A Cars forum. AutoBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AutoBanter forum » Auto makers » Chrysler
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

In-the-tank fuel pumps cause death and destruction



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old October 29th 04, 11:54 PM
thomas graham
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Wound Up wrote:
..
>
> Nomen Nescio? Scandanavian Networks?
>
> "NN - eller Nomen Nescio - er Nordiskt Netværk for navnegenkendelse.
>
> NN or Nomen Nescio is Scandinavian Networks by navnegenkendelse."
>
> <http://www.tranexp.com:2000/InterTran?url=http%3A%2F%2F&type=text&text=+NN+-+eller+Nomen+Nescio+-+er+Nordiskt+Netv%E6rk+for+navnegenkendelse.&from= dan&to=eng>
>
>
> Alright... I'm still working on the translation, but I think I'm close...
>
>


Nomen in Latin is "name" and Nescio is "I don't know", so, he doesn't
know his own name.... but I suspect it's Nader! Probably a descendant.
Ads
  #62  
Old October 29th 04, 11:54 PM
thomas graham
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Wound Up wrote:
..
>
> Nomen Nescio? Scandanavian Networks?
>
> "NN - eller Nomen Nescio - er Nordiskt Netværk for navnegenkendelse.
>
> NN or Nomen Nescio is Scandinavian Networks by navnegenkendelse."
>
> <http://www.tranexp.com:2000/InterTran?url=http%3A%2F%2F&type=text&text=+NN+-+eller+Nomen+Nescio+-+er+Nordiskt+Netv%E6rk+for+navnegenkendelse.&from= dan&to=eng>
>
>
> Alright... I'm still working on the translation, but I think I'm close...
>
>


Nomen in Latin is "name" and Nescio is "I don't know", so, he doesn't
know his own name.... but I suspect it's Nader! Probably a descendant.
  #65  
Old October 30th 04, 12:47 AM
shiden_kai
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Nomen Nescio wrote:

> Think your car is advanced? There are four self-locking nuts on a
> Wal-Mart shopping cart. They retain the casters. How many
> self-locking nuts are on your $30,000 car. My car has none that I'm
> aware of. Car manufacturers will do anything to avoid self lockers
> because of cost. Instead, auto engineers did their own work-around
> for plain fasteners. They specify torques at least 150% the maximum
> recommended by fastener torque tables. Check it out. Every important
> fastener on your car is overtightened and overstressed.


My goodness! You are so full of ****!

Ian


  #66  
Old October 30th 04, 12:47 AM
shiden_kai
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Nomen Nescio wrote:

> Think your car is advanced? There are four self-locking nuts on a
> Wal-Mart shopping cart. They retain the casters. How many
> self-locking nuts are on your $30,000 car. My car has none that I'm
> aware of. Car manufacturers will do anything to avoid self lockers
> because of cost. Instead, auto engineers did their own work-around
> for plain fasteners. They specify torques at least 150% the maximum
> recommended by fastener torque tables. Check it out. Every important
> fastener on your car is overtightened and overstressed.


My goodness! You are so full of ****!

Ian


  #67  
Old October 30th 04, 01:04 AM
shiden_kai
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Wound Up wrote:

> Also, this type of integration is used secondarily, but not
> insignificantly, to increase book-billed labour charges and replacement
> costs on all related parts and diagnostic procedures. Under warranty,
> this isn't usually a big deal, because the factory-trained techs are
> specifically trained in the "is/is not" questions that arise, and how
> to test for them. Off warranty, or at the local shop, properly
> trained techs use this to their advantage like many other things,
> simply billing "book time" that doesn't reflect reality, relying on
> the customer's ignorance.


This shows your lack of knowledge about the times required
to replace in tank fuel pumps and the older on-engine fuel pumps.
For someone who knows what they are doing (like myself), there
is very little difference in labour time needed to change an in-tank
fuel pump as opposed to the older on-engine fuel pumps. And as
far as "reality"....the trained tech has already taken his lumps on
the warranty side of things (low times) and has become extremely
efficient at doing the job by the time it becomes a "customer pay"
job. Who are you to pass judgement on them.....come and walk
in their shoes for a mile or two and then you will know what
flat rate is all about.

> In their defence, shops use book time out of necessity sometimes,
> because of a lack of local knowledge. In their attack, shops and
> techs use book time to make money on flat-rate labour. Techs and
> shops alike continually look for common, high-book-time gems with
> which to bilk their customers and reap profits.


This may be true in a certain percentage of labour operations,
but most operations, "you" as the owner, could not come close
to doing it in the time allowed by the book. You might be able
to beat the time on a thermostat, but if you were working on vehicles
all day long, you'd lose your ass. I'd extend a challenge to anyone
who isn't a professional technician to come on in and work with me
for a week. It'll be an eye opener both ways....you will see the jobs
that I make tons of time on, and you will see the jobs that waste my
time. It usually works out to about 140% efficiency overall. And you
would learn why I'm worth that.

> The saddest and most uncertain factor in these equations is the newbie
> tech who just invested $50,000 in his or her education and tools to
> work on new cars.


Good god....whoever spends that kind of money to get started in this
trade is a lunatic. Or has some sort of "tool fetish". I've seen those
types
of technicians. Lot's of shiny tools, but have no clue what to do with
them.

> Too many fail or quit, and most are underpaid for
> their valuable work. Others succeed, and either become vampires
> themselves, or are good enough (morally and skill-wise) to turn an
> honest, good profit and NOT screw consumers with (on average) 100%
> markups on parts and book-billed labour.


Too many fail or quit, because they imagine that they can be making
80 grand in five years. It doesn't work that way....it takes a lot of
time and experience to become a good, honest, flat rate mechanic.
I laugh at the young guys in our shop that think they should be making
14 hrs a day. It certainly won't happen if they take an hour in the morning
to "get going"...and spend another hour or two a day outside smoking and
bull****ting with everyone. You gotta work hard in this trade if you want
to make good money. And you "can" make good money.

Ian


  #68  
Old October 30th 04, 01:04 AM
shiden_kai
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Wound Up wrote:

> Also, this type of integration is used secondarily, but not
> insignificantly, to increase book-billed labour charges and replacement
> costs on all related parts and diagnostic procedures. Under warranty,
> this isn't usually a big deal, because the factory-trained techs are
> specifically trained in the "is/is not" questions that arise, and how
> to test for them. Off warranty, or at the local shop, properly
> trained techs use this to their advantage like many other things,
> simply billing "book time" that doesn't reflect reality, relying on
> the customer's ignorance.


This shows your lack of knowledge about the times required
to replace in tank fuel pumps and the older on-engine fuel pumps.
For someone who knows what they are doing (like myself), there
is very little difference in labour time needed to change an in-tank
fuel pump as opposed to the older on-engine fuel pumps. And as
far as "reality"....the trained tech has already taken his lumps on
the warranty side of things (low times) and has become extremely
efficient at doing the job by the time it becomes a "customer pay"
job. Who are you to pass judgement on them.....come and walk
in their shoes for a mile or two and then you will know what
flat rate is all about.

> In their defence, shops use book time out of necessity sometimes,
> because of a lack of local knowledge. In their attack, shops and
> techs use book time to make money on flat-rate labour. Techs and
> shops alike continually look for common, high-book-time gems with
> which to bilk their customers and reap profits.


This may be true in a certain percentage of labour operations,
but most operations, "you" as the owner, could not come close
to doing it in the time allowed by the book. You might be able
to beat the time on a thermostat, but if you were working on vehicles
all day long, you'd lose your ass. I'd extend a challenge to anyone
who isn't a professional technician to come on in and work with me
for a week. It'll be an eye opener both ways....you will see the jobs
that I make tons of time on, and you will see the jobs that waste my
time. It usually works out to about 140% efficiency overall. And you
would learn why I'm worth that.

> The saddest and most uncertain factor in these equations is the newbie
> tech who just invested $50,000 in his or her education and tools to
> work on new cars.


Good god....whoever spends that kind of money to get started in this
trade is a lunatic. Or has some sort of "tool fetish". I've seen those
types
of technicians. Lot's of shiny tools, but have no clue what to do with
them.

> Too many fail or quit, and most are underpaid for
> their valuable work. Others succeed, and either become vampires
> themselves, or are good enough (morally and skill-wise) to turn an
> honest, good profit and NOT screw consumers with (on average) 100%
> markups on parts and book-billed labour.


Too many fail or quit, because they imagine that they can be making
80 grand in five years. It doesn't work that way....it takes a lot of
time and experience to become a good, honest, flat rate mechanic.
I laugh at the young guys in our shop that think they should be making
14 hrs a day. It certainly won't happen if they take an hour in the morning
to "get going"...and spend another hour or two a day outside smoking and
bull****ting with everyone. You gotta work hard in this trade if you want
to make good money. And you "can" make good money.

Ian


  #69  
Old October 30th 04, 01:16 AM
Bill Putney
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Ken Weitzel wrote:

>
>
> wrote:
>
>> Perhaps if your degree was in electrical, rather than mechanical,
>> engineering you might. One reason is liquids can not burn. By
>> being inside the tank, there is no possibility of a combustible
>> mixture or fire. If for example the electric fuel pump were
>> outside the tank, in the line, there is a much greater
>> probability of a combustible mixture occurring in the event of a
>> fuel leak. OK?

>
>
> Hi...
>
> I'm electrical - but sure not interested in taking sides
> in this conversation.
>
> I do have one question though that I'd like to ask if
> I may? When I have a quarter tank of fuel left, what
> exactly occupies the remaining space?


If I see where you're going with this, the inside of the fuel pump
(where all the electrical commutation/sparking takes place) is 100% full
of liquid fuel under all conditions. Missing only one ingredient for
fire or explosion: air/oxygen. Comforting thought, eh?

To answer your question: air (but all the arcing and sparking is inside
the pump with only liquid fuel).

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
adddress with the letter 'x')


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
  #70  
Old October 30th 04, 01:16 AM
Bill Putney
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Ken Weitzel wrote:

>
>
> wrote:
>
>> Perhaps if your degree was in electrical, rather than mechanical,
>> engineering you might. One reason is liquids can not burn. By
>> being inside the tank, there is no possibility of a combustible
>> mixture or fire. If for example the electric fuel pump were
>> outside the tank, in the line, there is a much greater
>> probability of a combustible mixture occurring in the event of a
>> fuel leak. OK?

>
>
> Hi...
>
> I'm electrical - but sure not interested in taking sides
> in this conversation.
>
> I do have one question though that I'd like to ask if
> I may? When I have a quarter tank of fuel left, what
> exactly occupies the remaining space?


If I see where you're going with this, the inside of the fuel pump
(where all the electrical commutation/sparking takes place) is 100% full
of liquid fuel under all conditions. Missing only one ingredient for
fire or explosion: air/oxygen. Comforting thought, eh?

To answer your question: air (but all the arcing and sparking is inside
the pump with only liquid fuel).

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
adddress with the letter 'x')


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:51 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AutoBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.