Originally Posted by XLR8R

I wouldn't expect the dealer to do anything, warranty-wise, for a vehicle that the owner has modified from stock; as a manufacturer (or their rep), Dodge just can't afford to operate like that.

We work with our customers as much as we can, but we simply can't be held responsible for service or parts a customer does that we didn't provide.

Warrantys and BOMBS don't mix well!

Originally Posted by XLR8R

I couldn't find the 35-12.5-17 AT KO in BFG's lineup; I know the section width on their 37X12.5R17/D is essentially the same as the LT315/70R17/D on 10" rims.

Originally Posted by djbikeman

The 315/70R17 is a 35x12.5 roughly.

I don't think 2006Megacab is expecting it to be covered under warranty. He was just thinking that it failed prematurely comsidering that those are tie rods on a 1 ton truck. I would agree assuming he hasn't been tearing down gravel roads and through pastures. I have run bigger tires/wheels than that without any issues on other trucks I have owned.

It's fairly obvious that a dealer is going to laugh at the suggestion that it be fixed under warranty. I have 33" tires on 8" wide wheels. That is 1" bigger and 1" wider than stock. I know the dealer would tell me that any driveline or steering issues I would have are caused by the wheels/tires. That is if I had any warranty left other than the Cummins. The only thing that sucks about the 06 is the 3/36 warranty.

Originally Posted by CD in NM

It could be that these joints ARE a little undersized for the trucks. It used to be that trucks were built like tanks and rode like them. Wanting to target others to the trucks brought about the 'soft ride' suspensions. In the beginning they were still built somewhat 'tank' like, but over the last 10 years they HAVE beocme more 'car' like in their size of joints. Another factor has to do with technology - now a computer can be used to downsize a part and still have it perform within a given range of performance. Ultimately this decrease in mass also decreases cost. The real question becomes 'when does acceptable efficiency and performance decrease lifespan to a point of customer dis-satisfaction, and what does the consumer consider an acceptable lifespan?' It very well may be that the line is now crossed into that unacceptable territory.

The tire argument also has some validity when you compare a BFG AT KO 315-70-17 with 10" of tread width on the ground vrs the BFG AT KO 35-12.5-17's with 12.5" of tread on the ground. The 315's are 1" more tread on the ground over stock and really should not cause that much stress to the joints. The 35's increase it to 3.5"s more tread on the ground which does increase the stress to the joints. This actually becomes the real argument regarding warranty and tire issues. If you were upgrading to the 315-70's the dealership argument is all but moot. Since the 315-70's are found to be the stock tire on a Hummer, and the suspension is very similar in construction, joints and all, what's good for GM should be good for Dodge.

CD

Originally Posted by CD in NM

The tire argument also has some validity when you compare a BFG AT KO 315-70-17 with 10" of tread width on the ground vrs the BFG AT KO 35-12.5-17's with 12.5" of tread on the ground.