Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Most popular vehicles
Popular New Cars
- New Acura MDX
- New Acura RDX
- New Audi Q5
- New BMW 3 Series
- New BMW X3
- New Buick Enclave
- New Cadillac Escalade
- New Chevrolet Equinox
- New Chrysler 300
- New Dodge Challenger
- New Ford Edge
- New Ford Escape
- New Ford Expedition
- New Ford Explorer
- New Ford F-150
- New Ford Focus
- New Ford Mustang
- New Honda Accord
- New Honda Civic
- New Honda CR-V
- New Honda Fit
- New Honda Odyssey
- New Honda Pilot
- New Hyundai Elantra
- New Hyundai Santa Fe
- New Hyundai Sonata
- New Hyundai Tucson
- New Jeep Compass
- New Jeep Grand Cherokee
- New Jeep Wrangler
- New Mazda 3
- New Mazda 6
- New Mazda CX-5
- New Nissan Altima
- New Nissan Maxima
- New Nissan Rogue
- New Porsche Cayenne
- New Ram 1500
- New Subaru Crosstrek
- New Subaru Forester
- New Subaru Impreza
- New Subaru Outback
- New Tesla Model S
- New Tesla Model X
- New Toyota 4Runner
- New Toyota Camry
- New Toyota Corolla
- New Toyota Highlander
- New Toyota Prius
- New Toyota RAV4
- New Toyota Sienna
- New Toyota Tacoma
- New Volkswagen Jetta
- New Volvo XC60
- New Volvo XC90
Popular Used Sedans
- Used BMW 5 Series
- Used Chevrolet Impala
- Used Chevrolet Malibu
- Used Chrysler 200
- Used Dodge Charger
- Used Ford Fusion
- Used Ford Taurus
- Used Honda Accord
- Used Honda Civic
- Used Hyundai Elantra
- Used Hyundai Sonata
- Used Tesla Model S
- Used Toyota Camry
- Used Toyota Corolla
- Used Volkswagen Jetta
Popular Used SUVs
- Used Acura MDX
- Used Acura RDX
- Used Ford Edge
- Used Ford Explorer
- Used Honda CR-V
- Used Honda Pilot
- Used Hyundai Santa Fe
- Used Jeep Compass
- Used Lincoln Navigator
- Used Mazda CX-5
- Used Nissan Rogue
- Used Subaru Crosstrek
- Used Subaru Forester
- Used Tesla Model X
- Used Volvo XC90
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
But you know how cheap I am. I'd buy a used Prius EV (resale is the pits for EVs), and whack your low estimate in half. And that's not counting all the time I'll save by welding the hood shut.
$12k a year for taxes, tires and rental. That's a bit under your high $400k estimate over 30 years.
12K x 30 =$360K, that's close enough for a real world number and with a Volt you wouldn't need to rent a gasser, just buy some when needed.
I'd buy a used Prius EV (resale is the pits for EVs),
There are a lot of reasons for that, repairs are projected to rival the cost of full replacement. Go ahead and weld the hood shut, everything simply comes out the bottom anyway.
(ah, nevermind, I see you are pretty much doing exactly that).
General Motors, John Deere want to make tinkering, self-repair illegal (extremetech.com)
John Deere is the Apple of tractors.
For those who want to automate their plowing with GPS steering, there's Linux.
Back in the day Texas Instruments sold a cheap calculator (~$10 iirc). You could pop the cover and drill a hole in the right spot to access a "hidden" button. That button (memory?) turned your TI into the next better model and saved you $10.
That's what the Deere drivers want to do - access the "hidden" power of the engine without having to pay a bunch more for the "same" engine.
Everything else about this subject is simply parroting and a distraction from what EFF really wants.
Some of their other targets are found under topics like this one.
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/04/congress-stop-trying-limit-effs-ability-challenge-patents
You have to ask yourself who or whom benefits when patents are challenged, and who ultimately loses?
Don't underestimate some peoples need to create a problem so that they can be seen as part of the solution.
"It's just a myth that the manufacturers are the only people who can make improvements," he said. "That's why maintaining that choice is really important."
Automakers to gearheads: Stop repairing cars (autoblog.com)
Autel has managed to make accessing the PATS system possible without licensing, registration, a locksmiths ID, nor any form of cross checking and historical record of the event. That means the only history of access to the PATS system on a given vehicle is by those who have stepped up and taken a professional approach. Autel has made it possible for someone to go in after us, compromise the system and there is no record that they did so which would have all of the scrutiny should a vehicle be stolen go right back to the shop that actually approached this need for the customer securely and correctly. It's funny how EFF say's that they want us to be able to service the customers cars and at the same time turn right around and leave us hanging like that. The thing is there are many more functions across a number of manufacturers that should be carried out securely that have been compromised due to that kind of tampering.
http://www.law360.com/articles/582278/ford-sues-car-equipment-co-for-hacking-copying-database
You can also access the court filing through this next link. Here is the entire 19 page filing.
https://ia801404.us.archive.org/3/items/gov.uscourts.mied.295187/gov.uscourts.mied.295187.1.0.pdf
Time and again we see people raise questions about the ethics surrounding auto repair, and here we have a tool company that is profiting from the sales of software that they don't legally own. That software gives anyone who buys their tool access to sensitive systems that are supposed to protect the consumer's investment. The right approach to service those systems is a considerable expense for the shops and technicians because it takes more than just the tool and the software. It also takes extra training to go with the tools and it takes holding ones 'self to a high ethical standard to ensure that nothing bad happens to someone else's property. The access to this kind of software and tool support without such ethics should have everyone (consumers) deeply concerned, and maybe they would be if someone stepped up and explained what is really going on. The cheap tools aren't helping the consumer in the long term, they are only facilitating the current status that see's many not investing in their people with training, and a wages and benefits packages that helps towards being a career technician that the consumer needs the trade to have.
Tweaking the software in the Prius has been big sport for a decade now too. Can't wait until the manufacturers start bricking $30,000 cars like they do currently do with $600 phones.
By the time it gets to be a real sore spot, we'll all be renting autonomous cars from Uber anyway.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/teslas-new-battery-doesnt-work-that-well-with-solar/ar-BBji5jK?ocid=DELLDHP
But SolarCity doesn’t offer a discount for multiple batteries. To provide the same 16 kilowatts of continuous power as this $3,700 Generac generator from Home Depot, a homeowner would need eight stacked Tesla batteries at a cost of $45,000 for a nine-year lease. "It's a luxury good—really cool to have—but I don't see an economic argument," said Brian Warshay, an energy-smart-technologies analyst with Bloomberg New Energy Finance.
45K just to lease the batteries for nine years. Makes Penn Power look really cheap in comparison.
In the ongoing oil conflab, I take this to mean that you can't be required to use "Honda" oil. Dexos? Dunno about a licensed product.
Another blurb from Consumer Affairs re the MINI mess and the right to use an indy mechanic without automatically voiding the warranty.
As written the Magnuson-Moss act required that if the manufacturer insisted on their own products to protect the warranty, then they had to provide those products for free. Today we see a number of manufacturers doing just that with the free maintenance for a given period of time after a new car purchase. The typical European vehicle requires a High HTHS oil while North American and Asians require Low HTHS products. Servicing that Mini with a North American specification product fails to properly protect the camshaft and lifters and there have been a significant number of failures across all of the European car lines because of dealers, shops, and owners failing to understand the requirements. (North American manufacturers typically use roller lifter cams and the European manufacturers use flat tappet lifters)
Oil gelling is caused by a build-up of crankcase acids. Products that met the expired GM specifications (6094M and 4718M) , or ACEA A1/B1, and or A5/B5 were superior in controlling the crankcase acid production but the minimal API and ILSAC specifications (SL, SM and GF3, GF4) were not. Today's SN,.GF5 is a major step up from SM and GF4 and only now actually meets the requirements for those Toyota, and the Chrysler engines of the era that you are referring to. The only hindsight that was needed was for the manufacturers to require products that exceeded the minimal ratings but fears of consumerist pressure (as demonstrated when GM rolled out dexos) caused them to make a mistake and allow the use of the products that were available at the time.
That's why GM made the dexos licensing requirement, so that it was easy for everybody to choose a brand's product that was going to properly protect the engines as well as the vehicle emissions system. The 6094M and 4718M requirements were largely ignored and examples of the results are the complaints that can be found right in these very forums. It's also far easier to misinform the public with fragments on any topic then it is to educate everyone without exception. It also does no good to educate shops, mechanics or anybody else if the education isn't also provided to the consumer because of the tendency to try and discredit the techs as knowledgeable, whether a given individual has sufficient training on a given subject or not. Media sources need to get with it and if they want to even touch a subject like this one, then they need to present all of the information and not just cherry pick what the public at large wants to see like has always been the norm in the past.
Another reason to bring on EVs. No oil. Why are we still using hydroscopic brake fluid instead of lifetime fluid? We don't (much) change transmission fluid anymore.
People like that reporter want to play the hero for the ratings for the station while completely ignoring the real consequences of his/her actions. When they do one of those "stories", all they do is create more distrust between the techs and the consumers. That distrust then causes the consumers to reject almost all of the information that techs try to share with them in order to help them take better care of their vehicles.
"Hydroscopic brake fluid". So you don't know why the engineers choose such a fluid? Water boils at 212f at sea level. If brake fluid isn't hydroscopic then any water that did get into the brake system wouldn't be absorbed by the fluid and dispersed through the entire system. That means the water would migrate to the lowest points in the system and stay there. The lowest points in the system are the calipers and wheel cylinders. Now with the water concentrated in one or more of those components, the first time that the brakes get hot enough to vaporize that water, the customer ends up with a pedal that goes right to the floor the next time that he/she tries to apply the brakes. Hydroscopic fluid prevents that from happening.
Oh, and EV's? There isn't enough time to go into this as deeply as it really needs to be done, but this blog has some really good first hand, non-diluted information. http://evtv.me/2014/07/milling-mire/
Does it need engine oil changes? Of course not but when you read that article and look at the photos of the drive train and watch some of the video's the cars are anything but devoid of service requirements. Note the final drive assembly that the axle shafts connect to, with the drive motor on one side of it and the generator on the other side. One problem and the entire assembly is replaced, no-one is authorized to do any repairs of any kind. Once out of warranty that is going to have a big impact on affordability.
There's a brief section on oil (GM is mentioned in the notes, so we're talking Dexos).
A couple of snippets:
"Several commenters assert that the Commission’s Interpretations do not address
the market realities of manufacturers’ statements about the use of branded products."
"(a) Section 102(c), 15 U.S.C. 2302(c), prohibits tying arrangements that condition
coverage under a written warranty on the consumer's use of an article or service identified
by brand, trade, or corporate name unless that article or service is provided without
charge to the consumer."
What that really means...well, you tell me.
The entire doc is a pdf you can find at this link. It's only 54 pages of legalize.
the market realities of manufacturers’ statements about the use of branded products.
These commenters state that automotive and other consumer product manufacturers have
employed language in consumer materials “to suggest that warranty coverage directly or
impliedly ‘requires’ the use of a branded product or service”12 leading reasonable
consumers to believe that coverage under a written warranty will be void if non-original
parts or non-dealer services are utilized.13
Note 11 in bold above references these commenters. most notably Ashland, who most would recognize as Valvoline. There is a word that is missing in that entire document and that is specification.
11 Ashland; Automotive Oil Change Association; Automotive Recyclers Association; BP
Lubricants; Certified Auto Parts Association; Hunton & Williams; International Imaging
Technology Council; LKQ Corporation; Motor & Equipment Manufacturers Association;
Monro Muffler Brake; Property Casualty Insurers Association of America; and the
Uniform Standards in Automotive Products Coalition (“USAP Coalition”). One
commenter, the American Insurance Association, urges the Commission not to change §
700.10. The Coalition for Auto Repair Equality urges the Commission to uphold
MMWA’s tying prohibitions. Grandpa’s Garage comments that GM’s recommendation
that consumers use its branded oil is helpful because GM explains the right products to
use for repair and the prevention of premature failure. Consumer J. McKee generally
supports the tying prohibitions.
Even "Grandpa's Garage" makes the same mistake by calling the dexos specification(s) a brand.
Generally, the MMWA prohibits warrantors from conditioning warranties on the
consumer’s use of a replacement product or repair service identified by brand or name,
unless the article or service is provided without charge to the consumer or the warrantor
has received a waiver.9The Commission’s Interpretations illustrate this concept by
stating that phrases such as this warranty is void if service is performed by anyone other
than an authorized “ABC” dealer and all replacement parts must be genuine “ABC” parts
and the like, are prohibited unless the service or parts are provided free of charge. Such
provisions violate the MMWA’s ban on tying arrangements and are deceptive under
Section 5 of the FTC Act, because a warrantor cannot avoid liability under a warranty
where the defect or damage is unrelated to the consumer’s use of “unauthorized” parts or
service. This does not, however, preclude the warrantor from denying warranty coverage
for repairs associated with defects or damage caused by the use of the “unauthorized”
parts or service. 10
A warrantor can refuse coverage where the warrantor can
demonstrate that the defect or damage was caused by the use of the “unauthorized” part
or service.29
That last sentence says everything that the consumers need to understand. Keeping in context with the previous discussions on engine oil and the dexos specification Unauthorized products become very easy to identify because of GM's licensing program for the dexos specification. Why else would Valvoline who was quoted
in this Edmunds article http://www.edmunds.com/car-care/do-i-have-to-use-the-manufacturers-oil.html turn around and now have dexos licensed products? It is interesting that they choose to use the word "standard" as opposed to specification. But it is approved now. http://www.centerforqa.com/gm/dexos1-brands
Read's case for Dexos sounds compelling, but Valvoline's Smith isn't buying it.
"Our SynPower 5W-20, 5W-30 and DuraBlend 5W-30 went through all the Dexos testing and passed all the requirements," Smith says. "But we felt that carrying the Dexos name was not providing the consumer with any value."
Rather than raise the price of its oil to offset the cost of licensing the Dexos name, Valvoline chose to forgo the license and keep the prices lower, he says.
Smith says that GM's engine-performance warnings are part of its goal to drive consumers to dealerships for their maintenance. "We feel that they are taking choice away from the consumer," he says.
http://www.valvoline.com/auto-resources/motor-oil-faq
Which Valvoline motor oils meet GM standard dexos 1™? The following Valvoline motor oils meet the GM standard dexos 1™: SynPower 0W-20, 5W-20, 5W-30 Durablend 5W-20, 5W-30 MaxLife 5W-20, 5W-30 Full Synthetic High Mileage with MaxLife Technology 0W-20, 5W-20, 5W-30 - See more at: http://www.valvoline.com/auto-resources/motor-oil-faq#sthash.C6DW7l2c.dpuf
http://www.valvoline.com/auto-resources/motor-oil-myths
General Motor Oil Myths MYTH: Changing your vehicle's motor oil yourself or using a certain brand voids your manufacturer's warranty. Changing your vehicle's motor oil yourself or using a different brand of oil from your manufacturer's factory fill will not void the warranty. As long as the motor oil being used meets the manufacturer's standards required for the vehicle (e.g., viscosity grade, type), as provided in the owner’s manual the warranty cannot be considered void. - See more at: http://www.valvoline.com/auto-resources/motor-oil-myths#sthash.A96MDKQO.dpuf
It can also be a spec or a standard, but the terms don't have to be mutually exclusive.
If it's not a brand, let the API handle the Starburst for those refiners who don't want to be associated with the GM "name".
The commentary is all well and good, but what counts is the reg changes that were adopted. I just skimmed some of the ~50 pages, and it's still clear as
muddirty oil.BTW, leave it up to the API? That's funny. SAE 16 is coming out real soon and they will finally address issues that were known in 2007. That's why there is SAE 16A and SAE 16B. At that pace the API will catch up with the dexos specification around 2019-2020....
Oh, I'm at Wally World and just remembered I want to get some oil and a filter. Fram, check. Supertech, check. The big issue for me is remembering whether this van takes 5w20 or something else.
(I don't consider Amsoil a player btw - they are a MLM product and I've sneered before at their parent company marketing dubious "health" products, especially the ED stuff.)
Won't be a bit surprised if one day GM announces that they screwed up the formulas for dexos based on someone's inaccurate assumption and they are switching to a different formula.
Opinion: VW diesel buyers could have discovered cheating before the EPA did (marketwatch.com)
And it appears that the CARB people did examine the code per this NY Times story today.
"California regulators changed tack, examining the company’s software. Modern automobiles operate using millions of lines of computer code. One day last summer, the regulators made a startling discovery: A subroutine, or parallel set of instructions, was secretly being sent by the computer to what seemed to be the emissions controls."
Even officials at the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration acknowledge that the agency doesn’t have the capacity to scrutinize the millions of lines of code that now control automobiles.
One option for making auto software safer is to open it to public scrutiny. While this might sound counterintuitive, some experts say that if automakers were forced to open up their source code, many interested people — including coding experts and academics — could search for bugs and vulnerabilities. "
Lots more in this other NY Times article also dated today.
While coding experts and academics might get involved, most people don't do stuff like that out of a sense of duty and goodwill. In other words there would have to be some kind of an incentive, which BTW is easy to figure out just what others might find with the same access. (some kind of incentive)
http://www.wired.com/2015/10/car-hacking-tool-turns-repair-shops-malware-brothels/
Guess we'll have to retrain a bunch of "excess" taxi drivers and ER people.
Check out the prices.......
For all of the times someone has ever claimed that auto-repair cost them an arm and a leg, they have never once considered that it cost the techs their lives in comparison.
You can mess with your car’s software at will. Just not the A/V stuff or the black box. In a year, so the Environmental Protection Agency and other regulators can ready themselves
“Once the exemption is in place, tinkerers will have more freedom to alter their automobiles without fear of reprisal, at least due to copyright laws,” Klint Finley wrote at Wired."
Hacking your car is cool with us, says U.S. copyright authority (Washington Post)