Didn't they have a similar issue with Saturn cars that led Dr. Fatty to hate GM
forever?
Didn't GM have problem with plastic intake manifolds on one of their V6s?
-Curt
From: Donald Snook via Mercedes <mercedes@okiebenz.com>
To: Mercedes Discussion List <mercedes@okiebenz.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 7, 2015 11:34 AM
Subject: Re: [MBZ] specific MB suggestions
My wife has a 2006 Cadillac SRX. Her car is a good example of what you are
talking about. The 3.6L v6 in it (and in a whole bunch of other GM cars) has
massive and widespread timing chain failures. Many were replaced under
warranty and failed again. GM did extend the warranty on SOME cars, but not
all. But, they also had a "campaign" where they reprogrammed the computer to
alter the Oil change interval to make the light come on sooner. In other words
the solution to the chain/gear problem was to tell the owners to change the oil
more often because that would help to remove the metal and plastic that is
wearing off the chain and gears. I couldn't believe that was the solution. I
am sure that when they were testing the design they noticed that the
chain/gears were wearing prematurely and they probably did a cost benefit
analysis and figured it was cheaper to fix some percentage of them under
warranty rather than designing and building a better chain.
I fought with GM about 18 months ago on this exact issue and we ended up sort
of sharing the pain. Cadillac paid for the parts and half the labor. My wife
had to pay the other half. The lesson I learned is stay away from ANY gm car
with the 3.6 V6.
Don Snook
-----Original Message-----
From: Curly McLain [mailto:126die...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2015 8:52 AM
To: Mercedes Discussion List
Subject: Re: [MBZ] specific MB suggestions
The big difference between pre 1990 MBs and post 1990 MB is the type of
ownership. My friend who was one of the oldest MB dealers in the country told
me in the late 80s that ownership had shifted from the driver to leasing
companies. When the customer walked in and wrote a check, they wanted
something to last. When people walk in and lease a car, most have no
intention of keeping it beyind the lease term, so MB cheaped out at the same
time control was taken from engineers and given to bowties.
The problems with 210 and later and 140 and later are mostly related to the
fact thatMB went from die best oder nichts to "just build it to last through
the lease" because of the tax laws and the change in ownership
His other complaint at the time was that in the 60s and 70s people bought MBs
because they were the best. Now (late 80s on) people
lease them (new) because it is a status symbol. The buyers shifted
from older successful people to yuppies out to make an impression.
For these reasons, he sold off the dealership in the early 90s, but kept the
leasing company.
It was an interesting dealership. They started out as studebaker and IH truck,
probably in the 1920s. In the 50s when studebaker was fading, it was the
distributor for MB. Studebaker died, but he kept the MB line, so it was MB and
IH. About 1980, he added Mazda. When IH melted down, he had MB and Mazda.
_______________________________________
http://www.okiebenz.com
To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
All posts are the result of individual contributors and as such, those
individuals are responsible for the content of the post. The list owner has no
control over the content of the messages of each contributor.
_______________________________________
http://www.okiebenz.com
To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
All posts are the result of individual contributors and as such, those
individuals are responsible for the content of the post. The list owner has no
control over the content of the messages of each contributor.
