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

[Xeno]

On 7/11/2017 2:26 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 11/6/2017 12:28 AM, Xeno wrote:
On 6/11/2017 3:48 PM, RS Wood wrote:
Xeno wrote:

Lot of us keep a car until repair cost exceeds book value.

I trade my cars in when I'm sick of them.

For me, I get a new car when the old car has a repair that isn't worth
paying. That's less likely nowadays as I'm retired on a low budget.

I've been buying new cars since retirement - two last year.


Never bought two in one yer even when my wife was still driving.  She
usually got my hand me down.  I just bought a new car two weeks ago.  I
honestly can't give you a valid reason for doing so other than I like
the color better.

The guy that gets my old one with 38k miles is getting a real cream puff.

My wife pressured me for a new one last year. Bought her one, then
traded mine a month later. She's done 14k kilometres in hers, I'm up to
35k kilometres already.

--

Xeno

 

[Xeno]

On 7/11/2017 2:42 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 11/5/2017 11:48 PM, RS Wood wrote:
Ed Pawlowski wrote:

Not just mufflers any more.  They were smart enough to evolve into other
auto services like brakes, shocks, and the like.  As cars get more
sophisticated the more you have to rely on the dealer also.  My Genesis
was dealer service because the local guy could not get the right oil
filter for it.  The NAPA nest door did not carry it as it is a low
volume item.

I agree on Midas Muffler because they do other stuff and there is no way
they're staying in business on just mufflers nowadays.

I disagree on the dealer being required for anything.

To me, the dealer is whom you go to when you're under the original
factory
warranty and then that's the last time you ever go do the dealer.

I have nothing against the dealer except one thing, which is why they're
called the 'stealer'. But that's a biggie.

The only other reason you go to the dealer is to buy parts that they
might
stock where you need them now (e.g., you broke a bolt or forget a gasket
and you're in the middle of the job) but expect to pay more than
double for
those parts than anywhere else.

I go to an indy for alignment and clutch and tires, etc., where I
couldn't
imagine payking the price for the same job at the dealer.

Any shop can do a starter, water pump, but most don't have the expertise
for some of the electronics.  Dealer may be 1 hour at $75 versus the
indy at $50 but takes three hours to figure out the problem.  If my
adaptive cruise control stopped working I'm not trusting the corner gas
station.

True that. The indy doesn't have access to all the needed info for a
start. Nor the dealer training. They are both important.

--

Xeno

 

[Xeno]

On 7/11/2017 3:46 AM, clare@snyder.on.ca wrote:

On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 11:24:17 -0500, Ed Pawlowski <esp@snet.net> wrote:

On 11/6/2017 10:23 AM, clare@snyder.on.ca wrote:
On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 09:47:23 -0500, Ed Pawlowski <esp@snet.net> wrote:

On 11/6/2017 1:18 AM, RS Wood wrote:
RS Wood wrote:

I just am saying that nobody in this thread has given any logical reason
why rings would be "better" today than in the days of yore.

I think I got cranky.
Apologies.


As an alleged engineer you should be ashamed of yourself. Your thinking
lacks logic too, if you think a 1955 Chevy rings is the same as used
today.

https://upcommons.upc.edu/bitstream/handle/2099.1/22095/Designing%20and%20modeling%20of%20piston%20in%20combustion%20engines.pdf?sequence=1
Not to denigrate the GOOD engineers out there - but he sure thinks
like a typical engineer - - - One with no practical experience and a
"god complex" only exceded by orthopedic surgeons.


Intelligent people question
Arrogant people think the know everything.
I've always said it's what you learn AFTER you know it all that
REALLY counts - - -

I only really started learning *after* I completed my apprenticeship -
and I've never stopped learning ever since.

--

Xeno

 

[Xeno]

On 7/11/2017 3:49 AM, RS Wood wrote:

The Real Bev wrote:

I regard dust as a protective coating.

That was a good one.
Mind if I borrow it when my wife asks me to clean up the house?

Wouldn't work here. My wife is anal about dust.

--

Xeno

 

[Xeno]

On 7/11/2017 3:57 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

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.

I have a TV, I also have cable. They are for my wife.

I watch docos, etc on the internet. I prefer to schedule my own viewing.

--

Xeno

 

[Xeno]

On 7/11/2017 6:32 AM, TekkieÂŽ wrote:

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.

That is the easiest providing you have a good understanding of the
underlying systems, possess a good range of diagnostic equipment and,
finally, know how to use it. For judgemental issues, know first what is
*normal*, then you can easily recognise *abnormal*.

--

Xeno

 

clare@snyder.on.ca posted for all of us...

On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 04:49:16 +0000 (UTC), RS Wood <rswood@is.invalid
wrote:

Xeno wrote:

I have Toyotas precisely because they have a chain.
Some do, some don't. (perhaps today they all do - not sure)

The ones I buy sure do! ;-)

Two vehicles that are worthless to me:
1. FWD
2. Belt
Absoltely no biggy, on either count.
I like FWD. I like RWD. in NORMAL driving, there is basically no
difference - and the flat floor of a FWD is nice - and with the weight
of the engine over the drive wheels traction is snow is MUCH superior
to the traction of a rear wheel drive car with no extra weight in the
rear - - -

I've had my say on belts

What about suspenders? <g>

--
Tekkie

 

[Ian Field]

"TekkieŽ" <Tekkie@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:ec4MB.70902$Q03.60073@fx44.iad...

clare@snyder.on.ca posted for all of us...



On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 04:49:16 +0000 (UTC), RS Wood <rswood@is.invalid
wrote:

Xeno wrote:

I have Toyotas precisely because they have a chain.
Some do, some don't. (perhaps today they all do - not sure)

The ones I buy sure do! ;-)

Two vehicles that are worthless to me:
1. FWD
2. Belt
Absoltely no biggy, on either count.
I like FWD. I like RWD. in NORMAL driving, there is basically no
difference - and the flat floor of a FWD is nice - and with the weight
of the engine over the drive wheels traction is snow is MUCH superior
to the traction of a rear wheel drive car with no extra weight in the
rear - - -

I've had my say on belts

What about suspenders? <g

Pantyhose - her knees go up and down while you're shagging her.

 

[Ian Field]

"Xeno" <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:f6c066Fn437U4@mid.individual.net...

On 7/11/2017 3:49 AM, RS Wood wrote:
The Real Bev wrote:

I regard dust as a protective coating.

That was a good one.
Mind if I borrow it when my wife asks me to clean up the house?

Wouldn't work here. My wife is anal about dust.

"anal" and "dust" in the same sentence conjours up a vision............

 

[RS Wood]

Xeno wrote:

I only really started learning *after* I completed my apprenticeship -
and I've never stopped learning ever since.

You stop learning only when you're dead.

I learned a LOT in this thread, particularly about WHY engines last
forever, and why exhausts last forever, and why bearings last forever, and
why ball joints last forever.

That's all good.

I didn't learn a thing on rings that I didn't already know though.

I'm all prepared to learn how the metallurgy or shape of rings is different
nowadays versus yesteryear, but I haven't seen any reference that shows
even the slightest improvement over the years.

It might be there, but saying it's there isn't the same as it being there.
Proof in logic is always very simple.

 

[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.

If you think FWD is all about handling, then "your" logic should have a ton
of references to back it up.

If you think slotted rotors make any real difference on the street, then
you should be able to find a ton of reference that proves that (and not
some EBC marketing bullshit).

If you think rotors warp in street use then you should be able to find a
ton of references to back up your logic.

On any topic you see me take a stand on, it's not "my" logic but the logic
that has tons of references that back it up. Witness the fact that I gave
you a ton of references on rotor warp.

Now I understand that people don't think things through, so I understand
the 20-year-old kid who thinks FWD is all about handling because he falls
for the marketing bullshit. I understand all that.

But if you're over 70, you should have figured out that marketing is almost
all bullshit and very little logic by now.

You're not a young kid anymore.
Logic has to show up sometime in your life. It just has to.

 

[RS Wood]

Ed Pawlowski wrote:

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.

I don't know everything and I actually don't know much but I use logic on
it all and I've been on car forums for decades, where there always young
kids who fall for the marketing bullshit every time.

Not only do they fall for the marketing bullshit about FWD, rotor warp,
drilled rotors, pad friction, and so on, but they also desperately want to
BELIEVE the marketing that their car is special.

I can't count the number of "red" coolant "blue" coolant threads there are
from kids on Toyota and BMW forums respectively who want to desperately
feel that their engines are somehow special and therefore they require
special fluids (when water works as well).

These are all age-old arguments along the lines of "what oil" that I'm just
sick of. So it shows here and I get cranky, especially last night.

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.

You completely whoooshed on what I said, which is that I'll believe
anything if someone proves it. Anything. I believe in gravitons for
heaven's sake, and string theory, and that spacetime is warped by mass.

I'll believe anything if someone has a logical argument for it. But if
their "logical" argument is that Detroit came out with FWD for handling
reasons, not only is that illogical by failing every logical argument known
to mankind, but it's nothing new. It's the same crap the 18 year old kids
spew on the car forums.

It's the lack of logic I decry.

The whole brake warp idiocy suffers from the same complete lack of logic.
So does the drilled versus solid rotors.

If people actually followed their own logic, they'd be forced to undertand,
but they don't.

Take octane ratings for example, which we haven't covered. Do you know how
many times I've heard morons tell me that there is a lot of octane in
gasoline? Do you want to know how many times I hear people say they put the
high-test into an engine that isn't spec'd for resistance to knocking and
they declare they get better performance and mpg?

Morons all follow their own convoluted logic but it always stops short of
finding a reference that backs them up.

That's why here, I kept asking for reference, which I *knew* would never
exist because I could logically see the fallacy that they emotionally
cannot.

Mind you I don't take names. I just don't. If a post says something stupid
and it happens to be from my mother, I'll call the post out for it. And if
the post says something intelligent and I happened to have reamed that
person five minutes prior for idiocy, I'll thank them and congratulate
them.

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

You *should* know people like me.
We're called logical people.

We don't believe only in Marketing Bullshit.
I *hope* you know people like me.

Dear God. I hope.

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

I'm into biomedical engineering.

 

[RS Wood]

Xeno wrote:

True that. The indy doesn't have access to all the needed info for a
start. Nor the dealer training. They are both important.

I disagree but I understand why you say that.

You would presume that the dealer knows the most about the car.
That hasn't been my experience.

The parts guys are horrendously bad and the service guys marginally better.

I don't think it stems from ignorance as much as not caring.

This is mostly Toyota and BMW I'm talking though, so maybe your dealer is a
different brand.

 

[RS Wood]

Xeno wrote:

That is the easiest providing you have a good understanding of the
underlying systems, possess a good range of diagnostic equipment and,
finally, know how to use it. For judgemental issues, know first what is
*normal*, then you can easily recognise *abnormal*.

Being a diagnostician has always been the challenge.
How many times have we seen people throw parts at the problem?
That works. For older cars (20 years) it might even be a good idea.

Diagnostics is sometimes easy and sometimes hard.
It's always hard when you don't fully understand how the system works.

It's a lot easier in some cases, especially when you understand how the
system works.

The hardest things to diagnose are the intermittent's that only happen
while moving at speed.

 

[Scott Dorsey]

In article <otqu5p$b88$2@solani.org>, RS Wood <rswood@is.invalid> wrote:

If you think rotors warp in street use then you should be able to find a
ton of references to back up your logic.

Rotors warp in street use all the time when the kids at the chain store use
impact wrenches instead of a proper torque wrench to take tires off and
put them back on.

And of COURSE the chain store blames the driver, the tires, the phase
of the moon, for it. "You must be going over potholes too hard."
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

 

[RS Wood]

Xeno wrote:

I have a TV, I also have cable. They are for my wife.

I watch docos, etc on the internet. I prefer to schedule my own viewing.

I don't have a TV but the kids have monitors for their consoles which, I
guess, could be used as a TV if we had an antenna or cable - but we don't.

I get my news off the radio when driving and the Internet and my phone,
which is better than TV because I can skim pretty fast (that's one thing
I'm better at than the average person for some reason. They had me in a
special speed-reading class when I was a kid and the government funded
them, and I went to an ivy-league school before completing high school -
where speed reading came in handy there also).

Point is that TV is too slow for me.
The data doesn't come in hard and fast.

I liked that someone posted a paper for me to read, but the problem with
that paper was that I finished it, and then read it again, and then I had
to wonder what kind of logic *they* were using.

The paper didn't prove a single thing of what they implied it would.

It irks me that people aren't logical.

 

[RS Wood]

Ed Pawlowski wrote:

Did I say that is the only way? No, I did not. You are making up
things to suit you.

It's ok. You were implying that I'm stupid because I don't watch TV.
That's ok. I don't take *anything* personally.
What irks me the most is when people can't learn, like with the rotor warp
or the friction materials or the real reason for FWD, etc., because they
all fall prey to marketing bullshit.

That irks me and I get cranky. You can't imagine how many "blue coolant"
threads there are on the BMW forums, for example, or "red versus pink" on
Toyota. Just like with the drilled/slotted marketing bullshit, there are
people who tend not to use logic and there are people who use logic.

In the end, I should just plonk those who can't handle logic because I
can't fix them. They want to believe in marketing bullshit so badly that
they'll believe that an iPhone can do everything an Android phone can do,
and that's just marketing bullshit. It can't. Anyone knows that who can
think logically. But they can't.

The good news is that I don't take names. I don't even look at whom I'm
responding to. So he can say something stupid and I'll tell him that's
stupid and the next he can say something logical and I'll commend him for
using his brain.

You did, however, take the time to infer you know
everything about history, discovery, science, and the rest of the world.

I'm very well read. As are many people who have multiple higher degrees and
who are many (many) decades old.

In the days of yore, people respected the sage wisdom of their elders.

Books are great, but seeing some things on TV can be very enjoyable
and educational for those of us that don't know everything..

I don't have anything against TV. My only point is that people always bring
up that they have better use for their time than changing oil which is
where that issue came up.

I said I take my sweet time changing oil and someone said the cliche that
they have better use for their time which always means the same thing
because they don't use logic when they say it.

There is only one person on this planet who can make that argument and
that's a person who NEVER does anything but one thing in their entire life
(sort of how they say Bernard Montgomery was). Those people who have one
and only one interest in their entire lives are the only people who,
logically, can say what I was responding to.

Anyone else, e.g., someone who watches TV for even one hour a month, has no
business, logically, making that idiotic argument about not having time to
change their oil.

YOU are the one who brought in all the merits of watching TV.
Not me.

And then you argue with me for responding to YOUR issues.
You're not being logical here.

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

I watch a *lot* of stuff on the net, so, I can see a lot of how it's made.

You failed the simplest logic test.
Someone posited that piston rings are far better now than in days of yore.
I simply asked for proof.

The only proof that came out was a high-school level paper where some kid
doing a thesis (yes, I know it wasn't for high school but it may as well
have been) with lots of pretty pictures. Whoever proposed it was wowed by
all the pretty pictures, but clearly they didn't *read* the paper because I
did and it said nothing of the sort.

Now did I complain that they wasted my time?
No.

I simply responded with logic.

What you seem to hate, is logic.
Why?

 

[RS Wood]

Xeno wrote:

Which is the most reliable?

Gear by far, chain next, belt last.

Interesting. Makes sense.
Are gears prevalent?
If not, is the main reason the cost?

 

[RS Wood]

Scott Dorsey wrote:

Rotors warp in street use all the time when the kids at the chain store use
impact wrenches instead of a proper torque wrench to take tires off and
put them back on.

And of COURSE the chain store blames the driver, the tires, the phase
of the moon, for it. "You must be going over potholes too hard."

We covered that in the car forums about three decades ago, where you have
to wonder how anyone could say what you just said.

I haven't *looked* at the problem you speak of for more than 30 years, but
let's take it step by step in really big steps here.

1. How many footpounds *can* you torque a lug nut to before the bolt snaps?
2. Let's put *that* amount of torque on ONE of six bolts, shall we.
3. A rotor isn't solid, but let's assume a solid rotor for a moment.
4. How much torque would it take to *bend* a solid rotor?

QUESTION FOR YOU THAT WE ASKED 30 YEARS AGO OF OTHERS:
Q: How much torque on one bolt would it take to bend a rotor?

 

On Mon, 06 Nov 2017 10:03:21 -0800, Vic Smith
<thismailautodeleted@comcast.net> wrote:

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."

Correct. The "service" is more than checking pads. It's PRIMARILY
making sure all moving/sliding parts are free - and knocking off any
rust scale build-up on the edges of the rotors.