Re: Stupid GM Features (was GM hates Italian Cars)

[Simon Favre <favres@engmail.ulinear.com>]

Al Marrin wrote:

>Here's another "feature" of GM cars.  A friend owns a GMC Jimmy.  Couple
>years back, he blew a head gasket and got some water in the oil.  He
>talked to several shops (both dealers and independents) and was told be
>every one that the GM V6 is not re-buildable, that he would have to
>replace the engine with a brand new one.  And no, they weren't just
>taking him for a ride.  Someone here at work has a buddy that's service
>manager with a local dealer who confirmed that they don't rebuild them.
>Leave it to GM to design a throw-away engine.

I believe the original Mazda rotary was considered "disposable" as well.

Perhaps this is more a matter of economics than style.  Perhaps they got
the engine production cost down so low that rebuilding one would be more
expensive than simply replacing it and recycling the used metal.  This
makes the engine a "commodity" to be simply replaced.  It saves them the
expense of having tons of parts out in the field, and the expense of
training service techs to rebuild them in the field.  When one dies,
they just pop in a "crate" motor.  Have you checked shop labor rates
lately?  This means the cost of rebuilding one crossed over the cost of
replacing it with a new one.  To an Alfa owner, the engine is anything
but a commodity.  It's a work of art.  Rebuilding is always an option.

This GM thing reminds me of the "lifetime warranty" on transmission
fluid.  There is no such thing as transmission fluid that will last
forever.  What the car companies are doing is betting money that the
transmission fluid will outlive the rest of the car in the hands of an
average consumer.  They are prepared to eat the cost of replacing a few
trannies in order to secure the publicity of a "lifetime warranty".

Count your blessings.  The cars with the GM V6 will never achieve
collector status.  Once the supply of new engines disappears, they're
history.  ;=)