the more things change ...

I think you run into that in a lot of places. My Buick wouldnt pass the EU exam in Europe. Some of the ball joint rubbers were cracked, but not leaking, and there were a lot of other comments. This sort of thing would not even begin to fail a car in the USA.

I got some parts flown in from the USA and managed to get it to pass muster.

Valve cover seeps are bad, as are a bunch of other things. As you may have heard Cuhulin post earlier, in some parts of the USA, you go in and they put an approved sticker on your car, no matter what it is like.

Reply to
hls
Loading thread data ...

In Canada from what I understand. In the Yew Ess, the only state that I know of that has licensing is Michigan.

I think it is quite rare myself.

If the consumer would question the qualifications of the shops/mechanics they are choosing, market forces would take care of the ignorance and incompetent part.

They get to limp along picking up the scraps.

Reply to
aarcuda69062

Do you remember the specifics?

Thank you. I try my best to stay current. I've always said, there's more than enough honest money to be made in this industry, there's no need to be a cheat and a scoundrel.

Reply to
aarcuda69062

There is ZERO evidence that these inspections achieve anything except putting money in the pockets of "inspection shops". Just another scam put in place by a combination of political morons wanting campaign contributions and special interest groups like auto repair associations and parts manufacturers.

Reply to
Ashton Crusher

Are you kidding?? At least in regard to lawyers, they are the ONLY professional group that has the ability to run their own "oversight" rather then some state board running it. You do realize that the "Bar" is NOT a gvt agency but is just the lawyers own professional organization. Until a rare honest judge ruled that the BAR could not infringe on the first amendment it was illegal for lawyers to advertise. Why? Because it would drive down fees and teh BAR didn't want that.

Reply to
Ashton Crusher

I dont remember right now. It may have been some of the electronics systems. I have always thought that the integrated fuel pump module was an answer to a problem that didnt exist.

Reply to
hls

I can't think of any electronics system on a late model GM vehicle that can't be serviced by an independent shop that is properly equipped and trained. The equipment is freely available, the service information is freely available and the programming is freely available. Freely available doesn't mean free however. The training is what I mentioned in an earlier post. Two weeks ago I took a Delco class in Appleton Wi. drove 90 miles each way. The instructor is one of the best in the GM stable, he, the Delco rep in attendance and the rep from the warehouse profusely thanked those of us who attended for showing up. At the end I questioned the Delco rep as to why this particular series of classes were not available closer to Milwaukee (being totally selfish and ignoring that the instructor had driven from Chicago) his reply was that there wasn't enough interest in the Milwaukee area. Also worth noting is that although this was an AC Delco class and AC Delco paid trainer, this particular module of the class dealt with Ford (Motorcraft) flash J2534 programming. They also had a class module for Chrysler and there is one coming up on the Asian brands.

Not quite as nice as when every GM training center had a United Delco classroom and instructor on site but I'll take it either way.

But it does address a problem. Evaporative emissions. It insures leak integrity and insures that the fuel level sensor will read accurately enough that the EVAP monitors run when they are supposed to.

Reply to
aarcuda69062

Precisely.

Check out the ads in the airline magazines for plastic surgeons some time.

--scott

Reply to
Scott Dorsey

I have seen safety inspections pick up some pretty scary stuff. And having lived in states without safety inspections, I have seen some pretty scary stuff on the road that should have been picked up with an inspection. I'm talking about stuff like hand-welded control arms and nearly nonfunctional brakes.

Yes, some shops do use state inspections as an opportunity to find things that will become revenue sources, and some of those things aren't things that really exist. But don't blame the whole procedure just because of that.

--scott

Reply to
Scott Dorsey

Same thing could be accomplished with the external fuel pumps used on some vehicles and you wouldn't have to pay $500 ($350 labor) to replace a fuel pump. I think the main reason is that it's just cheaper to assemble the car if you stick EVERYTHING in the fuel tank.

Reply to
Ashton Crusher

The fuel pumps my son replaced on our cars have cost more than $150. Think the one on the '93 Grand Am was maybe $271 - that rings a bell. And we shopped it. That's the complete unit. Can't remember now, but after a false and cheaper start, maybe without the sender part, it was the way to go. Luckily what we bought first was exchanged. I though the reason for in-tank pumps was to cool them, since they're working harder with FI. Is that wrong?

--Vic

Reply to
Vic Smith

What a steaming load. State inspections have always been about generating revenue. What percentage of traffic incidents involving fatalities, injuries or even the simplest of accidents does documentation or any statistical analysis indicate have a causal relationship with faulty control equipment; and what percentage of those would or could be averted by a necessarily imperfect and always corrupt yearly inspection system?

Reply to
Heron McKeister

There are actually other valid concerns and reasons for placing the pump in the tank. .

formatting link
I however can think of none for not locating them in the vicinity of an easily removed inspection plate (such as under a rear seat) so that they can be easily extracted.

Reply to
Heron McKeister

Oops, I gues that link should have read:

formatting link

Reply to
Heron McKeister

aarcuda69062 wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@nothing.attdns.com:

Hm. So then I could just open up a shop outside of MI and bill myself as a "mechanic" and nobody would be the wiser?

And so I have, and have therefore declined to have my cars serviced at most places I've scoped out.

Then I made one BIG mistake at a shop that billed itself as a Japanese car specialist. See below.

We were victimized by such a professional monkey when the head gasket in the Tercel went two summers ago. He's a licensed mechanic, about 45- years-old. The shop's owner told me he's their "top tech".

I chose that shop because they'd done a good job for me on the A/C issue with the same car, and because their customer service was pretty good.

Here's what the monkey got wrong:

1) Did not know about the "scissor gear" on the one camshaft, so idle very bad and MIL illuminated with cam position sensor error; 2) Failed to seal end cam-cap, and so oil leaked down outside of head; 3) Upper rad hose installed backwards & fouling on air intake duct 4) Throttle cable mount bent and loose, had to straighten and readjust; 5) Valve adjustment shims mixed up; all clearances wrong; 6) Got oil in the coolant. Had to change coolant as soon as I got home, and have spent the last two years cleaning residue out as it rises to the top (residue tends to ruin rad caps by attacking rubber);

The shop fixed the scissor-gear thing on a second try after I went back, but idle was still rough and the oil leak was still there. I drove 50 miles to my old guy, who found and fixed the other problems. Original bill was $800. My guy's bill was $400, but the car is now running correctly again.

So I'm back to me and my old guy being the only ones to touch our cars.

Reply to
Tegger

aarcuda69062 wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@nothing.attdns.com:

You come across as honest to me too.

My mechanic (the most knowledgeable and honest mechanic I've ever come across) tells me he wouldn't have to cheat even if he wanted to: People make most of their own problems with their cars and the ones they work on, so all he has to do is sit back and watch the work come in.

Reply to
Tegger

A problem that possibly doesnt need addressing. This modular unit costs about $400-600 for replacement, compared with the older in tank units which were a fraction of that.

Reply to
hls

We're not talking about the in-tank pumps of that era, Vic. Those pumps were cooled by the fuel, possibly had some other advantages. I had one replaced at a garage for $160 total.

These new units have the fuel pump and module integrated together. I have found them at NAPA for on the order of $400. Niece had one replace at a shop in the Dallas Fort Worth area for $600.

Reply to
hls

Teg, in Texas you can open a shop and bill yourself as anything you want. BUT, we have some of the most effective and complete deceptive trade practices legislation in this in the nation.

There are several sections of this law, but it basically says that if you say it, you'd better do it. Make a claim, even perhaps a foolish one, and you have made a covenant. Dont tell someone "This will solve your problem" unless you know for sure what his problems are and that you can and will solve them.

If someone files a suit against you under this law, the burden of proof is on you, and the penalty set by law is damages times 3.

Reply to
hls

aarcuda69062 wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@nothing.attdns.com:

Interesting. Was it like this before the death of the full service gas stations and service bays?

Reply to
fred

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.