 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Honda Cars / August 2007Maintenance Reminders redux
Hi I thought the group might appreciate this short tale. I shared with you that I purchased a 2006 Honda Accord. It has now turned over 20.000 miles. Like clockwork, I got an email message from the service facility at the dealer from whom I bought the car that it was due for it's "20,000 mile service." Well, I dug out the owners manual, and looked for a schedule. Instead, it told me that the computer would tell me when the car needed service. No mileage schedule. I remembered the collective wisdom of this group and that this subject was discussed, so I dug through the archives. No mileage schedule. I searched the internet. No mileage schedule. So, I replied to the email from the service facility, explaining that all of the information I had was that the car would tell me when it needed service and if the service manager knew something I did not know, then he should share it with me. Particularly, I wanted to know if there really was a mileage schedule that supplemented the maintenance minders. No reply after a week. I think I will take my car, when it really does need service, somewhere else. Elliot Richmond Itinerant astronomy teacher Freelance science writer File > Hi > [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > Itinerant astronomy teacher > Freelance science writer sorry,that was a typo. > File >> Hi [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] >> Itinerant astronomy teacher >> Freelance science writer > Hi > [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > Itinerant astronomy teacher > Freelance science writer You can bring your car someplace else, but if that someplace else is another franchised dealer, you will be faced with the same annoyance. You may even face the same problem with a well-run independent garage if you end up on their mailing list. You see, it is the business of businesses to try to drum up business. Advertising is how they grow; part of how they manage to turn a profit and thereby employ persons (such as yourself) to perform the work that needs doing in the course of doing business. Caveat emptor, remember? The smart buyer spends only what is necessary, and most of all, /knows/ what is necessary. Having said all the above though, I find myself compelled to say that there is no such thing as too much service. Your car is like a woman: it loves attention and will respond well to it.  SignatureTegger The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ www.tegger.com/hondafaq/ >> Hi >> [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > there is no such thing as too much service. Your car is like a woman: > it loves attention and will respond well to it. I just got a service reminder for my 94 GSR that was stolen,stripped and torched the end of June. No email addy listed so I could update them and have them delete me and that car from their database. I've already updated Carfax in case St.Farm sells the carcass and someone tries to refurb and sell it. SignatureJim Yanik jyanik at kua.net > I just got a service reminder for my 94 GSR that was stolen,stripped > and torched the end of June. A sad end for a fine car. I'm so glad I live in the sticks where I do, well away from the anarchy of the cities. SignatureTegger The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ www.tegger.com/hondafaq/ >You can bring your car someplace else, but if that someplace else is >another franchised dealer, you will be faced with the same annoyance. It's not the annoyance, it's the deceit. If there is a maintenance schedule based on mileage, then Honda or their service departments should tell us about it. (I suspect there is.) It is also the failure to respond to my email request. That is what lost them a service customer. If they can take the time to send an emil to me, they can take the time to reply to mine. I know they are busy. So am I. Lacking information about a "secret" maintenance schedule, my best bet seems to be to go by the owners manual (something that is often recommended on this group). The manual specifically states that I should have the car serviced when the maintenance minder says to. So, that's what I plan to do. There are no listed alternatives for more frequent service. I do not think that going beyond service recommendations is cost effective anyway. One could change oil every 1000 miles, every 10,000 miles or somewhere in between. Where is the point at which more frequent oil changes do so little good, that they are simply not worthwhile? Clearly every 1000 miles is too often. But is 10,000 miles too long an interval? On my previous Honda, I decided I would go with what the owner's manual said, which was every 7,500 miles, despite the local Quicky Lube's insistence that it should be every 3000. The car had just turned 200,000 miles and was running like a fine watch when it had it's collision with a concrete barrier which severely damaged the suspension. Speaking of which, I now regret that I did not take the salvage value from the insurance and keep the car. I think I could have repaired it for less than the salvage value, especially if I had harvested good parts from the local automobile recycler. Elliot Richmond Itinerant astronomy teacher Freelance science writer >>You can bring your car someplace else, but if that someplace else is >>another franchised dealer, you will be faced with the same annoyance. > > It's not the annoyance, it's the deceit. If there is a maintenance > schedule based on mileage, then Honda or their service departments > should tell us about it. (I suspect there is.) There is not (aside from the servicing that arises from observed need). What the dealership is trying to do is to get you to do more work than the Maintenance Minder indicates. If you were running that dealership, you'd do the same thing. The service department is a real money maker, mostly because nobody takes care of their cars. I think you need to ease up here. > It is also the failure > to respond to my email request. Two explanations: 1)( They got somebody else to send out the mass mailing on their behalf, or 2) they're like a lot of companies that do very little email and thus never check it. I agree it's pretty silly to have a published email address, send out messages using it, then not respond to replies. It's also possible the dealership didn't want to put any answers in writing for fear of later getting in trouble. Did you include a telephone number? > That is what lost them a service > customer. If they can take the time to send an emil to me, they can [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > should have the car serviced when the maintenance minder says to. So, > that's what I plan to do. You RTFM! Everybody knows you're not supposed to do that! > There are no listed alternatives for more > frequent service. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > worthwhile? Clearly every 1000 miles is too often. But is 10,000 > miles too long an interval? Not if the Maintenance Minder says it OK. That depends on the use of the specified oil, too. You can't put just any old junk in there and rely on the Maintenance Minder. Considering your desire to abide by the Owner's Manual, I assume you will use the correct Honda-specified fluids when it's time to change them? Honda fluids are more expensive. SignatureTegger The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ www.tegger.com/hondafaq/ >Considering your desire to abide by the Owner's Manual, I assume you >will use the correct Honda-specified fluids when it's time to change >them? Honda fluids are more expensive. Yes, with one exception. The service facility I plan to use (a different Honda dealer) has always given me excellent and prompt service. Their prices have generally been lower than independents (e.g. timing belt replacement). They use Castrol GTX, so that is probably what I will go with. Elliot Richmond Itinerant astronomy teacher Freelance science writer > Considering your desire to abide by the Owner's Manual, I assume you > will use the correct Honda-specified fluids when it's time to change > them? Honda fluids are more expensive. wait--hold that-- --they're more expensive to purchase. They are NOT more expensive to operate the car with. It's the cheapest man who spends the most. > I do not think that going beyond service recommendations is cost > effective anyway. One could change oil every 1000 miles, every 10,000 > miles or somewhere in between. Where is the point at which more > frequent oil changes do so little good, that they are simply not > worthwhile? Clearly every 1000 miles is too often. But is 10,000 > miles too long an interval? Keep in mind that for the most part, those service intervals are heavily, heavily influenced by the marketing group. They absolutely need to compete on that level with everyone else who's claiming no need for service for 100K miles or whatever. Marketing groups serve their own needs, no one else's. Also, the car makers are building them to be obsolete. And for the most part, the sheeple respond. When you see things like "7500 mile oil change interval" or "we'll tell you when", it may be true--or it may be that "if you follow our generous interval, nothing bad will happen to you during the 3 or so years you own this car before your stupid burning lust to spend $30K takes over and you go buy a new one". For the information you're looking for, you need to find where the engineers go for beer and wings and buy them a round one night. Going beyond service recommendations is not always a waste of money. There is a point beyond which it's throwing money away, of course. But given the variability of manufacturing, it may be that you have the engine that doesn't quite respond as well to the 7500 mile intervals as another car might--but will be very happy with a 5000 mile interval, for example. You wouldn't know that until after the engine blew up, so what do you do? >Also, the car makers are building them to be obsolete. This may be true, but I see no compelling evidence. When I was a kid in high school, an automobile with 50,000 miles was due for a major overhaul. 100,000 miles on an engine was so rare that it was a news worth event. Now cars go 250,000 miles with no replaced engine parts at all except for maybe spark plugs and timing belt. And they still have good power and compression. I had my 93 Honda far longer than any other car I ever owned and I tend to keep 'em for a long time. It was still running great and as far as I could tell had another 100,000 miles in it. Some plastic bits had broken off, but they were easy to replace. Elliot Richmond Itinerant astronomy teacher Freelance science writer > >Also, the car makers are building them to be obsolete. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > at all except for maybe spark plugs and timing belt. And they still > have good power and compression. Let's just say that longevity at best is a byproduct of other design and engineering decisions. The main decisions have to do with lowering the cost to build the car while making people happy for about 3 years. If in the course of doing so they end up making a car that lasts longer, so be it. >>Also, the car makers are building them to be obsolete. > > This may be true, but I see no compelling evidence. Nor do I. I do see copious evidence of cost-cutting, especially on non- critical components. This is not the same as building in obsolescence. > When I was a kid > in high school, an automobile with 50,000 miles was due for a major > overhaul. 100,000 miles on an engine was so rare that it was a news > worth event. My dad had 140,000 miles on his '58 Dodge Regent (Royal) by 1970. It was the talk of the neighborhood at the time. The engine smoked and the 2- speed automatic leaked badly. > Now cars go 250,000 miles with no replaced engine parts > at all except for maybe spark plugs and timing belt. And they still > have good power and compression. Try over 400K these days. SignatureTegger The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ www.tegger.com/hondafaq/ >>> Also, the car makers are building them to be obsolete. >> This may be true, but I see no compelling evidence. > > Nor do I. I do see copious evidence of cost-cutting, especially on non- > critical components. This is not the same as building in obsolescence. there /definitely/ is built-in obsolescence, but it depends on manufacturer. honda & toyota are finally rumored to be getting into it, but for the vintage vehicles we drive, it's not an issue. it's quite a difficult engineering task. in terms of technology development, it used to be detroit closely followed by the euros. did a project on it at uni. the crazy thing is, some of it costs more to implement, but it pays back with increased sales. >> When I was a kid >> in high school, an automobile with 50,000 miles was due for a major [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Try over 400K these days. japanese, not domestic. they're better than they were, but when chevy make a big deal out of 200k, you know that's stratospheric for them. contrast that with the high mileage club over at toyota.com! >My dad had 140,000 miles on his '58 Dodge Regent (Royal) by 1970. It was >the talk of the neighborhood at the time. The engine smoked and the 2- >speed automatic leaked badly. Yeah, we had a 1956 Desoto with a 350 ci hemihead engine coupled to that model transmission. The gear selector was a set of push buttons at the far left side of the dashboard with a mechanical linkage to the transmission. Even with a two-speed, that thing was a rocket. Elliot Richmond Itinerant astronomy teacher Freelance science writer >>My dad had 140,000 miles on his '58 Dodge Regent (Royal) by 1970. It was >>the talk of the neighborhood at the time. The engine smoked and the 2- [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > at the far left side of the dashboard with a mechanical linkage to the > transmission. Yes. And one thing we kids discovered was that you could push all the buttons behind the faceplate at the same time. Drove my parents nuts. :) SignatureTegger The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ www.tegger.com/hondafaq/ > >>Also, the car makers are building them to be obsolete. > > > > This may be true, but I see no compelling evidence. > > Nor do I. I do see copious evidence of cost-cutting, especially on non- > critical components. This is not the same as building in obsolescence. It's the same as not caring if the cost-cutting causes the car to become obsolete beyond a certain (short) point. "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in news:elmop- D7ADAB.15072716082007@nntp1.usenetserver.com: >> I do not think that going beyond service recommendations is cost >> effective anyway. One could change oil every 1000 miles, every 10,000 [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Keep in mind that for the most part, those service intervals are > heavily, heavily influenced by the marketing group. That, and the desire to not piss off the environment lobby, which has considerable political clout these days. Long oil change intervals are supposed to be more "environmentally friendly". And a 10K interval IS too long if you're not using a synthetic. SignatureTegger The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ www.tegger.com/hondafaq/ > "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in news:elmop- > D7ADAB.15072716082007@nntp1.usenetserver.com: [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > And a 10K interval IS too long if you're not using a synthetic. it depends. the latest engine computers keep combustion pretty clean, and that leads to better oil life. > Hi > [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > Itinerant astronomy teacher > Freelance science writer This page might be of interest to you... http://www.high-road.com/maintenance/maintenance.htm Eric >This page might be of interest to you... >http://www.high-road.com/maintenance/maintenance.htm > >Eric It is interesting, but this is from a company that provides (sells) service. For example, it has that 3000 mile oil change recommendation. No automobile manufacturer has a recommended oil change interval that short. Most are going to longer intervals. Here is another approach: http://neptune.spacebears.com/cars/stories/interval.html And still another http://ask.cars.com/2007/05/oil_change_main.html And still another. http://greenmesh.com/2007/07/oil_changes_intervals_get_long.php Only one thing is clear. Whatever is being "sold" has a great effect on the recommended oil change interval. Elliot Richmond Itinerant astronomy teacher Freelance science writer > >This page might be of interest to you... > >http://www.high-road.com/maintenance/maintenance.htm [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > No automobile manufacturer has a recommended oil change interval that > short. Most are going to longer intervals. So, you asked for service mileage recommendations and I gave you a link for a well researched list based on roughly 25 years of empirical evidence (one of the owners of that shop is not just a "salesman" but also has a degree in mechanical engineering). However, all you appear to have done is shoot it down since you have already made your mind up about oil change intervals. While I'm not going to argue over the recommended length of oil change intervals, I really don't care when you change your oil or if you never do, one thing seems clear to me, you have already made up your mind and really didn't want a list of service mileage recommendations or you wouldn't have shot it down simply because you disagreed with only 2.5% of the information in the list. >So, you asked for service mileage recommendations I did not ask for recommendations. You supplied some, I assume, in the interest of continuing the conversation. I replied with some alternative viewpoints, also in the interest of continuing the conversation. Do with them as you wish. Elliot Richmond Itinerant astronomy teacher Freelance science writer
Elliot Richmond wrote:
> > On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:41:58 -0700, Eric <say.no@spam.now> wrote: > > >So, you asked for service mileage recommendations > > I did not ask for recommendations. Your original message... > Well, I dug out the owners manual, and looked for a schedule.
> So, you asked for service mileage recommendations and I gave you a > link for a well researched list based on roughly 25 years of empirical > evidence (one of the owners of that shop is not just a "salesman" but > also has a degree in mechanical engineering). However, all you appear He asked for Honda's recommendation. You did not provide that in the least. Any recommendation of 3000 Miles on today's engines is not well researched. Not a single auto manufacturer recommends 3000 miles anymore, and there is a reason. It is silly to suggest that they give longer recommendations in order to compete with other manufacturers. Especially for Hondas and Toyotas, which sell (largely) on a history of longevity. It is not in their best interest to give a service recommendation that will decrease said lifespan. That reputation took decades to develop, and can be destroyed in just a few short years. It would likely be the death of the products future sales. SignatureJoe - Registered Linux User #449481 "Hate is baggage, life is too short to go around pissed off all the time..." - Danny, American History X > It is silly to suggest that they give longer recommendations in order > to compete with other manufacturers. You've never lived in the marketing world, have you? > It is silly to suggest that they give longer recommendations in order > to compete with other manufacturers. Especially for Hondas and Toyotas, > which sell (largely) on a history of longevity. A reputation which they don't hesitate to throw down the toilet. Case in point: Honda automatic transmissions hooked to V6 engines. Those transmissions were CRAP for a solid 6 years. Honda knows it. Everybody knows it. Honda was run by beancounters who threw away that Honda reputation for the sake of a few shekels. Case in point: Toyota sludge. They may have reputations for longevity, but when it comes to saving a few pennies, they will throw those reputations away without another thought. >> So, you asked for service mileage recommendations <snip> >He asked for Honda's recommendation. <snip> Thanks, but actually, I did not ask even for that. I told a tale, which included a report of my lack of success in finding a recommended service interval, but that is not the same as asking for one. It may be a fine point, but recounting an anecdote is not the same as requesting information. I am sorry that Eric was offended. Sometimes these things just happen. I noticed he did reply to the list, but the reply showed up in my Agent as a graphics file which I did not open. So I do not know what Eric's reply was. Elliot Richmond Itinerant astronomy teacher Freelance science writer > >> So, you asked for service mileage recommendations <snip> > >He asked for Honda's recommendation. <snip> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > be a fine point, but recounting an anecdote is not the same as > requesting information. Depending on how you recount the tale, it is. Look up "conversational implicature". > >> So, you asked for service mileage recommendations <snip> > >He asked for Honda's recommendation. <snip> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Agent as a graphics file which I did not open. So I do not know what > Eric's reply was. The reply was html formatted to highlight the following quotes from your original message. · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · Well, I dug out the owners manual, and looked for a schedule. Instead, it told me that the computer would tell me when the car needed service. No mileage schedule. I remembered the collective wisdom of this group and that this subject was *discussed, so I dug through the archives. No mileage schedule.* *I searched the internet. No mileage schedule.* So, I replied to the email from the service facility, explaining that all of the information I had was that the car would tell me when it needed service and if the service manager knew something I did not know, then he should share it with me. *Particularly, I wanted to know if there really was a mileage* *schedule that supplemented the maintenance minders.* >The reply was html formatted to highlight the following quotes from your >original message. Okay, if you think I was asking for somebody on the list to supply a maintenance schedule and you thought you were doing a favor for me by supplying such a list, then I can see how you might have been offended. I have already apologized. Thanks for your help. Elliot Richmond Itinerant astronomy teacher Freelance science writer > Okay, if you think I was asking for somebody on the list to supply a > maintenance schedule Well, let's see. What are we supposed to take from what you originally said: In article <auc6c3h58i85rchcamapffi1t4iirpijt6@4ax.com>, > Particularly, I wanted to know > if there really was a mileage schedule that supplemented the > maintenance minders. When you come to the newsgroup and say something like that, the implication (remember "conversational implicature"?) is that you're asking the readers if THEY know of a mileage schedule. The implication is NOT that you're just talking to hear yourself talk. But, apparently you were talking just to hear yourself talk. >Well, let's see. What are we supposed to take from what you originally >said: [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >implication (remember "conversational implicature"?) is that you're >asking the readers if THEY know of a mileage schedule. The only implication I can construct is that the statement was directed to the service manager at the facility that had sent the message to me. Here is the original paragraph in question: >So, I replied to the email from the service facility, explaining that >all of the information I had was that the car would tell me when it >needed service and if the service manager knew something I did not >know, then he should share it with me. Particularly, I wanted to know >if there really was a mileage schedule that supplemented the >maintenance minders. You did not quote that part about "replied to the service facility." The question of whether I thought there really was a mileage schedule had, I thought, already been settled. Here is the previous paragraph: >Well, I dug out the owners manual, and looked for a schedule. Instead, >it told me that the computer would tell me when the car needed >service. No mileage schedule. I remembered the collective wisdom of >this group and that this subject was discussed, so I dug through the >archives. No mileage schedule. I searched the internet. No mileage >schedule. Notice the repetition for emphasis: "No mileage schedule." It was not a question; it was a statement. Eric, and possibly others, were misled by my message and interpreted it as a request for information, in spite of the fact that I began the message with. >I thought the group might appreciate this short tale. Clearly, my "tale" was not clear to some. But, I am now done with it. The rest of you may continue to discuss it if you wish, but I would suggest moving on to some other subject. Such as: Do synthetics really extend the life of an engine when coupled with an extended oil change interval to compensate for the extra cost of synthetics over conventional oils? Do synthetics really reduce dependency on petroleum based products to any significant degree considering that in the time it takes to "consume" five quarts of oil, which can actually be recycled, the car will consume over 300 gallons of gasoline. Elliot Richmond Itinerant astronomy teacher Freelance science writer <snip pedantry> > Do synthetics really extend the life of an engine when coupled with an > extended oil change interval to compensate for the extra cost of > synthetics over conventional oils? run doubled service intervals on conventional in your own car, then report back. > Do synthetics really reduce dependency on petroleum based products to > any significant degree considering that in the time it takes to > "consume" five quarts of oil, which can actually be recycled, the car > will consume over 300 gallons of gasoline. they can, yes. true synthetics can offer better lubricity and therefore lower gas consumption. what's the break-even? 0.3% better gas consumption? anything better than break-even is a benefit. that's not including lower oil burn-off rates either. > >In article <auc6c3h58i85rchcamapffi1t4iirpijt6@4ax.com>, > > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > directed to the service manager at the facility that had sent the > message to me. So, what you're saying is that there was nothing implied in what you said--that we were to take what you said solely and completely at face value. In other words, you came to a discussion newsgroup, one with the goal of sharing information, simply to tell a story. You were wrong in thinking that people here would want to hear your story and would know automatically to take it completely at face value. The people here are, generally, involved in DISCUSSING things. When you come here, the implication automatically is that you're looking to DISCUSS things. But apparently you want this newsgroup to be like a newspaper or a magazine--strictly one-way expression, strictly the reader telling his story, with absolutely no actual discussion of the topic. > Here is the original paragraph in question: > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > You did not quote that part about "replied to the service facility." It was immaterial. Look bub. Nobody cares about hearing your stories for the sake of hearing your stories. We don't know you, so when you came here to tell your story, you were doing one thing--telling a story with absolutely no expectation of discussing its details of the facts thereof--while the rest of the newsgroup was doing what we normally do in a newsgroup, which is discuss things. Further, we assumed--quite rationally--that you also wanted to discuss things, because coming to a newsgroup to spout a story without wanting to discuss it is just plain nonsense. So when you said, "Particularly, I wanted to know if there really was a mileage schedule that supplemented the maintenance minders," there was no question in any rational person's mind: you wanted to know if there really was a mileage schedule that supplemented the maintenance minders. We were wrong, but only because your expectations in coming here were TOTALLY out of whack. So actually, the people who thought you wanted to know that information *in general* were correct in their assumptions. You came to Rome, but wanted to do what the Japanese do. Well, when in Rome, do as the Romans do. > The question of whether I thought there really was a mileage schedule > had, I thought, already been settled. Here is the previous paragraph: [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >archives. No mileage schedule. I searched the internet. No mileage > >schedule. No, because as you say that's the previous paragraph. Allow me: * first you dig out owner's manual, look for schedule. * you don't find one * it says to pay attention to the computer instead * you searched the newsgroup, found no schedule * you searched the internet, found no schedule * emailed the service facility, saying explicitly that you're looking for a schedule * came to the discussion newsgroup and said explicitly, within the context of telling your story, "I'm looking for a schedule" * received some discussion about a schedule * started telling people here off about how you weren't looking for a schedule from them at all So why did you come here if you weren't looking for information from us? 'Cuz we just don't care about your pathetic story about "I emailed the service department. I'm looking for a schedule." > Eric, and possibly others, were misled by my message and interpreted > it as a request for information, in spite of the fact that I began > the message with. > > >I thought the group might appreciate this short tale. YOU were misled--or rather, misled yourself--into thinking that this is a STORY newsgroup, where one tells STORIES. You told a story, and within that story made it plain that you were looking for information that you had not yet found. What did you expect out of a DISCUSSION newsgroup? And then, to make matters worse for yourself, you get mad at people who are doing what comes naturally in a DISCUSSION newsgroup. You get mad at the people who are DISCUSSING it, and who are TRYING TO HELP YOU. You tell them, pretty much in so many words, to f.ck off, you weren't asking them for anything. You have just made the hall of fame for some newsgroup members, no doubt. > Clearly, my "tale" was not clear to some. Clearly, you (a) came to the wrong place, (b) had the wrong expectations, and (c) were not clear in expressing what you wanted out of your post. The ball was, and is, squarely in YOUR court to communicate clearly. On 8/18/2007 10:01 PM Elmo P. Shagnasty spake these words of knowledge: >> >In article <auc6c3h58i85rchcamapffi1t4iirpijt6@4ax.com>, >> > [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > magazine--strictly one-way expression, strictly the reader telling his > story, with absolutely no actual discussion of the topic. There was nothing in anything he said that indicated he wanted the newsgroup or its denizens to do a damn thing. He simply bothered to explain what he actually meant. Give it a f.cking rest. RFT!!! Dave Kelsen SignatureI'm the quiet neighbor with the big freezer. > > But apparently you want this newsgroup to be like a newspaper or a > > magazine--strictly one-way expression, strictly the reader telling his > > story, with absolutely no actual discussion of the topic. > > There was nothing in anything he said that indicated he wanted the > newsgroup or its denizens to do a damn thing. Absolutely there was. Go back and read what he wrote. When he comes into a DISCUSSION group and expresses a desire to know something, he should expect it to be DISCUSSED. But when he comes in and slams the group for daring to discuss it, he should be told to f.ck off. > >> So, you asked for service mileage recommendations <snip> > >He asked for Honda's recommendation. <snip> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Agent as a graphics file which I did not open. So I do not know what > Eric's reply was. Part of your original post was: "Particularly, I wanted to know if there really was a mileage schedule that supplemented the maintenance minders." Since this is a discussion group, rather than a storytelling one, I am sure that several people assumed you actually wanted to know the answer... SignatureJoe - Registered Linux User #449481 "Hate is baggage, life is too short to go around pissed off all the time..." - Danny, American History X >>> So, you asked for service mileage recommendations <snip> >>He asked for Honda's recommendation. <snip> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > I noticed he did reply to the list, but the reply showed up in my > Agent as a graphics file which I did not open. Somehow it got converted to an HTML file. He does not appeared to have added anything to the previous post, which was quoted in the HTML file. SignatureTegger The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ www.tegger.com/hondafaq/ |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.