[AT] The terror strikes again. - 4WD
Recentjester at aol.com
Recentjester at aol.com
Mon Jun 9 06:26:02 PDT 2014
Always figured that a dealership was just a big lot where they dumped the
trucks along a major freeway to sell them. the service or warranty area was
never big enough to do much more than change your oil. The object of a
truck is to get a heavy load where its going. I own a truck to bring things
home to make myself more self sustainable. I don't need a bunch of bells an
whistles. All the crap they want to stuff into the cab does not impress me.
The Pickups look so big now but they have less room in the bed.
In a message dated 6/9/2014 7:49:21 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
soffiler at gmail.com writes:
Sad to say, the automotive industry has become a "race to the bottom" or
"lowest common denominator" game; I think it's at least in part due to the
maturity of the industry. The manufacturers simply don't compensate the
dealers adequately for warranty work. There's a "flat rate" book that
defines what will be paid, and it has two columns, one for warranty and the
other for normal work. Warranty runs maybe 2/3 -3/4 of normal work. Odd
little problems might not even have a proper code to bill under so the
dealer isn't going to get anything at all from the mfg. On the mfg side,
warranty is pure cost and they try to avoid it by building cars to last
thru the warranty period (and how far beyond... that varies) and then they
try to control the payouts and systemic abuses by making it hard and making
sure every warranty expense is well documented and justified.
That makes the mfg sound evil. Walk a mile in their shoes. Notice how
poorly GM and Chrysler fared in 2008? And Ford wasn't that much better
(although they didn't need a bailout). You could be a lot more critical of
their approach to business and cost-control if they were making huge
profits. Sometimes they do, and when they don't, the whole house of cards
comes tumbling down. Building a car is an *incredibly* high-cost endeavor,
from engineering to tooling to government compliance to paying the assembly
workers and the overheads of assembly plants and I'm still leaving out a
lot. The fact that they'd take great pains to control warranty costs
doesn't surprise me.
Another thing I see... and this is quite common (I volunteer at a local
vo-tech automotive program and get to know some of the students) is that
the best and brightest in mechanical (and electronic, these days) aptitude
also seem to be the weakest in written and communication skills. In
short, these kids could fix the problem all day long but they struggle with
completing the paperwork needed for warranty.
Another angle... catch the dealer on the wrong day, when the bays are
relatively full of profitable work, and a little annoyance problem that is
not profitable is quite likely to get a Tall Tale attached to it and
ushered back out the door.
The system has evolved over MANY years to reach this point. No quick
fixes.
SO
On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 12:41 PM, charlie hill <charliehill at embarqmail.com>
wrote:
> Cecil, we've got a GM dealer here in town that claims to have the highest
> number of techs with some high certification or other of any dealer in
the
> state.
> A few years ago I took a Buick that was under warranty to him because
> condensation
> was building up in the air conditioning duct. They couldn't fix it!
> Couldn't figure out
> what was wrong with it and kept lying to me about it. I knew what was
> wrong
> with
> it when I took it to them. I just took it because it was under warranty.
> After three tries
> I gave up on them, drove it strattle of a road ditch, crawled under it,
> found the nipple on the
> drain and fixed it myself with my finger. Turns out it wasn't stopped
up.
> Something had
> just pushed the rubber nipple in and made it into an "inny' instead of an
> "outie" and it
> couldn't drain.
>
> I never told them the difference.
>
> Charlie
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cecil R Bearden
> Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2014 12:11 PM
> To: Antique tractor email discussion group
> Subject: Re: [AT] The terror strikes again. - 4WD
>
> I cannot really fault the mechanic. He is a former tech school
> instructor who worked earlier. in a small town ford garage. As for
> the $1000 I have invested in parts, I know the ford dealer would have
> stuck me with that much just to let me out the door. These dealers
> here are notorious for their charges. I refuse to deal with them.
> their attitude is if you cannot afford a 3 year old or newer vehicle,
> then you do not ned to be in their dealership. Sort of if you have to
> ask the price you cannot afford it....
>
> Cecil in oKla
>
>
> On 6/6/2014 8:49 AM, Stephen Offiler wrote:
> > The thing is, modern SUV's (and '97 is still pretty modern) aren't
> trucks.
> > They are family haulers, like the modern incarnation of the station
> > wagon
> > from the earlier decades. They have to be simple enough for soccer
moms
> > to
> > drive them without intimidation. Pushbutton 4WD instead of a manually
> > shifted transfer case is a necessary part of the program. I'll cite my
> > wife as an example. She's a farm girl, raised on a diary farm, and a
> > lifelong equestrian. She insists that her daily driver be equipped
with
> a
> > manual transmission. She drives our tractor with no qualms. She can
> > handle machinery. Yet, for some reason (a reason that Ford apparently
> > understands) my wife seems to have a problem with the stone-age 4WD
> system
> > on our '97 F-250 pickup. Manual hubs and manual transfer case... she
> just
> > doesn't even want to try to understand it. So there you go. THIS is
why
> > you have pushbutton 4WD on SUV's.
> >
> > Once the Ford designers and marketing people decide it's going to be
> > pushbutton, a new world of features opens up. For example, they can do
> > fancy things with electrically controlled center differentials to
provide
> > full-time or part-time 4WD modes. The '97 Expedition has just such a
> > system, called ControlTrac, by Borg-Warner.
> >
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_Trac
> >
> > It's very unfortunate that your mechanic is guessing and throwing parts
> at
> > it, which clearly he is, since you're $1000 deep and it's not fixed.
> >
> > SO
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 6:45 AM, Cecil R Bearden <crbearden at copper.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Charlie:
> >> I have a 97 Expedition 4WD. I have used the 4wd only once in the 75K
> >> miles I have owned it. I have maintained it religiously, however, the
> >> 4WD has decided to quit and we cannot find out why. It appears to be
in
> >> the powertrain control module (PCM) that controls the stepper motor
that
> >> engages the 4wd. I have spent over $1000 in parts with the help of a
> >> Ford mechanic trying to find the problem. The only thing left is the
> >> PCM... $350.00 All the computer crap just to turn on a motor, or
> >> replace a short lever or a cable that could be pulled from inside.
> >>
> >> On a tractor note... My 8345 Belarus 3 point quit working. The 820
is
> >> the same tractor but 10 years older. It has a lever for the 3 point.
> >> The 8345 has a control cable. The cable has broken and it is going
to
> >> be a 3 hour job to replace. ( this is the first major repair I have
> >> made to my Russian tractor) It looks like even the Russians can't
leave
> >> well enough alone.
> >>
> >> The engineers creed..... If it ain't broke, it doesn't have enough
> >> features........
> >>
> >> Cecil in OKla
> >>
> >>
> >> On 6/5/2014 11:50 AM, charlie hill wrote:
> >>> Grant you need to drive a newer 4 wd vehicle.
> >>> Mine is an 06 GMC Sierra crew cab. It weighs in at
> >>> about 5,000 lbs. Except for getting into and out of
> >>> tight parking spaces it drives and rides as good as
> >>> a full size sedan. It gets around 20 mpg on the highway.
> >>> My overall average fuel economy is about 17.5 over the life
> >>> of the truck and that includes a fair amount of towing.
> >>> The 4 WD is controlled by a switch on the dash. You run
> >>> in 2 wd. If things get touchy you can hit the switch to put it
> >>> in Auto 4 wd and it selects 4 wd if it needs it or you can hit
> >>> the button for full time 4 wd. You do this on the fly without
> >>> slowing down, stopping or putting the transmission in neutral.
> >>> The only time you have to stop to shift is if you need to go into
> >>> 4wd low range.
> >>>
> >>> The front suspension is independent like the rear suspension on
> >>> a Corvette or a typical front wheel drive sedan with short stub axles
> >> from
> >>> the transfer case to the front wheels. 210,000 miles and I've had
> >>> only very minor problems with the entire truck.
> >>>
> >>> There is nothing wrong with 2WD but there is also no down side to
> modern
> >>> 4 WD except for the up front cost.
> >>>
> >>> Charlie
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: Grant Brians
> >>> Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2014 12:08 PM
> >>> To: Antique tractor email discussion group
> >>> Subject: Re: [AT] The terror strikes again. - 4WD
> >>>
> >>> I fall into the category of the "2WD supporters", but for exactly the
> >> reason
> >>> Steve cites - I don't drive in snow or other conditions where it
would
> >>> be
> >>> useful! Once in a while we get snow in the Mountain valley ranch, and
> >> there
> >>> is frequently ice on the pass in the winter, but then we almost
always
> >> have
> >>> enough weight to compensate. Also, while I did finally buy a 4WD
Dodge
> >> last
> >>> year for wet conditions around the fields (1980 3/4 ton - boy it
drives
> >> like
> >>> an OLD truck...), it was not intended for road use really. As a
result,
> >>> I
> >>> can say that as the old internet meme goes YMMV your mileage may
vary!
> >> LOL.
> >>> Grant Brians
> >>> Hollister,California Farmer
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: at-bounces at lists.antique-tractor.com
> >>> [mailto:at-bounces at lists.antique-tractor.com]On Behalf Of Stephen
> >>> Offiler
> >>> Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2014 5:13 AM
> >>> To: Antique tractor email discussion group
> >>> Subject: Re: [AT] The terror strikes again. - Studebaker speed
response
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> (replying to Charlie's note with a lot of snipping...)
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 9:27 PM, charlie hill <
> charliehill at embarqmail.com
> >>>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> john I put some weight in the rear of my 4 WD truck if possible but
> >>>> usually not more than 200 or 300 lbs.
> >>> I usually don't add weight, and the reason why not is because my
truck
> >>> is
> >>> not a daily driver; it comes out when I need to haul something
meaning
> I
> >>> generally need the bed to be free of dead-weight obstructions; and
> >>> otherwise it comes out when the snow is really bad.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> I know those who don't have 4 WD or
> >>>> don't want 4 WD or just don't believe in it for one reason or
another
> >>> don't
> >>>> want
> >>>> to hear this but there really is a dramatic difference when
driving in
> >>> snow
> >>>> or
> >>>> anything else slick or deep.
> >>>
> >>> This is really the part I wanted to focus us. YES! It's just a
fact.
> >> The
> >>> 2WD supporters have found that it works for them, but clearly they
> >>> aren't
> >>> taking their trucks into some of the same situations as Charlie and I
> >> have
> >>> described.
> >>>
> >>> SO
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> AT mailing list
> >>> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> AT mailing list
> >>> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> AT mailing list
> >>> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> AT mailing list
> >> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > AT mailing list
> > http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
>
> _______________________________________________
> AT mailing list
> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
>
> _______________________________________________
> AT mailing list
> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
>
_______________________________________________
AT mailing list
http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
More information about the AT
mailing list