[net.auto] 81' Buick Skylark = Engineered Obsolescence

heneghan@ihlpf.UUCP (Heneghan) (02/15/86)

I've been boasting about how great my 81' Skylark is and
it's time for me to eat my words: I'm the kind of guy that
changes the oil and filter every 3k miles, gets chassi lube
every other oil change, rotates the tires, back flushes the
radiator every year, washes about once a week year round, waxes
twice a year and touches up dinks constantly. My car had 92k
miles on it and my "high tech computer system" crapped out on
me. The Buick dealer (Stillwell in Downers Grove, Ill.) told
me I needed $700 in repairs and proceeded to charge me for .9
of an hour labor for the 5 minutes it took them to diagnose my
computer, costing $40. This dealer, where I bought the car, would
not buy the car back (without even looking at the car itself). At
this point I was prepared to drive the car through the showroom
window. As I considered the other problems with the car I decided
that the car would cost more to fix than it was worth. I then 
unloaded the car at the Plymouth Dealer where I bought an 86' MiniVan
the week before. I hope Chrysler nails GM to the wall in sales.

The point I would like to make is that maybe all the TLC you
give a car doesn't mean **%$##@@# if the car was designed to
die young. So, maybe the manuals are right when they say change
the oil every 7k. Then, the car depreciates the same throughout,
and you don't have a good engine and body, with everything else
being waisted. 

Now I have a 1986 Plymouth Voyager and a 1972 Dodge Dart. I hope
the Dart doesn't outlast the Voyager! I submit this to you and
specifically those of you who are thinking of "running your car
into the ground" because cars are so %%$#@@# expensive! It might
pay to unload it sooner than later! Especially a newer car!

				Joe Heneghan