What are some car-repair jobs you always wished you could do

[RS Wood]

clare@snyder.on.ca wrote:

I've always said it's what you learn AFTER you know it all that
REALLY counts - - -

Did any of you actually *read* that paper?

I did.

It doesn't say what you imply it says.

Show me the slightest bit of technical on-topic merit that paper had with
respect to how piston rings are better now than they were in the days of
yore.

There isn't a *single* statement in that *entire* paper that backs up
*anything* you said it did.

Nothing.
And you expect me to believe because I'm an engineer and you're a mechanic
that you know more than I do about basic adult logic?

The fact of what we're trained in has *nothing* to do with the way our
brains think.

You think a high school level paper proves *something* about how piston
rings are designed better today than in yesteryear.

And yet, there's *nothing* in that entire paper about what you imply it
proves. Nothing.

Let's give up because you think I'm stupid and I think your paper doesn't
prove what you think it proves.

I think you need a few hundred courses in basic adult logic.
And you think I need all the years of experience that you have.

Let's leave it at that.

 

[Ed Pawlowski]

On 11/6/2017 10:20 AM, RS Wood wrote:

Xeno wrote:

Fractionally more than you. I watch the news on TV. That's it.

I get my news off the net.

But someone must be watching TV or cable (I don't have cable either).

My point is only that people spend time watching TV so they can't say that
taking your sweet time doing an oil change is wasted time if they're
wasting time watching "As the World Turns" all day.

People that do not have a TV tend to have a superiority complex. Sure,
95% of it is crap, but there are some excellent shows on History,
Discovery, Science that will broaden your horizons and educate you about
the rest of the world.

 

[RS Wood]

clare@snyder.on.ca wrote:

TMI here!
The friction between the pads and bare steel rotors is much
different than the friction between the pads and the pad material
deposited on the pads. The latter is the higher.

If the friction rating of a brake pad is too much information for someone
choosing a brake pad ...

.... then I have to wonder ... if friction isn't important ...

What kind of primary logic are they using to choose brake pads if it's not
friction?

Oh... I see. I get it.
Marketing bullshit.

I give up when someone complains that the friction coefficient of a brake
pad is too much information when choosing a brake pad.

It isn't a logical thought process.
I can't fix that. Even on the Usenet.
I just can't.

 

[Vic Smith]

On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 15:20:40 +0000 (UTC), RS Wood <rswood@is.invalid> wrote:

Xeno wrote:

Up to a point, I agree with you. Where I disagree is that most people
use them incorrectly (backwards) or size them inappropriately. They are
no different to an open end spanner when used correctly and, need it be
said, they are of a decent quality. When working on earthmoving
equipment, the most common adjustables I used were 15". 18" and 24". You
have no idea how many different spanners those three adjustables
replaced. In field work you need to cart *all your tools* with you. You
always look to minimise that load.

I should have made it clear that I was just kidding about making them
illegal.

I fully understand the *need* for the adustable wrenches, and I have a
Craftsman 3-piece set myself, which I almost never use.

I've probably used one about twenty times in forty years.

My beef is when people use them on "my stuff" when they have a perfectly
good socket wrench in the truck just 100 feet away.

I don't have any crescent wrenches, and would never buy one.
I used them as kid on my bicycles.
The last time I used one was when I was working for a plumber 35 years ago, and that's what
he used for valve compression fittings. I couldn't fault him for that, but if I carried my
own tools on that job I would have brought some open end wrenches with me.

 

[RS Wood]

Ed Pawlowski wrote:

People that do not have a TV tend to have a superiority complex. Sure,
95% of it is crap, but there are some excellent shows on History,
Discovery, Science that will broaden your horizons and educate you about
the rest of the world.

Ask me *anything* about "history, discovery, science, and the rest of the
world".

What makes you think that only watching TV will gain you that information?

 

[Ed Pawlowski]

On 11/6/2017 11:56 AM, RS Wood wrote:

clare@snyder.on.ca wrote:

I've always said it's what you learn AFTER you know it all that
REALLY counts - - -

Did any of you actually *read* that paper?

I did.

It doesn't say what you imply it says.

Show me the slightest bit of technical on-topic merit that paper had with
respect to how piston rings are better now than they were in the days of
yore.

There isn't a *single* statement in that *entire* paper that backs up
*anything* you said it did.

Nothing.
And you expect me to believe because I'm an engineer and you're a mechanic
that you know more than I do about basic adult logic?

The fact of what we're trained in has *nothing* to do with the way our
brains think.

No one can teach you anything as you know everything.

 

[RS Wood]

Vic Smith wrote:

I don't have any crescent wrenches, and would never buy one.
I used them as kid on my bicycles.
The last time I used one was when I was working for a plumber 35 years ago, and that's what
he used for valve compression fittings. I couldn't fault him for that, but if I carried my
own tools on that job I would have brought some open end wrenches with me.

Yup. The ones I see using them are the fix-it guys that come to the house,
less and less lately, as I do more and more since I have all the time in
the world now.

I taught my kids and grandkids to use the right tool for the right job.

For example, a screwdriver is for screws. Nothing else.
A pair of pliers is for things that you don't have wrenches for.

And I can't think of any good reason most of the time for an adjustable
wrench, although it's valid if you're hanging upside down out of a hotair
balloon where the correct socket or open-end or box wrench is down on the
ground next to the parts truck.

 

On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 08:37:17 -0800, The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com>
wrote:

On 11/05/2017 08:48 PM, RS Wood wrote:
clare@snyder.on.ca wrote:

What doesn't last longer on a car nowadays?
Sometimes things like power lock actuators and some electrical
connections

88 Caddy driver's window/door controls stopped working long ago. Stupid
motor-driven passenger-side mirror just unstuck itself from the mirror
and would have required removing the entire dashboard and AC to replace.
Whoever thought of the stupid electrical trunk-lid grabbing latch
should have been flayed alive. Engine ran fine up to the 90K end, it
was just the rest of the stuff that died.

I was watching a video by the MythBusters on how to get out of a car that
is sinking in a pond (pool in their case) where someone mentions to roll
down the windows ... heh heh ...

They claimed that power windows would work long enough to allow them to
be rolled down. Do they assume it would take minutes for the electrical
system to short out? Is that reasonable?

12 volt systems will NOT "short out" in water. I know guys that used
old heater motors as electric trolling motors. Being water cooled they
can run an old 6 volt motor on 24 without burning them out and get
lots of power out of them.

When's the last time you saw a roll-down window?

Our 70 Dodge pickup has them. What you can't get is the stuff that
keeps the windows from rattling.

For a while I thought I wanted a car intended for third-world repair
capabilities -- everything possible manual, etc. And then I
discovered the joy of pushing the tiny button on the key that unlocks
the doors :-(

 

On Mon, 06 Nov 2017 08:40:36 -0800, Vic Smith
<thismailautodeleted@comcast.net> wrote:

On Mon, 06 Nov 2017 10:08:46 -0500, clare@snyder.on.ca wrote:

On Mon, 06 Nov 2017 02:36:44 -0800, Vic Smith
thismailautodeleted@comcast.net> wrote:

On Mon, 06 Nov 2017 02:57:16 -0500, clare@snyder.on.ca wrote:


Only the stop-tech article is written by a pro (Can't open the
raybestos link so it's useless)

That "pro" says to replace brake fluid once a year.
I wonder how many people do that.
I never replace brake fluid unless I've got the system open.
I generally did when doing any major brake work (drums, rotors, pads
or shes) - just s thorough bleed.

I haven't touched any part of my brakes for 4 years.

I "service" my disc brakes at least once a year.

 

[RS Wood]

Ed Pawlowski wrote:

> No one can teach you anything as you know everything.

You think that because I asked you to think logically like an adult would.

You think I'm stupid because I don't have your experience.
You think everything you say is right because you have that experience.

OK. Let's just leave it at that, because I *read* that paper, and it
doesn't say what you and the other guy (I don't look at names) claim it
says.

So you have experience on your side.
I have simple factual logic on mine.

 

On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 12:05:11 -0500, Ed Pawlowski <esp@snet.net> wrote:

On 11/6/2017 11:56 AM, RS Wood wrote:
clare@snyder.on.ca wrote:

I've always said it's what you learn AFTER you know it all that
REALLY counts - - -

Did any of you actually *read* that paper?

I did.

It doesn't say what you imply it says.

Show me the slightest bit of technical on-topic merit that paper had with
respect to how piston rings are better now than they were in the days of
yore.

There isn't a *single* statement in that *entire* paper that backs up
*anything* you said it did.

Nothing.
And you expect me to believe because I'm an engineer and you're a mechanic
that you know more than I do about basic adult logic?

The fact of what we're trained in has *nothing* to do with the way our
brains think.


No one can teach you anything as you know everything.

Darn engineers think everything has to be "logical" - and that means
"their logic" - which in many cases isn't at all "logical" when you
get down to brass tacks because they are basing their "logic" on false
pretexts. Their initial thesis is wrong and they just try to make
reality fit their warped reality.

 

[RS Wood]

clare@snyder.on.ca wrote:

I haven't touched any part of my brakes for 4 years.


I "service" my disc brakes at least once a year.

I admit, I don't touch mine all that often.

When the dash indicates the sensor tripped, I generally pop the vehicle
with all four wheels in the air and rotate the wheels and check if it's the
front or rear (it's almost always the front for the obvious reasons but my
dash doesn't discriminate).

I chalk that operation up to a rotation, and then I order the PBS pads and
sensor, and when they come in, I repeat the process sans rotation.

Once in a blue moon, I admit less often than I should, I bleed the brakes.

At least I use the right tools for bleeding, and not a normal open-end
wrench, and, heaven forbid, not a crescent wrench!

But I admit I can go five years without bleeding while I realize that's
twice as long as I should go (but I live in a dry area if that's any
consolation and the bimmer has a nice screw-top cap on the MC).

 

[RS Wood]

clare@snyder.on.ca wrote:

No one can teach you anything as you know everything.
Darn engineers think everything has to be "logical" - and that means
"their logic" - which in many cases isn't at all "logical" when you
get down to brass tacks because they are basing their "logic" on false
pretexts. Their initial thesis is wrong and they just try to make
reality fit their warped reality.

You should give me credit for *reading* the paper someone referenced (I
don't look at whom I'm responding to - I just respond to what they say).

The paper was garbage for what it was supposed to say.
That's a fact.

But nonetheless, I get your point which is that you think you know
everything because you have seen everything in your years of experience
that I don't (and never will) have.

You think that I am stupid because I try to think logically about
everything, which means that I will sometimes be wrong, such that, overall,
it seems that the consensus here might be as bad as:

1. I'm wrong that FWD were not built to handle well 365 days a year,
2. I'm wrong on slotted rotors braking no better than solid in street use,
3. I'm wrong on piston rings being *proven* to be far better nowadays,
4. I'm wrong on both the fact of and the measurement of rotor warp,
5. I'm wrong on (insert pet peeve here).

The good news is that this thread was about something else, and not those
things, where the one GREAT thing that came out of this thread was you gave
me a better understanding of WHY engines last forever nowadays, as compared
to yesteryear.

In fact, just the carb-to-EFI knowledge learned from you is a diamond!
It all made logical sense!

Illogical things are unsettling to me (like Marketing Bullshit is).
Things that make logical sense, give me an immense satisfaction.

 

[Vic Smith]

On Mon, 06 Nov 2017 12:11:22 -0500, clare@snyder.on.ca wrote:

On Mon, 06 Nov 2017 08:40:36 -0800, Vic Smith
thismailautodeleted@comcast.net> wrote:

On Mon, 06 Nov 2017 10:08:46 -0500, clare@snyder.on.ca wrote:

On Mon, 06 Nov 2017 02:36:44 -0800, Vic Smith
thismailautodeleted@comcast.net> wrote:

On Mon, 06 Nov 2017 02:57:16 -0500, clare@snyder.on.ca wrote:


Only the stop-tech article is written by a pro (Can't open the
raybestos link so it's useless)

That "pro" says to replace brake fluid once a year.
I wonder how many people do that.
I never replace brake fluid unless I've got the system open.
I generally did when doing any major brake work (drums, rotors, pads
or shes) - just s thorough bleed.

I haven't touched any part of my brakes for 4 years.


I "service" my disc brakes at least once a year.

Sure, so do I. But I don't call that "service." I call it "looking at pad wear."
I sure don't open the MC reservoir. That would expose the fluid to more air than it's seen
in about 20 years of not opening it. And we all know, brake fluid if "hygroscopic."

 

[pfjw@aol.com]

Coming very late into this:

I came up on air-cooled VWs, and have done about everything on these beasts but those things that required an hydraulic press or welding.

Today, I will change tires, brakes, oil, coolant, plugs, sensors, and other discrete go/no-go devices. And I have some throw-back opinions:

Brake fluid and coolant gets three (3) years before a flush and re-fill.
Tires get five (5) years max no matter what the state of wear.
Trans Fluid (Auto) gets 100,000 miles.
Trans Fluid (clutch) gets 40,000 - 80,000 miles depending on type.
Oil is synthetic, and gets 10,000 miles or one year, whichever comes first.
With the trans fluid, so goes the differential fluid(s).

Otherwise, modern tooling being what it is, my mechanic can get what I need a weekend to finish done in a couple of hours _AND_ he gives me a warranty.

Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA

 

RS Wood posted for all of us...

What are some car-repair jobs you always wished you could do but have never
done?

Mine are, in this order of "I wish I could do it" order
1. painting
2. alignment
3. replace/rebuild engine
4. clutch replacement
5. tire mounting and balancing
6. timing belt
7. head gasket and vcg

I've done electrical, brakes, shocks, cooling systems, alternators,
ujoints, pitman/idler arms & tie-rod ends and ball joints, tuneups,
emissions hoses and sensors, exhaust, electrical components, fuel pumps,
and fluids, but not the six things above.

What are some car-repair jobs you always wished you could do but have never
done?

I have done all except #3.

The worst job I consider is exhaust. I guess that has diminished these days.

The hardest is being a good diagnostician.

--
Tekkie

 

[Ed Pawlowski]

On 11/6/2017 12:12 PM, RS Wood wrote:

Ed Pawlowski wrote:

No one can teach you anything as you know everything.

You think that because I asked you to think logically like an adult would.

You think I'm stupid because I don't have your experience.
You think everything you say is right because you have that experience.

OK. Let's just leave it at that, because I *read* that paper, and it
doesn't say what you and the other guy (I don't look at names) claim it
says.

So you have experience on your side.
I have simple factual logic on mine.

Never said you were stupid. You may be a nice guy in person but you
come across as an arrogant @#$ that knows everything and the rest of us
know nothing. We can never be as good as you.

A good engineer would know that even simple things like piston rings can
be improved in many ways, yet you insist they are no different than ones
made 60 years ago. Well, maybe if you think that is correct you cannot
be a real engineer.

I have known many engineers, have a couple in the family but none would
make that statement. I do know people like you though.

Any of theses your projects?
https://www.livescience.com/55619-engineering-disasters.html

 

[Xeno]

On 7/11/2017 2:20 AM, RS Wood wrote:

Xeno wrote:

Just add gear to your list and delete pushrod. We are talking about
driving the *camshaft*. gear, chain, belt. There are a few varieties of
chain in use; single row, double row, hyvo.

Thanks. Had I done the job even once, I'd know more than I do, so I will
gladly take your word for it that there are three choices and we must pick
one of the three.
1. Gear
2. Belt
3. Chain

We have to pick one.
Which is the most reliable?

Gear by far, chain next, belt last.

Noisiest;

Gear, chain, belt

--

Xeno

 

[Ed Pawlowski]

On 11/6/2017 12:04 PM, RS Wood wrote:

Ed Pawlowski wrote:

People that do not have a TV tend to have a superiority complex. Sure,
95% of it is crap, but there are some excellent shows on History,
Discovery, Science that will broaden your horizons and educate you about
the rest of the world.

Ask me *anything* about "history, discovery, science, and the rest of the
world".

What makes you think that only watching TV will gain you that information?

Did I say that is the only way? No, I did not. You are making up
things to suit you. You did, however, take the time to infer you know
everything about history, discovery, science, and the rest of the world.
Books are great, but seeing some things on TV can be very enjoyable
and educational for those of us that don't know everything..

You can watch an episode of "How It Made" and they may do a segment on
piston rings and the latest technology.

 

[Ian Field]

"TekkieŽ" <Tekkie@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:RM2MB.70895$Q03.48094@fx44.iad...

RS Wood posted for all of us...



What are some car-repair jobs you always wished you could do but have
never
done?

Mine are, in this order of "I wish I could do it" order
1. painting
2. alignment
3. replace/rebuild engine
4. clutch replacement
5. tire mounting and balancing
6. timing belt
7. head gasket and vcg

I've done electrical, brakes, shocks, cooling systems, alternators,
ujoints, pitman/idler arms & tie-rod ends and ball joints, tuneups,
emissions hoses and sensors, exhaust, electrical components, fuel pumps,
and fluids, but not the six things above.

What are some car-repair jobs you always wished you could do but have
never
done?

I have done all except #3.

The worst job I consider is exhaust. I guess that has diminished these
days.

The hardest is being a good diagnostician.

Diagnostics can be challenging when *EVERYTHING* rattles.................