| Author |
Message |
Philip
Guest
|
 Posted:
Wed Dec 07, 2005 4:38 am Post subject:
Re: 2000 Avalon - SLUDGE Story |
|
|
"Ray O" <rokigawa@tristarassociatesDOT.com> wrote in message
news:e72ac$4395e3bf$44a4a10d$4887@msgid.meganewsservers.com...
| Quote: |
"larry moe 'n curly" <larrymoencurly@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:1133852086.425345.185190@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Ray O wrote:
Toyota dealer service awards are based on a number of criteria,
including
customer responses to factory surveys; having master techs, having all
special service tools, factory service manuals, and service bulletins;
having shop equipment like brake lathes, wheel balancers, etc; having
trained service managers and service advisors; having a parts inventory
that
results in minimal down time for warranty repairs; and having a facility
large enough to handle their average daily service load; and controlling
warranty expenses.
1. Are there are actually dealers who don't have service manuals and
bulletins in stock???
More commonly, they are missing a few volumes or issues here and there or
they have not filed them in an orderly manner so that a tech can easily
find the right one. If a tech has to spend 10 or 15 minutes looking for
what he needs, he'll pass and take a shot in the dark.
2. Does "controlling warranty expenses" mean stiffing the customers the
way Ford and Chrysler do, or does it mean fixing the problem right the
first time? I'd like to know which dealers eat warranty expenses the
most when the manufacturer won't cover them, but there doesn't seem to
be any way to find it. :(
All manaufacturers know what their average warranty expense per new
vehicle sold is. By looking at warranty flat rate hours and parts
replaced, they can tell which dealers are incurring higher expenses than
average. Toyota does not get concerned about an occasional month with
high expenses at a dealership but an ongoing trend of high expenses could
mean that they have a lot of visiting owners, they have problems repairing
vehicles properly so it takes several attempts, or they are filing
fraudulent claims.
Manufacturers will not pay a dealer for a warranty repair if they did it
before but they will pay a different dealer for the claim. The problem
is, if a car is making a noise and the dealer replaces a part, and if the
part didn't cure the noise and they replace a different part on a
different repair attempt, then the warranty system doesn't look at it as a
comeback repair. This hit and miss repair method does drive up warranty
expenses so they would be caught in a warranty review.
3. Do manufacturers ever rig cars so they don't run right and then
bring them to dealers to test their competence?
No, but vehicles are bugged for tech classes and technician
trouble-shooting competitions.
--
Ray O
|
Oh GAWD yes. BMW classes were all about such "rigged" cars ... but like you
say, only in the tech classes.
--
- Philip
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ray O
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 07, 2005 5:02 am Post subject:
Re: 2000 Avalon - SLUDGE Story |
|
|
"Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:Jpolf.315$Dd2.311@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
| Quote: |
"Ray O" <rokigawa@tristarassociatesDOT.com> wrote in message
news:e72ac$4395e3bf$44a4a10d$4887@msgid.meganewsservers.com...
"larry moe 'n curly" <larrymoencurly@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:1133852086.425345.185190@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Ray O wrote:
Toyota dealer service awards are based on a number of criteria,
including
customer responses to factory surveys; having master techs, having all
special service tools, factory service manuals, and service bulletins;
having shop equipment like brake lathes, wheel balancers, etc; having
trained service managers and service advisors; having a parts inventory
that
results in minimal down time for warranty repairs; and having a
facility
large enough to handle their average daily service load; and
controlling
warranty expenses.
1. Are there are actually dealers who don't have service manuals and
bulletins in stock???
More commonly, they are missing a few volumes or issues here and there or
they have not filed them in an orderly manner so that a tech can easily
find the right one. If a tech has to spend 10 or 15 minutes looking for
what he needs, he'll pass and take a shot in the dark.
2. Does "controlling warranty expenses" mean stiffing the customers the
way Ford and Chrysler do, or does it mean fixing the problem right the
first time? I'd like to know which dealers eat warranty expenses the
most when the manufacturer won't cover them, but there doesn't seem to
be any way to find it. :(
All manaufacturers know what their average warranty expense per new
vehicle sold is. By looking at warranty flat rate hours and parts
replaced, they can tell which dealers are incurring higher expenses than
average. Toyota does not get concerned about an occasional month with
high expenses at a dealership but an ongoing trend of high expenses could
mean that they have a lot of visiting owners, they have problems
repairing vehicles properly so it takes several attempts, or they are
filing fraudulent claims.
Manufacturers will not pay a dealer for a warranty repair if they did it
before but they will pay a different dealer for the claim. The problem
is, if a car is making a noise and the dealer replaces a part, and if the
part didn't cure the noise and they replace a different part on a
different repair attempt, then the warranty system doesn't look at it as
a comeback repair. This hit and miss repair method does drive up
warranty expenses so they would be caught in a warranty review.
3. Do manufacturers ever rig cars so they don't run right and then
bring them to dealers to test their competence?
No, but vehicles are bugged for tech classes and technician
trouble-shooting competitions.
--
Ray O
Oh GAWD yes. BMW classes were all about such "rigged" cars ... but like
you say, only in the tech classes.
--
- Philip
|
Some of the techs thought they were funny and after they fixed the bugs that
the instructor put in the car, they would add some more of their own. In
our office, the instructors had to use their own company cars for class, and
the techs knew this. The instructors in my office were very sharp and were
always able to put the car the car back together in time for the trip home,
even including the extra bugs placed by the techs.
--
Ray O
correct the return address punctuation to reply |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gord Beaman
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 07, 2005 9:18 am Post subject:
Re: 2000 Avalon - SLUDGE Story |
|
|
"Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net> wrote:
snip
| Quote: | If there's 'nothing faulty about the separator' then why is the
company changing it?
...because it is easier to change it than clean it...
Well hell, it's likely easier to change 'the oil filter' than to
clean it also but you seldom see the company change it with no
charge do you now?...
-Gord.
A highly faulty analogy.
|
It is indeed not...Christ, where's your reading comprehension?
| Quote: | Who do you suppose paid/subsidized the cost of
repairing those few "gelled" engines? There is no such thing as "free"
except in the mind of a socialist. There is only cost shifting.
|
Obfuscation, pure and simple...this has nothing to do with the
subject at hand...please pay attention...
Don't go trying to change the subject here...you stated that
there was 'nothing faulty about the separator' and I maintain
that there is...simple, deal with it...
--
-Gord.
(use gordon in email)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FanJet
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 07, 2005 9:18 am Post subject:
Re: 2000 Avalon - SLUDGE Story |
|
|
larry moe 'n curly wrote:
| Quote: | Scott in Florida wrote:
On 5 Dec 2005 13:30:59 -0800, "larry moe 'n curly"
larrymoencurly@my-deja.com> wrote:
I took my Ford into one of the highest rated Ford dealers in the
nation,
Sanderson Ford of Glendale, Arizona, because of a squealing sound
from the front that varied with the speed of the car but not the
speed of the engine,
the dealer said that my problem was caused by loose wheel covers.
I reminded them that the car came in without wheel covers
Another hour later, they said the squeal was due to a bad serpentine
belt tensioner.
after I got on the road, the squeal returned, so I went back.
This time they replaced the speedo cable, and the noise disappeared.
why wasn't the speedo one of the first things they checked?
Cause it was a Ford ? ;-)
What made you think that your response was worth posting? Was it the
same thought process that makes you post all those off-topic messages?
;)
|
It's the 'RUSH' way of doing things and is slowly and naturally being taken
care of by natural selection. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gord Beaman
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 07, 2005 9:18 am Post subject:
Re: 2000 Avalon - SLUDGE Story |
|
|
"Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net> wrote:
| Quote: |
"Gord Beaman" <gord@islandtelecom.com> wrote in message
news:nv1ap1h1hdksaaapphnf17gv5e4mdvoerc@4ax.com...
"Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net> wrote:
"Gord Beaman" <gord@islandtelecom.com> wrote in message
news:qqv8p11t7f9sjtai256ta70u0o55ou6ovv@4ax.com...
"Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net> wrote:
snip
There is nothing "faulty" about the oil vapor separator matrix inside
the
valve cover ... IF ... you perform oil changes appropriate to your
unique
driving conditions. Perhaps you know by now that there have been
approximately 3,500 claims filed (fewer qualified) for "gelled" engines.
The total population of those affected engines is something on the order
of
3.3 million. That evidence suggests most people can get there oil
serviced
appropriately.
Since the oil vapor separator is riveted in place, Toyota prefers finds
it
more cost effective to replace with a new valve cover complete vs. the
labor
and time to remove rivets, clean, and re-rivet the old separator into
the
old valve cover. Also, the update oil separator simply has a couple
more
drain holes that are also a little larger. This is not a major
modification.
--
- Philip
If there's 'nothing faulty about the separator' then why is the
company changing it?
Your first sentence doesn't agree with your last two...
Make up yer mind guy...
There's something wrong or there isn't...
--
-Gord.
(use gordon in email)
For the same reasons you put the seat back down when your done urinating
...
political pressure.
Piss poor answer...(pun intended), there 'was' a problem with the
design of the separator, the holes were too small and not enough
of them (by your own statement).
-Gord.
There was and is no problem as evidenced by the OVERWHELMING number of V6
engines that have not 'gelled' simply because MOST people get appropriate
oil services. But to accomodate the the neglectful, the small change was
made. But is this change enough? YOU don't know.
I never said the holes were too small nor did I say their number
insufficient. But I will say your history of reading into a post what is
not expressly stated is well known. :^)
|
You lying POS!...look up about 45 lines IN THIS VERY POST!, there
you'll see the following quote by YOU
quote:
| Quote: | Also, the update oil separator simply has a couple
more drain holes that are also a little larger.
This is not a major modification.
unquote |
How about my apology now?
--
-Gord.
(use gordon in email) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FanJet
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 07, 2005 9:18 am Post subject:
Re: 2000 Avalon - SLUDGE Story |
|
|
larry moe 'n curly wrote:
| Quote: | High Tech Misfit wrote:
larry moe 'n curly wrote:
About ten years ago, I took my Ford into one of the highest rated
Ford dealers in the nation, [Sanderson Ford, and they couldn't fix
it until I told them what to do]
I wonder who actually rates these dealers so highly? The car makers
themselves? My father had a Grand Prix that he bought at a "highly
rated" GM dealer. But it took this dealer about 5 tries to get a
power window working again correctly. And it took 3 check engine
light incidents and 2 oxygen sensor replacements to correct a
problem that turned out to be carbon build-up in the EGR system.
Both of these problems were fairly common on this particular model
too.
I don't trust dealer awards. Word of mouth remains the best means of
knowing how good or bad a dealer or mechanic is.
I asked Ford and Chrysler how they rated their dealers and which were
the highest-rated ones in my area, but both refused to provide any
information, but I know that one 5-star Chrysler dealer, Bill Luke, is
pretty bad at diagnosing problems, even if they replace every part in
the vehicle. Also ABC Nissan has bribed customers for perfect scores
by giving them free oil changes.
|
And, of course, there are many who could name several Toyota dealerships
with the same flaws. Point? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gord Beaman
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 07, 2005 9:18 am Post subject:
Re: 2000 Avalon - SLUDGE Story |
|
|
Scott in Florida <JustAsk@Florida.com> wrote:
| Quote: | On Tue, 06 Dec 2005 18:07:21 GMT, Gord Beaman <gord@islandtelecom.com
wrote:
"Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net> wrote:
snip
There is nothing "faulty" about the oil vapor separator matrix inside the
valve cover ... IF ... you perform oil changes appropriate to your unique
driving conditions. Perhaps you know by now that there have been
approximately 3,500 claims filed (fewer qualified) for "gelled" engines.
The total population of those affected engines is something on the order of
3.3 million. That evidence suggests most people can get there oil serviced
appropriately.
Since the oil vapor separator is riveted in place, Toyota prefers finds it
more cost effective to replace with a new valve cover complete vs. the labor
and time to remove rivets, clean, and re-rivet the old separator into the
old valve cover. Also, the update oil separator simply has a couple more
drain holes that are also a little larger. This is not a major modification.
--
- Philip
If there's 'nothing faulty about the separator' then why is the
company changing it?
...because it is easier to change it than clean it...
|
Well hell, it's likely easier to change 'the oil filter' than to
clean it also but you seldom see the company change it with no
charge do you now?...
--
-Gord.
(use gordon in email) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gord Beaman
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 07, 2005 9:18 am Post subject:
Re: 2000 Avalon - SLUDGE Story |
|
|
"Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net> wrote:
| Quote: |
"Gord Beaman" <gord@islandtelecom.com> wrote in message
news:qqv8p11t7f9sjtai256ta70u0o55ou6ovv@4ax.com...
"Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net> wrote:
snip
There is nothing "faulty" about the oil vapor separator matrix inside the
valve cover ... IF ... you perform oil changes appropriate to your unique
driving conditions. Perhaps you know by now that there have been
approximately 3,500 claims filed (fewer qualified) for "gelled" engines.
The total population of those affected engines is something on the order
of
3.3 million. That evidence suggests most people can get there oil serviced
appropriately.
Since the oil vapor separator is riveted in place, Toyota prefers finds it
more cost effective to replace with a new valve cover complete vs. the
labor
and time to remove rivets, clean, and re-rivet the old separator into the
old valve cover. Also, the update oil separator simply has a couple more
drain holes that are also a little larger. This is not a major
modification.
--
- Philip
If there's 'nothing faulty about the separator' then why is the
company changing it?
Your first sentence doesn't agree with your last two...
Make up yer mind guy...
There's something wrong or there isn't...
--
-Gord.
(use gordon in email)
For the same reasons you put the seat back down when your done urinating ...
political pressure.
|
Piss poor answer...(pun intended), there 'was' a problem with the
design of the separator, the holes were too small and not enough
of them (by your own statement).
Don't be so GD arrogant, you're not above making errors, it's
easy, just say "oops, sorry, my error"... see?...it's easy.
--
-Gord.
(use gordon in email) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Philip
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 07, 2005 9:18 am Post subject:
Re: 2000 Avalon - SLUDGE Story |
|
|
"Gord Beaman" <gord@islandtelecom.com> wrote in message
news:nv1ap1h1hdksaaapphnf17gv5e4mdvoerc@4ax.com...
| Quote: | "Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net> wrote:
"Gord Beaman" <gord@islandtelecom.com> wrote in message
news:qqv8p11t7f9sjtai256ta70u0o55ou6ovv@4ax.com...
"Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net> wrote:
snip
There is nothing "faulty" about the oil vapor separator matrix inside
the
valve cover ... IF ... you perform oil changes appropriate to your
unique
driving conditions. Perhaps you know by now that there have been
approximately 3,500 claims filed (fewer qualified) for "gelled" engines.
The total population of those affected engines is something on the order
of
3.3 million. That evidence suggests most people can get there oil
serviced
appropriately.
Since the oil vapor separator is riveted in place, Toyota prefers finds
it
more cost effective to replace with a new valve cover complete vs. the
labor
and time to remove rivets, clean, and re-rivet the old separator into
the
old valve cover. Also, the update oil separator simply has a couple
more
drain holes that are also a little larger. This is not a major
modification.
--
- Philip
If there's 'nothing faulty about the separator' then why is the
company changing it?
Your first sentence doesn't agree with your last two...
Make up yer mind guy...
There's something wrong or there isn't...
--
-Gord.
(use gordon in email)
For the same reasons you put the seat back down when your done urinating
...
political pressure.
Piss poor answer...(pun intended), there 'was' a problem with the
design of the separator, the holes were too small and not enough
of them (by your own statement).
-Gord.
|
There was and is no problem as evidenced by the OVERWHELMING number of V6
engines that have not 'gelled' simply because MOST people get appropriate
oil services. But to accomodate the the neglectful, the small change was
made. But is this change enough? YOU don't know.
I never said the holes were too small nor did I say their number
insufficient. But I will say your history of reading into a post what is
not expressly stated is well known. :^)
--
- Philip |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Philip
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 07, 2005 9:18 am Post subject:
Re: 2000 Avalon - SLUDGE Story |
|
|
"Gord Beaman" <gord@islandtelecom.com> wrote in message
news:ch1ap11o85djo4r0cks9sihpv7ipnd62q9@4ax.com...
| Quote: | Scott in Florida <JustAsk@Florida.com> wrote:
On Tue, 06 Dec 2005 18:07:21 GMT, Gord Beaman <gord@islandtelecom.com
wrote:
"Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net> wrote:
snip
There is nothing "faulty" about the oil vapor separator matrix inside
the
valve cover ... IF ... you perform oil changes appropriate to your
unique
driving conditions. Perhaps you know by now that there have been
approximately 3,500 claims filed (fewer qualified) for "gelled" engines.
The total population of those affected engines is something on the order
of
3.3 million. That evidence suggests most people can get there oil
serviced
appropriately.
Since the oil vapor separator is riveted in place, Toyota prefers finds
it
more cost effective to replace with a new valve cover complete vs. the
labor
and time to remove rivets, clean, and re-rivet the old separator into
the
old valve cover. Also, the update oil separator simply has a couple
more
drain holes that are also a little larger. This is not a major
modification.
--
- Philip
If there's 'nothing faulty about the separator' then why is the
company changing it?
...because it is easier to change it than clean it...
Well hell, it's likely easier to change 'the oil filter' than to
clean it also but you seldom see the company change it with no
charge do you now?...
-Gord.
|
A highly faulty analogy. Who do you suppose paid/subsidized the cost of
repairing those few "gelled" engines? There is no such thing as "free"
except in the mind of a socialist. There is only cost shifting.
--
- Philip |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gord Beaman
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Dec 08, 2005 9:19 am Post subject:
Re: 2000 Avalon - SLUDGE Story |
|
|
"Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net> wrote:
| Quote: | I've have addressed and accurately shown your propensity to infer what is
not stated is quite intact. You owe me an apology ... a payment I have no
expectation of receiving. :^P
|
In a pig's arse philip, in a pig's arse...you really don't care
what people think of you do you?...poor under endowed little
guy...
--
-Gord.
(use gordon in email) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gord Beaman
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Dec 08, 2005 9:19 am Post subject:
Re: 2000 Avalon - SLUDGE Story |
|
|
"Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net> wrote:
| Quote: |
"Gord Beaman" <gord@islandtelecom.com> wrote in message
news:f46ap1lfnjpipaqljtg98ea5gein9m88ld@4ax.com...
"Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net> wrote:
snip
If there's 'nothing faulty about the separator' then why is the
company changing it?
...because it is easier to change it than clean it...
Well hell, it's likely easier to change 'the oil filter' than to
clean it also but you seldom see the company change it with no
charge do you now?...
-Gord.
A highly faulty analogy.
It is indeed not...Christ, where's your reading comprehension?
Who do you suppose paid/subsidized the cost of
repairing those few "gelled" engines? There is no such thing as "free"
except in the mind of a socialist. There is only cost shifting.
Obfuscation, pure and simple...this has nothing to do with the
subject at hand...please pay attention...
Don't go trying to change the subject here...you stated that
there was 'nothing faulty about the separator' and I maintain
that there is...simple, deal with it...
-Gord.
You have your opinion rooted in ignorance. I have a couple of Toyota TSBs
on the subject and practical experience which you lack. Deal with it.
|
You're making a horse's arse of yourself by refusing to admit a
simple error...smarten up for chrissake...pretty bad character
flaw you have there mister...does not look good on you at all.
--
-Gord.
(use gordon in email) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Philip
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Dec 08, 2005 9:19 am Post subject:
Re: 2000 Avalon - SLUDGE Story |
|
|
"Gord Beaman" <gord@islandtelecom.com> wrote in message
news:3r7ap1hqadqnamm3i0tn9h5er2r1l93o65@4ax.com...
| Quote: | "Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net> wrote:
"Gord Beaman" <gord@islandtelecom.com> wrote in message
news:nv1ap1h1hdksaaapphnf17gv5e4mdvoerc@4ax.com...
"Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net> wrote:
"Gord Beaman" <gord@islandtelecom.com> wrote in message
news:qqv8p11t7f9sjtai256ta70u0o55ou6ovv@4ax.com...
"Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net> wrote:
snip
There is nothing "faulty" about the oil vapor separator matrix inside
the
valve cover ... IF ... you perform oil changes appropriate to your
unique
driving conditions. Perhaps you know by now that there have been
approximately 3,500 claims filed (fewer qualified) for "gelled"
engines.
The total population of those affected engines is something on the
order
of
3.3 million. That evidence suggests most people can get there oil
serviced
appropriately.
Since the oil vapor separator is riveted in place, Toyota prefers
finds
it
more cost effective to replace with a new valve cover complete vs. the
labor
and time to remove rivets, clean, and re-rivet the old separator into
the
old valve cover. Also, the update oil separator simply has a couple
more
drain holes that are also a little larger. This is not a major
modification.
--
- Philip
If there's 'nothing faulty about the separator' then why is the
company changing it?
Your first sentence doesn't agree with your last two...
Make up yer mind guy...
There's something wrong or there isn't...
--
-Gord.
(use gordon in email)
For the same reasons you put the seat back down when your done urinating
...
political pressure.
Piss poor answer...(pun intended), there 'was' a problem with the
design of the separator, the holes were too small and not enough
of them (by your own statement).
-Gord.
There was and is no problem as evidenced by the OVERWHELMING number of V6
engines that have not 'gelled' simply because MOST people get appropriate
oil services. But to accomodate the the neglectful, the small change was
made. But is this change enough? YOU don't know.
I never said the holes were too small nor did I say their number
insufficient. But I will say your history of reading into a post what is
not expressly stated is well known. :^)
You lying POS!...look up about 45 lines IN THIS VERY POST!, there
you'll see the following quote by YOU
|
The POS is floating between your ears. I CLEARLY stated the fact of what
Toyota did. I did not express an opinion about the need for Toyota to make
any modification to the oil vapor separator. In fact I did state the
overwhelming number of V6 owners change their oil on schedule which is the
primary reason MOST V6 oil separators remain operating as intended.
| Quote: | How about my apology now?
-Gord.
|
I've have addressed and accurately shown your propensity to infer what is
not stated is quite intact. You owe me an apology ... a payment I have no
expectation of receiving. :^P
--
- Philip |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Philip
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Dec 08, 2005 9:19 am Post subject:
Re: 2000 Avalon - SLUDGE Story |
|
|
"Gord Beaman" <gord@islandtelecom.com> wrote in message
news:f46ap1lfnjpipaqljtg98ea5gein9m88ld@4ax.com...
| Quote: | "Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net> wrote:
snip
If there's 'nothing faulty about the separator' then why is the
company changing it?
...because it is easier to change it than clean it...
Well hell, it's likely easier to change 'the oil filter' than to
clean it also but you seldom see the company change it with no
charge do you now?...
-Gord.
A highly faulty analogy.
It is indeed not...Christ, where's your reading comprehension?
Who do you suppose paid/subsidized the cost of
repairing those few "gelled" engines? There is no such thing as "free"
except in the mind of a socialist. There is only cost shifting.
Obfuscation, pure and simple...this has nothing to do with the
subject at hand...please pay attention...
Don't go trying to change the subject here...you stated that
there was 'nothing faulty about the separator' and I maintain
that there is...simple, deal with it...
-Gord.
|
You have your opinion rooted in ignorance. I have a couple of Toyota TSBs
on the subject and practical experience which you lack. Deal with it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Art
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Dec 08, 2005 9:19 am Post subject:
Re: 2000 Avalon - SLUDGE Story |
|
|
"Gord Beaman" <gord@islandtelecom.com> wrote in message
news:3r7ap1hqadqnamm3i0tn9h5er2r1l93o65@4ax.com...
| Quote: | "Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net> wrote:
"Gord Beaman" <gord@islandtelecom.com> wrote in message
news:nv1ap1h1hdksaaapphnf17gv5e4mdvoerc@4ax.com...
"Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net> wrote:
"Gord Beaman" <gord@islandtelecom.com> wrote in message
news:qqv8p11t7f9sjtai256ta70u0o55ou6ovv@4ax.com...
"Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net> wrote:
snip
There is nothing "faulty" about the oil vapor separator matrix inside
the
valve cover ... IF ... you perform oil changes appropriate to your
unique
driving conditions. Perhaps you know by now that there have been
approximately 3,500 claims filed (fewer qualified) for "gelled"
engines.
The total population of those affected engines is something on the
order
of
3.3 million. That evidence suggests most people can get there oil
serviced
appropriately.
Since the oil vapor separator is riveted in place, Toyota prefers
finds
it
more cost effective to replace with a new valve cover complete vs. the
labor
and time to remove rivets, clean, and re-rivet the old separator into
the
old valve cover. Also, the update oil separator simply has a couple
more
drain holes that are also a little larger. This is not a major
modification.
--
- Philip
If there's 'nothing faulty about the separator' then why is the
company changing it?
Your first sentence doesn't agree with your last two...
Make up yer mind guy...
There's something wrong or there isn't...
--
-Gord.
(use gordon in email)
For the same reasons you put the seat back down when your done urinating
...
political pressure.
Piss poor answer...(pun intended), there 'was' a problem with the
design of the separator, the holes were too small and not enough
of them (by your own statement).
-Gord.
There was and is no problem as evidenced by the OVERWHELMING number of V6
engines that have not 'gelled' simply because MOST people get appropriate
oil services. But to accomodate the the neglectful, the small change was
made. But is this change enough? YOU don't know.
I never said the holes were too small nor did I say their number
insufficient. But I will say your history of reading into a post what is
not expressly stated is well known. :^)
You lying POS!...look up about 45 lines IN THIS VERY POST!, there
you'll see the following quote by YOU
quote:
Also, the update oil separator simply has a couple
more drain holes that are also a little larger.
This is not a major modification.
unquote
How about my apology now?
|
I heard Bush admitted a few mistakes today. Maybe there is hope for
Phillip. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in