On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 20:12:30 GMT, Brian Henderson
wrote:

On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 04:33:06 GMT, "
" wrote:

I too have been to China to visit manufacturing facilities. The workers
I have talked to are earning 30 cents an hour. Even if our minimum wage
was only $3.00 an hour, they would still be earning only %10 of an
American wage earner of minimum wage. So I don't know if the minimum
wage is the ONLY reason. Maybe the lack of an OSHA counterpart, and
healthcare are contributing.

The cost of living is much, much lower in China. It just doesn't cost
nearly as much to live there as it does here, that's why they can
afford to live on a much lower wage.

Maybe instead of complaining about how little they get paid there, we
should be more worried about why it costs so much to live here?

We just spent 87 billion dollars of our tax dollars on nothing.

The cost of living is much, much lower in China. It just doesn't cost
nearly as much to live there as it does here, that's why they can
afford to live on a much lower wage.

Maybe instead of complaining about how little they get paid there, we
should be more worried about why it costs so much to live here?

We just spent 87 billion dollars of our tax dollars on nothing.

I thought we spent it on plywood?

-Jack

BT W - Take a look at the recent prices for Chinese art; genuine
stuff, not export trade or modern tat. A vase sold recently (New York
?) for $300K,to a Chinese eel farmer. There's money in China now, and
they're wanting their heritage back.


Which is the ultimate irony.

Mao destroyed billions of dollars worth of chinese antiquities in his
"cultrual revolution". He felt that all those old things would restrict
their movement into a modern communist state. If he had not destroyed all
these precious artifacts, China would have untold wealth available to
itself.


That's ok, a billion doesn't go that far anymore anyway.
Haven't seen the Queen pawning the crown jewels either...

-Jack

On 11 Nov 2003 14:55:04 GMT, ojunk (Eric G.) brought
forth from the murky depths:

I found this interesting, from an article by Robert Reich....
-snip-
Here’s the real surprise. China saw a 15 percent drop. China, which is fast
becoming the manufacturing capital of the world, has been losing millions of
factory jobs.

One word explanation: AUTOMATION.

A friend of mine is automating small companies along the California
I-78 corridor and estimates that the companies he works for are
removing between 4 and 12 people/jobs per line he installs.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
* Scattered Showers My Ass! * Insightful Advertising Copy
* --Noah * http://www.diversify.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------

In so many corporate cases, the customer is the stockholder, not the
consumer. Ford had it right in the 90s and has since lost it. GM never
did get the idea that quality sells in the long run.
j4

Brian Henderson wrote:
On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 18:19:41 -0500, "RKON"
wrote:

Phisherman responds:

The cost of living is much, much lower in China. It just doesn't cost
nearly as much to live there as it does here, that's why they can
afford to live on a much lower wage.

Maybe instead of complaining about how little they get paid there, we
should be more worried about why it costs so much to live here?

We just spent 87 billion dollars of our tax dollars on nothing.


And not just government ****ing away our bucks: check into how many Chinese own
SUVs, entertainment centers, their own homes, three vehicles to a two person
family, 2800 square foot "starter" homes, eat meat three times a day, have
large (or small) workshops fully equipped with power tools, and on up and down
the line.

Charlie Self

"Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfils the same
function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of
things." Sir Winston Churchill

On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 20:00:50 GMT, Brian Henderson
wrote:

On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 23:50:25 GMT, (Doug Miller)
wrote:

Like you, I've had a few bad experiences with Fords. So I don't buy Fords
anymore. I *do* buy other American cars.

I've had other American cars. 100% crap so far. I've had GM, Ford,
Chevy and Cadillac.

I have a company-provided 2001 Chevy Cavalier LS that GM should have
been ashamed to sell. What a complete piece of garbage. We have a
fleet of them, in addition to some Malibus, and as each set of cars
hits certain mileage numbers, say 10k, 20k, etc... It's really neat
watching them all fail in identical ways. It's almost like watching a
Consumer Reports reliability survey live! G

FWIW, the Cavalier rates "poor" in frontal-offset crashes, and we're
in a downsizing mode, so maybe they choose them for a reason. G

Barry

On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 19:46:41 +0000, Andy Dingley
wrote:

My mountain bike is 6 years old now. Chinese titanium, and a beautiful
piece of work. If there's a call for it, China can deliver real
quality.

Habanero?

My Giant VT-1, a $3000 aluminum Chinese made mountain bike is
excellent!

Barry

On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 11:12:11 -0500, Silvan wrote:

Frank Shute wrote:

that more Americans are beginning to think that the war in Iraq was
not a very good idea and it can only be a matter of time before they
start questioning harder the given motives for it.

Some of us questioned the motives from the beginning.

Sure but from what I read the number is growing.


Imposing tarrifs on foreign imports can also only be a stop-gap
measure, so expect a farming crisis in your country in the not too
distant future.

With manufacturing gone and farming gone, one wonders how will will earn the
money needed to buy all these things from overseas.


It won't go entirely, it will just downsize. To buy things from abroad
to meet demand, you're already expanding the national debt ie.
borrowing from foreigners.

Eventually foreigners will suspect that you can't service that
debt/your economy is in trouble and stop buying treasury bonds. I
don't expect the US will end up a basket-case like Argentina though
Expect further devaluation of the dollar and a medium to long term
rise in unemployment.

What worries me is social anarchy in the US. The imbalance between
rich & poor seems set to widen, yet you can't keep a lid on that
forever by just throwing the dispossessed into prison when they try
and restore some balance by wielding their 45s.

If I lived in the US, I'd be looking to sell up & move abroad whilst
the going is fairly good & the dollar is still worth something.

--

Frank

On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 20:03:21 GMT, Brian Henderson wrote:

On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 23:57:14 -0500, Dr. Know
wrote:

Depends on whether you want to circulate your money back into this
economy or build yet another foreign world empire.

Since most 'foreign' cars are built in the US by US workers, I don't
have to worry about it. It's the design and management that makes the
difference. US auto makers want to crank out cheap crap at inflated
prices. Foreign auto makers produce quality cars at reasonable
prices. Which one should I choose? Planned obsolescence in 3 years?
A company that wastes millions to make their car SOUND powerful? Or a
reliable, well-built, well-designed car that will go as far as I need
it to without breaking the bank?

I've got a theory that the more a car manufacturer spends on
advertising the more useless their cars are. In the UK Ford is at the
top of the heap in terms of advertising! (....and producing useless
cars IMHO)

BTW, Ford did a study on the effects of customer disatisfaction some
years ago and they found that on average a ****ed off customer would
tell 8 potential customers that they were ****ed off with Ford. That
ratio must have increased vastly since the dawn of the Internet.

Ford are going to go bust, it's just a matter of time. They've been
palming off over-priced sh*te on customers for too many years.

It's unbelievable that a company that pioneered in a variety of areas
of manufacturing (including quality control!) should go down the
toilet.

BTW, I own a Nissan (built in the UK - the Japs send their engineers
abroad to sort things out though) & I couldn't be happier with it.

--

Frank

Frank Shute wrote:

Ford are going to go bust, it's just a matter of time. They've been
palming off over-priced sh*te on customers for too many years.

It's unbelievable that a company that pioneered in a variety of areas
of manufacturing (including quality control!) should go down the
toilet.

Henry's been dead & gone too long.

Really OT
I wonder what Walt Disney would think of what the empire using his name is
doing.
/Really OT

-- Mark

Silvan wrote:
Mark Jerde wrote:

LOL! I was in high school in the 1970's. I'd still wear bell
bottoms if they were available!

Where have you been for the last few years? They're everywhere.
They're called "flared leg jeans" this time around, and I've only
seen them available in styles aimed at women, but if you're that much
into the hideous things, maybe you don't mind wearing hip huggers.

The style I like use contrasting material for the "vee" and the bottom of
the "bell." Haven't seen any of those since "Mod Squad" reruns were taken
off... g

(Hip huggers are evil. They do absolutely nothing except make even
the best-formed ladies look chunky.)

Sorry sir, I disagree. g Some of my favorite memories of high school (in
the 1970's) involve hip huggers. ;-)

-- Mark

In article , wrote:
On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 23:50:25 GMT, (Doug Miller)
wrote:

Like you, I've had a few bad experiences with Fords. So I don't buy Fords
anymore. I *do* buy other American cars.

I've had other American cars. 100% crap so far. I've had GM, Ford,
Chevy and Cadillac. Not one has compared to that Toyota. Granted, I
have a friend who has a '67 Dodge Dart that is still running (sort
of), but of any car built in the last 25-30 years, I won't touch
another American car until things change radically in the US
automotive industry.

My first car was a '68 Dodge Dart, so I know whereof you speak. Just the same,
my '84 Buick LeSabre was a *much* more reliable car than the Dart. The Dart
went to the junkyard, dead, in 1984 at 163K miles. I sold the LeSabre, still
running fine, in 2001 at about 210K miles. My primary transportation now is an
'86 Suburban with 177K miles. It's in *far* better shape than the Dart was at
that age. And it has 4WD, air conditioning, stereo, and full power
accessories, too, all of which the Dart lacked. It's a much more complex
piece of machinery, and has given me much less trouble. SWMBO drives a '96
Buick Roadmaster (112K so far), and we've had remarkably little trouble.

My experiences with foreign cars drove me back to buying American. The Fiat
X-1/9 is a beautiful car, and it's a blast to drive, but it's just a pretty
piece of junk: constant breakdowns, stupid engineering, flimsy construction,
expensive parts. The next one was a Mazda RX7. Very reliable, hardly ever gave
a problem -- but when it *did* need repair, that car was a cast iron bitch to
maintain, even using a factory service manual. *Nothing* was easy to reach,
and *everything* was expensive. I'll give them one thing, though: I've *never*
seen a better-written repair manual, for any product, anywhere.

I like my Buicks. Not a lot of trouble. Yeah, they break occasionally, more
often than the Mazda, less than the Dart, *way* less than the Fiat. But they
cost a lot less to fix than the Mazda or the Fiat. I'm content. YMMV.

--
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

How come we choose from just two people to run for president and 50 for Miss America?

"Mark Jerde" wrote in message
s.com...
into the hideous things, maybe you don't mind wearing hip huggers.

The style I like use contrasting material for the "vee" and the bottom of
the "bell." Haven't seen any of those since "Mod Squad" reruns were taken
off... g

ued to wear those in high scholl. Hrd to get where I was (Japan). My mother
made them.

(Hip huggers are evil. They do absolutely nothing except make even
the best-formed ladies look chunky.)

Sorry sir, I disagree. g Some of my favorite memories of high school
(in
the 1970's) involve hip huggers. ;-)

No doubt. You've got to consider though, Silvan's just a kid
-- Mark

Mark Jerde recalls:

(Hip huggers are evil. They do absolutely nothing except make even
the best-formed ladies look chunky.)

Sorry sir, I disagree. g Some of my favorite memories of high school (in
the 1970's) involve hip huggers. ;-)

Soom of my favorite memories of the '60s and '70s involve micro mini skirts.

Charlie Self

"Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfils the same
function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of
things." Sir Winston Churchill

On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 22:14:39 GMT, B a r r y B u r k e J r .
wrote:

My mountain bike is 6 years old now. Chinese titanium,

Habanero?

Yes.

Lawsuit.


"Silvan" wrote in message
...


With manufacturing gone and farming gone, one wonders how will will earn
the
money needed to buy all these things from overseas.

--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/

Soom of my favorite memories of the '60s and '70s involve micro mini
skirts.

Yeah, I still remember those Jello commercials.... eg

-- Mark

"Frank Shute" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 20:03:21 GMT, Brian Henderson wrote:

On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 23:57:14 -0500, Dr. Know
wrote:

Depends on whether you want to circulate your money back into this
economy or build yet another foreign world empire.

Since most 'foreign' cars are built in the US by US workers, I don't
have to worry about it. It's the design and management that makes the
difference. US auto makers want to crank out cheap crap at inflated
prices. Foreign auto makers produce quality cars at reasonable
prices. Which one should I choose? Planned obsolescence in 3 years?
A company that wastes millions to make their car SOUND powerful? Or a
reliable, well-built, well-designed car that will go as far as I need
it to without breaking the bank?

I've got a theory that the more a car manufacturer spends on
advertising the more useless their cars are. In the UK Ford is at the
top of the heap in terms of advertising! (....and producing useless
cars IMHO)

BTW, Ford did a study on the effects of customer disatisfaction some
years ago and they found that on average a ****ed off customer would
tell 8 potential customers that they were ****ed off with Ford. That
ratio must have increased vastly since the dawn of the Internet.

Ford are going to go bust, it's just a matter of time. They've been
palming off over-priced sh*te on customers for too many years.

It's unbelievable that a company that pioneered in a variety of areas
of manufacturing (including quality control!) should go down the
toilet.

BTW, I own a Nissan (built in the UK - the Japs send their engineers
abroad to sort things out though) & I couldn't be happier with it.

--

And yet the largest selling single model vehicle, (at least in the US) is
the Ford F-150 pickup. I have a '97 Ford, with a Triton V-8 and 125,000
miles. There isn't a rust spot on the vehicle. The interior, after a clean
up, shows NO visible signs of wear. Everything still works, including the
air conditioner.

It still has the ORIGINAL spark plugs installed. (I was going to have them
changed about 15K miles ago, but the mechanic, after pulling a couple of
them, said there was simply no legitimate reason to change them.)

It has NOT been maintnenace free. I had to have a cracked head gasket
replaced at 110K, so I had them both replaced. It has had a new battery,
and is now on it's (new) third set of tires. The air conditioner has to be
recharged every other year, now, so there is some leakage.

If and when I do have to replace the truck, which will probably (hopefully)
not be in the near future, I'll be right back to that Ford dealership.

James.....

On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 01:10:11 +0000, J&KCopeland wrote:


And yet the largest selling single model vehicle, (at least in the US) is
the Ford F-150 pickup. I have a '97 Ford, with a Triton V-8 and 125,000
miles. There isn't a rust spot on the vehicle. The interior, after a clean
up, shows NO visible signs of wear. Everything still works, including the
air conditioner.

It still has the ORIGINAL spark plugs installed. (I was going to have them
changed about 15K miles ago, but the mechanic, after pulling a couple of
them, said there was simply no legitimate reason to change them.)

It has NOT been maintnenace free. I had to have a cracked head gasket
replaced at 110K, so I had them both replaced. It has had a new battery,
and is now on it's (new) third set of tires. The air conditioner has to be
recharged every other year, now, so there is some leakage.

If and when I do have to replace the truck, which will probably (hopefully)
not be in the near future, I'll be right back to that Ford dealership.

....and so will I. My '83 F150 had 175,000 on it when it was stolen out of
my driveway. I did all the maintenance on it and never had to add oil
between changes every 5000 miles. It was a 4.9L straight six with an
overdrive manual transmission. Got about 23MPG. The worst expense was a
new clutch at 150,000 miles.

Picked up an '87 F150 with the insurance money plus a few hundred. It
wasn't in the pristine shape of my '83, but it's just getting broken in
with 125,000 miles on it. This one is a 5.0L V8 with an automatic and
only gets about 16MPG

Neither had/has a speck of rust and both were/are tight and rattle free.

-Doug

"Brian Henderson" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 04:33:06 GMT, "
" wrote:

I too have been to China to visit manufacturing facilities. The workers
I have talked to are earning 30 cents an hour. Even if our minimum wage
was only $3.00 an hour, they would still be earning only %10 of an
American wage earner of minimum wage. So I don't know if the minimum
wage is the ONLY reason. Maybe the lack of an OSHA counterpart, and
healthcare are contributing.

The cost of living is much, much lower in China. It just doesn't cost
nearly as much to live there as it does here, that's why they can
afford to live on a much lower wage.

Maybe instead of complaining about how little they get paid there, we
should be more worried about why it costs so much to live here?

The Red Chinese are LOSING manufacturing jobs. They LOST 15,000 last year.
In fact, almost EVERYONE worldwide is losing manufacturing jobs. As Robert
Reich has pointed out, computerization, and robotization are the culprits.

Consider something.

If a highly robotized factory can produce a widget for a total cost of $100,
then it doesn't matter what, a low-tech factory making widgets, too, maybe
employing a hundred people CANNOT charge more than a $100. So the total
labor costs are effectively capped. The ONLY way to increase an
individual's wage, is at the expense of some other worker. Thus, a worker
may be making two dollars a day, but they'll probably be making $2 a day
twenty years from now.

IF the robotized factory, through some type of innovation, reduces the cost
of widgets to $75 each, the low-tech factory again, either reduces cost or
closes it doors. It's MUCH harder, using Taylorization techniques, to
institute innovations. (Taylor was an "effiency expert", that advanced the
idea of lots of people doing one small part, each, of a given manufacturing
process. Thus, on the early mass produced cars, there was one guy to screw
on the left side of a bumper and one guy to screw on the right side of the
bumper. They didn't have to do much, but they didn't have long to do it
either.

Dr. Walter Shewhart developed a set of statisical formulas that measured
efficiency of entire systems. Thus, incremental increases in efficiency
could be demostrated mathematically. Dr. Edward Deming "marketed" those
ideas. And in 1953, he began marketing those ideas in post-war Japan. In
the 50's and 60's, "made in Japan" mean "cheap" and shoddy. But by the
mid-1980's the Japanese car manufacturer's could challenge the Big Three US
manufacturers on their own turf. With vehicles that were demonstrably
superior in design and manufacture. The SPC (statistical process control)
movement was re-introduced into America...and it was a painful process.

I would argue, by the early 90's the US manufacturers were making
significant strides, and I seriously doubt there is significant differences
in the overall quality of almost any vehicles manufactured worldwide, today.
This of course, does include specific innovations introduced by different
car makers, from time to time. (BTW, I just got an eMail from someone.
They said the Ford Escort was the largest selling vehicle worldwide, for
several years. I have no idea if that is true.) It, also, does not
preclude a particular manufacturer producing a stinker, from time to time.

James...

Doug Winterburn writes:


Picked up an '87 F150 with the insurance money plus a few hundred. It
wasn't in the pristine shape of my '83, but it's just getting broken in
with 125,000 miles on it. This one is a 5.0L V8 with an automatic and
only gets about 16MPG

Neither had/has a speck of rust and both were/are tight and rattle free.


Yabbut, don't I recall you being in Aridzona? You have to park IN your swimming
pool to form rust on things there, or so I'm told.

Charlie Self

"Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfils the same
function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of
things." Sir Winston Churchill

On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 02:28:43 +0000, Charlie Self wrote:

Doug Winterburn writes:


Picked up an '87 F150 with the insurance money plus a few hundred. It
wasn't in the pristine shape of my '83, but it's just getting broken in
with 125,000 miles on it. This one is a 5.0L V8 with an automatic and
only gets about 16MPG

Neither had/has a speck of rust and both were/are tight and rattle free.


Yabbut, don't I recall you being in Aridzona? You have to park IN your swimming
pool to form rust on things there, or so I'm told.

True, but the the '83 spent it's first 10 years in Seattle, and the '87 is
a relatively recent import from Ohio.

-Doug

On 12 Nov 2003 02:28:43 GMT, otforme (Charlie Self)
brought forth from the murky depths:

Doug Winterburn writes:


Picked up an '87 F150 with the insurance money plus a few hundred. It
wasn't in the pristine shape of my '83, but it's just getting broken in
with 125,000 miles on it. This one is a 5.0L V8 with an automatic and
only gets about 16MPG

My '90 just rolled over (000486.3) and gets 18mpg with a rebuilt
4OD trailing a lovely little 302. This thing sure runs better
than my '68 Ranch Wagon with the same motor and a 2bbl carb, I
tell ya. About 100 horses better and never a studder no matter
what temp. I ADORE fuel injection! Good going, Dougie.


Neither had/has a speck of rust and both were/are tight and rattle free.


Yabbut, don't I recall you being in Aridzona? You have to park IN your swimming
pool to form rust on things there, or so I'm told.

Nope. Rusting is not allowed under Arizona waters. It's in the
Zonie Bylaws, Charlie. I saw it spelled out clear as day when
I lived there back in '72.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
* Scattered Showers My Ass! * Insightful Advertising Copy
* --Noah * http://www.diversify.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------

The thread that refuses to die.




--

Mark

N.E. Ohio


Never argue with a fool, a bystander can't tell you apart. (S. Clemens,
A.K.A. Mark Twain)

When in doubt hit the throttle. It may not help but it sure ends the
suspense. (Gaz, r.moto)

On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 00:39:08 +0000, Andy Dingley
wrote:

On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 22:14:39 GMT, B a r r y B u r k e J r .
wrote:

My mountain bike is 6 years old now. Chinese titanium,

Habanero?

Yes.

Nice bike!

Barry

Charlie Self wrote:

Mark Jerde recalls:

(Hip huggers are evil. They do absolutely nothing except make even
the best-formed ladies look chunky.)

Sorry sir, I disagree. g Some of my favorite memories of high school (in
the 1970's) involve hip huggers. ;-)

Soom of my favorite memories of the '60s and '70s involve micro mini skirts.

Charlie Self

"Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfils the same
function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of
things." Sir Winston Churchill


That was when pumping gas was a GREAT job!

Scott
--
An unkind remark is like a killing frost. No matter how much it warms
up later, the damage remains.

Note that the mini was the skirt of choice well into the eighties in Cuba,
because of the shortage of cloth. Women who didn't wear 'em, and there
were some who should have worn full length and better, were considered
unpatriotic.

Pumping _gas_ never was great, but I did enjoy pumping Ethyl....

"Scott Brownell" wrote in message
...

Soom of my favorite memories of the '60s and '70s involve micro mini
skirts.

Charlie Self

That was when pumping gas was a GREAT job!

Scott

On 11-Nov-2003, (Doug Miller) wrote:

The Fiat X-1/9 [...] Mazda RX7

Not exactly prime examples of what most of us would point to
when talking about reliable imports. Italian cars make the
old Lucas-equipped Brit cars look good. The RX7 was a novelty
after the fiasco Mazda had with the rotary engines in the 70's.

Mike

Yea, it sucks that some of love America still, doesn't it.

"Mark" wrote in message
...



The thread that refuses to die.




--

Mark

N.E. Ohio


Never argue with a fool, a bystander can't tell you apart. (S. Clemens,
A.K.A. Mark Twain)

When in doubt hit the throttle. It may not help but it sure ends the
suspense. (Gaz, r.moto)

"Doug Winterburn" wrote in message ws.com...
...and so will I. My '83 F150 had 175,000 on it when it was stolen out of
my driveway.

Rat *******s!

I did all the maintenance on it and never had to add oil
between changes every 5000 miles. It was a 4.9L straight six with an
overdrive manual transmission.

I had the 4.9L in a '92 E150 and it ran like a top with good gas
mileage and plenty of pep when hauling a load or climbing a hill (or
both). It was a high quality vehicle all around. Now I have an '01
F150 with the 4.2L V6 and I can't say I'm particularly pleased with
it. The engine is a dog and the payload capacity seems to be pretty
wimpy. There are also a lot of little things that make me question
what the design team was thinking. Now they're touting the '04 models
as being 'almost like a car.' Sh!t, if you want a car, why buy a
truck?

Cheers,
Mike

On 12 Nov 2003 18:49:44 -0800, (Mike) wrote:

what the design team was thinking. Now they're touting the '04 models
as being 'almost like a car.' Sh!t, if you want a car, why buy a
truck?

Cheers,
Mike

Exactly my argument with many SUV and truck buyers of the last 10
years.

That thinking has led to such awesome vehicles as the Ford Explorer
Sport Trac, all those short and medium wheelbase quad cab "trucks"
with 3' beds, and the Tupperware Avalanche.

Barry

In article ogers.com, "Michael Daly" wrote:
On 11-Nov-2003, (Doug Miller) wrote:

The Fiat X-1/9 [...] Mazda RX7

Not exactly prime examples of what most of us would point to
when talking about reliable imports. Italian cars make the
old Lucas-equipped Brit cars look good. The RX7 was a novelty
after the fiasco Mazda had with the rotary engines in the 70's.

As I noted (in parts that you snipped), the RX7 was _more_ reliable than my
American cars; it rarely gave trouble, but _when_it_did_ it was a royal PITA
to fix.

Your comparison of the Fiat to the "old Lucas-equipped Brit[ish] cars" brought
to mind an incident I had all but forgotten. Driving it in the rain one
afternoon, with the rear-window defogger on, and the ventilation fan and the
windshield wipers on high speed, suddenly everything went dead when I hit the
turn signal. The moron designers had put all that on a single 15A circuit, and
the fuse popped.

--
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

How come we choose from just two people to run for president and 50 for Miss America?

B a r r y B u r k e J r . wrote:

On 12 Nov 2003 18:49:44 -0800, (Mike) wrote:
what the design team was thinking. Now they're touting the '04 models
as being 'almost like a car.' Sh!t, if you want a car, why buy a
truck?

Exactly my argument with many SUV and truck buyers of the last 10
years.


I know a woman who got a SUV (Blazer?) and had two 'accidents' in 3 years.

Seems she thought she was in something car like she was driving a car.
Wound up on her top twice.


--

Mark

N.E. Ohio


Never argue with a fool, a bystander can't tell you apart. (S. Clemens,
A.K.A. Mark Twain)

When in doubt hit the throttle. It may not help but it sure ends the
suspense. (Gaz, r.moto)

On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 15:37:55 GMT, Mark
wrote:

Seems she thought she was in something car like she was driving a car.
Wound up on her top twice.


This is what caused some manufacturers to lower, widen, and install
independent suspension on SUV's ("New" Explorer, Trail Blazer,
etc...), ruining the semi-able off-road performance they actually had.
G

The funny thing is, AWD minivans have been around for a long time,
which combines great load space with go in bad weather traction.
Unfortunately, they just aren't stylish enough at the soccer field.

This past summer I was picking up an over-sand permit on Cape Cod. I
witnessed the world's stupidest argument between a US Parks Service
Ranger and a woman with an SUV. The woman was SCREAMING, the ranger
was remarkably calm.

Woman: _WHY_ can't I buy a permit?

Ranger: Your vehicle is 2WD.

Woman: But I can see other Grand Cherokee's moving toward the beach

Ranger: They have 4WD

Woman: But _I_ have a Grand Cherokee!

Ranger: Your's is 2WD

Woman: You sold permits to THOSE GC's!

Ranger: They have 4WD

Repeat for almost 30 minutes, with lawsuit threats, etc.
Conversation ends when Ranger's supervisor threatens to arrest woman
for disturbing the peace. G

Barry

B a r r y B u r k e J r . wrote:



Woman: _WHY_ can't I buy a permit?

Ranger: Your vehicle is 2WD.

Woman: But I can see other Grand Cherokee's moving toward the beach
........
Repeat for almost 30 minutes, with lawsuit threats, etc.
Conversation ends when Ranger's supervisor threatens to arrest woman
for disturbing the peace. G

LMAO.

Reminds me of something last summer.

During the county fair I park cars at my mothers house. She lives on a
one acre lot a couple hundred feet from the fairgrounds main entrance.
When it rains the fairgrounds parking lots turn into a mud bath and our
business picks up quite a bit. Our yard gets soppy but since we don't
have that much traffic it's manageable.

Wife flags in a Blazer, something I told her I didn't want. The lady
stops half way back the back yard. Then she tries to go, spins the
tires, breaks through he sod and loads the treads. Dumbass. Then she
tries going backwards. I'm looking at the beginning of a mud pit. I try
coaching her out. Forget it, she's got car tires.

These guys I just parked are walking by and offer to help push this lady
out. Seems people going to the fair are looking for adventure. I say
sure, they lean on it, lady puts it in gear and spins tires. ****.

Then I notice there's a 4x4 on the rear quarter. ? not a big 4x4 but a
tiny 4x4.

I start yelling for people to stop everything.

I ask this lady if she's got it in four wheel drive.

She says 'yes, it's a 4wd.

I ask again if it's engaged. (I know it isn't)

She takes her hands from the wheel and starts looking around the cabin.

(Jesus)

I look at the hubs, no locks. I look at the hump, don't remember seeing
the short lever.

She has no idea how to 'turn it on'. She can't find the button.

(Jesus)

I find the button for her. She presses it. I tell her to lean on the
gas, she smacks the throttle, but at least she's out of the rut..


We got a good laugh out of it, except for her because she was still
clueless about her cluelessness. You would think if someone's stuck in a
4x4 they would turn it on. Never crossed her mind.


--

Mark

N.E. Ohio


Never argue with a fool, a bystander can't tell you apart. (S. Clemens,
A.K.A. Mark Twain)

When in doubt hit the throttle. It may not help but it sure ends the
suspense. (Gaz, r.moto)

In article ,
says...
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 15:37:55 GMT, Mark
wrote:

Seems she thought she was in something car like she was driving a car.
Wound up on her top twice.


This is what caused some manufacturers to lower, widen, and install
independent suspension on SUV's ("New" Explorer, Trail Blazer,
etc...), ruining the semi-able off-road performance they actually had.
G

The funny thing is, AWD minivans have been around for a long time,
which combines great load space with go in bad weather traction.
Unfortunately, they just aren't stylish enough at the soccer field.


nice attempt at condescension. Funny thing is AWD minivans aren't
built on a truck body. I live off of an unimproved road -- it gets
graded twice a year whether it needs it or not. When we looked to
replace our Ford Explorer, we considered a minivan, but after having
driven a minivan owned by a friend, we determined that there was no way
such a vehicle would hold up for the long haul on our roads. On the
other hand, since SUV's are built on a truck chassis, they are more
likely to provide long-term service in this kind of environment.

It amazes me the vehemence some people have over what other people
choose to drive.

"Mark & Juanita" wrote in message
s.com...
In article ,
says...
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 15:37:55 GMT, Mark
wrote:

Seems she thought she was in something car like she was driving a car.
Wound up on her top twice.


This is what caused some manufacturers to lower, widen, and install
independent suspension on SUV's ("New" Explorer, Trail Blazer,
etc...), ruining the semi-able off-road performance they actually had.
G

The funny thing is, AWD minivans have been around for a long time,
which combines great load space with go in bad weather traction.
Unfortunately, they just aren't stylish enough at the soccer field.


nice attempt at condescension. Funny thing is AWD minivans aren't
built on a truck body. I live off of an unimproved road -- it gets
graded twice a year whether it needs it or not. When we looked to
replace our Ford Explorer, we considered a minivan, but after having
driven a minivan owned by a friend, we determined that there was no way
such a vehicle would hold up for the long haul on our roads. On the
other hand, since SUV's are built on a truck chassis, they are more
likely to provide long-term service in this kind of environment.

only some suv's are made on a truck chassis. a lot of the newer ones are
built on car frames.

It amazes me the vehemence some people have over what other people
choose to drive.

"Mark & Juanita" wrote in message
s.com...
In article ,
says...
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 15:37:55 GMT, Mark
wrote:

Seems she thought she was in something car like she was driving a car.
Wound up on her top twice.


This is what caused some manufacturers to lower, widen, and install
independent suspension on SUV's ("New" Explorer, Trail Blazer,
etc...), ruining the semi-able off-road performance they actually had.
G

The funny thing is, AWD minivans have been around for a long time,
which combines great load space with go in bad weather traction.
Unfortunately, they just aren't stylish enough at the soccer field.


nice attempt at condescension. Funny thing is AWD minivans aren't
built on a truck body. I live off of an unimproved road -- it gets
graded twice a year whether it needs it or not. When we looked to
replace our Ford Explorer, we considered a minivan, but after having
driven a minivan owned by a friend, we determined that there was no way
such a vehicle would hold up for the long haul on our roads. On the
other hand, since SUV's are built on a truck chassis, they are more
likely to provide long-term service in this kind of environment.

It amazes me the vehemence some people have over what other people
choose to drive.

Maybe because some vehicles raise insurance rates and fuel prices for
everyone?

Growing up with 13 siblings, I'm amazed at how my parents were able to get
us around to everything in a station wagon. Our farm was five miles from
the highway, subject to South Dakota winters. These days, it seems like
most folks can't get their two kids across town on paved streets without an
SUV.

SUV = Slow Unwieldy Vehicle :þ

Mark & Juanita wrote:


nice attempt at condescension.


Your the exception.

Maybe it's because you live in the sticks that you don't get to see how
many SUVs are sold to people who would think your unimproved road an
extreme off road experience.


--

Mark

N.E. Ohio


Never argue with a fool, a bystander can't tell you apart. (S. Clemens,
A.K.A. Mark Twain)

When in doubt hit the throttle. It may not help but it sure ends the
suspense. (Gaz, r.moto)