In article , Smitty Two wrote:
In article ,
(Doug Miller) wrote:

In article , Tegger
wrote:

Say you spend $600 to get the job done /right/, which means water pump,
tensioner and coolant as well as the belt, all with proper OEM parts. And
you do this at 90K. Now you hang on to the car until 150K. This means your
$600 is amortized over 60K miles. That's one cent per mile.

Now, say you wait until 120K to get the job done, but still get rid of the
car at 150K. $600 over 30K is: two cents per mile.

Nonsense. You're still driving the same 60K miles between 90K and 150K, and
you're still spending the same amount on the timing belt repair. The only
difference is when you buy the belt. Either way, you're amortizing the same
cost over the same mileage, and get the same cost per mile.

Uh, I think that was Tegger's point, Doug.

Uh, I think not, considering that he explicitly claimed that the cost per mile
to replace it later was double the the cost per mile to replace it now.

What part of "one cent per mile ... two cents per mile" did you find
confusing?