automatic transmission failure question

"jim beam" > wrote in message
t...

>> Let me remind the newsgroup ASSHOLE you and I are arguing with that he
>> might want to look at that "detroit iron" from the 40's and 50's on the
>> streets EVERY DAY in Cuba.

> jeepers, you guys /really/ don't get it do you? with a honda, it's not
> whether the thing can be rebuilt 50 times like in cuba, it's whether the
> thing runs perfectly for the first 500k miles or not. no rebuilds.

Don't let me break this to you. NAPA doesn't have a BIG operation in
Havana. There is no Auto Zone stores with ring sets. You don't seem to GET
that whatever they had in parts in 1959 were the LAST parts Cuba saw. If you
think they are constantly rebuilding the cars you are nuts. Sure they fix
things. Know what they use for brake fluid? A combination of shampoo and
cooking oil. Don't even ASK how they make brake shoes.

> i love it when clowns stand in line to bleat about how "reliable" their
> ford turnip truck is. but it's amazing how quickly they vaporize again
> when the specifics of broken half-shafts, stub axles, springs, kingpins,
> transmissions and engines that piece of crap has needed. yeehaw! mah
> truck is /that/ reliable folks!

Guy there were many extremely reliable old cars. I know people with old
Kaisers with that old Continental Read Seal 6 that are well on their way for
the second 500K with the original rings etc. Some folks with the old BIG 6
Nashes report the same longevity. It was later in the 60's that SELF
DESTRUCT (planned obsolescence) reared its ugly head on American cars. By
the 70's the cars were DNF.

Did I start in on Ford's? I had some really nice Chryslers. A 66 Dodge
Coronet with a 318 and torqeflight. GREAT CAR. I also had a 68 AMX with a
390 + 4 speed. PHENOMENAL CAR!
From there it was downhill. I did have a 85 Dodge Caravan that I had 250K
on. Loved it. I was a 4 banger. WAY underpowered but ran forever. You
measured zero to 60 times with a calendar.

Hachiroku ãƒ�ãƒ�ãƒ*ク wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 09:35:48 -0500, Steve wrote:
>
>> He should fix it for as little as
>> possible and then UNLOAD it ASAP. Its going to be a money pit from now on.
>
> If he takes Jim's advice and brings it to the dealer every time it hiccups!
>
> I have an '88 Supra with about 225,000 miles. Want to talk about a money
> pit? If I brought it to the dealer I couldn't afford to own it.
>

A supra is *not* an Accord or Civic or Camry or Escort or Neon or other
generic front-drive transportation appliance. Its not exactly a '69
Charger either, but its a very overbuilt and relatively simple
rear-drive vehicle that can be maintained pretty much indefinitely, and
is interesting enough to be WORTH maintaining indefinitely. Front-drive
Hondas are not.

On Tue, 28 Apr 2009 08:35:48 -0500, Steve wrote:

> Hachiroku ãƒ�ãƒ�ãƒ*ク wrote:
>> On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 09:35:48 -0500, Steve wrote:
>>
>>> He should fix it for as little as
>>> possible and then UNLOAD it ASAP. Its going to be a money pit from now on.
>>
>> If he takes Jim's advice and brings it to the dealer every time it hiccups!
>>
>> I have an '88 Supra with about 225,000 miles. Want to talk about a money
>> pit? If I brought it to the dealer I couldn't afford to own it.
>>
>
> A supra is *not* an Accord or Civic or Camry or Escort or Neon or other
> generic front-drive transportation appliance. Its not exactly a '69
> Charger either, but its a very overbuilt and relatively simple
> rear-drive vehicle that can be maintained pretty much indefinitely, and
> is interesting enough to be WORTH maintaining indefinitely. Front-drive
> Hondas are not.


Gee, I liked my Accord! It was a decent car. Um, I also bought it NEW, not
17 years old...