But your comment was "according to NHTSA they do" (implying.. expire you never even used the word) ... which is not true.
You did not choose a wrong word, you were replying to someone else and specifically inferred that NHTSA says they expire. WHICH IS FALSE.
Are you sure the 10 yr rule applies to recalls that happen after the 10yrs? I would assume GM and NHTSA have made an agreement about how long GM has to continue to support replacement of parts under the recall, but I have not heard what the timeline is.
And I don't know maybe Robo has seen how many of these new parts GM has made, and how long have they have agreed to keep them available, Does the 10yr clock restart? I have no clue.
Take that comment in the context of the conversation. It was a response to a response to the first comment I made. If you can't follow back that far I am sorry.
Am I sure about what happens? No. I can only relate my personal experience as it pertains to what we do here.
I will throw out this quote from an NBC news article:
The statute of limitations, according to NHTSA, for all no-charge recall repairs is 10 years from the original sale date of the vehicle. However, one exception is tires. Tire recall repairs must be completed within 60 days of receiving a recall notice.
I have not checked out NHTSA's site myself, but that looks pretty definitive, unless NBC is lying.
But there is no resetting of the clock. 10 years from the date of sale of the vehicle is it.
and to pile on ... I don't believe there is any requirement for warehousing all parts for all cars for 10yrs.
Here is an article from automotive news, they infer manufactures may try to have inventory for 6 -10 yrs but even that is getting to be not true.
Here is a good breakdown of what is probably the only Law that applies and that is for a "warranty" https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/q...arts-for-a-set
A consequence is that vehicle manufacturers must be able to provide parts during the term of a warranty (if any) made at the time of sale. They need not make or stock these parts themselves.
Vehicle makers could choose not to do so, but then they would be required to provide a replacement vehicle or a full refund of the vehicle cost. In practice it is usually more cost effective for makers to procure replacement parts to effect a warranty repair.
A further consequence is therefore that replacement parts are also available to people who do not have a warranty claim.
So with most cars having 3yr bumper to bumper "most" parts only need to be available for 3 yrs. Powertrain and emission part warranties are longer.
Pile on all you want. It doesn't really affect me.
My facility fabricates automotive glazing, which is classified as a safety component. I do not have universal knowledge of the industry, and have assumed (dangerous I know) that other safety components are handled the same as ours.
We are required by our contracts to retain tooling for, and therefore the ability to make, parts for ten years after the end of production of any specific part. After that we are free to scrap whatever dedicated tooling that we have. In the cases where specific production lines have been built for a unique part we have elected to fabricate what we hope is a 10-year supply of that part so that the line can be dismantled. If we are approached for a larger quantity of the part than we have, or cannot otherwise supply it, we are responsible for whatever costs the OEM incurs because of that failure.
I really don't understand what the point of this discussion is. I made the comments that I did originally to warn people that parts may not always be available to satisfy this recall. If I am wrong then there is no harm to anyone, and they will be happy some years from now when they want to finally get their car fixed. But if I am right then there are going to be some seriously unhappy people, and there won't be anything that they can do about it.
What will you do when you demand satisfaction for a repair that cannot be made? You will be offered the book value for your car so that it can then be taken and crushed. Not very satisfactory in my mind.