I suppose technically you are correct.  The free scheduled
maintenance, included in the warranty on the Lincoln, is
a warranty claim.  However I have never had a product failure.  
;)

mike hunt

Never had a car in 20 years requiring a warranty claim? You just lost ANY
and ALL credibility with me. That's like saying you don't require air and
water to live.

Actually I don't always dump my cars.  Some I sell, but most of
them go to family members.  I know you find warranties to be
important for some reason, I don't.    One would think you would
prefer a Korean cars since you look at warranties as part of your
buying decision.  Seems like you don't care if the car breaks
down as long as you don't need to pay to fix it.  I have not had
a car, in more than twenty five years, that ever needed a
warranty claim.  I purchased imports every two years, as well,
when I was buying imports. I changed cars every two years when
the warranty was only 90 days or 4,000 miles.  I don't base my
decision on the length of the warranty but how much car can I get
for my money.

Check NADA, example; a V8 Ford Crown Vic LX has an MSRP of around
26K.  A a top of the line V6 Camry XLE has an MSRP of around
29K.  In two years the Crown Vic is worth around $17,500.  The
Camry is worth around $20,200 according to their published
figures. Yet the drive home price of the Crown Vic is a lot lower
than the Camry, as low as 19K.   Which has the better resale
value in you mind?

I know what your mean about things going bad too soon. We has the
same problem with a Corolla rack, just the other day.  Like I
said every manufactures makes a bad one now and then, that is why
they all have a warranty.

Personally I could not care less where you spend your money.  If
you want to spend more of it on Toyotas that's your business.

mike hunt

But you dump your Fords before the warranty expires MikeHunt. Probably a
smart strategy.

"Retains more of it's drive-home price"   There you go lying again. Funny
how your figures are never confirmed on Kelly or any other car price quoting
service.

Even if I liked Fords, the crap you post here ... the lying figures and
distortions you continually post here .... would persuade me to buy another
American brand car (assuming I was so disposed to buy American).

BTW, a neighbor bought a new Ford 500.  The car had to have a new steering
rack at 4,000 miles.

That is fine if your goal is to spend more to buy your new car,
to help the dealer and manufacture earn more money.  I prefer to
spend less to get a new car every two years, not more

Glad you mentioned the Taurus.  A two year old top of the line V6
Taurus actually returns MORE of it actual drive home price than a
similar V6 Camry.  Sure the Camry has a higher resale value than
the Taurus, of about $4,000 according to NADA, but the Camry cost
$6,000 more to drive home when new so you lost $2,000.  When you
trade Taurus on Taurus you save on the next one as well   ;)

mike hunt

<snip>

I am talking about actual

,snip>

Actually, you claim to have facts but they are merely antidotes. My
numbers....actual transaction prices of new and used cars...is more FACTUAL.
Those FACTS show that Japanese cars are priced to go about 50% longer than
American cars. You may argue that the Japanese cars DON'T ACTUALLY go 50%
more, and you MAY (but probably are not) be right. But my FACT, which is
undisputable, is that the Japanese cars, both new and used, command a
premium suggesting 50% longer miles per car. And I am talking about actual
transaction-after-rebates prices. True, Taurus and Camry might have similar
window stickers, but the only way to move the Taurus is to cut the price
using rebates while Camry generally can be sold out at window sticker. Same
for used....a 3 year old Taurus will lose 60% of it's value while a Camry
will lose 35% (just guesses on THOSE numbers but you get my point).

And regardless of what you say, the Pinto was just plain garbage. OK, you
may have a rare, exceptional creampuff, but in the real world it was
garbage. And, OK, the early 1970's Toyotas and CERTAINLY the early Hondas
were junk too. And the Detroit Iron of that era, except for Pinto, Vega and
Gremlin, was indeed generally good. But let's get off the ancient history
here. Modern cars, priced by FACTUAL STATISTICS ACCORDING TO WHAT PEOPLE ARE
WILLING TO PAY, show the Japanese cars are priced to go about 150,000 miles
while Detroit (or Mexican or Canadian) metal is only priced for 100,000
miles. If you honestly believe you can get the same mileage out of Detroit
as you can out of Japan with no additional operating costs, then Detroit is
the better deal for you. The market of millions and millions of vehicles
suggests that the average American has learned otherwise.

You are entitled to believe whatever you wish.  I chose to
disagree with your opinion however, because of my own experiences
over the years.  That is after all what we are expressing here,
opinions.  I happen to own a 1971 Pinto, that I purchased new in
1970.  It has lasted for a lot more than you perceived 100K.
There is currently 298,000 miles on the clock and all original.
The only repairs have been s clutch at 210K and a Carbon and
valve job in February.   I own a half dozen old cars that I take
to old cars shows.  I see old cars for the US, England, Germany,
even Italy but I have never seen any Japanese cars from the
seventies at any of those shows let alone one with the 150K you
believe they will exclusively achieve. All manufactures build
some on occasion that are not up to their build standards for the
class in which they compete, that is why the all have a
warranty.  From what we see in our fleet service business, that
services nearly every brand on the market, is that ANY brand on
the market today will easily run 200K and more if properly
serviced. That is not an opinion but a fact and we have the
records to support that conclusion.  The only real difference we
see in todays vehicles is style and price, period.  I prefer
a particular style of vehicle and that is RWD and V8 powered.  I
want to buy those that will cost me the least amount of money to
replace every two years.  That is my choice, others may chose
differently and that is their privilege as well.

mike hunt

There is another thread about new Lexus and Toyota models that has just run
too long. Accordingly, I wanted to spin off that conversation with a new
thread. There was discussion about buying Lexus versus Lincoln. One of the
things that I realized is that, more or less, Toyota/Honda vehicles are
priced by the market, both new and used, as if the car will last 150,000
miles while American vehicles are generally priced as if the vehicles will
last 100,000 miles. Meaning that at 50,000MI, a Honda/Toyota will still be
worth about 2/3 of the original price while an American vehicle will be
worth about half. This is merely a very rough rule of thumb, but something
I've noticed. Even new, the US vehicles can't be sold unless Detroit rebates
it's way to a sale, so the "out the door" price is much less than the "out
the door" price of a Toy/Hon. Even though the sticker prices are similar.
Again, this seems to reflect that the market assumes the Toy/Hon will go
150,000 miles before major trouble vs merely 100,000 for the US vehicle. My
point is that buying similar sized-categorized vehicles from Toy/Hon vs US
is no longer an apples to apples comparison. (I realize that many vehicles
go 200,000 to 300,000 miles...maybe more....of both American and Japanese
build. But my point is that THE MARKET prices Toy/Hon vehicles to last about
50% longer).