Re: Automotive ennui
 

Chevy Man wrote:
> Went to buy a new chevy avalanche. Found out they had a motor that cuts off
> 4 cylinders at highway speeds. After remembering the cadillac 4-6-8 engine.
> I decided against a new chevy. Not just dull, not what I wanted.

Don't know how well it would work in the Avalanche but I just rented a
Impala LT earlier this month from Hertz. I drove it for about four days
before discovering it had their new engine that goes from 6 cylinders to 3.

I was impressed. Overall mileage was about 26.5 in mixed driving.
Tooling along outside Phoenix on I-17 at 80m/h on dead level or a VERY
slight downgrade showed instantaneous mileage readings in the 45-49 mpg
range.

Once I discovered it was there and dialed in the indicator in the DIC, I
simply could NOT tell when it was running on 3 or 6 cylinders without
seeing it on the indicator. Absolutely no lag or surge.

Very nice ride indeed.

How it will perform over the long term remains to be seen but I suspect
Chevy may have a winner.

Re: Automotive ennui
 

Chevy Man wrote:
> Went to buy a new chevy avalanche. Found out they had a motor that cuts off
> 4 cylinders at highway speeds. After remembering the cadillac 4-6-8 engine.
> I decided against a new chevy. Not just dull, not what I wanted.

Don't know how well it would work in the Avalanche but I just rented a
Impala LT earlier this month from Hertz. I drove it for about four days
before discovering it had their new engine that goes from 6 cylinders to 3.

I was impressed. Overall mileage was about 26.5 in mixed driving.
Tooling along outside Phoenix on I-17 at 80m/h on dead level or a VERY
slight downgrade showed instantaneous mileage readings in the 45-49 mpg
range.

Once I discovered it was there and dialed in the indicator in the DIC, I
simply could NOT tell when it was running on 3 or 6 cylinders without
seeing it on the indicator. Absolutely no lag or surge.

Very nice ride indeed.

How it will perform over the long term remains to be seen but I suspect
Chevy may have a winner.

Re: Automotive ennui
 

Great on flat ground but how would it do in the mountains? What happens when
it breaks I am sure it will be CHEAP to fix. Gas mileage is not everything
you have to include future repairs too. Especially when most people run
their cars well over 100k miles.

"Unquestionably Confused" <Puzzled2@ameritech.net> wrote in message
news:u3jLi.55667$YL5.55643@newssvr29.news.prodigy. net...
> Chevy Man wrote:
>> Went to buy a new chevy avalanche. Found out they had a motor that cuts
>> off 4 cylinders at highway speeds. After remembering the cadillac 4-6-8
>> engine. I decided against a new chevy. Not just dull, not what I wanted.
>
> Don't know how well it would work in the Avalanche but I just rented a
> Impala LT earlier this month from Hertz. I drove it for about four days
> before discovering it had their new engine that goes from 6 cylinders to
> 3.
>
> I was impressed. Overall mileage was about 26.5 in mixed driving. Tooling
> along outside Phoenix on I-17 at 80m/h on dead level or a VERY slight
> downgrade showed instantaneous mileage readings in the 45-49 mpg range.
>
> Once I discovered it was there and dialed in the indicator in the DIC, I
> simply could NOT tell when it was running on 3 or 6 cylinders without
> seeing it on the indicator. Absolutely no lag or surge.
>
> Very nice ride indeed.
>
> How it will perform over the long term remains to be seen but I suspect
> Chevy may have a winner.
>

Re: Automotive ennui
 

Great on flat ground but how would it do in the mountains? What happens when
it breaks I am sure it will be CHEAP to fix. Gas mileage is not everything
you have to include future repairs too. Especially when most people run
their cars well over 100k miles.

"Unquestionably Confused" <Puzzled2@ameritech.net> wrote in message
news:u3jLi.55667$YL5.55643@newssvr29.news.prodigy. net...
> Chevy Man wrote:
>> Went to buy a new chevy avalanche. Found out they had a motor that cuts
>> off 4 cylinders at highway speeds. After remembering the cadillac 4-6-8
>> engine. I decided against a new chevy. Not just dull, not what I wanted.
>
> Don't know how well it would work in the Avalanche but I just rented a
> Impala LT earlier this month from Hertz. I drove it for about four days
> before discovering it had their new engine that goes from 6 cylinders to
> 3.
>
> I was impressed. Overall mileage was about 26.5 in mixed driving. Tooling
> along outside Phoenix on I-17 at 80m/h on dead level or a VERY slight
> downgrade showed instantaneous mileage readings in the 45-49 mpg range.
>
> Once I discovered it was there and dialed in the indicator in the DIC, I
> simply could NOT tell when it was running on 3 or 6 cylinders without
> seeing it on the indicator. Absolutely no lag or surge.
>
> Very nice ride indeed.
>
> How it will perform over the long term remains to be seen but I suspect
> Chevy may have a winner.
>

Re: Automotive ennui
 

Chevy Man wrote:

> Great on flat ground but how would it do in the mountains? What happens when
> it breaks I am sure it will be CHEAP to fix. Gas mileage is not everything
> you have to include future repairs too. Especially when most people run
> their cars well over 100k miles.

Bingo. That's one of the problems with all the "money saving" or safety
technology - they do fail - not all of them at the same time, but let's
say you have 30 technological wizbangs on your car. There's a good
chance several are going to fail at some point. Some are cheap to fix,
some will cost more than the value of the car when it gets some age and
mileage on it (*especially* if you are not a DIY'er and parts
scrounger). Try selling or trading in a car when two or three
electronic things (ABS, tranny controls, seat heaters and air
conditionaers) are not working and see what that does to the value.

And God help you if an insurance company is totaling out your car and
discovers things missing or not working. They deduct fullup OEM parts
prices and labor from the value of your car for everything - whether
anyone really cares if it works or not - like that they can find.
Doesn't take long, with their fraudlently low NADA starting numbers to
get your actually-worth-$5000 car down to $2500 or less.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

Re: Automotive ennui
 

Chevy Man wrote:

> Great on flat ground but how would it do in the mountains? What happens when
> it breaks I am sure it will be CHEAP to fix. Gas mileage is not everything
> you have to include future repairs too. Especially when most people run
> their cars well over 100k miles.

Bingo. That's one of the problems with all the "money saving" or safety
technology - they do fail - not all of them at the same time, but let's
say you have 30 technological wizbangs on your car. There's a good
chance several are going to fail at some point. Some are cheap to fix,
some will cost more than the value of the car when it gets some age and
mileage on it (*especially* if you are not a DIY'er and parts
scrounger). Try selling or trading in a car when two or three
electronic things (ABS, tranny controls, seat heaters and air
conditionaers) are not working and see what that does to the value.

And God help you if an insurance company is totaling out your car and
discovers things missing or not working. They deduct fullup OEM parts
prices and labor from the value of your car for everything - whether
anyone really cares if it works or not - like that they can find.
Doesn't take long, with their fraudlently low NADA starting numbers to
get your actually-worth-$5000 car down to $2500 or less.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

Re: Automotive ennui
 

On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 09:06:49 -0400, Bill Putney <bptn@kinez.net>
wrote:

>Chevy Man wrote:
>
>> Great on flat ground but how would it do in the mountains? What happens when
>> it breaks I am sure it will be CHEAP to fix. Gas mileage is not everything
>> you have to include future repairs too. Especially when most people run
>> their cars well over 100k miles.
>
>Bingo. That's one of the problems with all the "money saving" or safety
>technology - they do fail - not all of them at the same time, but let's
>say you have 30 technological wizbangs on your car. There's a good
>chance several are going to fail at some point. Some are cheap to fix,
>some will cost more than the value of the car when it gets some age and
>mileage on it (*especially* if you are not a DIY'er and parts
>scrounger). Try selling or trading in a car when two or three
>electronic things (ABS, tranny controls, seat heaters and air
>conditionaers) are not working and see what that does to the value.
>
>And God help you if an insurance company is totaling out your car and
>discovers things missing or not working. They deduct fullup OEM parts
>prices and labor from the value of your car for everything - whether
>anyone really cares if it works or not - like that they can find.
>Doesn't take long, with their fraudlently low NADA starting numbers to
>get your actually-worth-$5000 car down to $2500 or less.
>
>Bill Putney
>(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
>address with the letter 'x')

Another great reason to keep my '92 Corolla Wagon!

No Air Bags to fail.

Just a damend good car that gets me where I want to go without hassle!

--
Scott in Florida

Re: Automotive ennui
 

On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 09:06:49 -0400, Bill Putney <bptn@kinez.net>
wrote:

>Chevy Man wrote:
>
>> Great on flat ground but how would it do in the mountains? What happens when
>> it breaks I am sure it will be CHEAP to fix. Gas mileage is not everything
>> you have to include future repairs too. Especially when most people run
>> their cars well over 100k miles.
>
>Bingo. That's one of the problems with all the "money saving" or safety
>technology - they do fail - not all of them at the same time, but let's
>say you have 30 technological wizbangs on your car. There's a good
>chance several are going to fail at some point. Some are cheap to fix,
>some will cost more than the value of the car when it gets some age and
>mileage on it (*especially* if you are not a DIY'er and parts
>scrounger). Try selling or trading in a car when two or three
>electronic things (ABS, tranny controls, seat heaters and air
>conditionaers) are not working and see what that does to the value.
>
>And God help you if an insurance company is totaling out your car and
>discovers things missing or not working. They deduct fullup OEM parts
>prices and labor from the value of your car for everything - whether
>anyone really cares if it works or not - like that they can find.
>Doesn't take long, with their fraudlently low NADA starting numbers to
>get your actually-worth-$5000 car down to $2500 or less.
>
>Bill Putney
>(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
>address with the letter 'x')

Another great reason to keep my '92 Corolla Wagon!

No Air Bags to fail.

Just a damend good car that gets me where I want to go without hassle!

--
Scott in Florida

Re: Automotive ennui
 

"Bill Putney" <bptn@kinez.net> wrote in message
news:5m70urFbtdh2U1@mid.individual.net...

>
> And God help you if an insurance company is totaling out your car and
> discovers things missing or not working. They deduct fullup OEM parts
> prices and labor from the value of your car for everything - whether
> anyone really cares if it works or not - like that they can find. Doesn't
> take long, with their fraudlently low NADA starting numbers to get your
> actually-worth-$5000 car down to $2500 or less.
>

While I don't doubt they can do this Bill - I have never had this happen to
a single claim. I have never had any form of deduct on a claim other than
the standard deductions per NADA - things like high mileage, lack of certain
options from the factory. Certainly never because a particular thing did
not work.

My best friend is an adjuster for a large insurance company and if this were
practice, he'd have talked about it. Rather, despite what most people like
to claim, most insurance claims pay pretty accurately.

--

-Mike-
mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net

Re: Automotive ennui
 

"Bill Putney" <bptn@kinez.net> wrote in message
news:5m70urFbtdh2U1@mid.individual.net...

>
> And God help you if an insurance company is totaling out your car and
> discovers things missing or not working. They deduct fullup OEM parts
> prices and labor from the value of your car for everything - whether
> anyone really cares if it works or not - like that they can find. Doesn't
> take long, with their fraudlently low NADA starting numbers to get your
> actually-worth-$5000 car down to $2500 or less.
>

While I don't doubt they can do this Bill - I have never had this happen to
a single claim. I have never had any form of deduct on a claim other than
the standard deductions per NADA - things like high mileage, lack of certain
options from the factory. Certainly never because a particular thing did
not work.

My best friend is an adjuster for a large insurance company and if this were
practice, he'd have talked about it. Rather, despite what most people like
to claim, most insurance claims pay pretty accurately.

--

-Mike-
mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net

Re: Automotive ennui
 

Mike Marlow wrote:
> "Bill Putney" <bptn@kinez.net> wrote in message
> news:5m70urFbtdh2U1@mid.individual.net...
>
>
>>And God help you if an insurance company is totaling out your car and
>>discovers things missing or not working. They deduct fullup OEM parts
>>prices and labor from the value of your car for everything - whether
>>anyone really cares if it works or not - like that they can find. Doesn't
>>take long, with their fraudlently low NADA starting numbers to get your
>>actually-worth-$5000 car down to $2500 or less.
>>
>
>
> While I don't doubt they can do this Bill - I have never had this happen to
> a single claim. I have never had any form of deduct on a claim other than
> the standard deductions per NADA - things like high mileage, lack of certain
> options from the factory. Certainly never because a particular thing did
> not work.
>
> My best friend is an adjuster for a large insurance company and if this were
> practice, he'd have talked about it. Rather, despite what most people like
> to claim, most insurance claims pay pretty accurately.

We can disagree then. Ask your friend if he allows adders for upgrades
done to the car. I'm going thru this right now.

A differnt twist, but about 6 years ago, I had an adjuster stand in my
driveway and deduct full OEM price for all trim moldings from the total
out value of a car because I had gotten "new" ones (perfect condition
ones out of a junk yard) and had pulled the old ones off. Both sets
were sitting on the bench in my garage during the accident and with him
standing in my driveway doing the evaluation. I told him the old and
new pieces were right over there in the garage. He refused to look at
them and refused to take the brand new OEM part subtractor off of his
total out value work sheet.

And yes - the NADA values are fraudulently low. Easily provable with
real market numbers and with other blue books. The banking industry
uses them to minimize the loan value on a car to cut their risk on
collateral loans, and the insurance industry uses them to cut their
costs on total outs, and it's fraudulent. The adjusters are trained in
doing this, and no doubt your freind actually believes the BS he was
trained in.

Why do you think their standard line when you challange them to find you
an equivalent car for the same money is "We're not in the business of
buying cars"? It's because you just called their bluff and that's their
only way out - by not having to actually find an equivalent car for what
they're saying it's worth. Tell them you're not asking them to find and
buy one for you, you just want them to prove it's possible, and they'll
refuse to go thru the effort. Once again, you called their bluff, and
they have no answer beyond "We're not in the business of buying cars".
Run a little experiment and ask your friend if your car was totalled, if
they would find one to replace it with. See if he doesn't use that
*exact* line (that he was trained to use if he is ever challenged).

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

Re: Automotive ennui
 

Mike Marlow wrote:
> "Bill Putney" <bptn@kinez.net> wrote in message
> news:5m70urFbtdh2U1@mid.individual.net...
>
>
>>And God help you if an insurance company is totaling out your car and
>>discovers things missing or not working. They deduct fullup OEM parts
>>prices and labor from the value of your car for everything - whether
>>anyone really cares if it works or not - like that they can find. Doesn't
>>take long, with their fraudlently low NADA starting numbers to get your
>>actually-worth-$5000 car down to $2500 or less.
>>
>
>
> While I don't doubt they can do this Bill - I have never had this happen to
> a single claim. I have never had any form of deduct on a claim other than
> the standard deductions per NADA - things like high mileage, lack of certain
> options from the factory. Certainly never because a particular thing did
> not work.
>
> My best friend is an adjuster for a large insurance company and if this were
> practice, he'd have talked about it. Rather, despite what most people like
> to claim, most insurance claims pay pretty accurately.

We can disagree then. Ask your friend if he allows adders for upgrades
done to the car. I'm going thru this right now.

A differnt twist, but about 6 years ago, I had an adjuster stand in my
driveway and deduct full OEM price for all trim moldings from the total
out value of a car because I had gotten "new" ones (perfect condition
ones out of a junk yard) and had pulled the old ones off. Both sets
were sitting on the bench in my garage during the accident and with him
standing in my driveway doing the evaluation. I told him the old and
new pieces were right over there in the garage. He refused to look at
them and refused to take the brand new OEM part subtractor off of his
total out value work sheet.

And yes - the NADA values are fraudulently low. Easily provable with
real market numbers and with other blue books. The banking industry
uses them to minimize the loan value on a car to cut their risk on
collateral loans, and the insurance industry uses them to cut their
costs on total outs, and it's fraudulent. The adjusters are trained in
doing this, and no doubt your freind actually believes the BS he was
trained in.

Why do you think their standard line when you challange them to find you
an equivalent car for the same money is "We're not in the business of
buying cars"? It's because you just called their bluff and that's their
only way out - by not having to actually find an equivalent car for what
they're saying it's worth. Tell them you're not asking them to find and
buy one for you, you just want them to prove it's possible, and they'll
refuse to go thru the effort. Once again, you called their bluff, and
they have no answer beyond "We're not in the business of buying cars".
Run a little experiment and ask your friend if your car was totalled, if
they would find one to replace it with. See if he doesn't use that
*exact* line (that he was trained to use if he is ever challenged).

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

Re: Automotive ennui
 

"Mike Marlow" <mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net> wrote in message news:34610$46fe56a3$471fbb11$26505@ALLTEL.NET...
>
> "Bill Putney" <bptn@kinez.net> wrote in message news:5m70urFbtdh2U1@mid.individual.net...
>
>>
>> And God help you if an insurance company is totaling out your car and discovers things missing or not working. They deduct
>> fullup OEM parts prices and labor from the value of your car for everything - whether anyone really cares if it works or not -
>> like that they can find. Doesn't take long, with their fraudlently low NADA starting numbers to get your actually-worth-$5000 car
>> down to $2500 or less.
>>
>
> While I don't doubt they can do this Bill - I have never had this happen to a single claim. I have never had any form of deduct
> on a claim other than the standard deductions per NADA - things like high mileage, lack of certain options from the factory.
> Certainly never because a particular thing did not work.
>
> My best friend is an adjuster for a large insurance company and if this were practice, he'd have talked about it. Rather, despite
> what most people like to claim, most insurance claims pay pretty accurately.
>
> --
>
> -Mike-
> mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net
>



Ditto... I have been with State Farm for around thirty years now and never have
been short changed by them. But I do see most my friends screw themselves when
it comes to insurance claims because they never even bother to read the policy.


I learned my lesson when someone stole my 1966 Baja VW. I paid extra to
have the ins policy show the value of the car at $3,500 so the insurance co could
not screw me if it got totaled or something. Or so I thought. LOL
When the adjuster told me I was just throwing money away doing that because
it makes no difference to the actual replacement cost I thought I was screwed for sure.
Then she asked me why there were no receipts and maybe a photo if the car was worth
more than normal value of $800. Boy was I mad when I went home to get them.

Later I get a phone call and she says "I am sorry" but this just does not add up to $3500
so I can not pay you $3500, will I accept $4,700.!

Boy did I feel like an idiot that time. LOL

Dan

Re: Automotive ennui
 

"Mike Marlow" <mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net> wrote in message news:34610$46fe56a3$471fbb11$26505@ALLTEL.NET...
>
> "Bill Putney" <bptn@kinez.net> wrote in message news:5m70urFbtdh2U1@mid.individual.net...
>
>>
>> And God help you if an insurance company is totaling out your car and discovers things missing or not working. They deduct
>> fullup OEM parts prices and labor from the value of your car for everything - whether anyone really cares if it works or not -
>> like that they can find. Doesn't take long, with their fraudlently low NADA starting numbers to get your actually-worth-$5000 car
>> down to $2500 or less.
>>
>
> While I don't doubt they can do this Bill - I have never had this happen to a single claim. I have never had any form of deduct
> on a claim other than the standard deductions per NADA - things like high mileage, lack of certain options from the factory.
> Certainly never because a particular thing did not work.
>
> My best friend is an adjuster for a large insurance company and if this were practice, he'd have talked about it. Rather, despite
> what most people like to claim, most insurance claims pay pretty accurately.
>
> --
>
> -Mike-
> mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net
>



Ditto... I have been with State Farm for around thirty years now and never have
been short changed by them. But I do see most my friends screw themselves when
it comes to insurance claims because they never even bother to read the policy.


I learned my lesson when someone stole my 1966 Baja VW. I paid extra to
have the ins policy show the value of the car at $3,500 so the insurance co could
not screw me if it got totaled or something. Or so I thought. LOL
When the adjuster told me I was just throwing money away doing that because
it makes no difference to the actual replacement cost I thought I was screwed for sure.
Then she asked me why there were no receipts and maybe a photo if the car was worth
more than normal value of $800. Boy was I mad when I went home to get them.

Later I get a phone call and she says "I am sorry" but this just does not add up to $3500
so I can not pay you $3500, will I accept $4,700.!

Boy did I feel like an idiot that time. LOL

Dan

Re: Automotive ennui
 

On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 07:14:39 +0200,
fritz@spamexpire-200709.rodent.frell.theremailer.net (Ed) wrote:

>"New-car sales are sagging in America and car makers are blaming the
>housing slump or the credit crunch. I suspect something else. I suspect
>boredom.
>
>"Face it. A lot of the cars sold in America are just dull..."
>
>Wall Street Journal article: http://301url.com/cf7

And when has this not been true?

I'll admit it, my Accord is boring, it just goes where you aim it,
reliably, economically, comfortably. Then what?

J.