On Jun 17, 2:24*pm, Smitty Two wrote:
In article ,
(Doug Miller) wrote:

You and he both fail to understand that *that* is false: the amortized cost
is
the same, because the car is driven 60K miles and thus the cost is amortized
over 60K miles, regardless of when the belt is purchased.

Argghhh. We all agree on what matters, it's just a semantics
disagreement. I'm sorry, but I won't concede my position on that. You're
only USING the new belt for 30,000 miles, so you can only amortize its
cost over 30,000 miles. If you change the belt at 120k and sell the car
at 150k, you paid .02 per mile for the use of the belt.

IOW, I perfectly well understand your logic, but I absolutely disagree
with it.

When should I admit that a small part of my reason for posting this
question was to see what kind of discussion it would produce?

120+ posts, and most of them pretty much on topic.

Not bad!