On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 17:04:00 -0400, Daniel J. Stern > wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Jun 2005, Dave Hinz wrote:
>
>> Well, Steve posted the 3 names,
>
> No, Steve posted the same thing I posted: "Ultradrive" was never an
> official name of the transmission, it was just a bit of hype used in car
> brochures. The transmission was known as A604 until all automakers changed
> their transmissions' designations in the mid '90s to conform to SAE
> nomenclature. Therefore, this "Two name changes! TWO NAME CHANGES!" shriek
> of yours is a complete red herring.

First of all, you're using quotation marks. I challenge you to post a
google link showing I wrote specifically what you're claiming I wrote.
I mentioned two name changes, but it's hardly the central point of my
posts. That you have fixated on that, rather than the meat of the
problem, is rather telling. For instance:

>> So, are you contending that there's only 4 fatal flaws
>
> Please don't put words in my mouth -- we hardly know each other.


Interesting that you snipped the context showing that this was a
question of what you're saying, rather than me telling you what you're
saying. I'll bite: how many fatal flaws do you feel that that
transmission has suffered from in it's ignoble history?

>> To respond with "too bad, we knew about it, and chose to fail to fix it,
>> but it's your problem" to a known engineering defect is inexcusable.

> Certainly, but that's not what you've been arguing.

Then you haven't been paying attention. I won't buy another chrysler
product, ever, because they knowingly ignore engineering problems and
refuse to take responsibility. Full stop.