Excellent tip, thanks!
Stiiles
Stiiles
I am so tired of this line of thought.
I disagree. Brake dust, for example, wasn’t even mentioned on the survey until 2006... and exactly what proof do you have that it “has always correlated very well to long term reliability”?
The shooter has been arrested: http://www.wltx.com/story/news/201…
If you’re talking about actual reliability issues, sure. But JDP is now just as much all about brake dust on the wheels, clunky infotainment interfaces and hard to clean seat fabric, none of which matters one bit to actual reliability.
Side note: motorcycles generally require a first service/break in oil change at around 600 miles, and a good dealership will schedule that service with the owner when they take delivery of their new bike. A good service writer will talk to the customer during that service and make sure any other concerns are addressed…
It’s not that meaningful. Manufacturers increasingly get significantly down voted for minor issues completely unrelated to reliability, like brake dust on the wheels, seat fabric that is hard to clean and clunky user interfaces on infotainment systems.
... Well, it's about 100% certain that the engine wasn’t running during that photoshoot, either, so I'm not sure what your point is, then.
Sometimes, not an option (when you’re really fixing a car). Like setting the timing on a ‘70 Cadillac.
This truck is rare and desirable, and looks to be in very nice shape. If you were looking for a performance mini truck back in the day, this was really the only option.
No.
It’s also possible that the IIHS is just covering for their policy of not testing entire body styles of pickups, or Auto News is wrong. Reporters do get things wrong sometimes- see 60 Minutes’ fraudulent report on GM truck gas tank fires for a particularly obnoxious example. People got fired for that one.
I think your article headline and premise are premature and not supported by the contents of the article. You have no proof that the extra component on the larger trucks is a safety related part, for starters.
It’s unclear if anyone knows for certain why Cernak was shot. He was shaking hands with FDR in Miami when he was shot, and the shooter’s arm was bumped by a bystander, plus he shot four other people in the process. FDR might have been the intended target. His Wikipedia page is interesting.
As much as I appreciate GAAP, I can’t take credit for that interpretation. :p
Yup, that’s Federal law. But how often do the Feds (or anyone else) send cops to collect guns from someone who has been freshly convicted of domestic violence?
You say it’s easily proven, yet you produce zero proof of your opinion.
Exactly. And this was during Prohibition, which started nearly 100 years ago.
Yup. This kind of incident is exactly why local police having a .50 rifle (and a sniper skilled and trained enough to use it effectively) is a legit and reasonable thing. The Killdozer incident comes to mind too.
Correct!