Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options

Diesels in the News

11213151718171

Comments

  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    quote 7265 = " But any other vehicle I would be driving would take premium any ways. "

    You could be getting 39 MPG in a 2007 camry hybrid and get all the luxury of your TDI. It does not take premium fuel. :shades:
  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    This looks promising if the technology pans out and is affordable:

    http://www.airhybridblog.com/

    As a result of this breakthrough design, and verified through the most sophisticated computer modeling available today, the Scuderi engine is expected to:

    • Improve fuel efficiency in today’s gas and diesel engines by almost one third
    • Emit 80 percent less toxic emissions than today’s gas and diesel engines
    • Enhance the performance of hybrid engines
    • Provide significantly more power than a conventional engine
    • Be easy to manufacture because it utilizes the same components found in today’s engines
  • moparbadmoparbad Member Posts: 3,870
    VW Diesel Ranks Ahead of Hybrids

    quote-On this, Dr. Wolfgang Bernhard, Chairman of the Volkswagen brand, said "The ’Alternative Powertrain Study’ is testament to our intensive and global commitment in the area of economic engines. And this innovative strength continues to have an impact, via our range of TDI vehicles. No other manufacturer has sold more diesel cars in the United States and that upward trend continues."-end

    No VW Diesels in 2007 :( (except for the Touareg).
  • dhanleydhanley Member Posts: 1,531
    Interesting. In my book, a tad cramped doesn't equal "mini torture chamber."

    :)
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    You could be getting 39 MPG in a 2007 camry hybrid and get all the luxury of your TDI

    Some would argue the luxury statement. I know you will get a lot of arguments on the handling comparo between the Jetta TDI and TCH. The killer for me is resale. All you have to do is look to see what hybrids are bringing after they have 75k on the clock to know they are not holding up against even the other Toyotas. I just did a check and several 2002 Camry's with 90k plus miles are bid higher than a 2002 Prius with 75k miles. The Prius cost more to start with and depreciated faster. With Hybrids you buy high and sell low. Not my idea of a wise choice in vehicles. The blue book is totally not showing the true sales picture on hybrids past 75k miles. Fear of the unknown.

    PS
    If you are an average driver you will get about 36 MPG in the TCH.
  • alp8alp8 Member Posts: 656
    I could care less about resale. I plan to buy a hybrid and drive it till it can't drive, anymore, which is pretty much what I do with all my cars. The Camry hybrid will be great car to hand down to one of my kids in 4-5 years.

    as to the "luxury" comment - I drove one this weekend, and I find the level of luxury in it to be good enough. It ain't an Audi interior, but it's way better than what you'd expect from Toyota.

    I was surprised by the drive of the Camry. I expected to dislike it, but I was sold on it.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    I expected to dislike it, but I was sold on it

    You are not alone. A lot of people like the Camry. I personally liked the last generation better than this one. That is personal preference. I am generally not turned on by most of the newer cars. Too low and poor visibility.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    You would not get an argument from me. I have driven his 330I and I would be just fine with it across country. But I am also ok with the Jetta across country (6,000 miles)
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    Then perhaps a high depreciation vehicle, (such as a hybrid) would be just the ticket, since resale value is not high on your priority list.

    I would suspect given the trials and tribulations of Ford GM and DCB products (other than some light truck and previously SUV products) that it is indeed important to those in that market. Conversely given the sucess (with one component being good to EXTREMELY good resale value) of Toyota, Honda, it is another MARKET indicator of most in the market; of the importance of resale value.
  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    Since this is the diesel news forum, I won't get too much into the resale issue.

    But anyone who thinks hybrids are a "buy high sell low" proposition is just W-R-O-N-G.

    I got $17K for my 2004 HCH after buying it for $19,324 and driving it 24,000 miles in 23 months. My co-worker neighbor just traded his 2005 Prius with 28K miles that he had paid $27K for and got $23K for the trade-in.

    The "fear of the unknown" is not a "real" phenomenon with the hybrids, it's just manifested and propagated by the hybrid naysayers.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    ..."Since this is the diesel news forum, I won't get too much into the resale issue."...

    My take is the resale value of diesels at worst is probably not much off topic.

    ..."The 2002-2003 was the best rated mileage cars. I have a friend in Boise that just sold a 2002 Jetta TDI for $18k. It had 76k miles on it"...

    ..."I got $17K for my 2004 HCH after buying it for $19,324 and driving it 24,000 miles in 23 months. My co-worker neighbor just traded his 2005 Prius with 28K miles that he had paid $27K for and got $23K for the trade-in.

    But anyone who thinks hybrids are a "buy high sell low" proposition is just W-R-O-N-G."...

    I am glad you are starting to put figures; as it can serve as a better basis for comparison and subsequent discussion.

    So if I can comment on the 2002 Jetta TDI sold for 18k and had 76,000 miles. While Gagrice did NOT quote the purchase price or months or years held, I bought a 2003 for $18,000. So in effect, (using projection and discounting the likelihood that the 2003 probably sold for MORE than a like 2002) the COST of ownership (or more specifically depreciation) per year was ZERO (18k-18k=0/76,000 miles=0 ), .00 per mile, TDI.

    The cost of the hybrid you mentioned is 12% or $2,324., this is app a tad MORE than 6% per year (6.275%). Cost per mile = .0968333 cents per mile. HYBRID

    Your co-workers neighbors' is 14.81481%, ( -4000/28,000 miles=) .1428571 cents per mile. HYBRID

    The math does not support your assertion of him (Gagrice) being just W-R-O-N-G.

    Folks of course can draw their own conclusions on the cost of ownership (depreciation) per mile driven.

    However, if I can comment, your coworkers' neighbor AND your hybrid experiences are probably better than a so called AVERAGE gasser.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    But anyone who thinks hybrids are a "buy high sell low" proposition is just W-R-O-N-G.

    I don't think so. You have pointed to very low mileage hybrids that were sold at a good price. That is not surprising to me. I am saying the curve takes a radical drop at 75k miles. Where non hybrid comparables do not. With diesel the perception is one of longevity. So they maintain high resale long past what may be prudent. I know I would not buy a high mileage diesel under that perception.

    I am tracking a 2003 HCH with 58K miles. So far it is only bid up to $6900. Another 2003 HCH with 81K miles that the dealer would be happy to get $8900. No one bidding on that one. Until I see some actual sales on hybrids over 75K miles that are as good or better than their ICE only comparables I will maintain that opinion.

    The "fear of the unknown" is not a "real" phenomenon with the hybrids

    It would seem that it is very true. At least from those interested in buying a used hybrid.
  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    gary SAYS-"I am tracking a 2003 HCH with 58K miles. So far it is only bid up to $6900. Another 2003 HCH with 81K miles that the dealer would be happy to get $8900. No one bidding on that one. Until I see some actual sales on hybrids over 75K miles that are as good or better than their ICE only comparables I will maintain that opinion."

    Please don't tell me you are talking about E-Bay motors !!! Didn't I convince you a LONG TIME AGO that E-bay is not an adequate measure of prices on the car market?

    Edmunds TMV. Edmunds TMV. Edmunds TMV. Edmunds TMV. Edmunds TMV. Edmunds TMV.

    That is the best way to judge resale prices, because it's based on aCTUAL Dealer sales by real people buying real cars which they DRIVE before they buy.

    Not some ridiculous E-Bay "buy this car sight unseen" car selling model.
  • alp8alp8 Member Posts: 656
    People don't buy new Toyotas because of resale value. They buy them because they think if they don't, that they will be making a lot of visits to the show. Blame that on the American and European car makers' history.

    If you buy new, and you consider "resale" a significant issue, then you are not using your brain. A new car is a BAD economic proposition. So what if you got a new car with good resale. Big deal, you saved 5 grand 5 years down the road. Maybe you should have bought USED on day one and saved 5 grand IN YEAR ONE?

    I can afford to take a hit on resale. Anyone who buys new who can not afford to take that hit, should be buying used.

    But we've been down this road. I know you guys disagree with me.

    I bet diesels don't hold their value quite as well when their supply isn't constrained (which is it in the U.S.). Not that I care. I don't buy a car based on its resale value. Thank god I don't have to worry about a few grand, right now. If I DID have to worry about it, I'd be looking at used cars. Frankly, that's what more people should be doing, but I'm glad they have been brainwashed to buy new, as that stimulates the economy more, I suspect, than buying used. That's just a guess.

    Am I right that the Camry Hybrids are being made in the U.S., or is that just the non-hybrid Camry?
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    You might have a quirky way of looking at things, for it works very similarly for subsequent ownerships, i.e., used. We just happen to be on the subject of new. So use YOUR brain and carry it down on the subsequent ownership cycles. In fact most of the dealership monies are made on the USED side of the car lot and NOT the new.

    Not to question what you can afford, but WHY if you don't have to? Reminds me of the joke about how to make a small fortune in car sales..... start with a LARGE fortune. :(:)
  • alp8alp8 Member Posts: 656
    I admit to being a contrarian. But that doesn't mean I am always wrong. I've learned that most people are stupid, so you are usually right if you take the opposing viewpoint. Just be careful to not practice that approach with your boss. ;)

    The biggest "hit" with a new car is depreciation, right. And that is, of course, intimately tied to resale.

    I am not saying we should all buy used. But if you can't afford the depreciation hit, then you should buy used. Or buy less of a car. Don't forget that if a car has good resale value, that is already figured in to the new price, so you ARE paying for it, even if you think you aren't.

    I am in a unique position with my next car purchase, as I have two teens who will be good candidates for hand-me-downs for the next ten years, probably. I can drive it for a few years, and then hand it down. Same with the next car. Sure keeps me sheltered from the used car market uncertainties, as well as the horrors of depreciation and poor resale.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    Nothing wrong with being a contrarian.

    ..."Don't forget that if a car has good resale value, that is already figured in to the new price, so you ARE paying for it, even if you think you aren't."...

    One interpretation might be one is paying much more than one has to for Japanese cars, (per se) such as Toyota Prius, Honda Accord, Civic,etc, etc.??

    I would agree with you that depreciation is a major hit with a new car or cars for that matter. Hence the real value added or utility of a web site like Edmunds.com. So indeed if one can get a car at invoice or below, it might be asking a bit much to get a car for less than the cost of manufacture.

    I am glad you also agree with my take on a bias toward cars lasting longer than the normal 7-8.5 years. On one that is no longer owed by me, but by another family member it has 171,000 miles and is approaching 17 years old, another has 137,000 miles and is 13 years old, a third is pushing 11 years old. The only real bummer, since 2 still has very high residual value; it still makes sense to fully insure them. :(
  • alp8alp8 Member Posts: 656
    One interpretation might be one is paying much more than one has to for Japanese cars such as Toyota Prius, Honda Accord, Civic,etc, etc.??


    yes, probably true, so if the low resale on hybrids is true, then you are getting doubly scrooged
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    I will let the math speak for itself. :)
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    I am in a unique position with my next car purchase, as I have two teens who will be good candidates for hand-me-downs for the next ten years

    I can fully appreciate that approach. I also believe in keeping cars till they are no longer running reliably. That is my big question mark with the newer cars. If the new TCH is plagued with rattles and squeaks when you drive it off the dealers lot, what will it be like in 5-8 years. I just don't think the new cars are built as well as those from 15-20 years ago. Too much depends on electronics to keep working. Very expensive repairs will kill most owners once the warranty expires.

    The best reason I see for buying with resale in mind is being able to dump a vehicle you don't like after a year or so. If you pay MSRP or above, god forbid, you have a big built-in loss from the start. Do you think that dealer will give you a better trade-in a year later just because you paid MSRP?
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    Edmunds TMV. Edmunds TMV. Edmunds TMV. Edmunds TMV. Edmunds TMV. Edmunds TMV

    Well Edmund's Trade-in TMV almost matches to the dollar the selling prices I am seeing on eBay Motors. Most go unsold because they did not get what they wanted for the car. Until someone comes up with a site that has the price paid for a given vehicle, I will consider those prices paid for vehicles a good indicator of vehicle values. Not prices that rarely reflect reality.

    If you sold your HCH to a private party Edmund's was very close to what you got. If you traded it in Edmund's was not even close.

    Show me a 2002 Prius with 75k miles that sold for $18k. And I will be convinced they hold their value as well as a VW TDI. Plus, Edmund's was miles off on the price I got for my Passat TDI. I'm glad I did not consider them a valuable pricing tool. I would have given up about $7000 from what they show as TMV. I could have gotten at least 2 grand more if I had waited another couple months to sell.

    The couple I sold it to in Prescott AZ just got back from a trip to NY and back. They averaged 37 MPG and cruised most of the time at 80+MPH. They love the car. So I made them happy. If given the choice of having the Passat TDI back or a brand new TCH, I would take the Passat.
  • alp8alp8 Member Posts: 656
    If given the choice of having the Passat TDI back or a brand new TCH, I would take the Passat.

    I enjoyed the rest of your post, and then I figure out that you are just smokin crack....

    :P

    I drove the TCH this weekend, and I'm ready to plunk down 30 grand for it. There is no way I'd take your smelly old Jetta with muffin crumbs in the seats for 30 grand, even if it got 45 mpg

    maybe if it got 50...but even then.....
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    Ebay Motors is never a good estimation of what the true value of a used vehicle is.

    The real worth of a vehicle is the price at which it can be turned into cash on the spot, at an auction for example. The auctions are basic capitalism with prices moving with supply and demand. It gives the lowest value of all the comparisons thus it's normally called the ACV ( Actual Cash Value ).

    The ACV is a cold number without any hype of any sort, neither the owner's ( It's my baby ), the dealers ( one-owner creampuff ), the prospective buyer's ( Omigod, a lime green hatchback ;) ).

    No other number is worth discussing since all others have too much emotion, pitch and expectation built into them.

    For reference Edmunds 'Used Car Trade-in Values' are a good approximation of the auction values ( subject to regional variations ) and thus the ACV of a vehicle.

    We've done this comparo before on other forums and there is NO depreciation hit for hybrids vs non-hybrids. It can be shown again.
  • moparbadmoparbad Member Posts: 3,870
    The real worth of a vehicle is the price at which it can be turned into cash on the spot, at an auction for example. The auctions are basic capitalism with prices moving with supply and demand. It gives the lowest value of all the comparisons thus it's normally called the ACV ( Actual Cash Value ).

    Auction selling prices for VW TDI's (New Beetle excluded) have been higher than Ebay. It is actually quite amazing and ridiculous how high they currently are.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    I would agree that auction sales do demonstrate that USED hybrids are no where near as desireable as TDI's.

    While this is a personal aside, I would love to get at auction a slug of 2003 VW Jetta TDI's at 2003 Jetta 2.0 pricing. Of course this is wishful thinking at its best. Another is the MB E320-350 TDI at gasser prices!!

    Also your post is one of the reasons why I said that the "good" money is (and has been )in the used car trade and not so much the NEW car trade.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    Yep ditto the Corolla/Civic pair due to the recent fuel cost spike.

    It's a tough business when 2 y.o. Corolla's/Civics with 20-30K on them are being bought at auction for $11,000 to $13000 ( depending on condition ) when the invoice on a new vehicle is about 15,500 to $16,500.....if you can find any for sale at auction.

    Just for comparison purposes the 'Black Book' values ( 9/18 Edition ) for the 2004 ...
    .. Jetta GLS TDI are $15000 - 16500 depending on condition
    .. Prius are $18000 - 19500 depending on condition
  • KCRamKCRam Member Posts: 3,516
    Let's not get too far off the diesel subject... plenty of discussions about resale elsewhere in the forums.

    kcram - Pickups Host
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    I think the recent lower commodity pricing per barrel of oil, despite all the gloom and doom leading to its recent highs will test the resolve of the regulators (among many others obviously). If they stifle or put the brakes on the (growth of) diesel vehicle fleet going forward, to me that will be a signal that the energy "shortage, addiction" or whatever you wish to label it, is a non issue. My take is they are probably thinking up ways to increase the TAXATION overall given the higher prices of fuel is at best a strawman.

    Pre Katrina (week before) throughout the southern states, #2 diesel was app 2.58 per gal. So if projections are correct some pundits predict 2 dollars per gal.

    Corner store prices in one of the highest priced fuel states in the nation ((CA) HI being probably the highest)is 2.79 today. Unleaded regular is 2.59. So given my diesel/unleaded regular mpgs of 50/39, that is: per mile .0558/.0664 cents respectively.

    I also read that the recent fuel "crisis" and price peaks only affected effected the overall USA petro demand by (- minus) 1.3%. Given the fact that overall USA petro demand grows at app 4% per year, the math would indicate "slower growth of 2.7% !!
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    I would have considered a 2006 Camry. I thought they were pretty decent vehicles. I just do not like the 2007 model Camry or the Lexus before them. Has nothing to do with hybrid vs diesel. Having spent a week driving a 2005 Camry rental and 13 months with the Passat TDI I do have a point of reference. There is no way a Camry is as much fun to drive as the Passat. You don't have to be smokin' crack to know that.
  • dhanleydhanley Member Posts: 1,531
    Hmm.. for quite some time now, the EPA has been 99% concerned with air quality/public health in regards to emissions. Perhaps this move with shift more attention to co2.

    This makes sense, IMO. Any car sold in the USA today is so clean that tailpipe emissions are not going to have much an an effect on air quality. Most urban smog doesn't come from newer cars anymore. It might be a good time to focus elsewhere for awhile, and energy independence is a good place to focus on. It's easy for conversations like this to break down into political sniping, but i think most people like the idea of the US not being completely dependant on foreign oil.

    Diesel makes 15% more Co2 than petrol per gram burned, but the engines are typically 40% more efficient. So about 30% less Co2 is emitted per mile driven, all other things being equal.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    Given your assertion, the EPA has been an abysmal failure. If fully half the fuel consumed (of all stripe and not JUST highway transportation) in the USA is essentially unmitigated, the concern translates to 49.5%. In every school I have ever been in, 49.5%/100 is a SOLID FAILURE. Municipalities continually advertise special 800 #'s to report so called "gross polluters" (they claim are app 5% of the vehicle fleet) who just happen to be 100% GASSERS that cause the majority of pollution.
  • alp8alp8 Member Posts: 656
    yes, and in baseball you'd be the greatest hitter who ever lived

    your point?

    a lawyer who wins half his cases is a God

    if you hit half your 3-point shots in the NBA, you are the greatest shooter ever

    Why would you use academics as the measuring stick?

    Blame Congress. They are in charge of this issue, not EPA. EPA doesn't get to regulate anything and everything.

    where did you get your 49.5% figure?
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    ... is Cali now going to sue its own citizens because it's they who actually buy these damaging products ( autos ) and put them to use/misuse.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    Based on the popular victim mentality, I would think NOT! I would think this is a state's attempt at a deep pockets extraction.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    I made the point in the first sentence. Let's move on. I would say if one can get a new or used diesel on the used car market, you will be able to use alternative fuel, i.e., fulfills the mantra of domestically produced fuel and hand in glove CAN make it structurally viable to import less FOREIGN oil. A portion of the total bio diesel inventory can be diesel made from waste stream "products" from MANY diverse and long time existing industries that would (and ARE) have to be mitigated at greater cost and environmental impact. Bio diesel can also be grown, again from a myraid of crops. Since diesel is tied to home heating oil (values) shipping, air travel and interstate commerce, it is not likely to be rationed. You get better mph, a cheaper (like for like) per mile driven cost, i.e., using a VW as an example 31 mpg vs 49 mpg. I also do like being able to go 711 miles vs 434 miles. In terms of the lawsuit and reality the diesel use/impact is almost non existent. It is also an unrealized benefit to have greater resale value than a like for like gasser. It is cheaper to produce, refine, and uses less upstream resources than unleaded regular. It also has a 37% fuel advantage. Not a whole of disadvantages.

    An interesting vision. You know those plant abatement programs on those so called overgrown parts of the freeways highways, interstates? Instead of letting weeds grow, grow fuel crops and harvest them, then convert them to fuel. I am sure the logistics andrental/royalty, issues, etc can be worked out. Right now weed abatement is almost ALL cost and NO SALES!!!!???
  • KCRamKCRam Member Posts: 3,516
    ...the California lawsuit is not in the scope of this discussion, and these posts will be moved.

    Second, the name calling will stop. Nothing wrong with a spirited debate, but keep personal comments out of it - this is one of the reasons we usually kill political posts here.

    kcram - Pickups Host
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    This acreage is literally in the millions upon millions.
  • alp8alp8 Member Posts: 656
    nah, that eel grass is way too slippery

    and I don't want to be crashing into a bunch of corn!!
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    Beats a bridge abutment or even the wandering oleanders etc etc.

    But more to the point your reaction might show that it (the foreign oil importation) is truly a non real, real problem.
  • dhanleydhanley Member Posts: 1,531
    "Given your assertion, the EPA has been an abysmal failure."

    Not al all. The air quality in chicago, for example, has increased dfamatically over the years.. In the 70's the city was typically under a haze.

    As long as we're claiming "assertions" that's all i see in your post i'm replying to. Do you really have facts to back up the claim that it's 100% gassers on the "1-800-pollution" lines you speak of?
  • once_for_allonce_for_all Member Posts: 1,640
    it is a pretty sick logic.

    Why not sue a baseball player if he runs too hard hoping to stop a home run?

    BTW I want credits for the trees around my house, they are sucking up all the C02 that everyone else's cars are emitting.

    Where does it end? We already know that cows are gross polluters too. That makes me guilty by association when I eat an ice cream cone.

    John
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    And you think no one else has noticed improvements in places like Wash DC, Boston, NYC, LA, SF, Oakland, Long Beach, etc?
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    Most card carrying environmentalists (and non card carrying ones also) want to "restore" wetlands, marshes, swamps. Those places as most people know are one of the GREATEST environments for generating CO2. This is the very same gas that those very same people say is BAD and want to classify as a "pollutant".
  • alp8alp8 Member Posts: 656
    what the HECK are you talking about?

    First, HAVE YOU READ THE COMPLAINT?

    Since I am pretty comfortable assuming that you have NOT, then it's pretty ridiculous for you to comment on something that you know nothing about.

    Second, if you DO want to discuss the California case, then can you please define what a "public nuisance" is? OK, since you have no freakin idea, I am guessing it is safe for me to say that you are blowing smoke out your bum.

    Next?

    Where does it end? I don't know. But it BEGINS with people who do some research and base their opinions on INFORMATION instead of prejudice or the very limited information they have in their skullions.
  • alp8alp8 Member Posts: 656
    Most card carrying environmentalists (and non card carrying ones also) want to "restore" wetlands, marshes, swamps. Those places as most people know are one of the GREATEST environments for generating CO2. This is the very same gas that those very same people say is BAD and want to classify as a "pollutant".

    LOL, I wish we had a list of all the really lame stuff you say. Your position on diesel really loses a lot of credibility when you come out with stuff like this.
  • moparbadmoparbad Member Posts: 3,870
    quote alp8-
    what the HECK are you talking about?

    it's pretty ridiculous for you to comment on something that you know nothing about.

    OK, since you have no freakin idea, I am guessing it is safe for me to say that you are blowing smoke out your bum.

    INFORMATION instead of prejudice or the very limited information they have in their skullions.
    -end

    So nice to be able to have a civil discussion with someone who is polite and rational.
  • alp8alp8 Member Posts: 656
    mopar: The fact, AGAIN, that you only critique MY comments and not the comments of the guys I have replied to simply shows your bias. Get off my case.

    I am not in what YOU have to say about MY comments to someone ELSE. Mind your own business, dude.
  • alp8alp8 Member Posts: 656
    I made the point in the first sentence. Let's move on.

    I guess that means that I pointed out how stupid your comment was, but that you don't want to retract it.

    Point Game Match.

    Maybe we should only pay attention to your sentences that make sense, and ignore the stuff that is nonesense?

    How are we to tell?
  • moparbadmoparbad Member Posts: 3,870
    quote alp8-
    Get off my case.

    Mind your own business, dude.

    -end :surprise:

    Question for you alp8 - Did you ever read the Rules of the Road?
    2. Courtesy is mandatory
    The Forums insist that users be courteous. We understand that our users are passionate about vehicles, and furthermore that sometimes you are right and someone else is wrong, and worse -- they won't admit it. But remember, ultimately the Forums are about autos not egos.
  • moparbadmoparbad Member Posts: 3,870
    quote alp8-
    I guess that means that I pointed out how stupid your comment was, but that you don't want to retract it.

    Point Game Match.

    Maybe we should only pay attention to your sentences that make sense, and ignore the stuff that is nonesense?

    How are we to tell?
    -end

    Please tone down your hostility.
Sign In or Register to comment.