You can spend it any way you want. I just find non computerized appliances to be much easier to repair.
Tom C wrote: > I used to think that way too. However when one has time to spend but not > the money, they spend the asset they can most afford to spend. > > In my case it was time. > > Is there anything wrong with that? > > Tom C. > > > >> From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: Don't want to sound too alarmist but... >> Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 18:10:37 -0400 >> >> My point is you spent 10 hours fixing a broken washer. I value my time >> at about $70.00 an hour spending 10 hours diagnosing something on that >> basis I would be $375 in the hole. Actually I replace about half of >> them as a prophylactic measure. Only two absolutely needed to be >> replaced, the rest were well on their way to failing and at less that >> $1.00 each it was well worth replacing them all at the same time. The >> switch was dodgey and on it's way to failure as well. I could probably >> have monkeyed around with to make it work better, but only a couple of >> bucks extra it seemed a no brainer to replace it at the same time. >> >> Tom C wrote: >> >>> I already told you, but what's your point? Mine is that I saved $325 I >>> didn't have free to spend on the unexpected problem. It's not that it >>> >> was >> >>> hard, to fix because done once I could do it again in less than an hour. >>> >> I'm >> >>> a clod when it comes to things mechanical. >>> >>> It sounds like you replaced lots of minor items without troubleshooting >>> them. Whereas I ran though the diagnostic flow chart, took off the >>> >> drain >> >>> pump, checked it to see if it's clogged and operating correctly, etc. >>> >> Much >> >>> of that, in the end, was time spent isolating the problem, not actually >>> repairing it. >>> >>> You can't make me feel bad about it. :-) >>> >>> Tom C. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >>>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >>>> Subject: Re: Don't want to sound too alarmist but... >>>> Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 16:26:43 -0400 >>>> >>>> How many hours did you spend fixing your washer? I replaced every >>>> important sensor and a switch, (essentially rebuilding the electrical >>>> system), in less that two hours. Most of that was figuring out how to >>>> take the back off. >>>> >>>> Tom C wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> I think the new technology is often easily repairable. It's just that >>>>> >>>>> >>>> most >>>> >>>> >>>>> of the electronics is now manufactured overseas and it's incredibly >>>>> >>>>> >>>> cheap. >>>> >>>> >>>>> A company makes more profit replacing an entire circuit board that >>>>> >> costs >> >>>> $20 >>>> >>>> >>>>> and charging $250 + 1 hour labor, than they do trouble shooting the >>>>> >>>>> >>>> board >>>> >>>> >>>>> for an hour and replacing $.10 and $1.00 parts. For the company, time >>>>> >> is >> >>>>> money. Also, the customer unable to diagnose othe problem, is happy >>>>> >> just >> >>>> to >>>> >>>> >>>>> get the serviceman in and out. >>>>> >>>>> Tom C. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>>> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >>>>>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >>>>>> Subject: Re: Don't want to sound too alarmist but... >>>>>> Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 14:40:39 -0400 >>>>>> >>>>>> Front loads have been around for a long time, even here. The old >>>>>> technology is much easier to repair, and usually costs less than new >>>>>> electronic devices, which seem to designed to not be repaired. >>>>>> >>>>>> Tom C wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Well I don't claim to be a rocket scientist. It usually take me 2 >>>>>>> >> or >> >>>> 3 >>>> >>>> >>>>>>> trips to the parts store or tool store before I get things right >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>> because >>>> >>>> >>>>>> I >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> learn as I go. I was happy to have saved at least $325. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Two advantages of the newer front load washers (long popular in >>>>>>> >> Europe >> >>>>>>> >>>>>> and >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> only becoming popular in the USA over the last decade for home use) >>>>>>> >> is >> >>>>>>> >>>>>> that >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> they use about 1/3 the water as older top load washers and are much >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> easier >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> on clothes. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Tom C. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>>>>> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >>>>>>>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Don't want to sound too alarmist but... >>>>>>>> Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 12:49:04 -0400 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> And it drys cloths no better than the 30 year old dryer I bought >>>>>>>> >> for >> >>>>>>>> $25.00 12 years ago, and fixed for less than $10. Replacing all of >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>> the >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>> temperature sensors and door switch in less than two hours. (I >>>>>>>> >> ended >> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> up >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> giving it away 6 months ago as I had no place to store it). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Tom C wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> What all these problems really indicate is how cheap, low-spec >>>>>>>>>> >> most >> >>>>>>>>>> of the electronic components being used are, even in high-end >>>>>>>>>> cameras. Curiously, my 1966 RCA transistor radio that cost me $20 >>>>>>>>>> (expensive back then!) is still going strong. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Godfrey >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Likely planned obsolescence? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On a side note, I just fixed our 2000 Maytag Neptune washer which >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> had >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> stopped spinning clothes in the spin cycle. If it had failed >>>>>>>>> >> about >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> two >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> yeas >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ago I could have gotten it fixed for free under the terms of a >>>>>>>>> >> class >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> action >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> lawsuit. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It was going to cost upwards of $400 for a service call, an entire >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> new >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>> main >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> control board, and an item called a wax motor which is essential >>>>>>>>> >> to >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> locking >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> the door. I replaced the wax motor (ultimate source of the >>>>>>>>> >> problem) >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> along >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> with a blown resistor and two transistors on the main board. In >>>>>>>>> >> the >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> process >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I ruined a metal 'leaf' spring that holds the wax motor in place >>>>>>>>> >> and >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> super >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> glued a switch closed, until the new parts arrived. Cost of my >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> repair >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> including parts which I runied in the process was under $75 >>>>>>>>> >> dollars, >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> though >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I have about 10 hours invested in it. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Tom C. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> All dogs have four legs; my cat has four legs. Therefore, my cat is >>>>>>>> >> a >> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> dog. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> All dogs have four legs; my cat has four legs. Therefore, my cat is a >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> dog. >>>> >>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> -- >>>> All dogs have four legs; my cat has four legs. Therefore, my cat is a >>>> >> dog. >> >>>> -- >>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> -- >> All dogs have four legs; my cat has four legs. Therefore, my cat is a dog. >> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> [email protected] >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> > > > > -- All dogs have four legs; my cat has four legs. Therefore, my cat is a dog. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
