Key fob costs over a hundred dollars

The procedure is lined out in my Grand Marquis' Owner's manual...

As long as you've got *two* keys, programming up to 8 total keys is pretty straightforward (at least according to my manual)

Otherwise, it's up to the stealership to program the keys...

Reply to
El Bandito
Loading thread data ...

How the heck can you lose *both* keys?

I;m keeping one on me, the other set (along with the remote starter's remote) is at my dad's...

as soon as I receive the uncut keys I've bought on Ebay (12$), I'll program them and keep one at my workplace and the other one at one of my female friend's place

Reply to
El Bandito

Thieves are lazy and work off of the percentages. I seriously doubt a thief is going to take the same risks of all the ramifications of getting caught to steal my wife's '99 Buick as a later model car worth

10 times the price in the marketplace. The risks are not worth it for the low value he'd get for the Buick even though it's easier to steal.

Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x')

Reply to
Bill Putney

Hopefully that means that most would-be thieves would simply get out of the business for the low value/return of what they'd be stealing weighed against the risks they are taking of getting caught - so maybe the end result is that overall, thefts should go down? Even stupid low lifes weigh the percentages of what they stand to gain vs. the risks.

Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x')

Reply to
Bill Putney

Even worse, a former cow-orker bought an '03 Saab and found out it would cost $300 for a spare key. The keys on those things ARE fobs, they are placed in an oval fitting on the console.

Reply to
velobard

and what does that have to do with a remote fob??

Reply to
Tom

it's easy. you see, you have to keep both keys for the vehicle on the same key ring, so you will not loose the spare key.

Reply to
Tom

For a Ford, the PATS keys are around $14 on Ebay. As long as you have two working keys, you can program a third yourself. Add in a couple of bucks to have the key cut at the local hardware store and the cost to create a spare key for a Ford is less than $20. So you are only off by a factor of 5 for Fords. For a GM with Pass Lock II, the keys are nothing special, figure about $5, so you are off by a factor of 20. I don't know what Chrysler is doing - nothing the last time I checked, so you are off by a factor of 20 for them as well.

Ed

Reply to
C. E. White

Reply to
ROY BRAGG

I believe they get a break in taxes, which reflects in purchase price, in some parts of Europe, when used as taxis... Just the same as if you buy a business coupe which is quite different from a regular 4-5 passenger car.

I think Mercedes has made some of the most beautiful sports and sporty cars. BUT, the expense and lack of reliability does not endear them to me. And they are said to be a bitch on ice.

Reply to
<HLS

Reply to
philthy

"Stealership"... interesting term, sometimes....

FWIW, I am a "stealership" tech and I have no qualms about helping where I can. Dealership rates are dealership rates... if you want second class work for not so cheap, go to Canadian Tire. However, if you could form simple sentences, you would see that I was talking about remote entry key fobs. To program a key fob to a car that has RKE, you don't need ANY programmed fobs... however, having a programmed key will help this part.

Now... what really amazes me is the number of folks that think they are so perfect that they will never lose or misplace a keyring... something we see "other people" do quite often. I would bet that there are many that have seen this tale of woe over and over again, clinging to their last remaining key.... and even more that possess two keys, and no consideration of purchasing a third while the programming is cheap.

You, sir, refuse to work for free.... I also refuse to work for free and the knowledge I have gained over the years is worth $$$$.

Stealership, indeed.....

Reply to
Jim Warman

Good point.

When I was doing some TV repair we used to say "Yes it's a $5 part, but it's $20 for knowing which one".

Reply to
I. Care

If you have one of the original keys you can program another. If you don't the dealer has to do it. These were PATS keys.

formatting link
Al

Reply to
Big Al

Rant on Jim. I don't work at a dealership. In fact, I work in an entirely different industry, so I have no allegiance to dealerships from an employment perspective. I have though, benefited greatly from a cooperative relationship with my local Chevy dealership over the past twenty-couple years. I buy a lot of parts from them to keep the cars in our family in shape. Currently there are five vehicles I maintain in my household, four of which are GM's and all of the Genuine GM parts that I buy (I do buy aftermarket as well) come from this Chevy dealer. I've established enough of a longstanding status with them that I've long paid shop floor rate on my parts, I borrow specialty tools from them (simply sign them out and bring them back), get advice/tips/etc. on problems that stump me or that require knowledge I don't have yet, stop by for a scan at no charge, and on and on. Stealership my ass. This is a great working relationship. I do spend a fair amount of money over the counter every year compared to the average consumer, and it's nice to have been able to develop this relationship. Every time I stop by to pick up a part I walk out genuinely impressed by the way the parts guys seem to appreciate the sale. Hell - I appreciate the sale, especially at the discount level I get.

Here's my latest "stealership" story:

My daughter's '98 Malibu needed strut cap bearings. I suggested rebuilding the strut since the car has 150K miles on it. We priced the aftermarket and the best deal out there was $176 each from Advance Auto for a complete strut. Rebuilding was not really an option since component prices (shock, bearing and labor rate for strut compressor) made that not-cost effective. I did not price the dealer, thinking that a strut was going to be an item I wouldn't be able to get a good enough price on. Finally, went the salvage yard route. Bought a pair of newly installed struts for $65 each. Still had the paint and the stickers on the struts. These were almost brand new struts. So - we got a pretty good deal. Turns out I was at the dealership for something else and they asked me why I hadn't priced them there. Told them I was sure it was going to be higher than my daughter could afford. To make a long story less long, they looked up my price and informed me that the next time I probably should stop by. My price for OEM brand new struts - $102 each. My daughter saved money and she got a good strut, but that was a fluke - they were almost new. All things being normal, the "stealership" was by far the best deal out there.

Stealership indeed...

Reply to
Mike Marlow

:)

Kinda taking backups but leaving the tape in the drive :)

Reply to
El Bandito

Well if it is not in proper running condition and properly tuned up maybe. I used to have a 1968 Nova with a 250 CID engine, and it was solid as a rock - nothing "fragile" about it. Once I converted to a manual choke, I could start a 40 below NO problem.

Since 2005???

Ummm.... I used to have a 1994 Grand Caravan that was a LOT less aerodymanic than my 2002. The 1994, with 3.3 engine, used to get about

22 MPG in the city, and 32 MPG on the highway. I was VERY surpprized when I got a newer, supposedly much more "advanced" model - with the same engine - only to discover the nasty mileage hit! What kind of crap is THAT!

Well you have to be careful with that statement. A similar sized car from the 50's and 60's would likely have a V8 in it. In which case the displacement would have been close to double. That is, the engine displacement would have likely been 302 (5.0 Litre) to 455 (7.5 Litre). So, yes, with a 3.3 you should EXPECT to get "50 %" better gas mileage. This is NOT due to improvements in engine design, or engine management. This IS because you are running a smaller engine!

230 CID is approximately 3.8 Litres. I am running a 2002 model year 3.3 with advanced computerized engine management. That 1948 230 CID in a WAY heavier vehicle with a carberator is getting slightly better mileage than I am in my 2002 mini-van.

Perhaps I should have purchased a van with a 3.8 Liter engine then???

Reminds me of when we switched to 2 Liter bottles for pop here in Canada. at the time, a 26 Oz bottle of pop (750 ml) was about 59 cents. When 2 litre came out, they were $3.59. By straight math, the 2 litre bottles should have been no more than $1.80. But WE THE CONSUMER were bing punished and made to pay for the transistion.

Now, long after the transition, "No Name" pop in a 2.0 litre bottle goes for 89 cents, and name brand for $1.25 at a discount grocery store.

SO by that analogy, the oil companies are ripping us off totally so they can use OUR money to fun the development and deployment of future reserves and alternate fuels, in order ot protect their own grossly obscene profits.

Yes, I have a very clear picture of it now. The oil companies are NOT doing us any favours, believe me.

Reply to
NewMan

But I used to own a 1987 Olds Cutlas Cruiser! 2.8 litre MFI engine. The emissions on that car were so low that the local testing station could barely measure them! And that car got WAY better gas mileage than I am getting with my 2002 mini-van!

I thought that there were supposed to be improvements in BOTH emissions AND gas mileage as years went on! And as I already stated, even my 1994 WAS an improvement over 1987, but 2002 and things are sliding backwards???

Something ain't right.

And >Tailpipe emissions and fuel consumption are two different things. >

Reply to
NewMan

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.