Talk about an oddball Accord! An EXL with Navi and a five speed! I think 2008 was the last year a five speed was available in an EXL. I know I never sold one in fact in the 14 years I sold Hondas I MAY have sold three or four 5 speed Accords in total out of the hundreds I sold!
Interesting to note that the co-author of the brake article was Manager of Chassis & Brake Development at the Hyundai / Kia Technical Center for five years.
Well, for starters, its probably not worth what you think it is, especially with the stick (is this a 4-cyl or 6? Coupe or sedan?). Secondly, if you like it, no reason why you shouldn't keep it a little longer. I'd suggest up to 95k miles would be a pretty good spot. Gives you more time to save up and probably wouldn't change the value much.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Interesting to note that the co-author of the brake article was Manager of Chassis & Brake Development at the Hyundai / Kia Technical Center for five years.
Yea that is real interesting that he didn't stress the correct removal of the caliper and the caliper support so that the support could be properly cleaned and the pad shims (bearings) installed against a clean surface to ensure proper movement of the pads. Then again it could be a result of the limited exposure to the real world demands that technicians face especially in the rust belt. That would also explain why the routine didn't account for checking for rust jacking of the rotor on the hub assembly causing run-out. Nor did it address how corrosion of the rotor cooling fins contributes to uneven pad to rotor material transfer resulting in brake pulsations, as well as rotor thickness variation which results in a completely different kind of brake pulsation. What that article describes is a pad slap and that would lead to the faulty brake job that you were so worried about.
Well to be fair the article does suggest going to a professional if you need one. Obviously this was an economy/basic job they were illustrating.
Sometimes "a man's gotta do what a man's gotta do", as John Wayne said (Was that from "The Searchers"?) I'm certainly not going to pay a shop $1400 to do pads and rotors on my Mini Cooper. That's 1/4 the value of the car! And it's not rocket science, doc. A person who is careful and diligent can do it.
Besides, I've got plenty of gripes from "Mini Specialists" with all kinds of fancy diplomas on their wall. This motivates me to do some DIY.
Interesting to note that the co-author of the brake article was Manager of Chassis & Brake Development at the Hyundai / Kia Technical Center for five years.
Tin whiskers has been a pet theory of mine for a while, but I thought the NASA study dismissed it as a cause of SUA.
As per the NHTSA review..... They mention "a particular kind of resistive short circuit" Page 8 executive overview.
Those would be the tin whiskers. Tin whiskers are a potential cause of the transient failures that are described in the report to cause throttle opening errors of about 5%, which are well within the ability of the brakes to stop the vehicle, they are also potentially to blame for many of the failsafe (limp-in) modes that occur.
> loss of communication between the modules in the car.
I think redundancy on that level will be cheap and easy to implement. And I still think self repair will happen too. For your busted bus, think self replication. (preposterousuniverse.com)
We talked about this before. The ONLY way a computer could do more than they do today would require another complete wiring harness solely for the purpose of allowing the computer to also measure the voltage at each end of every wire. You are talking about doubling (tripling) the complexity of the circuitry and software. It just isn't practical to have every measurement or computer decision crosschecked by another module. Even worse if you tried the result would be more frequent fault detection and lower customer satisfaction.
I never bought the tin whiskers theory because it required that the throttle, brake and ignition systems all fail at once, and then all miraculously fix themselves. Remember Occam's Razor (I know, not the best rule of them, but still-----"Hmmm....too big a shoe OR multiple simultaneous non-reproducible (without cheating) failures"?
There were many "experts" paraded by the media in front of the cameras who all made the same fundamental mistake. They didn't confirm the reported issue and follow a disciplined routine to the cause of the event. They simply started with an assumption and then filled in details that would result in their assumption. Tin whiskers are a real issue that cause random failures and often cause limp in strategies. They of course don't get to cause an unintended acceleration because the system fail-safes first.
Tin whiskers has been a pet theory of mine for a while, but I thought the NASA study dismissed it as a cause of SUA.
As per the NHTSA review..... They mention "a particular kind of resistive short circuit" Page 8 executive overview.
Those would be the tin whiskers. Tin whiskers are a potential cause of the transient failures that are described in the report to cause throttle opening errors of about 5%, which are well within the ability of the brakes to stop the vehicle, they are also potentially to blame for many of the failsafe (limp-in) modes that occur.
Cool, so I was right back in 2010. Being bearded, I really prefer "whisker shorts" though.
I never bought the tin whiskers theory because it required that the throttle, brake and ignition systems all fail at once, and then all miraculously fix themselves. Remember Occam's Razor (I know, not the best rule of them, but still-----"Hmmm....too big a shoe OR multiple simultaneous non-reproducible (without cheating) failures"?
Big shoe hitting both pedals at the same time, that was the problem with the Audi 5000 years ago. These discussions should also include this one. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_cheese_model
Well, for starters, its probably not worth what you think it is, especially with the stick (is this a 4-cyl or 6? Coupe or sedan?). Secondly, if you like it, no reason why you shouldn't keep it a little longer. I'd suggest up to 95k miles would be a pretty good spot. Gives you more time to save up and probably wouldn't change the value much.
4 cylinder sedan. Edmunds tool says trade-in is c. 10k now, but perhaps it's off...
Steve wrote "Cool, so I was right back in 2010. Being bearded, I really prefer "whisker shorts" though."
Well not exactly. The redundancy in the circuit logic would prevent a runaway because there is a tolerance for how far the two sensors were allowed to disagree. Exceed that and the system shuts down which is why whiskers would result in limp in mode if it happened.
For all of the discussion there I didn't see if anyone actually explained why they went to electronic throttle control in the first place. Today the PCM will open the throttle all the way while you are cruising down the highway and then between variable cam timing and variable valve lift the engine maintains cruising speed while a reduction in pumping losses increases fuel economy. Today the throttle is little more than a safety device.
Well, for starters, its probably not worth what you think it is, especially with the stick (is this a 4-cyl or 6? Coupe or sedan?). Secondly, if you like it, no reason why you shouldn't keep it a little longer. I'd suggest up to 95k miles would be a pretty good spot. Gives you more time to save up and probably wouldn't change the value much.
4 cylinder sedan. Edmunds tool says trade-in is c. 10k now, but perhaps it's off...
Most people won't care about the car having Navi but they WILL care about the stick.
It's always possible that the right buyer will come along.
Late '80s Ford Tempo/Mercury Topaz cars had a UA recall that was due to faulty components, not user error. http://www.autosafety.org/ford-tempo I owned a Topaz that had the problem a few times. Pretty scary to be riding the brakes to keep your speed down on the highway.
Well to be fair the article does suggest going to a professional if you need one. Obviously this was an economy/basic job they were illustrating. [..]
Let me introduce you left-coasters to the rust belt routine for brake jobs... At around year six, my cars will have ~ 70k on them. The front brake pads will be worn out. Time for a brake job!
Traditionally, a proper brake job requires several steps: - remove pads - remove caliper - remove rotor - resurface rotor - measure rotor thickness - pronounce rotor too thin and throw away - install new rotor. - install caliper - install pads - charge eye-watering amount of $$$.
I prefer another method: - remove pads. - gently force pistons into calipers. - ignore rotors. - replace pads with $20 autozone "lifetime" parts. - have a beer. Elapsed time 45 minutes.
The new pads will last ~ 30k miles, at which point one of the calipers is guaranteed to be frozen and I replace everything in sight, generously bleed the brakes, and now i'm good for another 70k. And hey! -- the pads are free from the "lifetime" warranty!
I don't pay much attention to rotors either unless they are warped of course. I always change out the pads somewhat prematurely and don't ride 'em to the bitter end. A few little grooves isn't going to hurt anything. In fact, if you think about it, once the pads bed you should end up with MORE surface area from the corrugated rotors
Both my BMW dealer and Mazda dealers don't automatically ask to replace the rotors. Last year when the rear brakes were serviced on the X3 and MS3 I was told that the rotor thickness was in spec- no need to change them. I don't know if it is still true, but with street driven Bimmers you used to be able to go through two sets of pads before you needed to replace the rotors.
Mine: 1995 318ti Club Sport-2020 C43-1996 Speed Triple Challenge Cup Replica
Wife's: 2021 Sahara 4xe
Son's: 2018 330i xDrive
Having lived my entire life on the West Coast I don't know what rust is, really.
Back when I ran a busy shop once in a great while an east coast rust bucket would come in and the guys who worked on them hated to. We had rusted brake cables and bolts that would break off etc.
We were spoiled and we knew it.
Labor rates should be much higher on rusted up cars!
[..] used to be able to go through two sets of pads before you needed to replace the rotors.
My point was that here in rust country, there is no point in trying for longevity on brake components, as the calipers will surely need to be replaced, which means "replaced in pairs," of course, at which point one is well advised to go for new rotors & pads as well.
In California, I'm sure I'd do it by the book and save money in the process. And the calipers would last longer than 90k miles, I bet..
Ha ha steine, my daughters Sonata just got one of those $20 brake jobs, including the beer afterwards. Years ago, I helped a friend moved from here in Wisconsin to California. We needed the exhaust system repaired on his Monte Carlo when we got there and the mechanic was cursing about the "damn northern cars."
2012 Mustang Premium, 2013 Lincoln MKX Elite, 2007 Mitsubishi Outlander.
Just a glitch? A sign of more troubles to come? Last night GM suspended its support for aftermarket shops to have access to the theft deterrent and key programming systems. http://www.nastf.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=1
Without this access a shop that has already made significant investments in tools, training for their techs and software cannot complete repairs that might include the replacement of a PCM, a body computer on some models without having to sublet that portion of the repair to the dealer.
Without this access a shop that has already made significant investments in tools, training for their techs and software cannot complete repairs that might include the replacement of a PCM, a body computer on some models without having to sublet that portion of the repair to the dealer.
Sounds like it's a temporary glitch, not a permanent refusal for service.
"GM has suspended access to their key codes due to technical problems. No date or time is indicated for restoration of this service. (6:51 pm, March 27, 2015)"
Time will tell. I was supposed to go do a flash program and set-up for a shop this morning that I had to call and cancel. To their customer who expected to get their car back today this is a major issue. The shop now has to have the car towed and pay the dealer to have this done which is considerably more expensive than it could have been done for.
So I'm helping a friend because his Toyota pickup won't start--he just has dash lights so it's a no crank/no start situation. It's a stickshift so I check the clutch pedal switch and there's no voltage to it. I check all the fuses and pull them out, no problems there. I check the 80 AMP fuse in the underhood relay box. No problem there. I bypass the ignition switch with a remote starter to the starter solenoid and it cranks.
So, start scratching my head, thinking this has to be an ignition switch problem . But then, as I'm putting the clutch switch back together, I see a wire from it going to this kind of credit card-looking device that has an insertable printed curcuit that you can push in or pull out.
So I pull out that circuit and it's corroded to all hell. Clean it up, boom! Car starts.
Doing some research I come to find out that this little card was what you got if you opted out of the factory alarm system. It's a substitute for the other half of the factory alarm connector.
LOL, not yet. Now that you found the problem you still need someone to come along and say something like" Why did it take you so long to find that? That's so simple you should have looked there first."
My diagnostic skills stop at around year 2000 Well sometimes a VOM can get you there on modern cars but when they start throwing wave forms at me for crank sensor checks, my eyes glaze over.
Thank you qb, for the "attaboy". I needed that!
By the way, Doc, did you read that question from a user about how he says that both his crank and cam sensor show no output? 2001 Ford 250 Super Duty. I was under the impression that these sensors are magnetically induced and produce their own signal? How can both fail at once? Seems like he's doing something wrong here.
There are a number of possible causes for the signals missing not the least of which could be wiring harness issue that is grounding the signal out, or even an internal PCM problem. Most trouble trees make the tech spend a lot of time testing for "SOG" (shorts, opens, and grounds) and it can be pretty labor intensive at times. Ford also likes to use a breakout box and the trouble trees are written so that the steps are fairly easy to perform one it is installed, although that is easier said than done all by itself.
If I was to look at this I'd start back at the beginning by pulling codes, and by paying attention to the PCM's command of the fuel pump relay operation. The PCM should command the relay on at key on and then it should turn off after two seconds. Then start cranking the engine and the relay should turn back on which would mean that the PCM actually see's the crankshaft sensor signal in spite of the attempt by the OP to measure it. Now if the relay does NOT turn back on then pinpoint testing of the crank sensor circuit would include disconnecting the PCM connector and making measurements from that point, which would include testing to see of the harness is grounded which could be caused by a pinch or abrasion. If the signal is present with the harness disconnected, but you lose it with the harness connected to the PCM then the PCM itself becomes suspect.
Thanks, I'll rely that info with a citation from you. I was also tempted to think defective PCM because of the multiple failures but if I were in his shoes I'd certainly examine the wiring very carefully.
Actually those myths have an interesting history, going back to just after WW II. There was such a demand for automobiles that you could sell anything on 4 wheels. Plenty of con men got into the auto biz after the war for that very reason---a fast buck. The sullied reputation of auto mechanics is only now recovering. I think that technology pioneers like Henry Ford and the Wright brothers also fostered the myth of the intuitive, aw shucks "shade tree" mechanic in greasy coveralls who used safety pins and junk parts to perform acts of wizardry---a very conspicuous part of American culture. But it was a myth---these people were all very well trained in their mechanical skills and geniuses in their own right. They trained at a time when America had a good apprentice system. Even Walter Chrysler apprenticed as a railroad mechanic.
Interesting. I changed mechanics a couple of years ago largely due to what I perceived as upselling and the place generally getting too big for my own comfort.
Found a one guy shop very well versed in the sorts of cars I tend to end up in and has some real fun personality to boot.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
My newest "guy" since I moved here is a younger guy with a couple of techs working with him. Certificates all over the walls but you don't want to hang out in the shop any longer than you have to. 3 chairs and some car mags, no coffee. No shuttle service either.
He seems to specialize in trucks and 4x4s, but seems happy enough to work on the Grand Caravan. Shop rate is $80 so he's on a par with lots of dealers. No upsales though.
Time and again there are posts on the forums about the problems people encounter with getting vehicle problems solved. One would think that improving the technician talent pool would be high on the dealers list of things to do in order to solve that. Instead we have dealer groups that self train with stuff like this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YY4jQdPS4JQ&index=1&list=PLzTmEBu7ZltPJPESMbFz4o9XMSf2HEuWA
To be the technician that the consumer needs the shop to have takes decades of hard work and study and there is no finish line because of all of the changes and the robotic technology that make today's cars the best that has ever been. That top technician doing warranty diagnostics in most dealerships has to be three to five times more efficient than an average technician does in order to make a decent paycheck. The more difficult that the work is, the better compensated the technician should be but that isn't how they run their shops. That's the foundation for why "the fear of the tech" exists and instead of addressing the real problem notice how the answer seems to be that they just need a full stable of warm bodies.
Don't expect anything to change anytime soon when it comes to needing qualified technicians.
You should see the responses to this article in some fixed operations managers forums. For all they try to impress the public as to how they can service the cars, the reality is they bleed technician talent faster than it can be replaced and they turn around and blame the techs for the problems. You should see thread about techs wearing shorts since the temperatures are breaking 100f. I wrote in and asked them why haven't they simply installed AC for the shop? Doing that makes the attire a non-issue. You'd think that they would realize how physical comfort for the technicians would increase both productivity as well as accuracy on top of just what it could do for morale but most of them can't get past the cost aspect of it. There are some shops that have figured it out, but they are few and far between.
Sounds like there are a lot of adversarial shops out there.
For all the "confessions of a" stories that have ever been written the work environment that the people in the trade deal with has been totally ignored. If no one ever asks why and looks for the real reasons for the problems the consumers experience, nothing substantial will ever change.
I'm pretty happy with my mechanic here. Did have one major oops. Replaced the clutch on my 04 Mazda6, admittedly because I said to. It was fading but still had life. Months later the catalytic converters (4 of them) clogged solid. Oh, well. That was time to punt.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
No, it wasn't and he feels terrible about it. I did a few other things to it at the time to prepare the car for the long haul but it was not meant to be.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
Here we go again . Mr Lehto, who is a lemon law lawyer decided that he needed to give advice to the consumers to try and protect them from the evil repair shops.
Now of course from that essay you get to have all of the obligatory comments. As you go through the comments you will see how he has to answer some of them in a fashion that tries to say that all shops aren't bad and that turning a profit isn't wrong. But then there are specific ones, such as how he researches prices online and how "his shop" never charges more than he can buy something online.
The reality is shops can buy things online too and that wholesale price they get there is the exact same price that those websites sell to any consumer. So in a nutshell he is saying that shops shouldn't have a mark-up on parts and some of the responses do indeed go there. The problem is if shops only charged labor, the rates would be well beyond what most would expect since a parts profit is currently a customary part of the retail business outline. Any shop that would dare to change to a labor only platform would fail to survive as a business no matter how good the techs are, or honest the shop owner is. Consumers wouldn't waste a second and not start shopping around for labor rates if they encountered someone trying to make it on the labor alone.
It was also very troubling that Mr. Lehto mentions in another response that "labor times don't come out of thin air". It was pretty convenient on his part that he refused to post my response asking him to show and explain where dealer labor time operations really do come from. (Hint, they don't come from legitimate time studies of a tech doing a given repair.) He also censored a response that challenged his position on whether shops do work at no-charge for the time invested or not. I can personally attest to thousands of unpaid hours during my career as an employee and the majority of those hours resulted in a correct diagnosis and repair.
It's pretty clear he gets to set the rules of how everyone gets to play in his sandbox. I wonder if he has the nerve to play in an equal forum.........
I see he hasn't come by yet so I'll go ahead and get started without him. One of his arguments with anyone that doesn't agree with him starts with the need to find anything that is incorrect in what he wrote. He seems to believe that everything he wrote can stand on its own and is unchallengeable. Let's start with this one. "Charging for unnecessary repairs. I often hear that a mechanic diagnosed a problem, repaired it and - surprise, surprise - the problem was still there. They then re-diagnose it as a different problem and repair that. Sometimes, this repeats as the mechanic conducts the Ship of Theseus paradox in real life."
The ship of Theseus paradox as described by this article in Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus is based on the argument that if EVERY PART of a ship is replaced is it really the same ship when they are done? A modern day example might be used on the USS Constitution http://www.ussconstitutionmuseum.org/collections-history/faq/#original which by the way the answer is that some ten to fifteen percent of the original ship remains. In that context it is a fair argument that the original ship doesn't exist anymore, the problem is in Mr. Lehto's attempt to stretch basic auto repair into that comparison.
Lets take his example literally and imagine anyone replacing every part on a car. What do you suppose that would cost, two to three times the purchase price of a new one? Imagine spending $45,000 to 60,000 for a $23,000 Camry, VBG.... To accept his statement that is the magnitude that you have to go to when he might really be referring to a given repair event where a car that needed a battery turned around and then needed an alternator.
There is another dynamic at play when it comes to today's automobiles and the diagnostics and repairs that they sometimes need especially when it comes to the emissions controls. The progressive nature of the computerized systems means that the tests that the computer runs usually have enabling and limiting criteria. For example if the computer detects a problem in one system, it can and will block any testing of another. A simple example of that would be if the PCM detects a crankshaft sensor signal or circuit issue. That problem will block the misfire test from running. A tech when presented the vehicle would easily identify and solve the crankshaft sensor issue which then allows the computer to run the misfire diagnostic tests. In this example that could result in the computer then generating a misfire code and that would actually be the system operating correctly. In the real world the tech didn't do anything wrong if he/she addressed the crankshaft sensor issue and stopped if there were no other identifiable issues at that time. In fact without any symptoms during the final test drive it would be very questionable behavior to suggest any additional repairs beyond scheduled maintenance as required, which by the way Mr. Lehto felt he needed to address as simply joy-riding and not explaining that there is a difference between the activities.
"Joyriding your car. This goes on more often than you want to know. I’ve represented clients whose cars were destroyed by repair shop joyriders after work had been performed. And other examples are in the headlines all the time. Does every mechanic joyride the car after a repair? No. But this is one of the things we are really learning more about with the advent of dash cameras. The problem is that if you catch the mechanic doing this and your car is undamaged, it is hard to get compensated for it."
Can you imagine how the conversation with him will go as it is explained that diagnostic time to road test and prove that a repair event has completely corrected a given vehicle issue after the repair is not only reasonable it is justifiably billable time. The fact that most shops drop the ball here and don't charge for the time actually contributes to the majority of the times that a customer gets to discover that some problem still remains after a given repair. Most shops/techs don 't road test enough and that causes many of the situations where a customer has to take a car back to a shop. Mr. Lehto did his best to try and suggest that it is wrong to road test the vehicle after repairs, meanwhile it is wrong to not take the car for a solid diagnostic road test after repairs before it is returned to the customer. Don't you just love these kinds of contradictions?
Comments
Rare car indeed!
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Sometimes "a man's gotta do what a man's gotta do", as John Wayne said (Was that from "The Searchers"?) I'm certainly not going to pay a shop $1400 to do pads and rotors on my Mini Cooper. That's 1/4 the value of the car! And it's not rocket science, doc. A person who is careful and diligent can do it.
Besides, I've got plenty of gripes from "Mini Specialists" with all kinds of fancy diplomas on their wall. This motivates me to do some DIY.
Those would be the tin whiskers. Tin whiskers are a potential cause of the transient failures that are described in the report to cause throttle opening errors of about 5%, which are well within the ability of the brakes to stop the vehicle, they are also potentially to blame for many of the failsafe (limp-in) modes that occur.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Well not exactly. The redundancy in the circuit logic would prevent a runaway because there is a tolerance for how far the two sensors were allowed to disagree. Exceed that and the system shuts down which is why whiskers would result in limp in mode if it happened.
For all of the discussion there I didn't see if anyone actually explained why they went to electronic throttle control in the first place. Today the PCM will open the throttle all the way while you are cruising down the highway and then between variable cam timing and variable valve lift the engine maintains cruising speed while a reduction in pumping losses increases fuel economy. Today the throttle is little more than a safety device.
It's always possible that the right buyer will come along.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
A dealer will see that stick and realize he will have a car that'll appeal to few buyers.
They will pay accordingly for it and for good reason.
A private sale is the way to go with this one for sure!
At around year six, my cars will have ~ 70k on them.
The front brake pads will be worn out. Time for a brake job!
Traditionally, a proper brake job requires several steps:
- remove pads
- remove caliper
- remove rotor
- resurface rotor
- measure rotor thickness
- pronounce rotor too thin and throw away
- install new rotor.
- install caliper
- install pads
- charge eye-watering amount of $$$.
I prefer another method:
- remove pads.
- gently force pistons into calipers.
- ignore rotors.
- replace pads with $20 autozone "lifetime" parts.
- have a beer.
Elapsed time 45 minutes.
The new pads will last ~ 30k miles, at which point one of the calipers is guaranteed to be frozen and I replace everything in sight, generously bleed the brakes, and now i'm good for another 70k. And hey! -- the pads are free from the "lifetime" warranty!
Cheers -Mathias
Mine: 1995 318ti Club Sport-2020 C43-1996 Speed Triple Challenge Cup Replica
Wife's: 2021 Sahara 4xe
Son's: 2018 330i xDrive
Back when I ran a busy shop once in a great while an east coast rust bucket would come in and the guys who worked on them hated to. We had rusted brake cables and bolts that would break off etc.
We were spoiled and we knew it.
Labor rates should be much higher on rusted up cars!
In California, I'm sure I'd do it by the book and save money in the process. And the calipers would last longer than 90k miles, I bet..
http://www.nastf.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=1
Without this access a shop that has already made significant investments in tools, training for their techs and software cannot complete repairs that might include the replacement of a PCM, a body computer on some models without having to sublet that portion of the repair to the dealer.
"GM has suspended access to their key codes due to technical problems. No date or time is indicated for restoration of this service. (6:51 pm, March 27, 2015)"
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
So, start scratching my head, thinking this has to be an ignition switch problem . But then, as I'm putting the clutch switch back together, I see a wire from it going to this kind of credit card-looking device that has an insertable printed curcuit that you can push in or pull out.
So I pull out that circuit and it's corroded to all hell. Clean it up, boom! Car starts.
Doing some research I come to find out that this little card was what you got if you opted out of the factory alarm system. It's a substitute for the other half of the factory alarm connector.
No wonder mechanics go nuts!
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Thank you qb, for the "attaboy". I needed that!
By the way, Doc, did you read that question from a user about how he says that both his crank and cam sensor show no output? 2001 Ford 250 Super Duty. I was under the impression that these sensors are magnetically induced and produce their own signal? How can both fail at once? Seems like he's doing something wrong here.
If I was to look at this I'd start back at the beginning by pulling codes, and by paying attention to the PCM's command of the fuel pump relay operation. The PCM should command the relay on at key on and then it should turn off after two seconds. Then start cranking the engine and the relay should turn back on which would mean that the PCM actually see's the crankshaft sensor signal in spite of the attempt by the OP to measure it. Now if the relay does NOT turn back on then pinpoint testing of the crank sensor circuit would include disconnecting the PCM connector and making measurements from that point, which would include testing to see of the harness is grounded which could be caused by a pinch or abrasion. If the signal is present with the harness disconnected, but you lose it with the harness connected to the PCM then the PCM itself becomes suspect.
http://jmcautomotiveequipment.com/blog/5-auto-technician-stereotypes-that-need-to-go/#.VYMBOPn5pdk.linkedin
Found a one guy shop very well versed in the sorts of cars I tend to end up in and has some real fun personality to boot.
He seems to specialize in trucks and 4x4s, but seems happy enough to work on the Grand Caravan. Shop rate is $80 so he's on a par with lots of dealers. No upsales though.
To be the technician that the consumer needs the shop to have takes decades of hard work and study and there is no finish line because of all of the changes and the robotic technology that make today's cars the best that has ever been. That top technician doing warranty diagnostics in most dealerships has to be three to five times more efficient than an average technician does in order to make a decent paycheck. The more difficult that the work is, the better compensated the technician should be but that isn't how they run their shops. That's the foundation for why "the fear of the tech" exists and instead of addressing the real problem notice how the answer seems to be that they just need a full stable of warm bodies.
Don't expect anything to change anytime soon when it comes to needing qualified technicians.
I'm pretty happy with my mechanic here. Did have one major oops. Replaced the clutch on my 04 Mazda6, admittedly because I said to. It was fading but still had life. Months later the catalytic converters (4 of them) clogged solid. Oh, well. That was time to punt.
http://carbuying.jalopnik.com/the-question-was-rhetorical-i-don-t-think-a-shop-can-c-1718877063
Now of course from that essay you get to have all of the obligatory comments. As you go through the comments you will see how he has to answer some of them in a fashion that tries to say that all shops aren't bad and that turning a profit isn't wrong. But then there are specific ones, such as how he researches prices online and how "his shop" never charges more than he can buy something online.
The reality is shops can buy things online too and that wholesale price they get there is the exact same price that those websites sell to any consumer. So in a nutshell he is saying that shops shouldn't have a mark-up on parts and some of the responses do indeed go there. The problem is if shops only charged labor, the rates would be well beyond what most would expect since a parts profit is currently a customary part of the retail business outline. Any shop that would dare to change to a labor only platform would fail to survive as a business no matter how good the techs are, or honest the shop owner is. Consumers wouldn't waste a second and not start shopping around for labor rates if they encountered someone trying to make it on the labor alone.
It was also very troubling that Mr. Lehto mentions in another response that "labor times don't come out of thin air". It was pretty convenient on his part that he refused to post my response asking him to show and explain where dealer labor time operations really do come from. (Hint, they don't come from legitimate time studies of a tech doing a given repair.) He also censored a response that challenged his position on whether shops do work at no-charge for the time invested or not. I can personally attest to thousands of unpaid hours during my career as an employee and the majority of those hours resulted in a correct diagnosis and repair.
It's pretty clear he gets to set the rules of how everyone gets to play in his sandbox. I wonder if he has the nerve to play in an equal forum.........
"Charging for unnecessary repairs. I often hear that a mechanic diagnosed a problem, repaired it and - surprise, surprise - the problem was still there. They then re-diagnose it as a different problem and repair that. Sometimes, this repeats as the mechanic conducts the Ship of Theseus paradox in real life."
The ship of Theseus paradox as described by this article in Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus
is based on the argument that if EVERY PART of a ship is replaced is it really the same ship when they are done? A modern day example might be used on the USS Constitution http://www.ussconstitutionmuseum.org/collections-history/faq/#original which by the way the answer is that some ten to fifteen percent of the original ship remains. In that context it is a fair argument that the original ship doesn't exist anymore, the problem is in Mr. Lehto's attempt to stretch basic auto repair into that comparison.
Lets take his example literally and imagine anyone replacing every part on a car. What do you suppose that would cost, two to three times the purchase price of a new one? Imagine spending $45,000 to 60,000 for a $23,000 Camry, VBG.... To accept his statement that is the magnitude that you have to go to when he might really be referring to a given repair event where a car that needed a battery turned around and then needed an alternator.
There is another dynamic at play when it comes to today's automobiles and the diagnostics and repairs that they sometimes need especially when it comes to the emissions controls. The progressive nature of the computerized systems means that the tests that the computer runs usually have enabling and limiting criteria. For example if the computer detects a problem in one system, it can and will block any testing of another. A simple example of that would be if the PCM detects a crankshaft sensor signal or circuit issue. That problem will block the misfire test from running. A tech when presented the vehicle would easily identify and solve the crankshaft sensor issue which then allows the computer to run the misfire diagnostic tests. In this example that could result in the computer then generating a misfire code and that would actually be the system operating correctly. In the real world the tech didn't do anything wrong if he/she addressed the crankshaft sensor issue and stopped if there were no other identifiable issues at that time. In fact without any symptoms during the final test drive it would be very questionable behavior to suggest any additional repairs beyond scheduled maintenance as required, which by the way Mr. Lehto felt he needed to address as simply joy-riding and not explaining that there is a difference between the activities.
"Joyriding your car. This goes on more often than you want to know. I’ve represented clients whose cars were destroyed by repair shop joyriders after work had been performed. And other examples are in the headlines all the time. Does every mechanic joyride the car after a repair? No. But this is one of the things we are really learning more about with the advent of dash cameras. The problem is that if you catch the mechanic doing this and your car is undamaged, it is hard to get compensated for it."
Can you imagine how the conversation with him will go as it is explained that diagnostic time to road test and prove that a repair event has completely corrected a given vehicle issue after the repair is not only reasonable it is justifiably billable time. The fact that most shops drop the ball here and don't charge for the time actually contributes to the majority of the times that a customer gets to discover that some problem still remains after a given repair. Most shops/techs don 't road test enough and that causes many of the situations where a customer has to take a car back to a shop. Mr. Lehto did his best to try and suggest that it is wrong to road test the vehicle after repairs, meanwhile it is wrong to not take the car for a solid diagnostic road test after repairs before it is returned to the customer. Don't you just love these kinds of contradictions?