Toyota Quality

Page 3 of 3  
I've been following the "Toyota Battle" here, and one question comes up;
An earlier post talks of "sludge buildup in Toyota engines"
How can that be ? Other than getting coolant in the oil, I thought that modern ( detergent ) oils made sludge a thing of the past.
I remember a recent SHELL (?) commercial where they showed a torn-down engine after several thousand miles of SHELL..... The oil chambers looked better than "factory new"
???
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The irony...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Mike Hunter" wrote:
Everything I posted was factual, DUMMY. Learn to comprehend what you read before you comment, DUMMY. Start by learning the definition of the word catastrophic, DUMMY. The case was settled with no testimony, only stipulations,, DUMMY. Learn the definition of the word deposed, DUMMY. Proper preventive maintenance .... <garbled> ... , DUMMY. That was not my comment, DUMMY. GM extended the warranty after liability was determined, DUMMY. ________________________________________________________________________
Mike:
I have enjoyed your posts for a long time, particularly the practical comments based on your knowledge and experience.
In the current thread about gasket failures, your comments on the topic were not completely clear, and sincere and intelligent persons could have easily misunderstood and questioned them. It can only chill good faith conversation by calling these persons "dummy".
I realize there is a howling army of people anxiously waiting to leap on every Mike Hunt post to find something to criticize, whether it's an opinion, a recitation of facts, a misspelled word or typo, or even a complicated sentence. But your comments stand on their own; nothing can be gained by superfluously calling these people "dummy.",
Keep up the helpful advice and information and and try to not be diverted by the background noise.
Good luck.
Rodan.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Point taken, but I only make remarks like that after I have first been called names by others.
My post was an effort to try to enlighten those with the erroneous believe that the auto manufactures deliberately try to screw their customers, which is ridiculous.

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

I never called you a name before you childishly resorted to calling me "dummy." Then again, being called names by you is in its own right a badge of honor.

Why is it ridiculous?
GM has a long history of trying to deceive the buying public.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Catastrophic to you means what if not 'the engine is junk.'

An out of court settlement has nothing to do with who is right or wrong, it's all about who has the most money and can last the longest thru all the legal maneuvering.

I know full well what "deposed" means. If in fact YOU were deposed in this affair, perhaps you might be able to remember that the first question asked of you was "do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth."
THAT is testimony, only difference is that it doesn't necessarily have to be done in a formal courtroom setting.

On Friday, November 27, 2009 YOU stated; -------------------------------------------------------- "It was fleets service shops like mine that first became aware of the trouble with none asbestos gaskets. I was deposed by the court to testify in the Ford case against the gasket manufacturers." -------------------------------------------------------- You really should try harder to keep up with the bullshit you spew.
Ya see Mike, that's the thing about lying, it's SO much harder to remember the lies than it is to remember things that one actually experienced.
So, sort it out now, was it _YOUR_ imaginary fleet service shop that first discovered the problem, or was it the gasket manufacturers thru preventive maintenance who first discovered the problem?

No they didn't. There is no extended warranty on the failing intake manifold gaskets. There are/were individual dealerships who are/were giving goodwill coverage IF the vehicle owner had a history of loyalty to the dealership service department for their PM work, but that example in and of it's self presents a double edged sword.
I can cite an example where GM wouldn't even cover their warranty repair on a 3800 one month after it was done and botched where their mechanic left one of the lower intake bolts out resulting in excessive manifold vacuum in the crankcase, hell, they couldn't even diagnose the resulting driveability problem.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
You in ability to understand what you read is your problem, not mine. That is why you are confused. I'm not going to spend any more of my time in an effort to enlighten you on the subject.
Of course you are free to continue to believe whatever you wish, no matter how convoluted your reasoning may be. Bye
wrote:

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

It isn't me who has the inability to understand. Your whole argument is based upon myth and falsehood. The EPA -attempted- to ban certain asbestos containing products in 1989. That ban was overturned in 1991 by a federal court. Asbestos never was nor has it ever been banned as a gasket material in automotive engines. Even now today, asbestos is legal to use as a gasket material. I can buy them any day of the week. I can but asbestos gaskets ready made-ready to install, I can buy it as bulk asbestos gasket material. The information concerning this is easily found on the EPA website. There are numerous other sites which also explain how full of bullshit you are. I agree though, you -shouldn't- spend any more time on this, you are wrong plain and simple. Reason being, you bit hook-line and sinker into a bunch of myths and half truths, putting yourself into the position of knowing just enough to be dangerous.
One might think given the billions of dollars that GM has squandered over the years, why it is that YOU are the best they could come up with as an apologist.
Your timeline just doesn't add up Mike even considering the two years between when the EPA attempted to ban asbestos and when that ban was overturned. GM had NO wholesale problems with gasket failures in the late 80s and early 90s, on the contrary, the comparable engines offered back then are far and away less likely to suffer intake manifold gasket or any other gasket failure compared to the crap they began producing in the mid 90s and forward.
The only thing you might have EVER been deposed about would have been missing urinal cakes.

I believe facts Mike, not the diluted garbage printed in enthusiast magazines.

For those who would rather deal with facts; http://www.epa.gov/asbestos/pubs/ban.html http://www.asbestos.com/abatement/banned.php
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Thank you, and well said.
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.