|Topic Review (Newest First)|
|11-15-2012 10:37 PM|
Hi, Me too.
I am sure most of what he says would be libalous(sp?)
Beats me why the brands representitives haven't taken him to court.
He would lose.
And I would be happy
|10-14-2010 10:50 PM|
|oz3litre||It surprises me that the car industry hasn't challenged him, because the book must affect sales of new and used cars and if the info is wrong wouldn't that be grounds for action? It would be interesting to hear a debate between him and someone who knows what they are talking about, but I dare say that is not likely to happen.|
|10-14-2010 06:36 PM|
|Hans-Peter||I have just had a look at the PDF's, "twin rotor distributor on T/S 164 " ? yes it is very expensive to replace but those only came on mid sixties GTA's . Cam belts difficult and expensive to replace on Suds ? wasn't whem I did it, indeed the reports are full of inaccuracies.|
|10-14-2010 06:15 PM|
|azzaob||oz3litre wrote The trouble is that the average, mechanically ignorant person treats the book as factual, rather than fictional.Exactly and for most people the $10 it costs is a cheap way of getting an idea of what is a good car or not before hitting the wonderful world of car yards or the perils of online car buying, so despite what we might think of it he is listened to. The only reason I got the PDFs was through buying VIN reports through CarJam. They now give you a free D&L review of the model of the car you check.....most of my cars carry an "Avoid Like the Plague" recommendation|
|10-14-2010 04:41 PM|
|oz3litre||The fact that he won't retract his statements and doesn't seem concerned about being wrong, just proves that he is only doing it to make money, which he does very successfully. The trouble is that the average, mechanically ignorant person treats the book as factual, rather than fictional. The other thing that worries me is that radio stations use him as an "expert authority".|
|10-14-2010 04:16 PM|
Oh great the D&L what a pile of rubbish as a guide for car buyers.
I once wrote to the guy in respect of the comments in the guide re the 156. He actually bothered to reply, almost apologetically, saying the only Alfa he had any first hand experience was a rusty Alfasud, and on that basis, hearsay etc, castigates all Alfas, Fiats, Lancias and probably most other in fact decent and interesting cars.
He conceeded that my experience in fact might be more the norm, that being my 156 hadn't suffered nor still hasn't from the crap that was written in the guide. Not though that despite his concessions, he has seen fit to re-appraise the comments in the guide.
Basically, I take no notice of the guide and reckon its only value is as a firelighter, in the same vein as yesterday's newspaper.
|10-12-2010 09:25 PM|
I bet he never hears or choses to ignore incidents like that. Hyundai gearboxes were another weakness at one stage that we got to hear about when I was selling new Nissans about 4 years ago.
I think though that at present it is correct that if a car is an appliance to you and minimisation of cost is the number one quality you seek you cannot go past the latest range (and evidently over the last 4 or so yrs) Hyundais.
Working in a motor group that sold Nissan, Toyota /Lexus and Volkswagen certainly reminded you there is no such thing as the perfect brand and Toyota especially, during this time, were rapidly falling.
|10-12-2010 05:23 PM|
Originally Posted by Hans-Peter View Post
|10-12-2010 11:10 AM|
|Hans-Peter||I didn't know about his Oxford which does really put him in his place, I have driven one and never have to again, however I think his stance is that if you want a reliable cheap to run car get something modern from Korea and he has a point, but we are a long time dead and would die of boredom quicker by taking that route.|
|10-12-2010 02:11 AM|
Again Rab he talks rubbish. The Alfa seats are stellite, the valves high quality and Alfas do not have valve problems caused by unleaded fuel. on the other hand his poxy old Morris Oxford with its cheapo BMC B series engine-cast iron head (and block)has its valve seats machined directly into the cast iron and they do suffer from valve recession without the heads being rebuilt to have harder material valve seats inserted.
In my vast experience the engineering and materials of Alfa Romeo mechanicals up to the time when Fiat had input in design were superior to most vehicles-they were "engineers cars". Only cars better being the pre Beta Lancias. In the `50`s `60`s `70`s and `80`s ordinary cars such as Fords, Holdens, Chevs, Austins etc including the Japanese really were crap made of cheap nasty materials, generally designed poorly with poor directional stability , poor brakes, poor handling, and rusted as badly if not worse than Alfas. Just go and drive what Joe Average drove then and you will appreciate the huge gulf that existed then between an Alfa and the ordinary.
|10-12-2010 12:20 AM|
Originally Posted by Kiwi 74 Alfa View Post
|10-11-2010 11:39 PM|
|Kiwi 74 Alfa||
Don't get too concerned. He says similar things about every car that is even half desirable to drive. His ideal car would be one as durable and as exiting as a TK Bedford truck.
I did note he said that all pre 79 Alfas needed fuel additive. Is he right and, if so, what additive?
|10-11-2010 05:08 AM|
|sam the chemist||Good point and well made|
|10-11-2010 05:01 AM|
|oz3litre||Take anything you read in that particular publication with a large quantity of grains of salt is my advice. The guy drives a Morris Oxford and gets his info from old factory recall bulletins and hearsay as far as I know. I don't think he is even a mechanic. I think that about the only cars he actually likes are a couple of BMWs and his Morris. He is very good at self promotion.|
|10-10-2010 11:07 PM|
Originally Posted by sam the chemist View Post
I am sure lots of Kiwis swear by it though???
|This thread has more than 15 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|