falling apart?!?!?!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: falling apart?!?!?! In defence of boring pieces of on wheels
On Mar 10, 8:18 am, Gordon McGrew <RgEmMcOgVr...@mindspring.com>
wrote:
> my 14-year-old GS-R. Having the savings in the bank is just a bonus.
> Does my GS-R cost more to maintain than a five-year-old Monte Carlo?
> Probably. But if I had a Monte Carlo, I would be looking to dump it
> because it is a boring piece of .
>
It might be a better buy for $5k than GS-R precisely
because it is a boring piece of !
If you have $5k and are looking for reliable transportation
fun should not be a part of the equation at all.
The fact that the car is a boring piece of means
that it was less likely to have been owned by someone
who did not take the living daylights out of it and sold it
when there was nothing left to milk.
> To summarize, it sounds like you are claiming that the Consumer
> Reports Auto Reliability is "pure rubbish" because it *might* be more
> economical to own a cheap, boring piece of crap.
Yep. The way the data is tabulated it's meaningless to
people on the budget like the OP. So he went for the fun and was had.
You just have to face the reality that quite a few people
out there don't want to or can't afford to spend much
on their cars. My point was that if they want reliable transport
they'd better buy a mistake of judgement from someone who
bought a boring piece of more recently than someone
who bought a funster and held to it longer... until it
started to fall apart.
wrote:
> my 14-year-old GS-R. Having the savings in the bank is just a bonus.
> Does my GS-R cost more to maintain than a five-year-old Monte Carlo?
> Probably. But if I had a Monte Carlo, I would be looking to dump it
> because it is a boring piece of .
>
It might be a better buy for $5k than GS-R precisely
because it is a boring piece of !
If you have $5k and are looking for reliable transportation
fun should not be a part of the equation at all.
The fact that the car is a boring piece of means
that it was less likely to have been owned by someone
who did not take the living daylights out of it and sold it
when there was nothing left to milk.
> To summarize, it sounds like you are claiming that the Consumer
> Reports Auto Reliability is "pure rubbish" because it *might* be more
> economical to own a cheap, boring piece of crap.
Yep. The way the data is tabulated it's meaningless to
people on the budget like the OP. So he went for the fun and was had.
You just have to face the reality that quite a few people
out there don't want to or can't afford to spend much
on their cars. My point was that if they want reliable transport
they'd better buy a mistake of judgement from someone who
bought a boring piece of more recently than someone
who bought a funster and held to it longer... until it
started to fall apart.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: falling apart?!?!?!
In article <986027_2258b1c5b87324111fbe1788db4afe8a@autoboard z.com>,
bummed71904 <none@000.com> wrote:
> Ok, I bought my car a year ago. Already I have put over 5g’s worth of
> parts into it, from axels and roters to motor mounts, three radiators,
> and 02 sensors. A week ago the SPEED SENSOR??? went out. I paid almost
> $200.00 to have it fixed. The check engine light came on again
> tonight. The code read main circut malfunction. I have no clue. Anyone
> know the costs on this repair and is it worth it? :cry:
>
> 1996 Honda Accord
So you've only had it for 1 of it's many 11 years.
It could have many more hard poorly maintained miles than you would ever
believe.
You need to buy such an old car from an old original owner who maintains
it properly, such as me, but my '95 LH Chrysler is not for sale. <
bummed71904 <none@000.com> wrote:
> Ok, I bought my car a year ago. Already I have put over 5g’s worth of
> parts into it, from axels and roters to motor mounts, three radiators,
> and 02 sensors. A week ago the SPEED SENSOR??? went out. I paid almost
> $200.00 to have it fixed. The check engine light came on again
> tonight. The code read main circut malfunction. I have no clue. Anyone
> know the costs on this repair and is it worth it? :cry:
>
> 1996 Honda Accord
So you've only had it for 1 of it's many 11 years.
It could have many more hard poorly maintained miles than you would ever
believe.
You need to buy such an old car from an old original owner who maintains
it properly, such as me, but my '95 LH Chrysler is not for sale. <
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: falling apart?!?!?! In defence of boring pieces of on wheels
On 12 Mar, 23:56, isq...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Mar 10, 8:18 am, Gordon McGrew <RgEmMcOgVr...@mindspring.com>
> wrote:> my 14-year-old GS-R. Having the savings in the bank is just a bonus.
> > Does my GS-R cost more to maintain than a five-year-old Monte Carlo?
> > Probably. But if I had a Monte Carlo, I would be looking to dump it
> > because it is a boring piece of .
>
> It might be a better buy for $5k than GS-R precisely
> because it is a boring piece of !
> If you have $5k and are looking for reliable transportation
> fun should not be a part of the equation at all.
I agree. A Civic would be a much better choice for such a buyer for a
number of reasons - fuel economy, regular gas, less likely the
previous owner drove it hard, possibly cheaper parts, etc. with
reliability at least as good as the GS-R. However, my point is that
the Civic like the GS-R is a car you will be likely to keep for a long
time because it is reliable and high quality.
> The fact that the car is a boring piece of means
> that it was less likely to have been owned by someone
> who did not take the living daylights out of it and sold it
> when there was nothing left to milk.
Right, buy the Civic.
>
> > To summarize, it sounds like you are claiming that the Consumer
> > Reports Auto Reliability is "pure rubbish" because it *might* be more
> > economical to own a cheap, boring piece of crap.
>
> Yep. The way the data is tabulated it's meaningless to
> people on the budget like the OP.
It is not meaningless to the OP, it is just one piece of information.
It is a reliability survey, not an "absolute cheapest cost of
ownership survey." It is also not a stupidity inhibitor. By your
reasoning, I guess it is a good thing that Mercedes have such a lousy
reliability record because otherwise someone on a budget might
mistakenly by a $50,000 used Mercedes.
>So he went for the fun and was had.
How much fun was he looking to have with a 10-year-old Accord? The
mistake he made was buying a 10-year-old car and thinking that it
wouldn't need any repairs. I also suspect he needs to find a new
mechanic. Three radiators and O2 sensors? One maybe.
> You just have to face the reality that quite a few people
> out there don't want to or can't afford to spend much
> on their cars.
The problem is there is no such thing as a cheap car. If you only
have $1000 - 2000 to spend you have to expect to spend money on
repairs wether it is a 7-year-old Taurus or a 10-year-old Accord.
Minimizing the repair cost is a matter of thorough inspection and
luck.
>My point was that if they want reliable transport
> they'd better buy a mistake of judgement from someone who
> bought a boring piece of more recently than someone
> who bought a funster and held to it longer... until it
> started to fall apart.
The problem is that pieces of are prone to break downs - even if
they aren't 10-years-old and were driven gently and maintained
properly. And after you fix them they are still pieces of .
> On Mar 10, 8:18 am, Gordon McGrew <RgEmMcOgVr...@mindspring.com>
> wrote:> my 14-year-old GS-R. Having the savings in the bank is just a bonus.
> > Does my GS-R cost more to maintain than a five-year-old Monte Carlo?
> > Probably. But if I had a Monte Carlo, I would be looking to dump it
> > because it is a boring piece of .
>
> It might be a better buy for $5k than GS-R precisely
> because it is a boring piece of !
> If you have $5k and are looking for reliable transportation
> fun should not be a part of the equation at all.
I agree. A Civic would be a much better choice for such a buyer for a
number of reasons - fuel economy, regular gas, less likely the
previous owner drove it hard, possibly cheaper parts, etc. with
reliability at least as good as the GS-R. However, my point is that
the Civic like the GS-R is a car you will be likely to keep for a long
time because it is reliable and high quality.
> The fact that the car is a boring piece of means
> that it was less likely to have been owned by someone
> who did not take the living daylights out of it and sold it
> when there was nothing left to milk.
Right, buy the Civic.
>
> > To summarize, it sounds like you are claiming that the Consumer
> > Reports Auto Reliability is "pure rubbish" because it *might* be more
> > economical to own a cheap, boring piece of crap.
>
> Yep. The way the data is tabulated it's meaningless to
> people on the budget like the OP.
It is not meaningless to the OP, it is just one piece of information.
It is a reliability survey, not an "absolute cheapest cost of
ownership survey." It is also not a stupidity inhibitor. By your
reasoning, I guess it is a good thing that Mercedes have such a lousy
reliability record because otherwise someone on a budget might
mistakenly by a $50,000 used Mercedes.
>So he went for the fun and was had.
How much fun was he looking to have with a 10-year-old Accord? The
mistake he made was buying a 10-year-old car and thinking that it
wouldn't need any repairs. I also suspect he needs to find a new
mechanic. Three radiators and O2 sensors? One maybe.
> You just have to face the reality that quite a few people
> out there don't want to or can't afford to spend much
> on their cars.
The problem is there is no such thing as a cheap car. If you only
have $1000 - 2000 to spend you have to expect to spend money on
repairs wether it is a 7-year-old Taurus or a 10-year-old Accord.
Minimizing the repair cost is a matter of thorough inspection and
luck.
>My point was that if they want reliable transport
> they'd better buy a mistake of judgement from someone who
> bought a boring piece of more recently than someone
> who bought a funster and held to it longer... until it
> started to fall apart.
The problem is that pieces of are prone to break downs - even if
they aren't 10-years-old and were driven gently and maintained
properly. And after you fix them they are still pieces of .
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: falling apart?!?!?!
OK. that seems really unreasonable. I would now check to make sure that car wasn't a flood car
from Katrina or something.
bummed71904 wrote:
> Ok, I bought my car a year ago. Already I have put over 5g’s worth of
> parts into it, from axels and roters to motor mounts, three radiators,
> and 02 sensors. A week ago the SPEED SENSOR??? went out. I paid almost
> $200.00 to have it fixed. The check engine light came on again
> tonight. The code read main circut malfunction. I have no clue. Anyone
> know the costs on this repair and is it worth it? :cry:
>
> 1996 Honda Accord
>
> --
> Posted at author's request, using http://www.AutoBoardz.com interface
> Articles individually verified to usenet standards. Visit URL to contact author/report abuse
> Thread archive: http://www.AutoBoardz.com/falling-ftopict208228.html
from Katrina or something.
bummed71904 wrote:
> Ok, I bought my car a year ago. Already I have put over 5g’s worth of
> parts into it, from axels and roters to motor mounts, three radiators,
> and 02 sensors. A week ago the SPEED SENSOR??? went out. I paid almost
> $200.00 to have it fixed. The check engine light came on again
> tonight. The code read main circut malfunction. I have no clue. Anyone
> know the costs on this repair and is it worth it? :cry:
>
> 1996 Honda Accord
>
> --
> Posted at author's request, using http://www.AutoBoardz.com interface
> Articles individually verified to usenet standards. Visit URL to contact author/report abuse
> Thread archive: http://www.AutoBoardz.com/falling-ftopict208228.html
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: falling apart?!?!?!
OK. that seems really unreasonable. I would now check to make sure that car wasn't a flood car
from Katrina or something.
bummed71904 wrote:
> Ok, I bought my car a year ago. Already I have put over 5g’s worth of
> parts into it, from axels and roters to motor mounts, three radiators,
> and 02 sensors. A week ago the SPEED SENSOR??? went out. I paid almost
> $200.00 to have it fixed. The check engine light came on again
> tonight. The code read main circut malfunction. I have no clue. Anyone
> know the costs on this repair and is it worth it? :cry:
>
> 1996 Honda Accord
>
> --
> Posted at author's request, using http://www.AutoBoardz.com interface
> Articles individually verified to usenet standards. Visit URL to contact author/report abuse
> Thread archive: http://www.AutoBoardz.com/falling-ftopict208228.html
from Katrina or something.
bummed71904 wrote:
> Ok, I bought my car a year ago. Already I have put over 5g’s worth of
> parts into it, from axels and roters to motor mounts, three radiators,
> and 02 sensors. A week ago the SPEED SENSOR??? went out. I paid almost
> $200.00 to have it fixed. The check engine light came on again
> tonight. The code read main circut malfunction. I have no clue. Anyone
> know the costs on this repair and is it worth it? :cry:
>
> 1996 Honda Accord
>
> --
> Posted at author's request, using http://www.AutoBoardz.com interface
> Articles individually verified to usenet standards. Visit URL to contact author/report abuse
> Thread archive: http://www.AutoBoardz.com/falling-ftopict208228.html
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: falling apart?!?!?!
Sorry,
I am going to join in on the bashing of Consumer Reports reliability rankings.
They are worthless. For one thing they cover too short a time.
JD Power survey seems practically fraudulent as they rank "initial
quality"...ie, defects when delivered...while that is nice...it doesn't tell you
if the transmission falls out at 6,000 miles.
Go to a very busy independent mechanic and ask him what breaks the least and
don't forget to get an opinion on how relatively expensive the replacement parts
are, you will be surprised.
Second best ask a lot of people who would qualify as "car enthusiasts" and ask
them for their experiences.
I wish I knew of a good place to find reliability rankings with published
criteria that I could believe in. If anyone does know of one please tell me.
..
Norm
Gordon McGrew wrote:
> On 7 Mar 2007 19:46:53 -0800, isquat@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >On Mar 7, 11:13 am, "Brian Smith" <Hali...@NovaScotia.Canada> wrote:
> >> <isq...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >>
> >> news:1173279145.251063.11370@h3g2000cwc.googlegrou ps.com...
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> > Yes, I drive a jap car and no, I don't like driving american cars
> >> > at all. But I have to be fair to the Detrua: their cars are far
> >> > more reliable than some people would like you think.
> >>
> >> I'm guessing here, but I believe you mean sane and reasonable people.
> >
> >I have to ask where's the reliability data is coming from?
> >Consumer retorts? People seem to rate their cars based on how
> >they like them not on how reliable they are
> >(despite the istructions from retorts I guess)
> >The reliability results they publish (per model per year) is pure
> >rubbish.
>
> You have no basis on which to make that statement. The survey is the
> best information available to the consumer on auto reliability.
I am going to join in on the bashing of Consumer Reports reliability rankings.
They are worthless. For one thing they cover too short a time.
JD Power survey seems practically fraudulent as they rank "initial
quality"...ie, defects when delivered...while that is nice...it doesn't tell you
if the transmission falls out at 6,000 miles.
Go to a very busy independent mechanic and ask him what breaks the least and
don't forget to get an opinion on how relatively expensive the replacement parts
are, you will be surprised.
Second best ask a lot of people who would qualify as "car enthusiasts" and ask
them for their experiences.
I wish I knew of a good place to find reliability rankings with published
criteria that I could believe in. If anyone does know of one please tell me.
..
Norm
Gordon McGrew wrote:
> On 7 Mar 2007 19:46:53 -0800, isquat@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >On Mar 7, 11:13 am, "Brian Smith" <Hali...@NovaScotia.Canada> wrote:
> >> <isq...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >>
> >> news:1173279145.251063.11370@h3g2000cwc.googlegrou ps.com...
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> > Yes, I drive a jap car and no, I don't like driving american cars
> >> > at all. But I have to be fair to the Detrua: their cars are far
> >> > more reliable than some people would like you think.
> >>
> >> I'm guessing here, but I believe you mean sane and reasonable people.
> >
> >I have to ask where's the reliability data is coming from?
> >Consumer retorts? People seem to rate their cars based on how
> >they like them not on how reliable they are
> >(despite the istructions from retorts I guess)
> >The reliability results they publish (per model per year) is pure
> >rubbish.
>
> You have no basis on which to make that statement. The survey is the
> best information available to the consumer on auto reliability.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: falling apart?!?!?!
Sorry,
I am going to join in on the bashing of Consumer Reports reliability rankings.
They are worthless. For one thing they cover too short a time.
JD Power survey seems practically fraudulent as they rank "initial
quality"...ie, defects when delivered...while that is nice...it doesn't tell you
if the transmission falls out at 6,000 miles.
Go to a very busy independent mechanic and ask him what breaks the least and
don't forget to get an opinion on how relatively expensive the replacement parts
are, you will be surprised.
Second best ask a lot of people who would qualify as "car enthusiasts" and ask
them for their experiences.
I wish I knew of a good place to find reliability rankings with published
criteria that I could believe in. If anyone does know of one please tell me.
..
Norm
Gordon McGrew wrote:
> On 7 Mar 2007 19:46:53 -0800, isquat@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >On Mar 7, 11:13 am, "Brian Smith" <Hali...@NovaScotia.Canada> wrote:
> >> <isq...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >>
> >> news:1173279145.251063.11370@h3g2000cwc.googlegrou ps.com...
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> > Yes, I drive a jap car and no, I don't like driving american cars
> >> > at all. But I have to be fair to the Detrua: their cars are far
> >> > more reliable than some people would like you think.
> >>
> >> I'm guessing here, but I believe you mean sane and reasonable people.
> >
> >I have to ask where's the reliability data is coming from?
> >Consumer retorts? People seem to rate their cars based on how
> >they like them not on how reliable they are
> >(despite the istructions from retorts I guess)
> >The reliability results they publish (per model per year) is pure
> >rubbish.
>
> You have no basis on which to make that statement. The survey is the
> best information available to the consumer on auto reliability.
I am going to join in on the bashing of Consumer Reports reliability rankings.
They are worthless. For one thing they cover too short a time.
JD Power survey seems practically fraudulent as they rank "initial
quality"...ie, defects when delivered...while that is nice...it doesn't tell you
if the transmission falls out at 6,000 miles.
Go to a very busy independent mechanic and ask him what breaks the least and
don't forget to get an opinion on how relatively expensive the replacement parts
are, you will be surprised.
Second best ask a lot of people who would qualify as "car enthusiasts" and ask
them for their experiences.
I wish I knew of a good place to find reliability rankings with published
criteria that I could believe in. If anyone does know of one please tell me.
..
Norm
Gordon McGrew wrote:
> On 7 Mar 2007 19:46:53 -0800, isquat@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >On Mar 7, 11:13 am, "Brian Smith" <Hali...@NovaScotia.Canada> wrote:
> >> <isq...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >>
> >> news:1173279145.251063.11370@h3g2000cwc.googlegrou ps.com...
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> > Yes, I drive a jap car and no, I don't like driving american cars
> >> > at all. But I have to be fair to the Detrua: their cars are far
> >> > more reliable than some people would like you think.
> >>
> >> I'm guessing here, but I believe you mean sane and reasonable people.
> >
> >I have to ask where's the reliability data is coming from?
> >Consumer retorts? People seem to rate their cars based on how
> >they like them not on how reliable they are
> >(despite the istructions from retorts I guess)
> >The reliability results they publish (per model per year) is pure
> >rubbish.
>
> You have no basis on which to make that statement. The survey is the
> best information available to the consumer on auto reliability.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: falling apart?!?!?!
On 5/6/2007 1:32 PM .... spake these words of knowledge:
> Sorry,
> I am going to join in on the bashing of Consumer Reports reliability rankings.
> They are worthless. For one thing they cover too short a time.
>
> JD Power survey seems practically fraudulent as they rank "initial
> quality"...ie, defects when delivered...while that is nice...it doesn't tell you
> if the transmission falls out at 6,000 miles.
>
> Go to a very busy independent mechanic and ask him what breaks the least and
> don't forget to get an opinion on how relatively expensive the replacement parts
> are, you will be surprised.
> Second best ask a lot of people who would qualify as "car enthusiasts" and ask
> them for their experiences.
>
> I wish I knew of a good place to find reliability rankings with published
> criteria that I could believe in. If anyone does know of one please tell me.
> .
> Norm
Just write your own. That should serve you quite well, and you'll be
very satisfied with how bright you think the author is.
There's no need to be sorry about bashing the Consumer Reports
reliability rankings; you join a large company of people who choose to
do so because the rankings don't agree with what they already 'believe'.
Relax.
In the meantime, those of us who value consumer input rather than
manufacturer's claims will continue to use this and other measures for
evaluation.
Of course, I have no way of knowing for sure that other people who rate
their purchases for reliability do so fairly and honestly, anymore than
you or the other cretins have any way of knowing that they do not. We
do know that there's nothing to gain by not doing so, and the
reliability of the Hondas and Toyotas which have topped the reliability
rankings for years and years isn't disputed by anyone with two brain
cells to rub together - or by anyone with data to back up the disputation.
By the way, Consumer Reports covers at least six years of history. For
my Hondas, that's about 120,000 miles.
Each.
A shitload more than enough to tell you if the transmission falls out at
6000 miles.
RFT!!!
Dave Kelsen
--
Don't pee down my back and tell me it's raining.
> Sorry,
> I am going to join in on the bashing of Consumer Reports reliability rankings.
> They are worthless. For one thing they cover too short a time.
>
> JD Power survey seems practically fraudulent as they rank "initial
> quality"...ie, defects when delivered...while that is nice...it doesn't tell you
> if the transmission falls out at 6,000 miles.
>
> Go to a very busy independent mechanic and ask him what breaks the least and
> don't forget to get an opinion on how relatively expensive the replacement parts
> are, you will be surprised.
> Second best ask a lot of people who would qualify as "car enthusiasts" and ask
> them for their experiences.
>
> I wish I knew of a good place to find reliability rankings with published
> criteria that I could believe in. If anyone does know of one please tell me.
> .
> Norm
Just write your own. That should serve you quite well, and you'll be
very satisfied with how bright you think the author is.
There's no need to be sorry about bashing the Consumer Reports
reliability rankings; you join a large company of people who choose to
do so because the rankings don't agree with what they already 'believe'.
Relax.
In the meantime, those of us who value consumer input rather than
manufacturer's claims will continue to use this and other measures for
evaluation.
Of course, I have no way of knowing for sure that other people who rate
their purchases for reliability do so fairly and honestly, anymore than
you or the other cretins have any way of knowing that they do not. We
do know that there's nothing to gain by not doing so, and the
reliability of the Hondas and Toyotas which have topped the reliability
rankings for years and years isn't disputed by anyone with two brain
cells to rub together - or by anyone with data to back up the disputation.
By the way, Consumer Reports covers at least six years of history. For
my Hondas, that's about 120,000 miles.
Each.
A shitload more than enough to tell you if the transmission falls out at
6000 miles.
RFT!!!
Dave Kelsen
--
Don't pee down my back and tell me it's raining.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: falling apart?!?!?!
On 5/6/2007 1:32 PM .... spake these words of knowledge:
> Sorry,
> I am going to join in on the bashing of Consumer Reports reliability rankings.
> They are worthless. For one thing they cover too short a time.
>
> JD Power survey seems practically fraudulent as they rank "initial
> quality"...ie, defects when delivered...while that is nice...it doesn't tell you
> if the transmission falls out at 6,000 miles.
>
> Go to a very busy independent mechanic and ask him what breaks the least and
> don't forget to get an opinion on how relatively expensive the replacement parts
> are, you will be surprised.
> Second best ask a lot of people who would qualify as "car enthusiasts" and ask
> them for their experiences.
>
> I wish I knew of a good place to find reliability rankings with published
> criteria that I could believe in. If anyone does know of one please tell me.
> .
> Norm
Just write your own. That should serve you quite well, and you'll be
very satisfied with how bright you think the author is.
There's no need to be sorry about bashing the Consumer Reports
reliability rankings; you join a large company of people who choose to
do so because the rankings don't agree with what they already 'believe'.
Relax.
In the meantime, those of us who value consumer input rather than
manufacturer's claims will continue to use this and other measures for
evaluation.
Of course, I have no way of knowing for sure that other people who rate
their purchases for reliability do so fairly and honestly, anymore than
you or the other cretins have any way of knowing that they do not. We
do know that there's nothing to gain by not doing so, and the
reliability of the Hondas and Toyotas which have topped the reliability
rankings for years and years isn't disputed by anyone with two brain
cells to rub together - or by anyone with data to back up the disputation.
By the way, Consumer Reports covers at least six years of history. For
my Hondas, that's about 120,000 miles.
Each.
A shitload more than enough to tell you if the transmission falls out at
6000 miles.
RFT!!!
Dave Kelsen
--
Don't pee down my back and tell me it's raining.
> Sorry,
> I am going to join in on the bashing of Consumer Reports reliability rankings.
> They are worthless. For one thing they cover too short a time.
>
> JD Power survey seems practically fraudulent as they rank "initial
> quality"...ie, defects when delivered...while that is nice...it doesn't tell you
> if the transmission falls out at 6,000 miles.
>
> Go to a very busy independent mechanic and ask him what breaks the least and
> don't forget to get an opinion on how relatively expensive the replacement parts
> are, you will be surprised.
> Second best ask a lot of people who would qualify as "car enthusiasts" and ask
> them for their experiences.
>
> I wish I knew of a good place to find reliability rankings with published
> criteria that I could believe in. If anyone does know of one please tell me.
> .
> Norm
Just write your own. That should serve you quite well, and you'll be
very satisfied with how bright you think the author is.
There's no need to be sorry about bashing the Consumer Reports
reliability rankings; you join a large company of people who choose to
do so because the rankings don't agree with what they already 'believe'.
Relax.
In the meantime, those of us who value consumer input rather than
manufacturer's claims will continue to use this and other measures for
evaluation.
Of course, I have no way of knowing for sure that other people who rate
their purchases for reliability do so fairly and honestly, anymore than
you or the other cretins have any way of knowing that they do not. We
do know that there's nothing to gain by not doing so, and the
reliability of the Hondas and Toyotas which have topped the reliability
rankings for years and years isn't disputed by anyone with two brain
cells to rub together - or by anyone with data to back up the disputation.
By the way, Consumer Reports covers at least six years of history. For
my Hondas, that's about 120,000 miles.
Each.
A shitload more than enough to tell you if the transmission falls out at
6000 miles.
RFT!!!
Dave Kelsen
--
Don't pee down my back and tell me it's raining.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: falling apart?!?!?!
"Dave Kelsen" <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:463e8f1d$0$27071$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>
> By the way, Consumer Reports covers at least six years of history. For my
> Hondas, that's about 120,000 miles.
>
That's the main reason they have never helped me; I typically buy at eight
to ten years and hold on to around 20 years. I would much rather know how
they do after ten and fifteen years. Even buying at five years would only
give the first year's data as a used car.
Mike
news:463e8f1d$0$27071$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>
> By the way, Consumer Reports covers at least six years of history. For my
> Hondas, that's about 120,000 miles.
>
That's the main reason they have never helped me; I typically buy at eight
to ten years and hold on to around 20 years. I would much rather know how
they do after ten and fifteen years. Even buying at five years would only
give the first year's data as a used car.
Mike
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: falling apart?!?!?!
"Dave Kelsen" <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:463e8f1d$0$27071$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>
> By the way, Consumer Reports covers at least six years of history. For my
> Hondas, that's about 120,000 miles.
>
That's the main reason they have never helped me; I typically buy at eight
to ten years and hold on to around 20 years. I would much rather know how
they do after ten and fifteen years. Even buying at five years would only
give the first year's data as a used car.
Mike
news:463e8f1d$0$27071$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>
> By the way, Consumer Reports covers at least six years of history. For my
> Hondas, that's about 120,000 miles.
>
That's the main reason they have never helped me; I typically buy at eight
to ten years and hold on to around 20 years. I would much rather know how
they do after ten and fifteen years. Even buying at five years would only
give the first year's data as a used car.
Mike
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
