Re: $1,800 profit-per-car over GM

Mike Hunter wrote:
[color=blue]
>Obviously Toyota should sell for less than GM vehicles,
>but Toyotas sell for a lot more...[/color]

Because Toyotas are better.

Mike Hunter wrote:
[color=blue]
>If you believe who is 'better' is based on the number sold than you
>obviously must conclude GM is 'better' not Toyota.[/color]

Only an absolute idiot would base his judgments or purchases on the
popularity of a product.

Does that mean you believe the people that buy the Camry are idiots? ;)


mike


<rantonrave@mail.com> wrote in message
news:1173195525.147046.70790@8g2000cwh.googlegroups.com...[color=blue]
>
> Mike Hunter wrote:
>[color=green]
>>If you believe who is 'better' is based on the number sold than you
>>obviously must conclude GM is 'better' not Toyota.[/color]
>
> Only an absolute idiot would base his judgments or purchases on the
> popularity of a product.
>[/color]

It is advisable that before one comments on a subject, they might want to do
some research first, or at least say in my opinion.

The history of asbestos and gaskets, as well as break, problems is well
documented. Ford did NOT change the design of the gasket. The gasket
manufactures were forced to change the material without being given enough
time to develop a replacement material, that was the cause and everybody in
the industry knows it.

Toyota, Honda GM, Chrysler and Ford ALL had some engines that had gasket and
other problems as the result of the asbestos ban . There was four different
materials used to replace asbestos, two worked and two didn't. If you used
one of the two you had problems. One that failed, went quickly and the other
much later. Toyota and Chrysler had some that went in the first 25K or less
and were handled under warranty. GM and Ford used the one that went out
around 75K, after thousands had been sold, and were out of warranty. That
is why Ford sued and won a court settlement with the gasket manufacturers,
for all users.. Ford extend the warranty on the effected 3.8L to 100K

Modern Ford engines do not distribute any fuel via the manifold, just air.
The fuel is injected into each cylinder. Nearly every manufacturer now
uses composite manifolds. Composite manifolds cost the engine manufacturer
more than iron manifold, but lees than aluminum, so cost is not the factor,
its weight. Weight is ALWAYS a factor in todays cars.



mike



"DH" <dh@stargate.com> wrote in message
news:45f1abaa$0$16328$88260bb3@free.teranews.com...[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
>>> news:45f0ae2e$0$16304$88260bb3@free.teranews.com...
>>>> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:2e2dnZEtEdqtMW3YnZ2dnUVZ_sWdnZ2d@ptd.net...
>>>>> The 3.8 was a great engine until the government made the gasket
>>>>> manufactures stop using asbestos. Those 3.8 built in the years before
>>>>> and after the gasket problem was settled were tough as nails.
>>>>>
>>>>> mike
>>>>
>>>> Oddly enough, although Toyota and Honda were also forbidden to use
>>>> asbestos they managed to avoid using crappy gaskets that failed early.[/color][/color][/color]
[color=blue]
>Who says they did?[/color]
[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
>>> Neither did most other Ford engines. Nor most Chevies and Chryslers.
>>>
>>> It wasn't that asbestos was no longer allowed to be used, but, rather,
>>> that Ford came out with a bad design. If Ford had to come out with a new
>>> design, so did other engine makers. Most other engine makers did not
>>> come
>>> out with a bad design. Ford didn't have to make a bad engine, either.
>>>
>>> Jeff[/color]
>>
>> It wasn't a bad design...as long as it had the right gasket. Mike's
>> right...it WAS a good engine, a good trade between power and efficiency.
>> But again, regulation killed it.[/color][/color]
[color=blue][color=green]
>> And I found something else interesting. In the mid-late 90's they
>> switched
>> to a plastic intake. Heard many horror stories of the intakes melting!
>> Stupidity?
>>
>> Nah...here in New England a lot of states require Ethanol in the fuel.
>> The
>> intake was not designed for this, so, in Mass particularly, there were a
>> lot of meltdowns of the intakes.
>>
>> I'd blame that on the State before Ford. Ford reaponded to the problem
>> and
>> altered the material.[/color]
>
> You could do that but you would be wrong. "Gasohol" dates back the late
> '70's. I was using it in my '79 Monza. Every Ford built after that date
> should have been prepared to deal with sizeable amounts of alcohol in the
> fuel.
>
>
> --
> Posted via a free Usenet account from [url]http://www.teranews.com[/url]
>[/color]

On Sun, 11 Mar 2007 18:28:37 -0400, Mike Hunter wrote:
[color=blue]
> It is advisable that before one comments on a subject, they might want to
> do some research first, or at least say in my opinion.
>
> The history of asbestos and gaskets, as well as break, problems is well
> documented. Ford did NOT change the design of the gasket. The gasket
> manufactures were forced to change the material without being given enough
> time to develop a replacement material, that was the cause and everybody
> in the industry knows it.
>
> Toyota, Honda GM, Chrysler and Ford ALL had some engines that had gasket
> and other problems as the result of the asbestos ban .[/color]


Supra...

"the gasket material got changed but the engineers didn't revise the
torque spec for the new material..." (Taken from a Supra Website...)

On Sun, 11 Mar 2007 18:28:37 -0400, Mike Hunter wrote:

And, why are you here if you're such a cheerleader for GM?

There are lots of GM groups. Go find one and start talking about Toyotas.

You should have learned enough from being here for so long by now...

If GM built a good vehicle, I'd be right beside you. But after seeing cars
of all kinds taken apart and put back together again, I'd buy a Ford LONG
before any GM product...




[color=blue]
> It is advisable that before one comments on a subject, they might want to
> do some research first, or at least say in my opinion.
>
> The history of asbestos and gaskets, as well as break, problems is well
> documented. Ford did NOT change the design of the gasket. The gasket
> manufactures were forced to change the material without being given enough
> time to develop a replacement material, that was the cause and everybody
> in the industry knows it.
>
> Toyota, Honda GM, Chrysler and Ford ALL had some engines that had gasket
> and other problems as the result of the asbestos ban .[/color]

"Hachiroku ????" <Trueno@AE86.gts> wrote in message
news:_T%Ih.7317$t8.5260@trndny02...[color=blue]
> On Sun, 11 Mar 2007 18:28:37 -0400, Mike Hunter wrote:
>
> And, why are you here if you're such a cheerleader for GM?[/color]

You already know the answer to that question.

*snipping rest*

Natalie

On Sun, 11 Mar 2007 19:40:49 -0400, Wickeddoll® wrote:
[color=blue]
>
> "Hachiroku ????" <Trueno@AE86.gts> wrote in message
> news:_T%Ih.7317$t8.5260@trndny02...[color=green]
>> On Sun, 11 Mar 2007 18:28:37 -0400, Mike Hunter wrote:
>>
>> And, why are you here if you're such a cheerleader for GM?[/color]
>
> You already know the answer to that question.[/color]

Gee, no I don't...

Unless you're saying Mikey's a Troll...



[color=blue]
>
> *snipping rest*
>
> Natalie[/color]