Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 16:23:10 GMT From: Bob <uctraingnospamanet.com> Subject: Re: Extended Warranty
On Sun, 12 Mar 2006 23:29:24 -0500, "Jonathan Kaplan" <insure10nospamo.com> wrote: >I would have to disagree. It depends on the general level of dependability >of the car. For a Honda or Toyota I would probably pass on the extended >warranty. On a Volvo or Saab, I'd consider it. (1) Neither has a currently >good reputation for trouble free service and (2) The parts and labor are >outrageously expensive. > >One large item like a transmission could pay for the warranty alone. > >I'm a current 9-5 owner and a former owner of three troublesome Volvo 850's >and a V-70 (the worst car I ever owned). It spent more time in the shop than >on the road. I traded it at 23,000 miles for the 9-5 Wagon. Well "outrageous" is a relative term. I have not noticed that parts prices are that much different at the dealer for any make or model. Around here there is not much difference between Saab repairs and other makes - maybe $10/hour. All dealers appear to be a rip off to me. Flat rate is the biggest scam ever perpetuated on the public - but I digress. Extended warranties are insurance, like any other. You should buy to cover the catastrophic losses you cannot afford out of pocket. That does not mean "comfortably out of pocket". It should hurt a little if you are matching the deductible to the policy cost. You should avoid paying for insurance to cover "ordinary expenses" or reasonable losses. Insurance is not a "maintenance plan" - it's too expensive for that (one of the problems with "medical insurance" today paying for things like office visits, but again I digress :-) I agree that certain cars, particularly in retrospect (V-70) have been issues that beg for extended warranties. But, you should probably just avoid those makes and models that make you tremble and buy something else. You should not buy based on the assumption that your particular car will be a lemon in a line of good cars. I suppose you can just consider the ext warr cost as the part of the cost of ownership to drive a V70 if you really, really, have to drive one. I don't mind paying $500 for a $250K in house coverage, or $500 for $300K in driver's liability. I think $1000+ to cover a low odds tranny loss at maybe $3-$4k is really just a give away to the warranty companies. MHO, there obviously are others.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
