Common parts cut car costs

Colors are FINALLY coming back to interiors, after 20 years of
mind-numbing grey, charcoal, and tan. An owner of a brand new Mustang GT
parks right beside me every day, and both our cars have a beautiful deep
red interior, almost exactly the same shade in fact. The difference is
exactly 40 years- his is a 2006 Mustang, mine is a 1966 Dodge.

 

And yet it is GM that failed to standardize. Chrysler abandoned 4
separate engine divisions that had few interchangeable parts (Chrysler,
Dodge, DeSoto, and Plymouth) in 1958, and came out with a line of
"corporate" engines used in all their car and truck lines- the B/RB
big-block V8s, the A (and later LA) small-block V8s, and the G/RG
slant-6 added in 1960. Ford did the same about the same time, abandoning
separate Mercury, Lincoln, and Ford engine familes. But GM kept on with
divisional engine plants, and in fact still has remnants of the
practice. It reached its worst in the 70s when there were no less than 4
GM small-displacement v8s with no parts interchangeable among them
(Chevy, Olds, Buick, Pontiac) and *5* big-block families with no
interchangeable parts, including 4 that were within 1 cubic inch of the
exact same size (Buick 455, Olds 455, Pontiac 455, Chevy 454, and
Cadillac 472). Even today, there are two GM v8 familes- the Chevy-based
Gen III v8s used in the trucks and Corvette, pluse the Cadillac
Northstar v8 family. There are *three* v6 families all overlapping in
size and power output- the Buick 3.8L, and the Chevy-derived 3.4 and
3.5L, and the Northstar-based OHC v6.

And we wonder why GM has been in financial trouble so long....

 

Sigh

OK, here we go again.

Yes, depreciation doesen't mean anything if you buy the car new then own
it until the wheels drop off In that case you can use the IRS tax
depreciation
curve which is very sharp, or construct your own gentle one, either
way, you pay the same money.

But it means a huge amount if you sell it before it's completely worn out.
Or, if you decide to do it the other way - meaning, buy an almost new car
that has a small number of miles on it.

A typical new car today has about 200K miles of life in it. (well, barring
some of the well known lemons)

If you buy it then drive it 100 miles down the road, realize oh shit I can't
afford this, take it back then what?

You lose maybe $2000 or more, returning it. Probably a lot more because
your getting out of it at the beginning of the sharp curve. That's
depreciation.

If you drive it 150K miles then sell it you get maybe $500. If you don't
sell
it but just continue driving it until it hits 200K miles, then sell it, you
will also
get maybe $500.

In other words, those 50K extra miles you got cost you - nothing. Since
your now at the end of the depreciation curve. Once more that's also
depreciation.

Most people understand this. I guess you don't. Or, you have some other
name for it other than depreciation. Since you seem to like to make
spelling
flames, your probably going to hit me with some other hair split. And, yes,
these yours are deliberate - to bug you.

Lots of people have found that you don't need to lean them down
to pass smog. It really depends on how new the cat is, how good
the engine is, and many other variables.

Yah, I got that. I was just pointing out that the lack of a computer
controlled carb, or a repair part for one, was not an excuse for
getting rid of the car if it was still running. I also think you can get
a smog variance if parts aren't available any longer.

Of course, if your just sick of driving the same thing and want to
use that as an excuse to make yourself feel better about tossing a
running car, go ahead. But, I thought the whole point of driving one
of these cars way beyond it's original factory-estimated lifespan
was to be able to say "**** you" to the factory "I ain't one of your
dumb pigeons that is going to fit in the hole you decided for me"
Seems to me that if you sell it before the body completely
rusts away, that you are nothing more than just another one of
the lemmings. ;-)

Very good point. But you forgot to mention also that those Standard
EGR's have you peen in the selectable orifices, so you don't get many
chances
to try different sizes until the damn casting is so peened in that you can't
get
the orifice to stick in it anymore.

"**** you factory, I ain't one of your damn lemmings!!"

Ted

 

I also owned a 1978 510 and what a difference - good leg room with
the seat all the way back. Amazing how they went backwards on the
models they released a few years later.

Ted

 

So then you both look like rolling brothels, eh? ;-)

Ted

 

The auto industry builds what (they think) will make them the most
money and then marketing convinces customers that's what they want (or
"need").

 

No, one's a Polara and one's a Mustang. Neither is a Lincoln, Cadillac
DeVille, or Mercedes with 20-inch rims and blacked-out windows. Or a
full-size van with red shag carpeting.

 

But what need would I have to construct or use any depreciation curve
if I buy a vehicle cash, operate it for 15 years and THEN sell it?

True, IF you're expecting "trade-in value," which most people seem to
bank their futures on these days. To me, it's never been a selling
point on any car. One thing were it does hit home, however...coverage
value for comprehensive insurance claims. When my '92 Cad was
totaled, I was rather pleased to receive "high book" for the car, and
the book value was about $3K higher than I'd expected for that
particular model. However, I don't make a habit of wrecking cars, or
having them stolen. I leave the former up to my wife, who seems to
have a penchant for doing so. It's also why I do most of the driving.

Then, the dealer smiles and offers low book for it as the buyer's only
escape, vacuums the ashtray and floor mat, and sells it on the used
lot for high used book.

True, one that's codified (proper usage here) by our tax law, as well.
The civil court system almost everywhere, as well as the IRS and state
tax franchise boards, still use the "KBB" as their standard of value.
Whether or not the "Blue Book" has any basis in reality isn't a
factor, since valuations stated in it lag sales by many months. With
the KBB now being on line and delear input regarding sale prices being
fed to them the same way, however, it seems Blue Book prices are now,
more than ever before, reflecting actual market conditions, rather
than arbitrary formulæ..

Precisely. You are then "driving for free," according to CPAs, with
the benefit of loss of depreciation being offset by increased
maintenance costs. How you handle your vehicle maintenance determines
just how "free" it is.

This is how US railroads used motive power until fairly
recently...finance through a trust, run the drivers off of it in
mainline service, then "bump" it to branch, switching, industrial or
maintenance of way service once it was fully amortized. Then, the
only factor determining scrapping would be maintenance costs versus
replacement cost. This no longer holds sway, as management no longer
wants to do ANY maintenance, and foolishly trades in motive power long
before full amortization is reached, depending on trade-in allowances
mostly from GE Capital, who has all US railroad now captive
financially. General Electric knows this, and now builds its motive
power with a very short expected life span. Many individuals who
lease their cars also do this...don't do any maintenance at all save
that which will keep the car going down the road, then turn it in and
it's someone else's problem to clean up the mess left behind. My
analysis of this is that this is probably a cost savings, but ONLY if
the person is a mechanical nimrod who only takes the car to the dealer
for all service, parts and repair. Otherwise, the cost/benefit
analysis doesn't pan out at all.

I understand depreciation schedules quite well. They're arbitrary, at
best.

At least you're now aware of it, whereas before this, you obviously
were not. People get very testy when their poor usage is exposed, but
you do now think of it, don't you?!

That varies state to state. In California, they offer either $500
toward the cost of repairs (usually paying for a replacement cat) or
$1000 to junk the car, and it's far more expensive in terms of bother
and lost time to keep going back to the "smog referee" to get a
variance than it is to either fix the problem or scrap the car. The
program is designed now to get rid of any car that cannot pass
dynamometer testing for HC, CO and NOx, regardless of repair costs.
It's a tough program, but I notice a lot of the beaters running on 3
cylinders preferred by illegal aliens are fast disappearing off the
roads, and Los Angeles hasn't had as many Stage 2 smog alert in the
years since the program took effect.

That would be me...and, since we don't have rust out here,
theoretically a car could, assuming a cache of essential parts, run
forever, barring metal fatigue of the monocoque body structure..

I got lucky...I downsized by one "washer" size and hit the "sweet
spot." The problem with those is some rather hay wired engineering.
Although the diameter of the suggested "washer" was sized identically
to the original Mopar part, the hole was through essentially a washer,
not the thickness of the casting, as it was on the original. I
figured that down sizing the "washer" orifice by a single size would
do the trick, and I hit it the first time. However, had I had to make
more than two or three changes, the lip around the countersunk area
where the "washer" rests on the flange would have been useless.

What arched an eyebrow from me was that the downsizing had such a
dramatic impact on HC and CO decreasing, while NOx barely crept up.
The engine wasn't missing at all on the original sized orifice, and
driveability was good. However, just by decreasing the exhaust stream
a tiny bit made a world of difference, both in emissions and, to a
lesser degree, power. The shop's multi-purpose dynamometer is
calibrated in KW, and doing some quick calculation showed that the
smaller orifice yielded 4 more net horsepower at the rear wheels at
WOT at 3800 RPM. That's really a fairly big gain from a very small
change in EGR orifice.

As if to disprove common lore that EGRs should routinely be
disconnected, I did so, and found that my 4 HP gain simply evaporated.
I also noted that the ECS II system was trying to lean out the mxture,
and was "up against the stops" at 18% duty cycle, where before it was
running around 40%. So much for hayseeds who think smog controls are
a communist plot to make thier cars run "worser."!

The more I read about mishaps with OBD II cars in here and elsewhere,
I say exactly the same thing! While owners of new DC cars are
scratching their heads to figure out what those codes mean, or trying
to figure out why they're getting weird shift problems caused by their
TCMs, I'm out driving with good economy and legal exhaust...as well as
very low parts costs.

A side benefit is that the profile of the old M-body seems to instill
fear in kids driving little rice boxes. One asked me recently if it
was an "undercover cop car," although M-bodies haven't been in any
police fleets I know of in over 15 years.

 

Lee Iacocca disputed this notion years ago, but did admit that the
"concept to showroom" lead time for US cars was unacceptably long.
Chrysler (before Daimler) was the only US manufacturer to make
significant headway on this problem when Iacocca insisted on building
the Belvidere Design Center, cutting lead design time down to as
little as 18 months. GM probably still has the longest lead time to
market of the Big 3, thanks to their inbred, unmovable corporate
culture.

Ford is making progress (the now well-selling Fusion was a two year
project) but doesn't seem to be taking full advantage of it. Whether
Mulally can shake off the demons of Ford family control of Dearborn
remains to be seen. I really think Bill Ford, Jr. tried to speed
things up, as his remarks about the "new" Mustang showed, but he
didn't have the managerial ability and/or was probably held back by
making too many changes by Ford family constraints. Blood's thicker
than water with that bunch for sure, as was exemplified by William
Clay Ford's neglect of doing anything about his obviously
out-of-control brother, King Henry II, while Ford was swirling down
the crapper around 1980.

Once King Henry was out of the way, Ford struck gold with the
Taurus/Sable, and to a lesser extent, the Tempo/Topaz. The former was
a really good design that covered all bases (except, perhaps,
reliability), while the latter wasn't very well engineered at all, but
sold in big numbers due to interior room. What Ford did with the
Taurus, however, was cover a market slot that Chrysler had been trying
to fill with "EEK" car stretches of the original K-car, somewhat
unsuccessfully. By then, the legacy of Roger Smith had just about
killed off GM, and they were already in decline with "badge
engineered" cars that didn't really do anything well. Iacocca hated
the Taurus (probably out of jealousy), calling it "the potato car."
Within two years, though, he was "potatoing" his "EEK" cars to try to
compete!

 

The original PL-510, "the box," did have one thing that amazed people
back in the early '70s, besides its long lived OHC engine....ride,
courtesy of independent rear suspension. I believe Datsuns were the
first with IRS in an economy car, aside from the Corvair with its
swing axles that doomed it. Honda's attempts later weren't nearly as
successful in terms of a nice, well controlled ride, and were
notoriously "choppy."

Seating comfort in the original 510 wasn't as good as the second
series though, and interiors were de rigeur for the era...cheesy
plastic and pseudo-vinyl with rubber floor mats. Paint was abysmal in
comparison to US cars as well, and most Datsuns (and Toyotas) from
that era would have chalked, oxidized paint in two years without
judicious waxing and garaging. By the end of the '70s, they had that
problem fixed as well, and were in position to really start eating Big
3 sales.

Another Datsun that rode really well...the "luxury" 610, circa
'72-'76. I actually saw a '74 610 coupe running down the road the
other day...battered, but still going, with no blue smoke. Biggest
loser for Nissan in that era was the solid rear axle 710, of which I
haven't seen one in at least 20 years...ugly styling, bad ride,
indifferent handling, but the good L20B OHC engine. It seemed in that
era that Nissan was concentrating on mechanical reliability (which has
been proven to be prodigious) while Toyota was concentrating on
"features" and creature comforts. The early Celicas, while hot
sellers, were mechanically unsound, with exhaust valves frying at 30K
miles in the 18RC engine and other screw-ups like too-soft motor
mounts.

 

Don't forget the heart shaped "bed" and the fountain! Also included
must be a teensy welded chain steering wheels and a beer tap shift
knob.

 

If you're so smart, why are you using "smoke and mirrors", a term that
I used all the time...and you copied.

You didn't even know what an EGR valve WAS, until I told you what they
did here on Usenet. And the best thing to do is, DISCONNECT THEM.
Esp. on old cars.

You tore down an ENTIRE 318 Mopar motor, looking for cause of
overheating, when you actually had a stuck thermostat !

You know SHIT about depreciation- if someone buys a new car, and uses
it for business purposes, they get to WRITE OFF the cost of that car
each year, and NOT PAY TAXES on the income used to pay for that car.
So if they are in a 30% tax bracket, the GOVERNMENT basically picks up
30% of the cost of the car in the long run- you DUMB ASS.

 

Ted,

"DeserTBob" actually owns and drives a 1978 HONDA.

He is unemployed, and has a bogus SSI scam going, where he sits home
and collects checks.

Anything you "prove" to him in an argument here, he will "osmose" and
use in a later argument, as if he knew it all along- he's a DUMB ASS
who has become accustomed to learning through insult and argument on
Usenet. A PATHETIC LOSER.

His recent posts of EGR's and depreciation are gleaned info he just
LEARNED from a flame war he was in 2 weeks ago.

See how he works ?? All of a sudden, he's an expert at accounting,
cars, engines, you name it.

 

DESERTBOB (not its real name) is a troll.
It regularly frequents at least twenty news groups,
including many rabid/sex/racist/liberal idiot/wannabee mechanic groups.

Normally, it starts off with reasonable, even witty lines,
but rapidly drifts into lies, abuse and stupidity.
Check its details at Google Groups at this URL:

http://groups.google.com/groups/pro...YFW4KG3QbhQogR222h-kUg4S0n7nbF1Te82ZIng&hl=en

See it's pathetic picture and myspace page at this URL- as it searches
for companionship at age 50- looks like a quart of oil for the car in
that hair...

http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=30321125

It had 2 Ebay usernames, both banned due to abuse, auction
interference, and harassment- they were VOXPOPPER and XCALIBER44- see
them here- search history of VOXPOPPER to see how it left (8) negative
feedbacks for a seller, for items that cost only a penny each !

http://feedback.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewFeedback&userid=voxpopper

http://feedback.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewFeedback&userid=xcaliber44


It is a sad creature, deserving of pity, not anger.
Any direct response simply feeds it,
but it will go away if you ignore it.

 

give it up Bob- no one's replying to your SSI-sucking posts...

 

this is charley nudo from drums, pa. he's mad that bob ruined his
ebay scam business and now is disrupting news groups every where he
is. turn his fat stupid ass in to to have this
his current google accounts shut down. they have shut down about 15 of
them so far and he still does not learn.

 

this is charley nudo from drums, pa. he's mad that bob ruined his
ebay scam business and now is disrupting news groups every where he
is. turn his fat stupid ass in to to have this
his current google accounts shut down. they have shut down about 15 of
them so far and he still does not learn.

 

Hey posting this as "=ViPeR=" is enough.
Any more of this and I'll KILL both of you.

 

DeserTBoB wrote:

And why the banks and insurance companies try to use the fraudulently
low NADA values for loan and total-out value. I learned this a couple
of years ago on a total out. Stood my ground and documented value with
KBB and real-world sales - which were remarkably in agreement. Told
them I'd see them in small claims court if they insisted on using NADA.
They paid me the KBB.

Oh man! Don't tell the ACLU that! They'll kill that program for sure.
Although, it is a liberal dilemma: Whether to encourage people to be
here illegally or try to hurt people economically in the name of "saving
the environment". Tough decision for them.

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