Toyota, GM, and Ford differences

"351CJ" wrote

~text that I'm sure SgtSillycon didn't read, snipped~

Some people just won't let facts, convention or common sense get in the way of doing things *their* way. If the posters that follow convention would ignore or KF those that refuse to, they might see the error of their ways. I agree with another poster that people that don't trim their posts are just as bad as top posters. FWIW

Dave

To educate you Mike it depends on the design of the brake pads and wheel covers. My 4 wheel disk brake Concord leaves only a modest amount of visible pad dust. My wife's 4 wheel disk Sebring leaves much more visible pad dust. One obvious difference in these cars is the much more open wheels on the Sebring which improves cooling of the brakes.

yes.

Not necessarily.

My recent look at Toyotas indicate similar prices for similar cars.

Just bull Mike. I've had Chrysler FWD 4 & 6 cyl vehicles from '79 to '01. They were all price competitive with similar RWD vehicles.

Recent Chrysler 300 vehicles are much more expensive than the mid sized cars they replaced. Economies of scale and similar cars on the same platform has always been with us, as even GM, Ford and Chrysler well know.

(top posting corrected)

Nope. It not only prevents quality, point-by-point discussion, but if often multiplies the effort of reading and understanding a post, because one must scroll-down into the post to see what is being responded to, and then back up to the top to read the response.

It's obviously less effort than properly formatting and trimming your response as I am doing. This is not really "top vs. bottom" so much as "right vs. wrong". There's no way a top post can match the quality of communication of an interleaved post like this one.

Those who don't properly trim are indeed lazy, as you say. However, they are not "the lazy ones" - they are only a subset of the lazy ones.

Wrong, obviously. Only idiots think that top-posting is superior. Sorry.

So if someone else is a lazy, selfish idiot, that gives you the right to be one as well?

The first thing I did when I read your follow up was to scroll down past all the quoted stuff because I ALREADY AM FOLLOWING THE THREAD. If, and ONLY if, It's not making sense, then I will quick check the quoted. Most of the time, probably 90%+, I just recently finished reading the quoted material in its original posting and I do not need to read any of it. I do not need to re-read it every time someone throws in 2 cents. See another posting I have made regarding so called self appointed preachers of what is netiquette.

Good thing there are standards then. Imagine if you thought people driving on the right side of the road instead of the left were idiots. Read RFC 1855.

There are laws proscribed for driving on public roadways. Individual preference is the rule here. Is that the best you can do? It's pretty lame.

I disagree. I think it is very comprehensible for most people most of the time, and in the times it isn't, the option is there to quick scroll down to check the context. That's my comment on the subjective point. Objectively you also are factually wrong about the not having yet been said. It HAS been said. That's how it was able to be quoted in the 1st place you doof!

It's as if you have this mental barrier that you just can't get past, that each posting stands alone. And as such, each posting must start off with (at the top) all previous parts of the discussion. Then the reader needs to read a complete history of all postings on the subject before reading a bit of new material. Then, when the reader goes to the next message in the thread (immediately after they read this one) they should do it all over again in the next message, because hey, after all, each message has to stand all alone right? NOT! In usenet, postings are part of a thread. I'll give you a big hint to help your problem. Stop doing primary sorting by date, and start organizing by thread 1st. It's the smart way to do it, regardless what posting styles are being used.

You can adopt the sheep mentality if you like. I think for myself. I wish you could "observe" my middle finger about now.

Funny, I hardly ever have a problem with that. You really need to primarily start organizing your reading by thread, not date.

Opinion. One I disagree with. You don't seem to have too much trouble responding to my posts. Honestly now, are you claiming it is too hard to scroll down to scan the context if needed, but it isn't a big deal to have to do the scrolling to get to the fresh material each and every time? If so that is soooo illogical.

Sure there is. Maybe you should better learn how to use a news reader to advantage.

It's right below new material! If you consider that a hard nut to crack, then I guess I'm starting to realize what I'm dealing with here.

Sigh. Can you say "bahh"? There is plenty of support for top posting too. I prefer to debate my stance on my own. There once was a man named Copernicus who suggested it was wise to understand that the earth and other planets revolved around the sun. Convention said that no, everything rotated around the earth. Oh the great ones that were quoted, even the great Aristotle and others. And yet even so, Calumnious was right; convention was wrong.

THAT from our friend who calls himself DIZZY ;)

mike hunt

So you claim that top posters are the lazy ones, then claim that those who do not cull their quoted material are lazy but only as a subset of the true lazy ones. That means you are saying that bottom posters never fail to properly cull their quoted material, or it means you are saying that if they do fail we shouldn't label them lazy. Are you daft sir? Is not there mountains of evidence of bottom posting full quoting idiots even here in this very newsgroup?

Sound rationale has been provided. You respond by insults like idiot then here's one for you.... go f*ck yourself.

Which one do you use, just out of curiousity? I'm not exactly a newsgroup connoisseur, and I've been using xnews for absolute years. Honestly, haven't compared it to much of anything other than that crappy outlook express feature.

snipped-for-privacy@ihatespam.net (SgtSilicon) wrote in news:43cb1a22.83778500 @nntp.charter.net:

dizzy wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:

It does give me the right to put my post at the top, where people can read it quickly and move on. You can insult as much as you want, but I've been online for many years, and I've never thought the 'bottom post' was a better way of doing it. J

Dear Mike, I do not know what dream world you live but let me share some real world experience with you. In my life I have owned, Mustang, F150, Taurus, Contour, Impala, Silverado, 280ZX, 240SX, Caprice, and now a Sebring. can say without a doubt that not only are the foreign made cars better quality but they hold their value....

Look at what has happened to Mercedes since the merger... gone to hell... same thing with Volvo and Ford.

Current car 2002 Sebring Convertible LXi is a total piece of shit.... within 3 years it has developed some serious issues including the AC/Heat blower motor refusing to operate no matter the mechanics do. If it were not a lease it would have been back in the dealers show room, whether or not he opened the doors!!!! Oh and by the why if Chrysler thinks they make such good vehicle why do they not stand behind them. The rotors warped on the Sebring in less than 15,000 miles, dealer said tough luck.... Even Ford warranties their stuff better..not much.

So come down off your "American made" high horse, its just not true... I am a red blooded American too....but I can see the truth....

Look at the consumer reports reliability ratings,,,, hell even look at the the predicted reliabilty ratings..... I think there might be one American made car on the list....

My next car will either be a Lexus or Toyota of some kind

They did not steal anything from US car companies you idiot. The manufacturing process was offered to all American auto makers but they refused because it would cost to must to implement.

Look at