MORE than expensive - outrageous!
#76
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: MORE than expensive - outrageous!
In article <3f293ad4.269372433@news.txol.net>, Rex B
<NOSPAMrex@REMOVEtxol.net> wrote:
> Just to stir the pot: Borg Warner charges us $41.17 for a 1991 igniter.
Thanks.
Even the mechanic showed me later year ignitors and said that they were
half or less than half the cost of my igniter.
<NOSPAMrex@REMOVEtxol.net> wrote:
> Just to stir the pot: Borg Warner charges us $41.17 for a 1991 igniter.
Thanks.
Even the mechanic showed me later year ignitors and said that they were
half or less than half the cost of my igniter.
#77
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: MORE than expensive - outrageous!
In article <3f293ad4.269372433@news.txol.net>, Rex B
<NOSPAMrex@REMOVEtxol.net> wrote:
> Just to stir the pot: Borg Warner charges us $41.17 for a 1991 igniter.
Thanks.
Even the mechanic showed me later year ignitors and said that they were
half or less than half the cost of my igniter.
<NOSPAMrex@REMOVEtxol.net> wrote:
> Just to stir the pot: Borg Warner charges us $41.17 for a 1991 igniter.
Thanks.
Even the mechanic showed me later year ignitors and said that they were
half or less than half the cost of my igniter.
#78
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: MORE than expensive - outrageous!
In article <ab380c1b.0307310756.33c7f0c3@posting.google.com >, redrum
<redrum_q3@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Miles and years factor into this equation whether YOU care or not.
> That is why all car warranties are for x amount of miles and x amount
> of years.
>
> So given that you are discouraged that the part failed you should
> consider it has lasted for 20+ years, which surpasses any warranty
> I've ever seen.
Warranty is not the question. I believe that this part should not have
burned out in the first place, but it did, in which and like cases I
expect to pay something reasonable (even if it's at the high end of
reasonableness) for a replacement part, not get my wallet jacked out of
my jeans.
<redrum_q3@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Miles and years factor into this equation whether YOU care or not.
> That is why all car warranties are for x amount of miles and x amount
> of years.
>
> So given that you are discouraged that the part failed you should
> consider it has lasted for 20+ years, which surpasses any warranty
> I've ever seen.
Warranty is not the question. I believe that this part should not have
burned out in the first place, but it did, in which and like cases I
expect to pay something reasonable (even if it's at the high end of
reasonableness) for a replacement part, not get my wallet jacked out of
my jeans.
#79
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: MORE than expensive - outrageous!
In article <ab380c1b.0307310756.33c7f0c3@posting.google.com >, redrum
<redrum_q3@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Miles and years factor into this equation whether YOU care or not.
> That is why all car warranties are for x amount of miles and x amount
> of years.
>
> So given that you are discouraged that the part failed you should
> consider it has lasted for 20+ years, which surpasses any warranty
> I've ever seen.
Warranty is not the question. I believe that this part should not have
burned out in the first place, but it did, in which and like cases I
expect to pay something reasonable (even if it's at the high end of
reasonableness) for a replacement part, not get my wallet jacked out of
my jeans.
<redrum_q3@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Miles and years factor into this equation whether YOU care or not.
> That is why all car warranties are for x amount of miles and x amount
> of years.
>
> So given that you are discouraged that the part failed you should
> consider it has lasted for 20+ years, which surpasses any warranty
> I've ever seen.
Warranty is not the question. I believe that this part should not have
burned out in the first place, but it did, in which and like cases I
expect to pay something reasonable (even if it's at the high end of
reasonableness) for a replacement part, not get my wallet jacked out of
my jeans.
#82
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: MORE than expensive - outrageous!
> Apple computers are great. A lot of people who work with IBM
> compatibles go home to Macs. Very few people who work with Macs go
> home to an IBM compatible. I like 'em. I've never used an IBM
> compatible, mainly because I see my friends struggle with them. No
> thanks.
What the HELL is an IBM Compatible? I believe the correct term these
days is "PC" or "Windows Machine"
IBM doesn't set the standards for other PC manufacturers to follow
anymore.
Back to the post about the electronics cost comparison - that's the
most ridiculous comparison I've ever seen. A 1 gram microprocessor
costs a hell of a lot more than a 1 gram nand-gate array, and the 1
gram microprocessor needed MANY more engineers and many more hours to
develop than the nand array. Weight is a **** poor factor to use when
comparing electronics
> compatibles go home to Macs. Very few people who work with Macs go
> home to an IBM compatible. I like 'em. I've never used an IBM
> compatible, mainly because I see my friends struggle with them. No
> thanks.
What the HELL is an IBM Compatible? I believe the correct term these
days is "PC" or "Windows Machine"
IBM doesn't set the standards for other PC manufacturers to follow
anymore.
Back to the post about the electronics cost comparison - that's the
most ridiculous comparison I've ever seen. A 1 gram microprocessor
costs a hell of a lot more than a 1 gram nand-gate array, and the 1
gram microprocessor needed MANY more engineers and many more hours to
develop than the nand array. Weight is a **** poor factor to use when
comparing electronics
#83
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: MORE than expensive - outrageous!
> Apple computers are great. A lot of people who work with IBM
> compatibles go home to Macs. Very few people who work with Macs go
> home to an IBM compatible. I like 'em. I've never used an IBM
> compatible, mainly because I see my friends struggle with them. No
> thanks.
What the HELL is an IBM Compatible? I believe the correct term these
days is "PC" or "Windows Machine"
IBM doesn't set the standards for other PC manufacturers to follow
anymore.
Back to the post about the electronics cost comparison - that's the
most ridiculous comparison I've ever seen. A 1 gram microprocessor
costs a hell of a lot more than a 1 gram nand-gate array, and the 1
gram microprocessor needed MANY more engineers and many more hours to
develop than the nand array. Weight is a **** poor factor to use when
comparing electronics
> compatibles go home to Macs. Very few people who work with Macs go
> home to an IBM compatible. I like 'em. I've never used an IBM
> compatible, mainly because I see my friends struggle with them. No
> thanks.
What the HELL is an IBM Compatible? I believe the correct term these
days is "PC" or "Windows Machine"
IBM doesn't set the standards for other PC manufacturers to follow
anymore.
Back to the post about the electronics cost comparison - that's the
most ridiculous comparison I've ever seen. A 1 gram microprocessor
costs a hell of a lot more than a 1 gram nand-gate array, and the 1
gram microprocessor needed MANY more engineers and many more hours to
develop than the nand array. Weight is a **** poor factor to use when
comparing electronics
#84
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: MORE than expensive - outrageous!
On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 20:23:49 GMT, expensive
<common_sense@emodgnik.com> wrote:
>In article <rd9iivkq8vf4s2aubpavn98aeijb4enlg3@4ax.com>, Gary Seven
><garyluckynospam@nospa.yahoocom> wrote:
>
>> >$193 for a $27 part, indeed! That's abusive!
>>
>>
>>
>> This whole doller per unit of weight thing has got to go... A
>> pentium 4 3.2 Ghz costs about $600. It weight about 500 grams. Thats
>> $120 / gram. Convert to ounces youself. maybe you should buy a
>> Buick? I know you gave up Detriot long ago, but you said you're near
>> retirement age... i doubt you'll live long enough to see that car
>> start to fail and blow up.
>
>Oh, c'mon. The comparison was not intended to be scientific certain
>nor meet any particular standards, specifications or conventions.
>
>But, both parts are made of electronic components in plastic. So, it
>was fun. Thanks for being so broad minded.
>
>A Buick? Think it'll be as good as my '50 (3 on the column, straight
>eight) or my 1955 Roadmaster?
>
>My real objective is to ditch cars altogether. Perhaps I'll do it
>earlier than I'd planned. Public transportation is okay with me. When
>I need a car, a rental will do. The older I get the fewer places I
>seem to have to go. That's why I have an '81 Honda with 110,000 mile
>on it. And a brand new outrageously expensive ignitor, geeze.
I dunno... seems like you made of well considering. You applied some
sort of pointless weight to dollar formula that didn't really have
anything to do with anything thats why I made up mine. Believe me,
there are things smaller and much more expensive than that probably in
your own house, you just don't know it.
Components fail, these things happen and we have to live with it.
Cars are imperfect machines made by imperfect beings.
<common_sense@emodgnik.com> wrote:
>In article <rd9iivkq8vf4s2aubpavn98aeijb4enlg3@4ax.com>, Gary Seven
><garyluckynospam@nospa.yahoocom> wrote:
>
>> >$193 for a $27 part, indeed! That's abusive!
>>
>>
>>
>> This whole doller per unit of weight thing has got to go... A
>> pentium 4 3.2 Ghz costs about $600. It weight about 500 grams. Thats
>> $120 / gram. Convert to ounces youself. maybe you should buy a
>> Buick? I know you gave up Detriot long ago, but you said you're near
>> retirement age... i doubt you'll live long enough to see that car
>> start to fail and blow up.
>
>Oh, c'mon. The comparison was not intended to be scientific certain
>nor meet any particular standards, specifications or conventions.
>
>But, both parts are made of electronic components in plastic. So, it
>was fun. Thanks for being so broad minded.
>
>A Buick? Think it'll be as good as my '50 (3 on the column, straight
>eight) or my 1955 Roadmaster?
>
>My real objective is to ditch cars altogether. Perhaps I'll do it
>earlier than I'd planned. Public transportation is okay with me. When
>I need a car, a rental will do. The older I get the fewer places I
>seem to have to go. That's why I have an '81 Honda with 110,000 mile
>on it. And a brand new outrageously expensive ignitor, geeze.
I dunno... seems like you made of well considering. You applied some
sort of pointless weight to dollar formula that didn't really have
anything to do with anything thats why I made up mine. Believe me,
there are things smaller and much more expensive than that probably in
your own house, you just don't know it.
Components fail, these things happen and we have to live with it.
Cars are imperfect machines made by imperfect beings.
#85
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: MORE than expensive - outrageous!
On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 20:23:49 GMT, expensive
<common_sense@emodgnik.com> wrote:
>In article <rd9iivkq8vf4s2aubpavn98aeijb4enlg3@4ax.com>, Gary Seven
><garyluckynospam@nospa.yahoocom> wrote:
>
>> >$193 for a $27 part, indeed! That's abusive!
>>
>>
>>
>> This whole doller per unit of weight thing has got to go... A
>> pentium 4 3.2 Ghz costs about $600. It weight about 500 grams. Thats
>> $120 / gram. Convert to ounces youself. maybe you should buy a
>> Buick? I know you gave up Detriot long ago, but you said you're near
>> retirement age... i doubt you'll live long enough to see that car
>> start to fail and blow up.
>
>Oh, c'mon. The comparison was not intended to be scientific certain
>nor meet any particular standards, specifications or conventions.
>
>But, both parts are made of electronic components in plastic. So, it
>was fun. Thanks for being so broad minded.
>
>A Buick? Think it'll be as good as my '50 (3 on the column, straight
>eight) or my 1955 Roadmaster?
>
>My real objective is to ditch cars altogether. Perhaps I'll do it
>earlier than I'd planned. Public transportation is okay with me. When
>I need a car, a rental will do. The older I get the fewer places I
>seem to have to go. That's why I have an '81 Honda with 110,000 mile
>on it. And a brand new outrageously expensive ignitor, geeze.
I dunno... seems like you made of well considering. You applied some
sort of pointless weight to dollar formula that didn't really have
anything to do with anything thats why I made up mine. Believe me,
there are things smaller and much more expensive than that probably in
your own house, you just don't know it.
Components fail, these things happen and we have to live with it.
Cars are imperfect machines made by imperfect beings.
<common_sense@emodgnik.com> wrote:
>In article <rd9iivkq8vf4s2aubpavn98aeijb4enlg3@4ax.com>, Gary Seven
><garyluckynospam@nospa.yahoocom> wrote:
>
>> >$193 for a $27 part, indeed! That's abusive!
>>
>>
>>
>> This whole doller per unit of weight thing has got to go... A
>> pentium 4 3.2 Ghz costs about $600. It weight about 500 grams. Thats
>> $120 / gram. Convert to ounces youself. maybe you should buy a
>> Buick? I know you gave up Detriot long ago, but you said you're near
>> retirement age... i doubt you'll live long enough to see that car
>> start to fail and blow up.
>
>Oh, c'mon. The comparison was not intended to be scientific certain
>nor meet any particular standards, specifications or conventions.
>
>But, both parts are made of electronic components in plastic. So, it
>was fun. Thanks for being so broad minded.
>
>A Buick? Think it'll be as good as my '50 (3 on the column, straight
>eight) or my 1955 Roadmaster?
>
>My real objective is to ditch cars altogether. Perhaps I'll do it
>earlier than I'd planned. Public transportation is okay with me. When
>I need a car, a rental will do. The older I get the fewer places I
>seem to have to go. That's why I have an '81 Honda with 110,000 mile
>on it. And a brand new outrageously expensive ignitor, geeze.
I dunno... seems like you made of well considering. You applied some
sort of pointless weight to dollar formula that didn't really have
anything to do with anything thats why I made up mine. Believe me,
there are things smaller and much more expensive than that probably in
your own house, you just don't know it.
Components fail, these things happen and we have to live with it.
Cars are imperfect machines made by imperfect beings.
#86
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: MORE than expensive - outrageous!
In article <e821bab6.0307310845.3b2fe5e8@posting.google.com >, John D.
<jcdech@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Somehow I get the impression that folks here do not consider $193 to be
> > a burdensome expense.
>
> Well, I sure do! It IS a rip-off!
>
> As for finding an 1981 car in an auto salvage yard after all these
> years, I have the SAME problem but a whole lot worse: Try finding a
> 1973 Datsun 1200!
>
> Fortunately, though, it's got no igniters, ECU, CEL or sensors to
> speak of...just a simple carbuerator, points, condensor, plugs...and
> an oil filter that not only is mounted vertically (instead of
> horizontally), but is quite easily accessible.
>
> But as for parts, I haven't seen one of these cars in a junkyard for
> years. Eventually I may have to give it up just for that reason...I
> guess that sometimes happens if you keep a car long enough.
>
> John D.
We should have acreage with maybe half a dozen '81 Hondas or '73
Datsuns parked in the weeds. Then there'd be no problem with parts
departments or scrap yards.
Did you ever hear the story about why Datsuns were called Datsuns and
not Nissans? Nissan was not convinced that their cars would be
suitable for US consumers or successful in the marketplace. They
called the early cars "Datsun" so that a failure in the marketplace
would not reflect negatively on the Nissan brand name.
<jcdech@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Somehow I get the impression that folks here do not consider $193 to be
> > a burdensome expense.
>
> Well, I sure do! It IS a rip-off!
>
> As for finding an 1981 car in an auto salvage yard after all these
> years, I have the SAME problem but a whole lot worse: Try finding a
> 1973 Datsun 1200!
>
> Fortunately, though, it's got no igniters, ECU, CEL or sensors to
> speak of...just a simple carbuerator, points, condensor, plugs...and
> an oil filter that not only is mounted vertically (instead of
> horizontally), but is quite easily accessible.
>
> But as for parts, I haven't seen one of these cars in a junkyard for
> years. Eventually I may have to give it up just for that reason...I
> guess that sometimes happens if you keep a car long enough.
>
> John D.
We should have acreage with maybe half a dozen '81 Hondas or '73
Datsuns parked in the weeds. Then there'd be no problem with parts
departments or scrap yards.
Did you ever hear the story about why Datsuns were called Datsuns and
not Nissans? Nissan was not convinced that their cars would be
suitable for US consumers or successful in the marketplace. They
called the early cars "Datsun" so that a failure in the marketplace
would not reflect negatively on the Nissan brand name.
#87
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: MORE than expensive - outrageous!
In article <e821bab6.0307310845.3b2fe5e8@posting.google.com >, John D.
<jcdech@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Somehow I get the impression that folks here do not consider $193 to be
> > a burdensome expense.
>
> Well, I sure do! It IS a rip-off!
>
> As for finding an 1981 car in an auto salvage yard after all these
> years, I have the SAME problem but a whole lot worse: Try finding a
> 1973 Datsun 1200!
>
> Fortunately, though, it's got no igniters, ECU, CEL or sensors to
> speak of...just a simple carbuerator, points, condensor, plugs...and
> an oil filter that not only is mounted vertically (instead of
> horizontally), but is quite easily accessible.
>
> But as for parts, I haven't seen one of these cars in a junkyard for
> years. Eventually I may have to give it up just for that reason...I
> guess that sometimes happens if you keep a car long enough.
>
> John D.
We should have acreage with maybe half a dozen '81 Hondas or '73
Datsuns parked in the weeds. Then there'd be no problem with parts
departments or scrap yards.
Did you ever hear the story about why Datsuns were called Datsuns and
not Nissans? Nissan was not convinced that their cars would be
suitable for US consumers or successful in the marketplace. They
called the early cars "Datsun" so that a failure in the marketplace
would not reflect negatively on the Nissan brand name.
<jcdech@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Somehow I get the impression that folks here do not consider $193 to be
> > a burdensome expense.
>
> Well, I sure do! It IS a rip-off!
>
> As for finding an 1981 car in an auto salvage yard after all these
> years, I have the SAME problem but a whole lot worse: Try finding a
> 1973 Datsun 1200!
>
> Fortunately, though, it's got no igniters, ECU, CEL or sensors to
> speak of...just a simple carbuerator, points, condensor, plugs...and
> an oil filter that not only is mounted vertically (instead of
> horizontally), but is quite easily accessible.
>
> But as for parts, I haven't seen one of these cars in a junkyard for
> years. Eventually I may have to give it up just for that reason...I
> guess that sometimes happens if you keep a car long enough.
>
> John D.
We should have acreage with maybe half a dozen '81 Hondas or '73
Datsuns parked in the weeds. Then there'd be no problem with parts
departments or scrap yards.
Did you ever hear the story about why Datsuns were called Datsuns and
not Nissans? Nissan was not convinced that their cars would be
suitable for US consumers or successful in the marketplace. They
called the early cars "Datsun" so that a failure in the marketplace
would not reflect negatively on the Nissan brand name.
#88
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: MORE than expensive - outrageous!
I am sure my car ('73 Datsun 1200) hasn't cost anythere near your
example yearly rate in the ENTIRE 30 years I've had it. Can't complain
at all. I can only hope that my "new" '95 Nissan proves as frugal to
own.
Of course, the Datsun is all beat-up looking on the outside...sort of
in character with my chronic "cash flow" problem. In fact, the car
looks quite at home here in El Paso, TX, on the Mexican border, since
people think it's one of the many junker car visiting from
Mexico...except mine doesn't smoke!
And when I am driving slow -- like 42.5 mph on freeway access/frontage
roads listening to my really nice sound system with beverage
refreshments -- cops don't pay any attention to me since my car looks
like it couldn't GO any faster anyway. ;-)
John D.
TL <tlehman@visi.com> wrote in message news:<muliivch5cae9p4jcfsibuvbqratj75abb@4ax.com>. ..
> With all due respect to your financial situation ... and I really mean
> that ... owning a car is very expensive. It is much more expensive
> than most people, particular people in this country, understand. The
> standard reimbursement rate is now up to something like 37cents a
> mile. That means if you drive say 12,000 a year, your cost to own and
> operate that car is in the neighborhood of $4,500 a year, ie, $350-400
> a month. The single largest component is depreciation which is
> $2-3,000 a year for late model cars. Insurance and gasoline are
> probably tied for the next two slots with maintenance bringing up
> forth place. For those like you who own an older car, the depreciation
> is less of a factor and repairs are likely to be somehwat higher.
> Maybe for a 10 year old car, it is more like $300 a month. Still
> that's a lot of money. Putting aside for a moment whether this part
> was overpriced at this dealer, $193 for a car repair / part on a car
> actually is not atypical. Cars are just expensive to own.
>
>
> On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 04:59:53 GMT, expensive
> >
> >Somehow I get the impression that folks here do not consider $193 to be
> >a burdensome expense. But I live on a fixed income and $193 is
> >approximately 1/5 of what I have to live on. So the towing and the
> >repair wiped me out as far as discretionary income is concerned.
example yearly rate in the ENTIRE 30 years I've had it. Can't complain
at all. I can only hope that my "new" '95 Nissan proves as frugal to
own.
Of course, the Datsun is all beat-up looking on the outside...sort of
in character with my chronic "cash flow" problem. In fact, the car
looks quite at home here in El Paso, TX, on the Mexican border, since
people think it's one of the many junker car visiting from
Mexico...except mine doesn't smoke!
And when I am driving slow -- like 42.5 mph on freeway access/frontage
roads listening to my really nice sound system with beverage
refreshments -- cops don't pay any attention to me since my car looks
like it couldn't GO any faster anyway. ;-)
John D.
TL <tlehman@visi.com> wrote in message news:<muliivch5cae9p4jcfsibuvbqratj75abb@4ax.com>. ..
> With all due respect to your financial situation ... and I really mean
> that ... owning a car is very expensive. It is much more expensive
> than most people, particular people in this country, understand. The
> standard reimbursement rate is now up to something like 37cents a
> mile. That means if you drive say 12,000 a year, your cost to own and
> operate that car is in the neighborhood of $4,500 a year, ie, $350-400
> a month. The single largest component is depreciation which is
> $2-3,000 a year for late model cars. Insurance and gasoline are
> probably tied for the next two slots with maintenance bringing up
> forth place. For those like you who own an older car, the depreciation
> is less of a factor and repairs are likely to be somehwat higher.
> Maybe for a 10 year old car, it is more like $300 a month. Still
> that's a lot of money. Putting aside for a moment whether this part
> was overpriced at this dealer, $193 for a car repair / part on a car
> actually is not atypical. Cars are just expensive to own.
>
>
> On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 04:59:53 GMT, expensive
> >
> >Somehow I get the impression that folks here do not consider $193 to be
> >a burdensome expense. But I live on a fixed income and $193 is
> >approximately 1/5 of what I have to live on. So the towing and the
> >repair wiped me out as far as discretionary income is concerned.
#89
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: MORE than expensive - outrageous!
I am sure my car ('73 Datsun 1200) hasn't cost anythere near your
example yearly rate in the ENTIRE 30 years I've had it. Can't complain
at all. I can only hope that my "new" '95 Nissan proves as frugal to
own.
Of course, the Datsun is all beat-up looking on the outside...sort of
in character with my chronic "cash flow" problem. In fact, the car
looks quite at home here in El Paso, TX, on the Mexican border, since
people think it's one of the many junker car visiting from
Mexico...except mine doesn't smoke!
And when I am driving slow -- like 42.5 mph on freeway access/frontage
roads listening to my really nice sound system with beverage
refreshments -- cops don't pay any attention to me since my car looks
like it couldn't GO any faster anyway. ;-)
John D.
TL <tlehman@visi.com> wrote in message news:<muliivch5cae9p4jcfsibuvbqratj75abb@4ax.com>. ..
> With all due respect to your financial situation ... and I really mean
> that ... owning a car is very expensive. It is much more expensive
> than most people, particular people in this country, understand. The
> standard reimbursement rate is now up to something like 37cents a
> mile. That means if you drive say 12,000 a year, your cost to own and
> operate that car is in the neighborhood of $4,500 a year, ie, $350-400
> a month. The single largest component is depreciation which is
> $2-3,000 a year for late model cars. Insurance and gasoline are
> probably tied for the next two slots with maintenance bringing up
> forth place. For those like you who own an older car, the depreciation
> is less of a factor and repairs are likely to be somehwat higher.
> Maybe for a 10 year old car, it is more like $300 a month. Still
> that's a lot of money. Putting aside for a moment whether this part
> was overpriced at this dealer, $193 for a car repair / part on a car
> actually is not atypical. Cars are just expensive to own.
>
>
> On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 04:59:53 GMT, expensive
> >
> >Somehow I get the impression that folks here do not consider $193 to be
> >a burdensome expense. But I live on a fixed income and $193 is
> >approximately 1/5 of what I have to live on. So the towing and the
> >repair wiped me out as far as discretionary income is concerned.
example yearly rate in the ENTIRE 30 years I've had it. Can't complain
at all. I can only hope that my "new" '95 Nissan proves as frugal to
own.
Of course, the Datsun is all beat-up looking on the outside...sort of
in character with my chronic "cash flow" problem. In fact, the car
looks quite at home here in El Paso, TX, on the Mexican border, since
people think it's one of the many junker car visiting from
Mexico...except mine doesn't smoke!
And when I am driving slow -- like 42.5 mph on freeway access/frontage
roads listening to my really nice sound system with beverage
refreshments -- cops don't pay any attention to me since my car looks
like it couldn't GO any faster anyway. ;-)
John D.
TL <tlehman@visi.com> wrote in message news:<muliivch5cae9p4jcfsibuvbqratj75abb@4ax.com>. ..
> With all due respect to your financial situation ... and I really mean
> that ... owning a car is very expensive. It is much more expensive
> than most people, particular people in this country, understand. The
> standard reimbursement rate is now up to something like 37cents a
> mile. That means if you drive say 12,000 a year, your cost to own and
> operate that car is in the neighborhood of $4,500 a year, ie, $350-400
> a month. The single largest component is depreciation which is
> $2-3,000 a year for late model cars. Insurance and gasoline are
> probably tied for the next two slots with maintenance bringing up
> forth place. For those like you who own an older car, the depreciation
> is less of a factor and repairs are likely to be somehwat higher.
> Maybe for a 10 year old car, it is more like $300 a month. Still
> that's a lot of money. Putting aside for a moment whether this part
> was overpriced at this dealer, $193 for a car repair / part on a car
> actually is not atypical. Cars are just expensive to own.
>
>
> On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 04:59:53 GMT, expensive
> >
> >Somehow I get the impression that folks here do not consider $193 to be
> >a burdensome expense. But I live on a fixed income and $193 is
> >approximately 1/5 of what I have to live on. So the towing and the
> >repair wiped me out as far as discretionary income is concerned.
#90
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: MORE than expensive - outrageous!
expensive wrote:
> It's done the job for me for many years. But, at 110,000 miles, it has
> a long way to go yet. It has to get me to retirement age when I will
> buy my last car.
That's a pretty tall spec. Try adding that to the sales contract and I
doubt you'll find a dealer in North America who'd sell you a car.
That's your goal (which I understand, BTW, having just a new Accord as
my "retirement car") and has nothing to do with Honda or Honda dealers.
> The arrogance of the dealer really put me off as much as the cost of
> the part. Someone who sells something should not laugh at the anguish
> of a customer. Until a few days ago, I'd planned my last car to be a
> Honda. Not any more.
Keep in mind that companies don't really "care" about their customers,
no matter what their advertising screams about. They want to sell you
something good enough so you'll come back and buy another, and they want
to make money on both transactions. IMHO it's completely unrealistic to
expect any big company to really care about its customers, everyone has
a sad story.
> Somehow I get the impression that folks here do not consider $193 to be
> a burdensome expense. But I live on a fixed income and $193 is
> approximately 1/5 of what I have to live on. So the towing and the
> repair wiped me out as far as discretionary income is concerned.
> It's done the job for me for many years. But, at 110,000 miles, it has
> a long way to go yet. It has to get me to retirement age when I will
> buy my last car.
That's a pretty tall spec. Try adding that to the sales contract and I
doubt you'll find a dealer in North America who'd sell you a car.
That's your goal (which I understand, BTW, having just a new Accord as
my "retirement car") and has nothing to do with Honda or Honda dealers.
> The arrogance of the dealer really put me off as much as the cost of
> the part. Someone who sells something should not laugh at the anguish
> of a customer. Until a few days ago, I'd planned my last car to be a
> Honda. Not any more.
Keep in mind that companies don't really "care" about their customers,
no matter what their advertising screams about. They want to sell you
something good enough so you'll come back and buy another, and they want
to make money on both transactions. IMHO it's completely unrealistic to
expect any big company to really care about its customers, everyone has
a sad story.
> Somehow I get the impression that folks here do not consider $193 to be
> a burdensome expense. But I live on a fixed income and $193 is
> approximately 1/5 of what I have to live on. So the towing and the
> repair wiped me out as far as discretionary income is concerned.