On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 11:11:48 -0800, SMS
wrote:

Edwin Pawlowski wrote:

Most new cars recommend 3000 miles under severe conditions.

Not true.

Some recommend 3000. A lot more recommend 5000 for severe, 7500 for
"normal."

The real problem is that the oil change industry has apparently
convinced many people that just about all driving falls into the severe
service category, even though the manufacturer makes it perfectly clear
what they consider severe service, and in reality few people fall into
that category.

Since there's no real downside, at least for the vehicle, in having
unnecessary oil changes, the "cheap insurance" excuses is regularly
trotted out.

Are you going to believe Honda and Toyota, two companies that are
absolutely anal about their reputation for long term dependability, or
are you going to believe Jiffy Lube?

A person forks over $30,000.00 or $40,000.00 to one of those dealers
you speak of who says from behind his $500 suit, "Nah, just change
the oil every 5,000 miles and don't worry about. Excuse me, I've got
to talk to a customer"
Same person pulls into a Jiffy Lube maybe 4 times a year and hears
an earnest kid in greasy overalls say "Oil and filter changed, added 2
pounds of air to front left and right rear tire, air filter ok, trans
fluid ok, topped off the washer fluid. You might want to get your
serpentine belt checked, sir. It's frayed. That'll be $21.99, sir.
Thank you for using Jiffy Lube. See you in 3 months or 3000 miles."

What's the better experience?
Now it's time for you to trot out the tales of oil streaks on the road
leaving Jiffy Lube and a blown engine because the kid cross threaded
the drain plug.
You got your stories, I got mine.

--Vic

On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 08:07:28 -0600, Leonardo wrote:

Mark Rand wrote:



Manufacturer's recommended oil change interval for the Peugeot 407 is 20,000
miles.


Probably why they don't sell them in the 'States'


LA


Maybe you need to look for automobiles with decent engines then :-)


Mark Rand
RTFM

On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 15:25:13 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote:

On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 11:11:48 -0800, SMS
wrote:

Edwin Pawlowski wrote:

Most new cars recommend 3000 miles under severe conditions.

Not true.

Some recommend 3000. A lot more recommend 5000 for severe, 7500 for
"normal."

The real problem is that the oil change industry has apparently
convinced many people that just about all driving falls into the severe
service category, even though the manufacturer makes it perfectly clear
what they consider severe service, and in reality few people fall into
that category.

Since there's no real downside, at least for the vehicle, in having
unnecessary oil changes, the "cheap insurance" excuses is regularly
trotted out.

Are you going to believe Honda and Toyota, two companies that are
absolutely anal about their reputation for long term dependability, or
are you going to believe Jiffy Lube?

A person forks over $30,000.00 or $40,000.00 to one of those dealers
you speak of who says from behind his $500 suit, "Nah, just change
the oil every 5,000 miles and don't worry about. Excuse me, I've got
to talk to a customer"
Same person pulls into a Jiffy Lube maybe 4 times a year and hears
an earnest kid in greasy overalls say "Oil and filter changed, added 2
pounds of air to front left and right rear tire, air filter ok, trans
fluid ok, topped off the washer fluid. You might want to get your
serpentine belt checked, sir. It's frayed. That'll be $21.99, sir.
Thank you for using Jiffy Lube. See you in 3 months or 3000 miles."

What's the better experience?
Now it's time for you to trot out the tales of oil streaks on the road
leaving Jiffy Lube and a blown engine because the kid cross threaded
the drain plug.
You got your stories, I got mine.

--Vic


http://www.consumeraffairs.com/autom...be_damage.html

Raymond of Warminster PA (10/31/05)
My 2001 Camry was in the shop for an oil change on Sept. 06, 2005. Their
shop order indicated date of service as Aug.31. After driving to the
Jersey Shore on Wed., Sept. 07 and subsequent driving on Thurs. and
Friday I noticed a strange texture to the rear pasenger mat. On checking
further I found the floor flooded as was the case under the front
pasenger mat. It took two days of mopping and shop vac. at home to suck
up the water. On taking the car to my mechanic I learned that the air
conditioner drain hose had been deliberately shoved up into the car body
and that was the cause of the flood. It was fished down and the problem
was eleminated. The mechanic asured me that this could have only been
done deliberately as the hose was pushed well back from the opening.

I rather like this one....

"They also had poor customer service one of the employee that started on
my car went over to another customer's car and started smoking
marijuanna i made sure he didnt get back under my hood what good that
did it still got messed up all i want is my car fix I am a single
working mother attending school and it is hard trying to get around
without my own transportation I have to pay someone everyday to take me
around and i have missed days off work because i couldnt find someone I
call the region office and they told me I would hear from a distrct
manager I havent heard from one yet Would you please help me to get this
resolved.........

Gunner

"Deep in her heart, every moslem woman yearns to show us her tits"
John Griffin

Homer J Simpson wrote:

"The Real Bev" wrote:

And speaking of Fry's: They sent me a check themselves when the company
weaseled out of the properly-completed rebate. They claimed that the
'Rebate Receipt' was improper and that I should have sent the regular
receipt. Fry's handled it properly. Screw K-World.

Shades of OfficeMax!

Man, what a memory! I'd forgotten that.

--
Cheers, Bev
================================================== ==================
His men would follow him anywhere, but only out of morbid curiosity.

Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
Alan wrote in message
The 3000 mile myth has been passed on from generation to generation,
even as oils have progressed from single-weight non-detergent oils, to
multi-weight detergent oils.

Maybe in your infinite understanding of such things it's a
myth. However it is printed in black and white in every new
car manual I've gotten in the last 20 years with I bought a
new car.

Most new cars recommend 3000 miles under severe conditions. For normal
use, 7500 is typical today as stated in my GM and Hyundai manuals. I've
been doing that in my cars for years. Works well for my driving conditions.
The oil change places give you that little sticker for 3000 miles under any
condition because they want to sell oil changes.


If you tell people 3000, a lot of them will start thinking about it at
3500 and get around to doing it at 5000 or 6000. If you say 7500, they
get around to it at 10,000 to 12,000. So if the ideal is to change it
at 7,500, your better off saying 3000, so most of the people will
change it before 7,500. Saves a lot of hasle in the long run.

"Vic Smith" wrote in message

That'll be $21.99, sir.
Thank you for using Jiffy Lube. See you in 3 months or 3000 miles."

He make shis living changing oil. What do you expect him to say?


What's the better experience?
You got your stories, I got mine.

The better experience is my own evaluation of my own driving habits and
conditions as well as reading what the manufacturer of the engine and
testing laboratories conclude. Short distance driving in cold weather?
Certainly 3000 miles is a good idea. Longer distances in temperate
climates? Easily 7500 miles. Having put 200,000 miles on cars with that
change interval, I'd conclude it works for me. Only car I ever had an oil
related problem was one I bought used with 100,000 miles on it and it was
the GM 3.8 V-6 of the early 80's. I have no idea how, if ever, the oil was
changed in it.

Andrew VK3BFA ha escrito:
Rod Speed wrote:
Andrew VK3BFA wrote
SMS wrote
clare at snyder.on.ca wrote


Sadly, I do despair at the lack of basic intellectual ability and
elementary social skills of some of my own countrymen - fortunately,
Rod is a special case and beyond being irritating is of no real
consequence in any society. Its like wrestling with a bagful of snakes
- interesting at first as a challenge, but eventually tiring.

Rod has achieved notoriety - his "insults" have been immortalized in
its own website at

http://www.sensationbot.com/chat-rodspeed.html

where you can type in a phrase and get a "Roddism" in return. Saves
time replying to his ravings.


Don´t forget this other website:

http://www.ozdebate.net/rod.html

seems like the guy is a legend. I wonder if he speaks other languages
besides english... if he can annoy the english speaker world, I guess
he will have the talent to show his "gifted skills" in other languages
too.

lsmartino wrote:
Andrew VK3BFA ha escrito:
Rod Speed wrote:
Andrew VK3BFA wrote
SMS wrote
clare at snyder.on.ca wrote


Sadly, I do despair at the lack of basic intellectual ability and
elementary social skills of some of my own countrymen - fortunately,
Rod is a special case and beyond being irritating is of no real
consequence in any society. Its like wrestling with a bagful of
snakes - interesting at first as a challenge, but eventually tiring.

Rod has achieved notoriety - his "insults" have been immortalized in
its own website at

http://www.sensationbot.com/chat-rodspeed.html

where you can type in a phrase and get a "Roddism" in return. Saves
time replying to his ravings.


Don´t forget this other website:

http://www.ozdebate.net/rod.html

seems like the guy is a legend.

I am indeed. Eat your heart out, wogchild.

I wonder if he speaks other languages besides english...

Nope, never bothered with the babble you stupid wogs get up to.

if he can annoy the english speaker world,

Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed fantasys, wogchild.

I guess he will have the talent to show his "gifted skills" in other languages too.

Guess again, wogchild.

Let´s do an experiment === Rod vs. Rod !!


Rod Speed ha escrito:
lsmartino wrote:

Don´t forget this other website:

http://www.ozdebate.net/rod.html

seems like the guy is a legend.

I am indeed. Eat your heart out, wogchild.


Keep furiously sweeping the awkward evidence under the carpet.


I wonder if he speaks other languages besides english...

Nope, never bothered with the babble you stupid wogs get up to.


It's a tad more complicated than that.


if he can annoy the english speaker world,

Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed fantasys, wogchild.


Fraid not.

I guess he will have the talent to show his "gifted skills" in other languages too.

Guess again, wogchild.

You really are a juvenile little child.




P.S: Reply constructed using http://www.ozdebate.net/rod.html

Vic Smith wrote:

You got your stories, I got mine.

They're not my stories. There are regularly warnings by automotive
columnists and mechanics to avoid the quick-change oil change places
like the plague, as well as the horror stories of customers that have
had their vehicles damaged by these places.

I'm not risking my vehicle to a place like that. I'll bring it to a
reputable independent mechanic, do it myself, or go to the dealer if
they have a good price. Usually the Toyota dealer has an oil change deal
that is cheaper than Jiffy Lube, plus they are using better quality
filters, and more experienced mechanics.

scenario_dave wrote:

If you tell people 3000, a lot of them will start thinking about it at
3500 and get around to doing it at 5000 or 6000. If you say 7500, they
get around to it at 10,000 to 12,000. So if the ideal is to change it
at 7,500, your better off saying 3000, so most of the people will
change it before 7,500. Saves a lot of hasle in the long run.

LOL. Maybe some people are like this. I try to do the maintenance as
close as possible to the proper interval, so I can keep on schedule over
the long haul.

It's becoming moot as more and more vehicles have service interval
indicators that are based on driving conditions, temperature, etc.

Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
"Vic Smith" wrote in message
That'll be $21.99, sir.
Thank you for using Jiffy Lube. See you in 3 months or 3000 miles."

He make shis living changing oil. What do you expect him to say?


What's the better experience?
You got your stories, I got mine.

The better experience is my own evaluation of my own driving habits and
conditions as well as reading what the manufacturer of the engine and
testing laboratories conclude. Short distance driving in cold weather?

Yes, if you _only_ do short distances, you build up moisture in the oil
system which doesn't get vaporized by engine heat. But short trips with
occasional longer trips and freeway driving gets rid of that moisture.

All the experts agree that 3000 mile oil changes are almost always
unnecessary for normal service.

There are sometimes side benefits to the 3000 mile changes, such as when
people have an oil burning engine yet never check or top off their oil.
The 3000 mile oil changes mean that they'll have a lot more oil in their
engine, on average, than if they did 7500 mile changes. There were some
Saturn engines where the oil needed to be exceptionally clean because it
was used to hydraulically to tension the timing chain. Varnish build-up
in the timing chain tensioner bore could cause the tensioner mechanism
to malfunction, and lead to timing chain failure. But these sorts of
issues are pretty rare.

Some stupid wog claiming to be
lsmartino wrote
just the puerile **** you'd expect from a stupid wog.

Rod Speed ha escrito:
Some stupid wog claiming to be
lsmartino wrote

Hehehehehehe! The experiment is going well, let´s try it again.



just the puerile **** you'd expect from a stupid wog.

The rule of holes - when you're in one, you should stop digging.

P.S: Reply created using http://www.ozdebate.net/rod.html

Ignoramus16071 wrote:

On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 00:04:59 GMT, James Sweet
wrote:
Ignoramus16071 wrote:
On Tue, 16 Jan 2007 20:41:59 GMT, James Sweet
wrote:

Ignoramus16071 wrote:

TO the skeptics of the "planned obsolescence" and "designed to fail"
theory, I have a simple suggestion.

Take household machines from trash and take them apart. Look for
signs of above mentioned behaviours -- and you will find plenty. Such
as parts that are obviously designed to fail.


i


Designed to fail, or designed to be cheap? When you see these "designed
to fail" parts, does it often appear that they could be made to last
much better for the same cost?


Well, let me give you one example. We had a electric tea kettle. It
broke the hinge on the lid. Postmortem indicated that it broke because
it lacked material around the hinge. At the cost of extra 1-2 cents,
they could have a few mm more plastic around the hinges so that they
hold up better.

The extra cost is minuscule.

Another example, I received a KMart wallet as a gift and it is
unusable -- the credit card pockets are too tight and it is generally
too tight for money also(I like to carry a few hundred $$ in cash etc,
which does not affect credit card pockets). Again, at the cost of
perhaps 10 cents per wallet, it could have been made into a better
wallet.

If anyone has suggestions for a really good three section leather
wallet, I will appreciate.

i

There's the key, an extra few cents. 2 cents times 2 million kettles and
you're talking 40 grand, that's not minuscule, even for a big company.

10 cents is even more significant, when you're manufacturing millions of
things, pennies *do* matter. You can get something that cost an extra 10
cents to make, but it will cost you an extra 10 bucks to buy and the
average consumer not knowing the difference will buy the cheaper one.

It's all about offering the lowest price and making the most profit per
sale, they don't intentionally try to make it break, they just don't
care if it does so long as it lasts through the warranty.

If they know what happens with their product -- and they do -- then it
IS intentional.

If I set a fire on my kitchen floor, hoping to cook a pig that would
not fit in a stove, knowing that my house would burn down, and the
house burns down, the result is intentional -- even though the fire
was started to cook a pig. Same here -- if they try to save 2 cents
and make products that they KNOW do not perform their intended
purpose, then making substandard products is intentional on their
part.

That's why I do not patronize cutthroat retailers such as Walmart.
Because they are looking to screw ME by selling products that do not
perform their intended purpose (and by forcing manufacturers to make
such via abusive methods). I do not like such capitalists and to not
want to give them any of my business. I would rather pay 3x more to
businesses such as McMaster-Carr, or Bosch, etc, to get a product that
actually works.

My experience with Harbor Freight has been spotty, but most of the
products that I bought from them, do work as advertised.

i

I just recently bought a hand-held spothight with a 6V valve-regulated
lead-acid battery. (bought at Lidl in the UK.) It is Osram brand but who
knows who actually designed or made it. Out of curiosity I opened it up
and measured the voltage as it was charging the battery. The 6V (3 cell)
battery gets charged to about 8.5V with the supplied charger so that would
kill the battery pretty quickly. The proper charging voltage is even
marked clearly on the Chinese-made battery. The charger is basically just
a resistor and an unregulated power supply. I know that say a LM317 would
be too expensive for these guys but there would surely be a cheaper circuit
e.g. with a zener diode and a transistor that could clamp the charging
voltage to a sensible limit, for 10c or less. In my own case, I will
charge it with a regulated power supply instead, but it makes me sad to
think that the rest of these things will be destroyed quite soon by
overcharging, and since the battery is not easily removable from the casing
of the torch, I guess that approximately none of them will be recycled when
they stop working. Even if they were "recycled", I have heard some bad
things about the way lead-acid battery recycling is done these days, so it
would be much better if someone had at least been able to use it for a few
years first.

That is one good thing about lithium batteries, the appliance manufacturers
are so ****-scared of abusing the batteries, causing a fire and getting
sued that they usually do put a half-decent charger in the products, even
if that does cost them the extra 10c.

Chris

"Ignoramus16071" wrote in message
...

Another example, I received a KMart wallet as a gift and it is
unusable -- the credit card pockets are too tight and it is generally
too tight for money also(I like to carry a few hundred $$ in cash etc,
which does not affect credit card pockets). Again, at the cost of
perhaps 10 cents per wallet, it could have been made into a better
wallet.


Obviously you got the wallet intended for tightwads. :-)

I got a new wallet for Christmas wherer some compartments were
a bit too tight when I loaded them with the various assorted plastic
cards, ATM, credit, membership, insurance, driver's license, etc.

I ended up trimming some of the cards with scissors.
Now they fit ok. No harm done to the cards.

If anyone has suggestions for a really good three section leather
wallet, I will appreciate.

There's your problem! A single-fold wallet is a lot less bulky.
I had a 3-section wallet and hated it. It felt like I was carrying
a baseball in my pocket.

Don

Some stupid wog claiming to be
lsmartino wrote
just the puerile **** you'd expect from a stupid wog.

It has been found that the subject under study, in this case Rod Speed
has a compulsion to answer to anything, even to himself :-D


Rod Speed ha escrito:
Some stupid wog claiming to be
lsmartino wrote
just the puerile **** you'd expect from a stupid wog.

Says SFA about your pathetically childish remark. (R. Speed trademark
quote)




See you never, loser... hehehehehehehehe!

Some stupid wog claiming to be
lsmartino wrote
just the puerile **** you'd expect from a stupid wog.

lsmartino wrote:
It has been found that the subject under study, in this case Rod Speed
has a compulsion to answer to anything, even to himself :-D



I am starting to wonder about this - remember the "Turing Test" for AI
- you have a conversation, via a teleprinter, with the "robot" in
another room. If you cant distinguish the reply from that of a person,
then it passes the Turing Test.

Your testing seems to show that Rod might, indeed, be a robot. A bloody
good one - had me fooled for along time.

But the inability, or unwillingness, to answer ANY direct questions
seems to suggest it is an AI program. Probably someones thesis, and
they are keeping track of how much "conversation" Rod manages to
continue.

If its a good one, it should have some sort of adaptive learning
algorithm built in......

Interesting.

Andrew VK3BFA.

Some gutless ****wit desperately cowering behind
Andrew VK3BFA desperately
attempted to bull**** its way out of its predicament and
fooled absolutely no one at all, as always.

No surprise that it got the bums rush, right out the door.

Even Telecom had noticed what a completely unemployable dud it was.

Alan wrote:

Oh sure. They all agree.

Except for my owner's manual.

LOL.

"Especially since normal city driving is, according to your
owner's manual "extreme service" and they recommend you
change your oil every 3,000 miles. . . ."

At least you no longer believe that everyone else's owner's manual is
like yours.

So what kind of vehicle do you have, and/or what does your owner's
manual say? I've never seen an owner's manual that defined severe
service as any service that included short trips, unless there were
never any longer trips (which heat up the engine and oil hot enough to
vaporize the moisture).

Toyota:
------
"Repeated short trips (less than 8 km) in freezing conditions."

Nissan:
------
"Repeatedly driving short distances."

Honda:
-----
"Driving less than 5 miles (8 km) per trip or in freezing temperatures."


Don't fall for the oil industry's attempt to redefine "severe" service
to fit their own agenda.

"Andrew VK3BFA" wrote in
oups.com:

But the inability, or unwillingness, to answer ANY direct questions
seems to suggest it is an AI program.

Isn't "AI" the acronym for "Annoying Idiot"? grin

James Sweet wrote:


And I want to add something about "planned obsolescence" because it
is often misused. If people are choosing to buy cheap, it's hardly
that the manufacturers are making things so they will break. The
consumer often wants that cheaper tv set or VCR.



Rather than planned obsolescence, it's normally more a case of how many
cost reducing corners can they cut and still have it last "long enough".
It's hard to blame the manufactures, they're supplying what the average
consumer is demanding.



If my computer from 1979 had been intended to last forever, it would
have been way out of range in terms of price. Because they'd have to
anticipate how much things would change, and build in enough so upgrading
would be doable. So you'd spend money on potential, rather than spending
money later on a new computer that would beat out what they could
imagine in 1979. And in recent years, it is the consumer who is deciding
to buy a new computer every few years (whether a deliberate decision or
they simply let the manufacturer lead, must vary from person to person.)



There's been various attempts over the years at marketing easily
upgradeable computers, but invariably by the time you were ready to
upgrade, the cost of a new CPU module was a sizable portion of the cost
of a whole new PC, as well as the rest of the major components were
showing their age.

Not to mention, the fact that by the time you decide to upgrade, the
architecture has changed. You decide to upgrade your processor: new
processor won't fit in the old socket. Same with memory and
peripherals. I've got a few series port products that won't even work
on newer computers, a pile of 30 and 72 pin SIMM ram sticks...floppy
drives, who wants 'em?

Anybody want a couple of AT power supplies?

jak

On 21 Jan 2007 19:49:41 -0800, "Andrew VK3BFA"
wrote:


But the inability, or unwillingness, to answer ANY direct questions
seems to suggest it is an AI program. Probably someones thesis, and
they are keeping track of how much "conversation" Rod manages to
continue.

If its a good one, it should have some sort of adaptive learning
algorithm built in......

Interesting.

Andrew VK3BFA.


That particular trait is shown by politicians as well :-)



Mark Rand
RTFM

On Sun, 21 Jan 2007 09:59:08 -0800, SMS
wrote:

Vic Smith wrote:

You got your stories, I got mine.

They're not my stories. There are regularly warnings by automotive
columnists and mechanics to avoid the quick-change oil change places
like the plague, as well as the horror stories of customers that have
had their vehicles damaged by these places.

Sure, they're your stories. You believe them and apparently are
affected by them. I believe the horror stories, but also believe them
be merely anecdotal warnings that "**** happens."
In fact, my son the professional mechanic, last year called me from
the road asking to bring him oil and a drain plug. He had just been
working in my garage putting an intake manifold and a bunch of other
stuff on his car, and changed the oil while he was at it. Didn't
tighten the drain plug and it shook out. He saw the stream in his
mirror when it came loose, pulled over and shut it down, so no harm
was done except 4 quarts of Mobile 1 on the street. This is a kid who
is truly mechanically gifted, but doesn't specialize in changing oil.
I have *never* hand tightened an oil drain plug, always wrenching it
when it goes in, and I'm sure he won't make that mistake again. But
he can do 10 things at once, and I can do only 1.
Point is, the quick lube places specialize in this simple stuff,
sometimes with drill instructer-like shouts of "Plug in!!!, "Plug
torqued to 20 foot pounds!!!" Sort of funny, but good practice.
OTOH, I've heard the same type of oil plug horror stories about dealer
service bays, and independents. **** happens.
The only effect these stories have had on me is to make me pull over
after *anybody* changes my oil and make sure nothing is screwed up.
Since I don't crawl under the car, even that won't help with a
hand-tightened plug, which is a time bomb.
The only way to be absolutely confident that things are done as you
would do them is to do them yourself. Of, course then when you screw
something up, you can't whine and carry on about it.
Though I usually change my own oil, I've been to quick lube places
many, many times and *never* had an issue. Those are my stories.
BTW, I'm more particular about who does other types of auto
maintenance on my cars.

I'm not risking my vehicle to a place like that. I'll bring it to a
reputable independent mechanic, do it myself, or go to the dealer if
they have a good price. Usually the Toyota dealer has an oil change deal
that is cheaper than Jiffy Lube, plus they are using better quality
filters, and more experienced mechanics.

Good for you. Sounds as if you have your own stories of success.
You're happy with your stories, and I with mine.

--Vic

Andrew VK3BFA ha escrito:
lsmartino wrote:
It has been found that the subject under study, in this case Rod Speed
has a compulsion to answer to anything, even to himself :-D



I am starting to wonder about this - remember the "Turing Test" for AI
- you have a conversation, via a teleprinter, with the "robot" in
another room. If you cant distinguish the reply from that of a person,
then it passes the Turing Test.

Your testing seems to show that Rod might, indeed, be a robot. A bloody
good one - had me fooled for along time.

But the inability, or unwillingness, to answer ANY direct questions
seems to suggest it is an AI program. Probably someones thesis, and
they are keeping track of how much "conversation" Rod manages to
continue.

If its a good one, it should have some sort of adaptive learning
algorithm built in......

If Rod is a robot, it is probably still in development. Please notice
the fact that as soon it reachs the end of its script, or possible
answers, it has the tendency to repeat the same answer over and over,
in an endless loop. This seems to me like a software bug, but surely
the AI programmers behind the Rod project are working hard to correct
it. Probably they didn´t knew about this bug, because our testing made
it surface. Maybe they will incorpore some sort of adaptive learning
algorithm into the robot, as we clearly demonstrated that the Rod
project is laking one badly, or has a non functional one. :-)

Have fun!

Some stupid wog claiming to be
lsmartino wrote
just the puerile **** you'd expect from a stupid wog.

Message to Rod Speed developers:

This is the bug that must be solved

Some stupid wog claiming to be
lsmartino wrote
just the puerile **** you'd expect from a stupid wog.

Three times the same answer in a row. Remember to solve that before you
finish the project. Otherwise the project could be considered a total
failure. ;-)

Ah... and I think a personality change would be fine too. It would make
the final product more appaling to the end user.

Rod Speed wrote:
Some stupid wog claiming to be
lsmartino wrote
just the puerile **** you'd expect from a stupid wog.



Off your meds again, welfare boy?

Some stupid wog claiming to be
lsmartino wrote
just the puerile **** you'd expect from a stupid wog.

William Souden ha escrito:
Rod Speed wrote:
Some stupid wog claiming to be
lsmartino wrote
just the puerile **** you'd expect from a stupid wog.



Off your meds again, welfare boy?

Probably not. The Rod Speed robot is waiting for a long due update to
its A.I. software. Until that happens, it won´t be able to produce an
understandable or meaningful answer since the current software reached
the end of all possible combination of insults and answers. I wonder if
there is a way to reset Rod remotely...

Some stupid wog claiming to be
lsmartino wrote
just the puerile **** you'd expect from a stupid wog.

Alex spake thus:

I was buying a vacuum cleaner from a local vacuum cleaner repair guy and
while he was complaining about quality of modern he showed me a vacuum
cleaner that looked like it was from from 50s or 60s that he was
repairing(replacing a motor) He has a contract with a airline to service
vacuum cleaners that are used to vacuum airplane salons. These vacuum
cleaners work 24/7 for 50 years and all they need a minor service and
motor replaced every so many years.

Since you brought up the subject of old vacuums, thought I should
mention mine: a Kenmore upright that I bought for $10 back in 1980, when
it was already, what? probably 30 years old. I just used it yesterday.

In the time I've had it, I've replaced the footswitch, repaired the plug
(the cord going into it got a bit frayed, so I epoxied it into the
plug), and that's it. Oh, and it has a resuable filter bag, so no
filters to buy.

Beat that with any of the pieces of **** made today (except for the
expensive, gold-plated ones) ...


--
Just as McDonald's is where you go when you're hungry but don't really
care about the quality of your food, Wikipedia is where you go when
you're curious but don't really care about the quality of your knowledge.

- Matthew White's WikiWatch (http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/wikiwoo.htm)

Since you brought up the subject of old vacuums, thought I should mention
mine: a Kenmore upright that I bought for $10 back in 1980, when it was
already, what? probably 30 years old. I just used it yesterday.

In the time I've had it, I've replaced the footswitch, repaired the plug
(the cord going into it got a bit frayed, so I epoxied it into the plug),
and that's it. Oh, and it has a resuable filter bag, so no filters to buy.

Hrm... a 50 year old vacuum bag probably doesn't filter dust out like the
disposable bags of today. Other than that I'd prefer a referbed old unit.

Beat that with any of the pieces of **** made today (except for the
expensive, gold-plated ones) ...

Saw an ad for a vacuum using water to catch the dirt and dust instead of a
filter. It SOUNDS like a good idea. They were selling for $200 for two.
That's more than I'll spend to find out how well it works, but at $100 for
one I may have considered. Dumb marketing.

Any idea if the idea of filtering with water is actually a good idea? Maybe
something I should look for when buying the central vac I'll install in the
next year or two when our old canister dies.

In article zAjth.777612$1T2.674406@pd7urf2no,
says...
Since you brought up the subject of old vacuums, thought I should mention
mine: a Kenmore upright that I bought for $10 back in 1980, when it was
already, what? probably 30 years old. I just used it yesterday.

In the time I've had it, I've replaced the footswitch, repaired the plug
(the cord going into it got a bit frayed, so I epoxied it into the plug),
and that's it. Oh, and it has a resuable filter bag, so no filters to buy.

Hrm... a 50 year old vacuum bag probably doesn't filter dust out like the
disposable bags of today. Other than that I'd prefer a referbed old unit.

Beat that with any of the pieces of **** made today (except for the
expensive, gold-plated ones) ...

Saw an ad for a vacuum using water to catch the dirt and dust instead of a
filter. It SOUNDS like a good idea. They were selling for $200 for two.
That's more than I'll spend to find out how well it works, but at $100 for
one I may have considered. Dumb marketing.

Any idea if the idea of filtering with water is actually a good idea? Maybe
something I should look for when buying the central vac I'll install in the
next year or two when our old canister dies.

We've owned a Rainbow for about 25 years. It filters through water.
The idea is that virtually nothing gets past the water, so you're not
redistributing dust throughout the area you just cleaned. After 25
years, I'm sold! It was (and, if I'm not mistaken, still is) only
available through home sales. I originally thought that it would be
too much hassle filling, emptying, and rinsing each time we used it,
but it was well worth the effort, IMO. After 20 years or so, it
needed new bearings. The cost of repair was such that I chose to
buy a refurbished unit on ebay instead. I paid a bit more than the
repair, but got all new hoses and accessories in the process.

WRT central vac - there's no point in getting a water filter with CV,
since the exhaust doesn't go into your living space.

Noozer spake thus:

Since you brought up the subject of old vacuums, thought I should mention
mine: a Kenmore upright that I bought for $10 back in 1980, when it was
already, what? probably 30 years old. I just used it yesterday.

In the time I've had it, I've replaced the footswitch, repaired the plug
(the cord going into it got a bit frayed, so I epoxied it into the plug),
and that's it. Oh, and it has a resuable filter bag, so no filters to buy.

Hrm... a 50 year old vacuum bag probably doesn't filter dust out like the
disposable bags of today. Other than that I'd prefer a referbed old unit.

Well, I'd never claim that it filters to HEPA specs, but it does work
plenty well enough for my needs (and, I imagine, for most folks'). I
don't need a modren vacuum for which I have to buy disposable bags.


--
Just as McDonald's is where you go when you're hungry but don't really
care about the quality of your food, Wikipedia is where you go when
you're curious but don't really care about the quality of your knowledge.

- Matthew White's WikiWatch (http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/wikiwoo.htm)

Vic Smith wrote:

The only effect these stories have had on me is to make me pull over
after *anybody* changes my oil and make sure nothing is screwed up.
Since I don't crawl under the car, even that won't help with a
hand-tightened plug, which is a time bomb.

I prefer to go to a competent mechanic who has the experience and
attitude to do things properly. This eliminates the need to check that
everything was done properly.

You can't see if everything was done properly with an oil change easily.
Did the mechanic leave the old oil filter gasket stuck onto the engine,
a fairly common occurrence? Did he replace the oil drain plug gasket?
Did he use the proper oil (something that even the dealer sometimes
doesn't do)? Was the filter tightened sufficiently, but not
over-tightened? Was the drain plug tightened sufficiently, but not
over-tightened.

My mechanic now even stocks factory oil filters for his regular
customers so you don't have to bring our own. He doesn't try to sell you
unneeded services such as the Bilstein Wallet Flush, etc. Oh, and he's
about $10 less for an oil change than Jiffy Lube. I'd go there even if
he wasn't my brother-in-law!