NHTSA Complaint #11144721 — 2004 MAZDA RX-8

WHILE DRIVING AT APPROXIMATELY 45 MILES PER HOUR ON A RURAL ROAD, THE FRONT PASSENGER BALL JOINT SEPARATED FROM THE LOWER CONTROL ARM, CAUSING THE CONTROL ARM TO FIRST DROP ONTO THE INSIDE SURFACE OF THE FRONT PASSENGER WHEEL AND THEN ONTO THE GROUND AS THE WHEEL MOVED OUT OF ITS NORMAL POSITION. IN THE PROCESS, THE PASSENGER SIDE INNER TIE ROD WAS SEVERELY BENT, THE INSIDE SURFACE OF THE WHEEL WAS BADLY SCORED, THE TIRE SURFACE (WHICH CONTACTED THE FENDER) WAS DAMAGED, AND THE PASSENGER FRONT FENDER WAS BENT WHEN THE TIRE CONTACTED IT. I SPOKE WITH MAZDA USA, WHO PUT ME IN CONTACT WITH A LOCAL DEALER. I TOWED THE CAR TO THE DEALER AND DROPPED IT OFF. THEY HAVE REPLACED BOTH CONTROL ARMS (PER THE RECALL) AS WELL AS THE BENT TIE ROD AND PASSENGER FRONT WHEEL BEARING. THEY ALSO PERFORMED AN ALIGNMENT. MECHANICALLY, THEY HAVE REPAIRED THE CAR. HOWEVER, MAZDA IS REFUSING TO REMEDY THE DAMAGED WHEEL OR TIRE OR THE FENDER. SINCE THE CAR HAS BEEN LOWERED, THEIR CLAIM IS THAT THE FENDER MAY NOT HAVE BEEN DAMAGED ON A STOCK CAR AT STOCK RIDE HEIGHT. THEY MAY BE RIGHT, AND THE FENDER DAMAGE IS MINOR, SO I'M NOT WORRIED ABOUT THAT. HOWEVER, SINCE A STOCK VEHICLE WOULD LIKELY HAVE SUFFERED THE SAME WHEEL/TIRE DAMAGE, I WAS TOLD THAT IF THE VEHICLE HAD A STOCK WHEEL & TIRE THEY WOULD REPLACE THE WHEEL & TIRE SINCE THEY WERE BOTH DAMAGED. I'M NOT EVEN SURE WHAT "STOCK TIRE" MEANS ON A 14-YEAR-OLD CAR SINCE ANY CAR WILL HAVE HAD THE TIRES REPLACED MULTIPLE TIMES SINCE THEN, BUT AFTERMARKET OR NOT THE FAILURE OF THE RECALLED PART CAUSED DAMAGE TO THESE PARTS. BESIDES, WITH DAMAGE TO THE TREAD SURFACE OF THE TIRE, IT IS MY OPINION THAT THE SAFETY OF THE TIRE HAS BEEN COMPROMISED (OR, AT THE VERY LEAST, THE LIFE EXPECTANCY OF WHAT IS A NEARLY NEW TIRE HAS BEEN SEVERELY REDUCED).