Stories from the Sales Frontlines

driver100

Some cars (Mercedes and I believe BMW) can actually check oil quality. They have sensors that measure not only time, mileage, RPM's, average engine temperature, starts, oil level, but electrical conductivity (which indicates quality). They will also tell you if the car is even a half quart low

Thanks, it's just you and me that seem to believe this. The light indicating when low is definitely true....I think it does tell you how much oil you should add actually.

I just can't find a real answer that explains how the car anylizes the oil. I think it is true otherwise they light would not come on at different mileages depending on the way the car is driven, it would come on right at 15k miles, but it can come on before or after depending on the quality of the oil.

jmonroe

Worse to have too much than not enough as I understand it!

They're both bad.

Not enough oil...well that's kinda obvious as to what will happen if you don't have enough oil in there being pumped around.

Too much oil...well that ain't so obvious but what happens is FOAMING. Because when you beat something you inject air into it. Air is not a good lubricant, hence engine damage.

To avoid all of this guessing, dipsticks were added years ago. Now someone thinks because of these analytic techniques you don't need dipsticks.

I'd say a dipstick thought of this, maybe I should say a real dipsh**. :mad:

My Genny has an oil dipstick but none for the transmission fluid. I think that dipsh** was half awake that day. :confuse:

jmonroe

roadburner

Take a look at the latest used oil analysis from my wife's X3 2.5. Using Mobil 1 0W-40(a BMW LL-01 approved oil) it seems that 8000-9000 miles is the upper limit for an oil change interval:

oregonboy

It looks like you have issues with boron and lead, and this thread has set an all time record for off topic posts! :sick:

biker4

Exactly. If I wanted to read about oil, tires, etc I'd visit another thread or forum. How about an actual SALES story from the front lines?

sterlingdog

When you're out of sugar, you use alternate sweeteners. :P

Richard

jmonroe

Take a look at the latest used oil analysis from my wife's X3 2.5.

I've seen these types of reports dating back to the mid 70's. They are very informative and interesting. When you start to have a high mileage engine (around 60/70K back then) it's also reassuring to have this kind of info.

I notice that you have run Mobil 1. Did you get these results when you used regular oil?

To stay off topic, today is the day my son is going to the track.

He went so far as to get rims at a junk yard to match the originals on his Altima and mounted his old tires so he didn't have to use his daily rubber. I'm going with him and I'll let you know how he liked it. Right now it is poring down pretty good but I don't think they'll call it off. Do you really think I'll be reporting any negatives about his first run?

jmonroe

jmonroe

How about an actual SALES story from the front lines?

Yeah, how about one.

Can you help us out with this? Several posters of late have gone into debt just to keep the original intent of this site going.

jmonroe

driver100

If I wanted to read about oil, tires, etc I'd visit another thread or forum.

I think that is your 1st post here, how about contributing something worthwhile while you're here.

Talking about sales stories don't go to see the movie Duplicity. I don't think any one can understand what it was about and it is boring. For cleverness and fun (a little violence though have to warn you) do see Slumdog Millionaire. I think American movies are going the way of American cars, if they keep this up they will need a bailout.

I think I am stretching the limits here but we bought 3 cars here this month.

driver100

it seems that 8000-9000 miles is the upper limit for an oil change interval:

Why? It seems your oil was good shape and could very well make it to 12 or 15K.

RB, you are the most knowledgeable bmw person. Does the car have sensors to take into account mileage, driver habits, dust, dirt, humidity, temperature etc, or does the light come on based on miles and a little driver habits? :confuse:

sterlingdog

Respond to post #40734. Inquiring minds want to know.

Richard

jmonroe

Respond to post #40734.

I'm a firm believer that the best way to get to know your car is to do a through cleaning of it and then wax it. Paying particular attention to all details. Usually more than one coat of wax is needed for best protection.

Doing this keeps all of the bodies joints moving. Very good for old people. You oughta try it. :P

jmonroe

jmonroe

I think I am stretching the limits here but we bought 3 cars here this month.

What's this "we" crap? Are you pitching in for the payments? :confuse:

jmonroe

golic

Great - please forward any contributions to my lease payment to my paypal account!!

Now that is STIMULUS or socialism, but I digress.

driver100

What's this "we" crap? Are you pitching in for the payments?
Great - please forward any contributions to my lease payment to my paypal account!! Golic

We were behind you all the way urging you on....supporting you all the way.

Payments! Where did I say anything about payments? No, no payments.
Just good old verbal support. Might have to see Judge Judy...........

Go do some more polishing.....................

snakeweasel

Mercedes engineers said Princess Diana would have survived the crash if she was wearing a seat belt. Think about it.....5 seconds to do up a seat belt could have saved her life!

True having a seat belt on could have saved her life, but having a sober driver who was not racing through the streets of Paris would have given her a much better chance of staying alive.

driver100

, but having a sober driver who was not racing through the streets of Paris would have given her a much better chance of staying alive

SW, You always have such good common sense advice but I really think you have lost it on this issue. Princess Diana didn't know the driver was drunk, but she did have a choice in putting on a seat belt....so there is a measure of safety she could have taken, and she would probably be alive today.

Would you drive without seatbelts because you are a great defensive driver? Are you telling me you have the capability of avoiding all possible accidents?

First, answer the seatbelt question and we'll see if we can help you...as Safety Director it is my responsibility to find out what is going on here.

snakeweasel

Princess Diana didn't know the driver was drunk,

How do you know? He was acting very drunk and she would have seen him acting in such a way. If she didn't know she should have known.

Would you drive without seatbelts because you are a great defensive driver?

I currently drive with seat belts on simple because the ragtop warning chime keeps chiming if I don't and its very annoying. Usually I drive seatbeltless and I have a reason for that.

Are you telling me you have the capability of avoiding all possible accidents?

No all I am saving is that the driver is the best safety equipment in any car.

snakeweasel

Now since I answered your question let me ask you one.

You need to get across a very large very congested urban area, say New York or Chicago, about 12-15 miles. You have two identical cars that can drive you with one exception car 'B' has had the seat belts removed so you cannot belt yourself in.

Now car 'A' will be driven by someone who is drunk and will race across town with no regards to laws of safety (but you can wear the seatbelt).

Car 'B' will be driven by a sober, well rested driver who has taken many driving course including safety and defensive driving courses and will drive very safely (sans seatbelts).

Which car do you get into?

driver100

Princess Diana didn't know the driver was drunk, How do you know?

I don't really know, but usually when people go in a limo they jump in the back seat and don't talk directly to the limo driver. I doubt if Royalty would talk directly to the driver....so, I assume she didn't realize he was drunk.

Usually I drive seatbeltless
You say you have a reason for this. If it is a health issue that is up to you. If you believe you can escape worse injury...you are probably right....about 1% of the time. Sometimes, people do survive without a belt on because they are thrown clear, but usually it works against you, usually get slammed into a tree or the car rolls over you.

No all I am saving is that the driver is the best safety equipment in any car.
Again, I wouldn't disagree! One driver that's almost as bad as a really bad driver is a driver who thinks he is so good he is indestructable. Not saying that is you, just saying in general. I mean the guy who drives through a fog or blinding snow, as if conditions are perfect, and he doesn't take into account how far he can see ahead, or take into account that someone else might skid into his lane. I see these people pass me in a snow storm, and quite often they spin out a few miles up ahead......they thought they knew what they were doing.

If you have that much confidence in your driving ability than good for you. From one who has taught driving in cars and in classrooms, I think it is wise to realize there could be a situation when you have no control over the outcome, and to have as much protection as possible if that happens...within reason.

golic

So snake are you suggesting that people who have no alcohol in their system don't have to wear seat belts?

I didn't realize all accidents are alcohol related.

golic

The error in this logic is that it completely ignores car "C" which plows into you at 75 mph.

driver100

Which car do you get into?

12 or 15 miles in Chicago or New York.

I probably wouldn't take either, probably grab a cab and put on my seatbelt.

Having been in cabs in both those cities that often isn't a good choice either.

But, you would probably like a real answer to make a point. So, let me see, I could take A because at least I'll be belted in and you probably can't go that fast in NYC or Chicago. Or, B, since the driver is good but once again he can't go that fast, so my chances of being safe are pretty good. Why not get the best of both....drive safely and wear seatbelts?

However, since I have to choose one I'll go with B. But I am not sure this situation will come up in the real world, and I don't care who's driving......I always put on a seatbelt, and unless there isn't an alternative, I wouldn't get into a car that doesn't have seatbelts.

driver100

The error in this logic is that it completely ignores car "C" which plows into you at 75 mph.

I am glad you said that. Is it me or SW that's missing something here?

I am sure he's making a point but I am not completely sure what it is. That some people are such good drivers they will never be in an accident. That you can defensively drive your way out of every possible situation? :confuse:

I think we've really lost biker4 now!

isellhondas

When I was in high school, I lost a classmate. A beautiful, smart girl who was a passenger in a car without a sealtbelt on.

the car somehow went into a ditch and she was thrown out and the car rolled on top of her. She was crushed but tragically, it took her a week to die.

The Calif Highway Patrolman cried when he told her parents..." If only she had worn her seatbelt"

So, snake, whatever your reason is unless it's a medical one, I think you are very foolish not to wear a belt.

I think about Karen pretty often.

golic

I survived a rollover 19 years ago. I was in the back seat. I have not gotten into a car since that day without putting on a seat belt.

driver100

I think about Karen pretty often. Isell

. I have not gotten into a car since that day without putting on a seat belt. Golic

Wow you guys said it better than I did. There are always a few exceptions to the rule, but 99% of the time people come out of an accident better with a seatbelt. I don't know why someone would not wear one?

I just take the seatbelt for granted these days, but your stories reminded me just how important they can be.

imidazol97

When in high school I had installed seatbelts in my own car even though they weren't standard--the floor fittings were already present for them but they weren't installed as an option. I came on an accident along a highway and the funeral home driver asked me to help lift the driver out of the car to the hearse for the ride to the hospital. He was drunk and the cause of the accident, and he was really messed up with going halfway through the windshield. I was cured of thinking about not using seatbelts to help control the physics involved during an accident after seeing the injuries to his head.

I've worn belts and then shoulder belts ever since.

To help swerve back to the topic, have any salespeople sold seatbelts (with cars around them) in the recent days.

CalifLookieLoo

.....after 25 years as an RN in Intensive Care (both Adult and Pediatric) I drive down the street with my teens and point at seatbelt-less drivers, kids without bike helmets, horseback riders without headgear and shout, "JOB SECURITY"! My kids roll their eyes, but wear headgear and seatbelts :P

boomchek

In my other lifetime, before I sold cars, I worked in one of our biggest hospitals, in the ER.

I've seen a few people who were brought in with massive injuries because they weren't wearing their seatbelts. It doesn't really hit you until you see the gashes, bruises and blood on their face and upper body, or the protruding bones from their legs after they make contact with the windshield, dashboard, and steering wheel.

But back on topic:

I've been on test dirves where people didn't want to put on their seatbelts. Or where they wanted to have their child sit on their lap unbuckled. :confuse: I told them we were not going to test drive until everyone is buckled in or their kids are in a child seat. If an accident should happen, sneaky lawyers will find a way to pin these people's stupidity on me and the dealership and sue us. I don't really need it and if you want to be careless about your life do it in your own car on your own time. :mad:

And speaking of an accident, I mentioned this when I worked at Honda, we had someone put a new Odyssey into a ditch on a 45% angle after they were t-boned on a test drive when they pulled out and weren't paying attention. $12k in damage. Luckily everyone was belted, and the child was in a child seat. Had it not been, he might have bounced like a rag doll against the interior of the van.

snakeweasel

I don't really know, but usually when people go in a limo they jump in the back seat and don't talk directly to the limo driver.

Usually people in this situation have some interaction with their drivers (and IIRC she wasn't in a "limo" but rather a sedan) and actually know and interact in some way with their driver.

If you believe you can escape worse injury...you are probably right....about 1% of the time.

Its because in the one serious accident that I was in if I was wearing one I would have been seriously injured if not killed.

Again, I wouldn't disagree!

Then we agree the best piece of safety equipment a car can have is the driver. Everything else is secondary.

snakeweasel

So snake are you suggesting that people who have no alcohol in their system don't have to wear seat belts?

Did I say that?

You and I both know I didn't say that.

But who is more likely to be in one? And which one is far more likely to be serious?

I was just illustrating a point.

snakeweasel

There is no error in the logic as you would be safer in car 'B' than you would be in car 'A'. Also that car 'C' has a better chance of meeting up with car 'A' than car 'B'.

snakeweasel

I am sure he's making a point but I am not completely sure what it is. That some people are such good drivers they will never be in an accident.

No the point I am trying to make is that the best safety equipment that a car can have is the driver. This is something you seem to be arguing with me about even though you also seem to be agreeing with. I am not saying that being a safe driver doesn't mean that you don't need other safety equipment, just that that equipment is secondary to good defensive driving. As I said its better to avoid then try to survive.

golic

Lets take your example weasel, - Car A and Car B are on the tollway. Both stop in the manual lanes to pay the attendant.

As they sit there, Car C, thinks he is in the I-pass lane and plows into the back of Car A/B. So, tell me why I am safer in Car B?

I refuse to believe, unless you can offer evidence to the contrary, that the engagement of behavior A is has a different result than behavior B when variable C is introduced equally.

driver100

that the engagement of behavior A is has a different result than behavior B when variable C is introduced equally.

I guess B would have seen car C coming and would have stomped on the gas pedal to avoid the accident.

snakeweasel

I have already addressed the rear end issue.

But lets say its car 'C' thats stopped at the toll booth the driver of car 'A' is much more likely to think he is in the I-pass lane.

Again I am not saying that you can dump the other safety features, just that the best is the driver. Nuff said?

You are safer in a car that is being driven safely that doesn't have all the latest safety features than you are in a recklessly driven car that has all the bells and whistles (unless its a tank).

sterlingdog

"I currently drive with seat belts on simple because the ragtop warning chime keeps chiming if I don't and it's very annoying."

Driver and golic will blast me out of here for telling you this. In your car and mine, the warning chime will stop after 1.5 miles or about 25 chimes. Also, if you will buckle the seat belt behind you before starting the car, you will hear no chimes at all. This is not true in all cars. My Explorer's warning chime will NEVER stop until you put on the seat belt.

Please don't get me wrong. I know that seat belts are important, and I am not the best driver because I am visually impaired. Then how do I know about the chimes? I have a shoulder and neck problem that is irritated by seat belts. While I don't wear seat belts while driving around the village, I do force myself to wear them on trips.

As for Princess Diana, I have seen several pictures of the Mercedes after the crash. It is hard to believe that she could have survived with or without seat belts. In addition to the drunken chauffeur, we are reminded of the raging paparazzi trying to catch them. Also keep in mind that Fhad's father has never been convinced that it was just a tragic accident. Even Di's brother said that the royal family was eager to find a way to get rid of her. We'll probably never have all of the answers to this loss of a beautiful, sweet, and smart young lady.

Richard

driver100

No the point I am trying to make is that the best safety equipment that a car can have is the driver. This is something you seem to be arguing with me about even though you also seem to be agreeing with. I am not saying that being a safe driver doesn't mean that you don't need other safety equipment, just that that equipment is secondary to good defensive driving. As I said its better to avoid then try to survive.

And, once again I agree, the driver is the most important factor in avoiding an accident. But, a good driver knows, he can make a mistake and others can make a mistake, and it is good to have as much back up as possible, to try to eliminate or minimize injuries to you and your passengers.
You might have survived one accident because you didn't have on a seatbelt, but your odds are really reduced that you could survive two accidents without a seatbelt. And, if you are such a good defensive driver, how did the first accident happen?

driver100

While I don't wear seat belts while driving around the village, I do force myself to wear them on trips.

Most accidents happen within 10 miles of home. The short trips are even more important to wear seat belts.
As for Princess Diana, I have seen several pictures of the Mercedes after the crash. It is hard to believe that she could have survived with or without seat belts.

In Europe they study and reconstruct accidents to see how they can improve the safety of cars. Ford and GM seem to like to cover up accidents exploding Pintos and Chev trucks, flipping Explorers). People have survived much worse accidents than Princess D's. There is an excellent chance she would have survived, the car is designed to crumple and absorb the impact, while still leaving a cage around her. Experts say she had a good chance of living, her chances of living without a seatbelt would be about zero.

Even Di's brother said that the royal family was eager to find a way to get rid of her

I don't believe in conspiracy theories unless there is some direct proof. I know about the space ships that are hidden, about the 3rd tower etc. I don't know how you make sure the driver is drunk and is going to crash into a bridge abbutment.

Quite a few people have died around here in the last year because they were riding their bike without a helmet. I saw guys in Florida riding motorcycles in Florida without a helmet.....I don't think there is a law there. This is beyond ridiculous. Do you know how easy it is to damage your brain with a simple bump of the head. Look up Natasha Richardson. It's unfortunate but it would be good to realize how fragile the human body is.

snakeweasel

Driver and golic will blast me out of here for telling you this. In your car and mine, the warning chime will stop after 1.5 miles or about 25 chimes.

Not sure thats the case on mine, I seemed to remember driving it for about 2 miles or so and the chiming didn't stop, got less frequent but didn't stop. Maybe I am remembering that wrong or maybe it was programed differently (it was a rental).

As for Lady Di (remember she lost the princess title when she and prince Chuck divorced) I don't believe to any of the conspiracy figures, the possible backlash if people found out that the royal family had anything to do with her death would be to much of a risk for them to take.

snakeweasel

Most accidents happen within 10 miles of home.

Thats simply because most driving is done within 10 miles of home. The reality of the situation is there are more accidents per mile the further you get from home (mostly due with being unfamiliar with your surroundings). As an example if 65% of your driving is within that 10 miles then you should have less than 65% of your accidents in that area. Now lets say 1% of your driving is more than 100 miles away from home you might have a 1.5-2% chance of an accident 100 miles or more away.

driver100

Most accidents happen within 10 miles of home.
Thats simply because most driving is done within 10 miles of home.

You are correct and I will not disagree about it.

I was using it for dramatic affect. The accident I had when the car went through the stop sign was 2 blocks from home, but I do agree....most driving is within 10 miles of home, so liklihood of an accident is much greater. But, maybe that is even a stronger arguement to wear your seatbelt for those small trips....Oh no, here we go again. :sick:

houdini1

One day I was reminding my then 5 year old son to buckle his seat belt. He said that we were only going to the store. I told him something like 90% of all auto accidents happen within a mile of where you live. His reply, let's move !! :surprise:

golic

You are safer in a car that is being driven safely that doesn't have all the latest safety features than you are in a recklessly driven car that has all the bells and whistles (unless its a tank).

I don't think anyone is disputing this fact. You can do many things to drive your car as safely as possible, which will decrease the likelihood of an accident.

But, what is not clear, is why go through all this training and preparedness to be safe and then decide not to take 2 seconds to click on another safety feature???

And ignoring all the safety argument. In Illinois, all front seat occupants are required to be protected by a safety belt or safety restraint system, regardless of age. Passengers under age 16 regardless of location in the vehicle must be protected by a safety belt or restraint system

So, be careful driving around in that new convertible before you get ticketed!!

golic

And then there is this..
http://ehs.okstate.edu/KOPYKIT/seatbelt.htm

sterlingdog

It's interesting how my generation lived through the '40's, '50's, and '60's without seat belts. Naturally, there were accidents, but were there that many more deaths? The inventor of seat belts would want you to think so, along with the government.

Richard

sterlingdog

The royal family may take the title away; the public never will.

Richard

fezo

Count me in the seatbelt crowd. I used them already pretty religiously then in February of 1993 I was driving my 85 Accord and an old gent ran a stop sign and sending said Accord sideways. Enough force to bend the frame. I was pitching suddenly forward and as I'm thinking "I'm going to hit the windshield!" the belt grabbed me and plopped me back in the driver's seat. Well, actually it just kept me there rather than putting me back.

I was pretty banged up though no broken bones and the car gave its life for me (too bad - nice car).

sterlingdog

"...let's move!"

Out of the mouths of babes... That was really cute. I often think that we should listen to the children in order to have a better world.

Richard