Anyone receive the Warranty Extension Program SSP92 (Power Transfer Unit) letter ?

mccasle

Member
We have a 2012 CX-9 Touring with AWD

Just received it along with SSP93 for the brake issue. He is a small section of the letter for those of you that have not seen it.....


Mazda Motor Company has decided to conduct a Special Service Program (SSP) to extend the warranty coverage for the repair of the Power Transfer Unit (PTU) on certain 2010-2014 CX-9 all-wheel drive vehicles produced from July 28, 2009 through December 2, 2013.

The warranty coverage for applicable repair is extended to 7 years (84 months) from the original warranty start date or 90,000 miles, whichever comes first.

What is the problem?
On some vehicles, when driving under high load or at high speeds, increased oil temperature inside the transfer unit may result in poor lubrication. Continued driving under these conditions may result in abnormal noise and transfer unit damage, and may cause PTU oil leakage. The warranty extension applies only to this condition.
 
Received just the SSP 93 letter today. Did not receive SSP 92 letter (yet?) 2012 Grand Touring AWD
 
Last edited:
We received both brake booster and transfer case letters yesterday. (They were mailed in separate envelopes.) I have some questions about the transfer case letter:
1) Have they now redesigned the transfer case so that the replacement units will be less likely to fail?
2) Is there a drain plug added to the replacement transfer case so that regular maintenance can be performed?
3) Have they made any revisions to the factory maintenance procedures for the original transfer cases that haven't failed yet or for the new replacement transfer cases (assuming these are redesigned)? What do they recommend to prevent future failures?
 
Those are great questions and ones I have been thinking about. This issue was the reason I paid to get the 10 year - 120,000 mile extended warranty for our CX-9. I am willing to call my service advisor to get his thoughts on these questions. Perhaps others can do the same and we can learn what is going on.

I'll be back in touch.

Thanks!
 
I checked with two service advisors here in Columbus, Ohio. Here is what they told me (take it for what it is worth):

1) The transfer cases have been completely redesigned by Ford and Mazda, improving the seals and case itself. It is now used on both the CX-9 and the Ford Edge
2) According to both service advisors, the 2012 TC does have a drain plug and the fluid can be exchanged. Germain recommends a 30,000 TC interval. Ricart did not recommend any interval, but the TC fluid exchange is only $150 at Ricart
3) No response by either service advisor on this one. They both shared they are seeing these failures between 45,000 and 90,000 miles. If the CX-9s get past that, things look good for the future. The one thing they both indicated increases the potential for failure (seal or entire unit) is using the car to tow things.

I hope this helps.
 
Got my PTU letter today. Need to crawl under the car and see if it indeed does have a drain plug in the PTU. I have a 2013 CX-9 GT
 
I got the brake booster letter (SS93), not the TC yet (SS93).
Mazda should take notice not to use FORD parts anymore..... my personal suggestion.
Don't know about the brake booster. It is made by Ford also?
 
"On some vehicles, when driving under high load or at high speeds, increased oil temperature inside the transfer unit may result in poor lubrication. Continued driving under these conditions may result in abnormal noise and transfer unit damage, and may cause PTU oil leakage. The warranty extension applies only to this condition."

That's not always the case.... I don't drive under high load or high speed and my 2010 CX9 has had 2 PTUs replaced. Thankfully all under warranty, but it was crazy. My car kept making this "angry" noise and I kept bringing it in- they could never find anything wrong. Finally they decided it was the PTU so it was replaced. A few months later- same problem- replaced again. Hopefully 3rd time is the charm! I am glad that they have finally recognized the issue and it wasn't just me.
 
Assuming my 2012 has a drain plug on the PTU what would be the proper oil to use and how much does it take? Thanks if anyone has this information.

I also received both letters today for my 2012 GT.
 
I got the booster letter today, mine is not AWD so I won't see the other one. However, the letter is a little confusing. So they extended the coverage to 7 years or 90K miles whichever comes first. Well, mine did both already. The letter says something to the effect of if I am past their 90K mileage that this will still be in effect up until March 2015. Huh??? So am I covered or not?? Not clear on this one.
 
I received the PTU Warranty Extension (SSP 92) but haven't heard about the brake issue. Whats that all about?

Glad Mazda is doing something and I do hope if my 2014 AWD Touring PTU eats it, the new one is actually an improved part.
 
I got the brake issue warranty extension today. I just passed 91K so I guess I'm good for another year.

Any notice ALL the car manufacturers are stepping up recalls now with GM under scrutiny? Toyota, VW, Infinity, Land Rover, Chevy, Honda, the list goes on...
 
Looks like they covered anyone who had to pay for service already. That's rather good on Mazda's part IMO.

I think that's pretty standard for a recall. It's only right--if you already paid out of pocket before they discovered there was a recall, why shouldn't you get reimbursed?
 
I got the brake booster letter 2 days ago. Mine is a 2010, not AWD. It is good to know the booster is a weak link, but then not sure about waiting until it fails on this big car and then do something about it. At this point loosing a bit of confidence in the car to have my wife driving the kids around in it.
 
10Molavi: we are starting to think about trading the car in for something else. Given the recent publicity the resale value would be worse than that of an old Yugo, but it might still be worth it in a long term.
 
I'm glad Mazda has extended the warranty on the brake booster and transfer case - though I think I would be happier if there were a full blown recall to replace substandard/defective/weak parts with upgraded replacements. I don't think that will happen with the transfer case, but in the current climate it is possible that NHTSA will eventually force Mazda to issue a brake booster recall. While I welcome the letters we are receiving from Mazda, in the absence of a full recall these letters are like announcements to the general public that these cars have known defects. (What's the current resale value of a ticking time bomb?)

On the other hand, Mazda is certainly not unique in all of this. Public scrutiny of defects is the new normal and few companies come out smelling like roses. Our 2001 Odyssey had a warranty extension for faulty automatic transmissions. Ours failed just after the extended warranty expired and we got no consideration from Honda. Worse, the replacement transmission were apparently just rebuilt versions of the original transmissions with most of the defects not fixed. Many owners suffered identical failures with the replacement units. (Sounds like the Mazda transfer cases?!)

Toyota's unintended acceleration debacle is a terrible example of safety fears morphing into a public relations nightmare. I was really shocked to read of Michael Barr's testimony in the October 2013 Toyota civil liability trial. He was granted many, many hours of access to Toyota's throttle position software source code (much more than NASA had) and what he found is really distressing. Toyota's software engineers showed a shocking disregard for industry-wide safety standards. Toyota really had no rejoinder to Barr's testimony and they settled the case immediately after he testified.

It has taken Ford years now to fix their Ford MyTouch software problems. Not everyone listens to Consumer Reports, but I have to believe that all those black dots and the arrival of Ford in the least reliable slot cost them a fortune in lost sales. How is it possible that a company of their size couldn't get their software s**t together after so many years?

And what are we to say about GM and there cheap-ass attempt to save a few pennies on ignition switches? Their safety defect monitoring process seems so screwed up that it looks like no one there has any idea of what actually happened and why. How can buyers have confidence when GM itself can't explain what when wrong and why?

Designing safe and reliable cars is apparently a really difficult task. Throw in the normal human inclination to hubris, add enormously large and complex organizational systems, combine with a profit-driven inclination to cut costs and voil: recipe for disaster. Nevertheless, cars are safer and more reliable now than they were when I was growing up. My kids are safer in our CX-9 then my sister and I were when were young, lying on the back shelf of the old Chevy, without airbags, seatbelts or crumple zones.
 
Back