Interesting comment on the news this morning: sales of sodium silicate are
up.
Announcer said car dealers use the chemical to 'kill' engines so they can
never be repaired.
(Must be tied to the $4500 dollar rebates...)
So, do you pour it in the tank? Air cleaner?
Why does it work?

"Chet" fired this volley in
:

Interesting comment on the news this morning: sales of sodium
silicate
are up.
Announcer said car dealers use the chemical to 'kill' engines so
they
can never be repaired.
(Must be tied to the $4500 dollar rebates...)
So, do you pour it in the tank? Air cleaner?
Why does it work?



Oil sump... The liquid has pretty high lubricity, and is easily
pumped around the lubrication system, until things start to get hot.
Then, sodium silicate in contact with hot metal forms metal silicates
and silicides that effectively glue the parts together. The more it
solidifies, the hotter the motor gets, accelerating the process. The
solidified materials are also hard enough to badly score any parts
that can be moved.

Sodium silicate is the adhesive in "muffler patch" paste and muffler
wrap bandages.

This destruction of a valuable resource just hurts my mind. OK...
DON'T re-sell the gas-guzzlers. But for heaven's sake, part them out!
There are plenty of ongoing applications for those bigger motors where
they're necessary, and high-compression, higher-efficiency baby 4-
bangers won't do the job.

Or they could DONATE the cars to folks who cannot work because they
don't have reliable transportation.

I hate government waste, but hate even more being forced to waste by
the government.

LLoyd

On 2009-08-04, Chet wrote:
Interesting comment on the news this morning: sales of sodium silicate are
up.
Announcer said car dealers use the chemical to 'kill' engines so they can
never be repaired.
(Must be tied to the $4500 dollar rebates...)
So, do you pour it in the tank? Air cleaner?
Why does it work?


I hope that you do not need a password to read this (I have a full WSJ
logon)

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1249...googlenews_wsj

I can post the entire article

On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 08:43:15 -0500, Lloyd E. Sponenburgh wrote:

"Chet" fired this volley in
:

Interesting comment on the news this morning: sales of sodium
silicate
are up.
Announcer said car dealers use the chemical to 'kill' engines so
they
can never be repaired.
(Must be tied to the $4500 dollar rebates...) So, do you pour it in the
tank? Air cleaner? Why does it work?



Oil sump... The liquid has pretty high lubricity, and is easily pumped
around the lubrication system, until things start to get hot. Then,
sodium silicate in contact with hot metal forms metal silicates and
silicides that effectively glue the parts together. The more it
solidifies, the hotter the motor gets, accelerating the process. The
solidified materials are also hard enough to badly score any parts that
can be moved.

Sodium silicate is the adhesive in "muffler patch" paste and muffler
wrap bandages.

This destruction of a valuable resource just hurts my mind. OK... DON'T
re-sell the gas-guzzlers. But for heaven's sake, part them out! There
are plenty of ongoing applications for those bigger motors where they're
necessary, and high-compression, higher-efficiency baby 4- bangers won't
do the job.

Or they could DONATE the cars to folks who cannot work because they
don't have reliable transportation.

I hate government waste, but hate even more being forced to waste by the
government.

Helping the economy by destroying valuable property, helping the
environment by forcing the (energy intensive) manufacturing of a bunch of
cars.

There's no better tasting mint than a gov'mint.

--
www.wescottdesign.com

Well, you folks wanted change. You got it, like it or not. Now you
will have to live with it. The thing about the cash for clunkers that
gets me is that the program is hurting the very people that need help
the worst-those that cannot buy a NEW car even with the $4500 co-
payment. These are the poor folks who would benifite from having one
of the 10 year old but still running fine "clunkers" being destroyed.

Gerry fired this volley in news:8978c78b-b075-
:

Well, you folks wanted change. You got it, like it or not.

Who you callin' "you folks"?

The only change I want is that asshole out of office, WITH his pick-
pocket cronies.

"When your neighbor loses his job, it's a recession.
When you lose your job, it's a depression.
When Obama loses his job, it's 'change we can live with.'"

LLoyd

On Aug 4, 1:36*pm, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:
Gerry fired this volley in news:8978c78b-b075-
:

Well, you folks wanted change. You got it, like it or not.

Who you callin' "you folks"?

The only change I want is that asshole out of office, WITH his pick-
pocket cronies.

"When your neighbor loses his job, it's a recession.
*When you lose your job, it's a depression.
*When Obama loses his job, it's 'change we can live with.'"

LLoyd
You folks?

Everyone who voted for him or refused to vote at all because there was
such a lack of choices. AND everyone who has voted for a democrat
member of congress. We're all in this sinking boat together, like it
or not

Gerry fired this volley in news:d517654d-6e71-451c-
:

You folks?

How do you assume that I (or any particular person here) "wanted
change", at least in the sense of voting for him? I didn't. We were
trampled by a stampede of sheep.

I wanted change, for sure. I wanted people who were bent on voting for
him to change from the sheeple they were to intelligent folk who would
see him for what he really is. But I didn't get THAT change, either.

LLoyd

Let the Record show that Ignoramus22110
on or about Tue, 04 Aug 2009
08:46:29 -0500 did write/type or cause to appear in
rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
On 2009-08-04, Chet wrote:
Interesting comment on the news this morning: sales of sodium silicate are
up.
Announcer said car dealers use the chemical to 'kill' engines so they can
never be repaired.
(Must be tied to the $4500 dollar rebates...)
So, do you pour it in the tank? Air cleaner?
Why does it work?


I hope that you do not need a password to read this (I have a full WSJ
logon)

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1249...googlenews_wsj

I can post the entire article

The link is good.
-
pyotr filipivich
We will drink no whiskey before its nine.
It's eight fifty eight. Close enough!

On Tue, 4 Aug 2009 09:33:30 -0400, "Chet" wrote:

Interesting comment on the news this morning: sales of sodium silicate are
up.
Announcer said car dealers use the chemical to 'kill' engines so they can
never be repaired.
(Must be tied to the $4500 dollar rebates...)
So, do you pour it in the tank? Air cleaner?
Why does it work?


So, Obama along with congress screws the poor man again, the supply of
used cars and used parts dries up. The guy/teenager/minimum wage
earner now needs to by a pricey fairly new car, or a cheap import like
a Kia or Hyundai.

There's a local car dealer in Allentown that's running radio ads along
these lines.

(soon to be overheard at the local garage)
We could fix your car with an $800 junkyard engine if we could get
one, but I'm sorry they were all destroyed in the cash for clunkers
program, for $50 we can tow your car to the Kia dealer up the street.

From what I've heard they must also destroy the transmission too.
Maybe even the rear diff if a RWD car. No part of the drivetrain can
be resold.

Thank You,
Randy

Remove 333 from email address to reply.

On 2009-08-04, pyotr filipivich wrote:
Let the Record show that Ignoramus22110
on or about Tue, 04 Aug 2009
08:46:29 -0500 did write/type or cause to appear in
rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
On 2009-08-04, Chet wrote:
Interesting comment on the news this morning: sales of sodium silicate are
up.
Announcer said car dealers use the chemical to 'kill' engines so they can
never be repaired.
(Must be tied to the $4500 dollar rebates...)
So, do you pour it in the tank? Air cleaner?
Why does it work?


I hope that you do not need a password to read this (I have a full WSJ
logon)

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1249...googlenews_wsj

I can post the entire article

The link is good.

I have a feeling that I can post any WSJ article here is I append
?mod=googlenews_wsj at the end of the URL.

How about this one:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1249...googlenews_wsj

ISTM that just filling the crankcase with water would do the job...start
the engine, and run it until it seizes....

--
A host is a host from coast to
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433

On Tue, 4 Aug 2009 11:10:40 -0700 (PDT), Gerry wrote:

Well, you folks wanted change. You got it, like it or not. Now you
will have to live with it. The thing about the cash for clunkers that
gets me is that the program is hurting the very people that need help
the worst-those that cannot buy a NEW car even with the $4500 co-
payment. These are the poor folks who would benifite from having one
of the 10 year old but still running fine "clunkers" being destroyed.


The aim of the exercise isn't to help Elmer keep his clapped out old wreck on
the road for another year or two, that would do nothing to stimulate the
economy as a whole. It's to retain employment in the dealers, manufacturers,
parts suppliers, finance companies etc. and their suppliers. If you can't
understand that simple fact, you deserve to get your one meal a day from a
soup kitchen after a long queue :-|


Mark Rand
RTFM

Mark Rand wrote:

The aim of the exercise isn't to help Elmer keep his clapped out old wreck on
the road for another year or two, that would do nothing to stimulate the
economy as a whole. It's to retain employment in the dealers, manufacturers,
parts suppliers, finance companies etc. and their suppliers. If you can't
understand that simple fact, you deserve to get your one meal a day from a
soup kitchen after a long queue :-|


The aim is to get rid of SUV's. (At least in the hands of the non-elites)


Wes

"Mark Rand" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 4 Aug 2009 11:10:40 -0700 (PDT), Gerry wrote:

Well, you folks wanted change. You got it, like it or not. Now you
will have to live with it. The thing about the cash for clunkers that
gets me is that the program is hurting the very people that need help
the worst-those that cannot buy a NEW car even with the $4500 co-
payment. These are the poor folks who would benifite from having one
of the 10 year old but still running fine "clunkers" being destroyed.


The aim of the exercise isn't to help Elmer keep his clapped out old wreck
on
the road for another year or two, that would do nothing to stimulate the
economy as a whole. It's to retain employment in the dealers,
manufacturers,
parts suppliers, finance companies etc. and their suppliers. If you can't
understand that simple fact, you deserve to get your one meal a day from a
soup kitchen after a long queue :-|


Mark Rand
RTFM

Now you see why I'm so optimistic for the US, Mark. The guys who don't get
it -- and who have developed a sudden and surprising concern for the
downtrodden -- are the ones who lost.

d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

Randy wrote:
On Tue, 4 Aug 2009 09:33:30 -0400, "Chet" wrote:

Interesting comment on the news this morning: sales of sodium silicate are
up.
Announcer said car dealers use the chemical to 'kill' engines so they can
never be repaired.
(Must be tied to the $4500 dollar rebates...)
So, do you pour it in the tank? Air cleaner?
Why does it work?


So, Obama along with congress screws the poor man again, the supply of
used cars and used parts dries up. The guy/teenager/minimum wage
earner now needs to by a pricey fairly new car, or a cheap import like
a Kia or Hyundai.


WOW, there's only a three month supply of used cars in the whole
country? That is shocking! I'd think that people like us would be
thrilled, Imagine the hundreds I could get for that old motor in a few
months. I'm gonna start stockpiling 12 MPG motors like I was holding
onto primers!

There's a local car dealer in Allentown that's running radio ads along
these lines.

A Car DEALER!! Yeah that's where I go first when I want honest facts,
never been known to lead a guy astray, those car dealers!


(soon to be overheard at the local garage)
We could fix your car with an $800 junkyard engine if we could get
one, but I'm sorry they were all destroyed in the cash for clunkers
program, for $50 we can tow your car to the Kia dealer up the street.

From what I've heard they must also destroy the transmission too.
Maybe even the rear diff if a RWD car. No part of the drivetrain can
be resold.

FALSE! The transmission, drive shaft and rear-end can be sold as
separate parts.

But I know you whacko winger types are not bothered by the truth, and
surely wouldn't break a sweat looking for a fact before you post
something... So just go ahead and keep saying it.

For those with enough brains not to vote for Palin, here's the info...
http://www.cars.gov/files/amendment.pdf


Thank You,
Randy

Remove 333 from email address to reply.

On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 08:46:29 -0500, the infamous Ignoramus22110
scrawled the following:

On 2009-08-04, Chet wrote:
Interesting comment on the news this morning: sales of sodium silicate are
up.
Announcer said car dealers use the chemical to 'kill' engines so they can
never be repaired.
(Must be tied to the $4500 dollar rebates...)
So, do you pour it in the tank? Air cleaner?
Why does it work?


I hope that you do not need a password to read this (I have a full WSJ
logon)

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1249...googlenews_wsj

I can post the entire article

I can't wait for the bad guys to buy some and ruin someone's precious
new car engine with it. sigh

--
A great preservative against angry and mutinous thoughts, and all
impatience and quarreling, is to have some great business and
interest in your mind, which, like a sponge shall suck up your
attention and keep you from brooding over what displeases you.
-- Joseph Rickaby

Chet writes:

Announcer said car dealers use the chemical to 'kill' engines so they
can never be repaired.

No, not the car dealers. The FEDERAL GOVERNMENT requires it. Read the 100
pages of the final rules on the program. And they were all effete about
even this, worrying if there wasn't some environmental harm, or cost, or
hazmat, or workplace risk, or any other whiny nanny liberal fret. This was
chosen of things like drilling a hole in the block, or running without oil.

This is not euthanasia for perfectly good machines. More like Nazi
efficiency in killing. As long as we're going to slaughter innocents, we
might as well be clean and effective about it. The machine must be RUINED
without any salvage possibility.

Also reminds one of battlefield "demil" procedures in the Army for captured
weapons and materiel.

Or the surplus Garand rifles being cut in half by the USA in peacetime
instead of sold.

Richard J Kinch wrote:
Chet writes:

Announcer said car dealers use the chemical to 'kill' engines so they
can never be repaired.

No, not the car dealers. The FEDERAL GOVERNMENT requires it. Read the 100
pages of the final rules on the program. And they were all effete about
even this, worrying if there wasn't some environmental harm, or cost, or
hazmat, or workplace risk, or any other whiny nanny liberal fret. This was
chosen of things like drilling a hole in the block, or running without oil.

This is not euthanasia for perfectly good machines.

Right, it is the destruction of old crappy machines that get lousy mileage.

If you have to anthropomorphize it, it is like taking a 15 year old,
blind, incontinent, old mutt with mange on his final car ride to see the
vet...

As long as we're going to slaughter innocents, we
might as well be clean and effective about it. The machine must be RUINED
without any salvage possibility.

That is the idea! Yeah! the winger is finally getting it!!!!


Also reminds one of battlefield "demil" procedures in the Army for captured
weapons and materiel.

hardly, pretty much everything but the short block can be parted out and
sold.


Or the surplus Garand rifles being cut in half by the USA in peacetime
instead of sold.

Only if they only did it to rifles with lousy headspace, eroded throats
and broken stocks...

That woman that was ranting about doing to engines - making
them dump trash.....

Melt them down as is - The water glass doesn't hurt melt.

Yes - lots of pumps and machines that need engines could
use these in special applications.

I saw some on TV that were for sale - so maybe not all get the hit.

Martin

Lloyd E. Sponenburgh wrote:
"Chet" fired this volley in
:

Interesting comment on the news this morning: sales of sodium
silicate
are up.
Announcer said car dealers use the chemical to 'kill' engines so
they
can never be repaired.
(Must be tied to the $4500 dollar rebates...)
So, do you pour it in the tank? Air cleaner?
Why does it work?



Oil sump... The liquid has pretty high lubricity, and is easily
pumped around the lubrication system, until things start to get hot.
Then, sodium silicate in contact with hot metal forms metal silicates
and silicides that effectively glue the parts together. The more it
solidifies, the hotter the motor gets, accelerating the process. The
solidified materials are also hard enough to badly score any parts
that can be moved.

Sodium silicate is the adhesive in "muffler patch" paste and muffler
wrap bandages.

This destruction of a valuable resource just hurts my mind. OK...
DON'T re-sell the gas-guzzlers. But for heaven's sake, part them out!
There are plenty of ongoing applications for those bigger motors where
they're necessary, and high-compression, higher-efficiency baby 4-
bangers won't do the job.

Or they could DONATE the cars to folks who cannot work because they
don't have reliable transportation.

I hate government waste, but hate even more being forced to waste by
the government.

LLoyd

"Stuart Wheaton" wrote in message
...
Richard J Kinch wrote:
Chet writes:

Announcer said car dealers use the chemical to 'kill' engines so they
can never be repaired.

No, not the car dealers. The FEDERAL GOVERNMENT requires it. Read the
100 pages of the final rules on the program. And they were all effete
about even this, worrying if there wasn't some environmental harm, or
cost, or hazmat, or workplace risk, or any other whiny nanny liberal
fret. This was chosen of things like drilling a hole in the block, or
running without oil.

This is not euthanasia for perfectly good machines.

Right, it is the destruction of old crappy machines that get lousy
mileage.

If you have to anthropomorphize it, it is like taking a 15 year old,
blind, incontinent, old mutt with mange on his final car ride to see the
vet...

As long as we're going to slaughter innocents, we might as well be clean
and effective about it. The machine must be RUINED without any salvage
possibility.

That is the idea! Yeah! the winger is finally getting it!!!!


Also reminds one of battlefield "demil" procedures in the Army for
captured weapons and materiel.

hardly, pretty much everything but the short block can be parted out and
sold.


Or the surplus Garand rifles being cut in half by the USA in peacetime
instead of sold.

Only if they only did it to rifles with lousy headspace, eroded throats
and broken stocks...

One of the article cars was a 2002 Windstar. Not a crappy 15 year old
polluting gas hog.

On Tue, 4 Aug 2009 11:10:40 -0700 (PDT), Gerry
wrote:

Well, you folks wanted change. You got it, like it or not. Now you
will have to live with it. The thing about the cash for clunkers that
gets me is that the program is hurting the very people that need help
the worst-those that cannot buy a NEW car even with the $4500 co-
payment. These are the poor folks who would benifite from having one
of the 10 year old but still running fine "clunkers" being destroyed.

what the hell is this idea of a 10 year old car being a clunker?
surely american knowhow can produce a car that lasts more than 10
years.

in australia parts are generally only available for 20 years so a 20
year old car starts being unmaintainable. hell they all last 20 years
in our country.

maybe that's why american manufacturing is going down the gurgler.
you guys losing the technological edge?
Stealth Pilot

Stuart Wheaton writes:

Right, it is the destruction of old crappy machines that get lousy
mileage.

Fine, function, running machines with $1000s in remaining value.

During the Great Depression, WWII, and for a while after, owning an
automobile was an unfulfilled ambition for most people. How far we have,
where we have so many that we must destroy them.

We so resemble Japan. They destroy (*) cars over 3 years old for "safety"
reasons.

(*) Destroy by applying a prohibitive tax on ownership

Larry Jaques wrote:

I can't wait for the bad guys to buy some and ruin someone's precious
new car engine with it. sigh

I have a feeling the Greenpeacer / ELF types in the Obama administration had practice
killing engines prior to CfC. The destruction method was too fiendish for a bureaucrat to
come up with.

Wes

--

USA

1776 - 2008

Suicide

On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 06:18:52 GMT, the infamous Stealth Pilot
scrawled the following:

On Tue, 4 Aug 2009 11:10:40 -0700 (PDT), Gerry
wrote:

Well, you folks wanted change. You got it, like it or not. Now you
will have to live with it. The thing about the cash for clunkers that
gets me is that the program is hurting the very people that need help
the worst-those that cannot buy a NEW car even with the $4500 co-
payment. These are the poor folks who would benifite from having one
of the 10 year old but still running fine "clunkers" being destroyed.

what the hell is this idea of a 10 year old car being a clunker?
surely american knowhow can produce a car that lasts more than 10
years.

I think the idea is to remove all vehicles which don't measure up to
the current gas mileage standards.


in australia parts are generally only available for 20 years so a 20
year old car starts being unmaintainable. hell they all last 20 years
in our country.

maybe that's why american manufacturing is going down the gurgler.
you guys losing the technological edge?

Yes, to the government-mandated edge. big sigh

You'll be reading a whole lot more about those for the next 3.5 years,
or until something stronger than a symbolic tea party hits town.

My guess is that Obama is likely to be remembered as the root cause
(the stimulus, if you will) for American Revolution v2.0.

--
"It was difficult for the three of us to write a book titled _The End
of Prosperity_."

"We're not doom and gloom people; we're natural optimists. And we're not
part of the trendy set of intellectuals who like to trash our nation,
blame America first for all the world's problems, or worst of all,
predict with glee America's downfall as some kind of punishment for our
alleged past environmental crimes, racism, financial mismanagement, greed,
overconsumption, imperialism, or whatever the latest chic attack on the
United States is."
--page one, by Arthur B. Laffer, Stephen Moore, & Peter Tanous

On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 02:21:32 -0500, Richard J Kinch
wrote:

Stuart Wheaton writes:

Right, it is the destruction of old crappy machines that get lousy
mileage.

Fine, function, running machines with $1000s in remaining value.

During the Great Depression, WWII, and for a while after, owning an
automobile was an unfulfilled ambition for most people. How far we have,
where we have so many that we must destroy them.

We so resemble Japan. They destroy (*) cars over 3 years old for "safety"
reasons.

(*) Destroy by applying a prohibitive tax on ownership

we used to see a lot of those 3 year old cars imported into australia.
most went on to give years, decades, of trouble free running until one
of the unique to japan pollution mods stuffed up. then it was off for
scrap.

"Stealth Pilot" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 02:21:32 -0500, Richard J Kinch
wrote:

Stuart Wheaton writes:

Right, it is the destruction of old crappy machines that get lousy
mileage.

Fine, function, running machines with $1000s in remaining value.

During the Great Depression, WWII, and for a while after, owning an
automobile was an unfulfilled ambition for most people. How far we have,
where we have so many that we must destroy them.

We so resemble Japan. They destroy (*) cars over 3 years old for "safety"
reasons.

(*) Destroy by applying a prohibitive tax on ownership

we used to see a lot of those 3 year old cars imported into australia.
most went on to give years, decades, of trouble free running until one
of the unique to japan pollution mods stuffed up. then it was off for
scrap.

For a long while -- and maybe now -- most of the used Japanese engines on
the market were exports that were shipped here on that program. At one time
it mandated that engines were not to be used after they had roughly 40,000
miles on them. They drive a lot less per year in Japan, so that was not a
new car.

They did the same with their machine tools at one time. The old ones (which,
in the early '80s, were newer, on the average, than the average machine tool
used in the US), wound up in Malaysia, Thailand, etc. This was a
semi-official program worked out between MITI and the banks that owned most
of their manufacturing companies.

It worked for them. Every developed country needs a dumping ground for its
junk. The US and Australia were their equivalent of international
Dumpster-divers.

Before you become too critical of the policy remember that they beat the
hell out of you, and us, for over two decades, starting from nowhere. Their
per capita GDP (PPP basis) is virtually the same as yours today according to
the World Bank, even after their miserable decade, and they were the ones
that were crushed by WWII and had few physical resources. Australia is
loaded with resources.

We still can't manufacture most big-ticket items, like cars and machine
tools, as effectively and efficiently as they can. Neither can Australia.
Whatever you think of their policy, it works for manufacturing, better than
your policies or ours.

--
Ed Huntress

"Jon Anderson" wrote in message
...
Stealth Pilot wrote:

in australia parts are generally only available for 20 years so a 20
year old car starts being unmaintainable. hell they all last 20 years
in our country.

I'm not familiar with your car models, but when I was there earlier this
year, out in the country, I noticed a lot of cars that looked to be well
over 20 years old. And not restored classics or hotrods (though did see a
few of those as well) but daily drivers. This impressed me. I've just
never understood the fascination so many have here with buying a new car
every couple years.

The per capita GDP (PPP) in the US is around $47,000. In Australia, it's
$36,000. That's why.

--
Ed Huntress

On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 18:48:46 -0400, Stuart Wheaton
wrote:

(soon to be overheard at the local garage)
We could fix your car with an $800 junkyard engine if we could get
one, but I'm sorry they were all destroyed in the cash for clunkers
program, for $50 we can tow your car to the Kia dealer up the street.

From what I've heard they must also destroy the transmission too.
Maybe even the rear diff if a RWD car. No part of the drivetrain can
be resold.

FALSE! The transmission, drive shaft and rear-end can be sold as
separate parts.


The story I read said the driveline had to be destroyed. That would
include the trans and rear. However, the assholes in DC did a double
speak in the wording. quoted below from your link.

"This facility will not sell or transfer the trade-in vehicle’s engine
block and drive train (unless with respect to the drive train, the
transmission, drive shaft, or rear end are sold as separate parts) at
any time prior to its crushing or shredding."

First it names the whole driveline, then exempts the trans, drive
shaft and rear. WTF?

Also note it specifically states the engine block, you could legally
resell the heads, crankshaft and pistons and other parts.

Thank You,
Randy

Remove 333 from email address to reply.

The cash for clunkers program in the USA is like the song "match in
the gas tank, boom boom"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MywAigZ1leU

But now it is "Sand in the crankcase, grind grind"


Come on Obama, sing it with me.

sand in the crankcase, GRIND! GRIND!

Stealth Pilot wrote:

in australia parts are generally only available for 20 years so a 20
year old car starts being unmaintainable. hell they all last 20 years
in our country.

I'm not familiar with your car models, but when I was there earlier this
year, out in the country, I noticed a lot of cars that looked to be well
over 20 years old. And not restored classics or hotrods (though did see
a few of those as well) but daily drivers. This impressed me. I've just
never understood the fascination so many have here with buying a new car
every couple years.


Jon

Also note it specifically states the engine block, you could legally
resell the heads, crankshaft and pistons and other parts.

Not ethically... At least not after they run "sand" through 'em.

Regards,
Joe Agro, Jr.
(800) 871-5022
01.908.542.0244
Automatic / Pneumatic Drills: http://www.AutoDrill.com
Multiple Spindle Drills: http://www.Multi-Drill.com
Production Tapping: http://Production-Tapping-Equipment.com/
Flagship Site: http://www.Drill-N-Tap.com
VIDEOS: http://www.youtube.com/user/AutoDrill

V8013-R

On Aug 5, 2:04*am, "Calif Bill" wrote:

One of the article cars was a 2002 Windstar. *Not a crappy 15 year old
polluting gas hog.

Reports 18 mpg when I ran it through the eligibility calculator. If
they replace it with a 30 mpg civicarolla...

I ran the 1993 Geo Prizm that I did trade in two years ago... not
eligible, presumably because it was rated for and still getting close
to 30 mpg.

On Aug 5, 3:21*am, Richard J Kinch wrote:
Stuart Wheaton writes:
Right, it is the destruction of old crappy machines that get lousy
mileage.

Fine, function, running machines with $1000s in remaining value.

During the Great Depression, WWII, and for a while after, owning an
automobile was an unfulfilled ambition for most people. *How far we have,
where we have so many that we must destroy them.

There is no "must" - participation in the program is not mandatory.

I doubt many people are going to be destroying cars that are worth
more than the subsidy; the point of spending public money on this
subsidy is to buy inefficient vehicles off the road and prop up the
automakers - the old the vehicles are not destroyed, it becomes simply
a cash handout with little greater public benefit.

On Aug 5, 12:28*pm, wrote:

I doubt many people are going to be destroying cars that are worth
more than the subsidy; the point of spending public money on this
subsidy is to buy inefficient vehicles off the road and prop up the
automakers - the old the vehicles are not destroyed, it becomes simply
a cash handout with little greater public benefit.

That should of course say "if the old vehicles are not destroyed..."

fired this volley in news:ae3799bc-e177-4566-
:


On Aug 5, 2:04ÿam, "Calif Bill" wrote:

One of the article cars was a 2002 Windstar. ÿNot a crappy 15 year
old
polluting gas hog.

Reports 18 mpg when I ran it through the eligibility calculator. If
they replace it with a 30 mpg civicarolla...

Consider the passenger-mile economy. Load that Windstar up with
bodies, and it'll whip the ass of any econo-car.

LLoyd

On Aug 5, 12:32*pm, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:

Reports 18 mpg when I ran it through the eligibility calculator. *If
they replace it with a 30 mpg civicarolla...

Consider the passenger-mile economy. *Load that Windstar up with
bodies, and it'll whip the ass of any econo-car.

Actually, no, it won't. The windstar seats 6 in the configuration I
recall, maybe 7 in another. The civicarolla seats 5.

7 * 18 mpg = 126

5 * 30 = 150

Now granted, putting 5 people in a compact may not make them happy,
but I've done it on occasion. More importantly, you have to look at
how many passengers is typical - outside of dedicated carpool service
or large family ownership, I'm guess the average is under 3, in which
case the compact is both comfortable and far, far more efficient.

On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 06:02:14 -0700, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 06:18:52 GMT, the infamous Stealth Pilot
On Tue, 4 Aug 2009 11:10:40 -0700 (PDT), Gerry

Well, you folks wanted change. You got it, like it or not. Now you
will have to live with it. The thing about the cash for clunkers that
gets me is that the program is hurting the very people that need help
the worst-those that cannot buy a NEW car even with the $4500 co-
payment. These are the poor folks who would benifite from having one
of the 10 year old but still running fine "clunkers" being destroyed.

what the hell is this idea of a 10 year old car being a clunker?
surely american knowhow can produce a car that lasts more than 10
years.

I think the idea is to remove all vehicles which don't measure up to
the current gas mileage standards.

I think it's a scheme to get everybody to buy a new Government Motors
car, to prop up the bailout, much like the snake Ouroborous, eating
its own tail.

Plus, the new ones all probably have a tracking GPS that reports in
to Big Brother with your location and mileage.

Cheers!
Rich

On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 09:28:36 -0700, cs_posting wrote:
On Aug 5, 3:21*am, Richard J Kinch wrote:
Stuart Wheaton writes:
Right, it is the destruction of old crappy machines that get lousy
mileage.

Fine, function, running machines with $1000s in remaining value.

During the Great Depression, WWII, and for a while after, owning an
automobile was an unfulfilled ambition for most people. *How far we have,
where we have so many that we must destroy them.

There is no "must" - participation in the program is not mandatory.

I doubt many people are going to be destroying cars that are worth
more than the subsidy; the point of spending public money on this
subsidy is to buy inefficient vehicles off the road and prop up the
automakers - the old the vehicles are not destroyed, it becomes simply
a cash handout with little greater public benefit.

Don't forget subsidizing Government Motors and the UAW.

It reminds me of the Snake Ouroborous, eating its own tail.

Thanks,
Rich

"Ed Huntress" wrote:

We still can't manufacture most big-ticket items, like cars and machine
tools, as effectively and efficiently as they can. Neither can Australia.
Whatever you think of their policy, it works for manufacturing, better than
your policies or ours.

GMFanuc iirc was GM and Fanuc working to bring robotics to the US auto industry. I
suspect GM management w/o out the union would have been able to manufacture autos
efficiently.

Mazak makes machines in Kentucky. Bases are milled on a huge Eagle Picher VMC. Likely
the machine has been retro'd with Mitzubushi controls but we did build it initially.

The difference is the Japanese government doesn't look at companies as the enemy like the
current majority goverment in the US does.

Wes