction include writing to the BBB in NAPA's HQ city, which will require a response from NAPA. Also many states have a consumer protection division of some sort. My favorite is sending a physical letter to the CEO's office outlining your concerns and lack of redress, along with another series of letters that you intend to send off to the Chamber of Commerce, BBB, Editor of the local newspaper and the consumer protection / scam reporter at your local TV affiliate if progress is not forthcoming.
Mentioning how many MUD members who could view this thread might help as well.
