Anyone thinking of buying Dodge..........check this first

Page 2 of 3  


How exactly do you figure that?
--
Max

Give a man a match, and he is warm for a short while. Light him on fire, and
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Vehicle is a POS by the number and frequency of required repairs..
The fact that DC keeps repairing it shows that they know it is not the customers fault.
--
If at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Each item was fixed once. No "frequency" about it.

Again, rubbish. You know it and said as much to the OP when you told him he was "stretching it". Simply put, it is good business to just fix a problem rather than find blame for its cause.
--
Max

Give a man a match, and he is warm for a short while. Light him on fire, and
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
TBone wrote:

You nor I know what the cause of the problems are so to make that assumption is absurd. Problems do occur with any make or model. What makes this different than many others is DC resolved them.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

appears
Not at all. The problems indicated are not easily caused by the customer with the exception of high centering the truck as Max suggested and the fact that DC fixed them indicates that they were not caused by the customer.

And I never said anything different. My concern is the frequency of occurrence of problems with this particular vehicle which is simply not either normal or acceptable.

No, it simply indicates that DC knows that these problems are not the customers fault but feel free to give me a list of current auto manufacturers that routinely ignore warranty issues.
--
If at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

DC fixed it because the truck was under warranty, no other reason needed. The fact that DC fixed it means nothing more than DC is standing fast on its agreement to fix the truck under warranty. Its simply good business to not argue with a customer over issues that will promote customer satisfaction and perhaps another sale.
--
Max

Give a man a match, and he is warm for a short while. Light him on fire, and
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

geez tom. i know you like to carry these discussions to incredibly boring and trivial lengths, but it gets old. every company has "lemens", including cars, boats, trains, etc. maybe this is one, maybe it isn't. you have no clue. you haven't put your sluthy mechanical skills to the first hand test with it. you are listnening to one guy bitch and believing what he says. maybe he caused it, maybe he didn't. you need to examine your thought process though. some guy like this one writes in and you believe him lock stock and barrell. but on the other hand, anyone else says anything, even if they are actually a mechanic with skills and knowledge that exceed yours and you argue with them for weeks.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

failures
appears
And yet, you keep reading it.

Sure I do, if it really had this many problems and they kept fixing it, I would call it a lemon.

Usually people who cause the damage AND get it fixed for free don't complain the way this asshole is. They may call the truck weak, but not a lemon and usually don't bad mouth the company this way. I personally don't care one way or the other, his opinion has no effect on mine because as you say, it could be complete BS and he is whining WAY TO MUCH for me to take him seriously.

LOL, get real. I am arguing with Max who doesn't even seem to know what a compression ration stands for (or is just trying to start another argument) and who likes to argue with me even more than I do with him. Now if you have something of actual value to add, feel free to jump in otherwise, STFU.
--
If at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It doesn't? There are PERFECT machines out there? EVERY stinking one has NO defects? Find me one that proves this point you are desperate to make. Make sure its fasirly complex like a motor vehicle, weighs at least 2000lbs, and goes at least 50MPH, or moves more than 10 tons.

Exactly, thats why a warranty is offered.

PROOF?
No, wear is directly affected by amount of use. It is INdirectly affected by the other two.

I suggest then, that you not buy anything with paint on it, lest you get the one that didn't work out perfectly.

Yup, and that number of problems is addressed in the lemon laws.

Or owner abuse. So far, you've yet to prove your point (QC), while my point is that the failure could have happened for reasons other than manufacturer defect. Yet, while the manufacturer may not have been at fault, they STILL came through on warranty items.

Well then, according to your logic, you are assuming the dealer has another brand for sale on the lot.

Not at all. I worked for a small Chrysler Dealer in the mid 80's . I prepped all of the LeBaron coupes they had at the time, and I was required to put 10 miles on each one. Further, if you look at Fritz's site, I think he has the dealer prep process listed there, including the 10 mile req. Also, my truck had exactly 10 miles on it when delivered to me.

Which proves nothing except that the dealer didn't follow proceedure on your truck. It has nothing to do with a test drive, and is merely your attempt to use an irrelevant item to prove a point you cannot make. My truck ALSO had scratches in the roof paint, but they DID test drive it per the required prep process.

Because two different people do the prep work.

Because any mechanical object takes time to work hte bugs out. Its the truth, even if its a poor PR move.

Well, when ya sell a lot of one thing, and cover the warranty, its likely you'll get a lot of them on warranty work. Thats just he way it is, nothing terrible about it.

Um, owner abuse, I mentioned that, didn't I?

You claimed substandard parts in regard to shift linkage, y pipe, paint, and almost anything else mentioned. Yet no where do I see huge numbers of trucks sitting at dealers because of y pipes, paint, or shift linkage. Face it, the three mentioned look distinctly like someone took the truck offroad, and worked it a bit, and expected DC to repair it after getting hung up on a rock. Figure it out!! trans linkage, y pipe, "rusted out" trans pan, paint peeled off a bumper. Then we have the threats and juvenile demeanor displayed by the OP. This reads like a kid took dads truck off road, and scrambled to the dealer when he got in a jam.

Nope. You made the statement, now back it up. This is your typical BS spin. You claim something, and have no proof. Hell, you even as much as admitted the guy was stretching things a bit.

Abuse. Abuse. Abuse. Look at the problems, and as I said, the only thing that ties them together is the owner/driver.

I've provided more than enough to substanciate my claim that abuse is a possibility. Meanwhile, you've made a definite claim of substandard parts. I won't wait for you to bring proof, because as usual, you won't.
I have deleted at least two more claims of low QC which you did not address, and I find to be pointless in addressing again until you provide proof. Claiming that another car has functioning equipment does not prove the quality or lack thereof in the failed part/vehicle.

It damn sure was, and it was a stupid move that, now past, I will gladly claim for bragging rights.

Or the steering boxes.

Unless he high centered the truck in the area of the trans linkage and y pipe......
--
Max

Give a man a match, and he is warm for a short while. Light him on fire, and
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

There sure is, and the Op's truck certainly didn't "crap out every day".

The number of failures to each part is exactly one.

More rubbish. You've obviously not done any studies regarding cost/benefit or QC in the area of acceptable failure rate.

I see, so anything that fails is a lemon to you? Thats not the "accepted definition" by most people. But I would say I expected as much from you.

Doesn't have to be fixed all at the same time, because (as you said) it takes time for stuff to break.

Prove it. You can't. I have a viable theory/possibility, you don't. I have facts, you have assumed bullshit that fits your perfect picture.

I have NO idea, but he DID complain, and he DID ADMIT that DC fixed the problems.

Individual situations vary, and thats why your conclusions don't add up. Different dealers operate different ways, and you can't accept that. I've offered possibilities, and backed those ideas with evidence that makes them viable. Youin turn, insist that the world operates YOUR way and your way only, yet you have no viable evidence that the world is perfect.

Your reaction backed up my point: >> > Most of them do in todays world but what does that have to do with your point?

LOL, WHAT??? Design isn't part of quality??? Ok...... thats it. I'm done here. YOU are full of shit up to your eyeballs, no need for me to prod you into showing any further.
--
Max

Give a man a match, and he is warm for a short while. Light him on fire, and
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
TBone wrote:

No, DC fixed the problem. Dealer only supplies the labor and was authorized and paid by DC.

DC fixed the problem. See above.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

DC also caused the problem so in that case it would be DC -1 then DC +1 which = DC 0

Ditto and the point is not what DC fixes, but the level of quality that caused it to begin with.
--
If at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
TBone wrote:

Make up your mind. 1st you say DC -1, now you say DC +/- 1? Can't you stick to your same train of thought rather than just bounce around to suit your argument?

True except according to JDPowers and Edmunds Dodge for at least the past 2 years has had higher reliability in almost all areas. A few areas were equal to Ford and Chevy for 1/2 ton and 3/4 ton trucks. Even if the Big 3 are about equal what sets them apart is how they handle problems that do occur. DC scores well as they fixed the problems.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
You know what I like about philosophical discussions like this?
Everyone is wrong.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Not even close. But I did get a cute little plaque for putting in my 25 yrs...

Haven't got the final sheet yet. But I'm sure I'm my usual spot in the standings... The good news is that I shot only four hostages....none fatal... Some of the guys had 7-8 good guys. Most of the stages were set up for accuracy instead of speed. I get to help with the stages next month so I'm really gonna have fun. Lets see......at the buzzer, load six rounds in your magazine, charge your weapon then engage your target. <G> Nothing like slowing down some of those machine gun fingers.<VBG> This is the good thing about mppc, stage set-up is not near as strict as the idpa.
Denny

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I just got the scores. The ole blind hog was in Ohio again, I got 8th out of 15 shooters in my class. I'd have had 7th if'n I'd only shot two hostages instead of four.
Denny
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

WTF is wrong with that?? C'mon Hathcock, you are better than first time out. Practice, practice, practice, is what Carlos preached. Get with the friggin' program and put some more rounds through it. You will improve bit by bit.
Roy

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<snip>

The hostages would probably be a lot happier, too, Buggs... Good shootin', though..
mac
Please remove splinters before emailing
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I thought that you were going to STFU and watch me implode. I guess that honesty isn't really a strong point of yours. Do you intend to explain this comment, oh, WTF am I kidding.
--
If at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

oh tom.............oh tom.....i just can't stfu. besides, you are the one who told me to do that tom and wtf are you to me? oh yeah, i remember now......a toy. you make yourself way too rich a target for me to resist any more. but i did try,i really did.
you are like.............well, you are like an incredible moron. you go on and on and on and on. at one time i thought you did it because you just love to argue and this was a place you could do it all day long. then, i thought maybe you were baiting max and gary. but i realize that i gave you way too much credit. after watching you drivel on and on for days over the most rivial and mundane things, i now realize that you just stupid. you are just an idiot. thats pretty it tom.
hey, just saying man.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.