Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 22:50:57 GMT From: Bob <uctraingDESPAMnopsamanet.com> Subject: Re: Help - motor crashed on 94 V6
On Wed, 17 Jul 2002 20:00:22 GMT, "Wyatt Taylor" <wwtaylornopsamll.net> wrote: >>Your friend should have bought a Saab with a Saab engine, not the crappy V6 >>which Saab only started fitting because you bloody yanks cant accept that a >>straight 4 engine is any good, you all go insisting on V's. > >That explains everything, thank you!! It's because we are stupid bloody >yanks. Somehow I knew it was his fault... He, he, he. Actually, the Brit is right in that it's an ignorant American populace that assumes that a V6 is "better" than a 4. I know plenty of ignoramuses out there who will argue the point with you. However, that has little to do with the issue at hand. (Hey, did they forget we saved their butts in WWII ? :-) In a parallel case, I had a timing belt go my Toyota at 56K (with a 60K change interval). Toyota did not pick up any of the cost even though I'd bought the car new from them. (The warranty in those days was 3/36) Bottom line though, even if you friend didn't know much about cars, he should have had it checked. A large majority of cars on the market have 60K belts. Since he did not personally know the history, he should have inquired about the belt. Even a "normal" engine might have broken its 60K belt at 72K and there's little justification for not having it checked. Bob
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
