On Wednesday, May 27, 2015 at 2:30:22 AM UTC-10, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 2015-05-27 6:15 AM, wrote:
> > On Tue, 26 May 2015 21:52:09 -0400, Dave Smith
> > > wrote:
> >
> >> On 2015-05-26 20:44, wrote:
> >>
> >>> I've had no gripes about their work, just their price gouging
> >>> prices. An example: I was in for recall, free fix, but they
> >>> did do a bit of going over to check for other things. They
> >>> said I needed a new fuel filter and the price was $50; my local
> >>> garage did it for $10.
> >>>
> >> My last Ford went in in a recall, came back running like crap. They said
> >> it needed a tuneup, even though there was low mileage. Then they found a
> >> cracked head casket.
> >>
> >> A short time later the battery up and died. No problem they told me...
> >> it's under warranty. FWIW.. it was 1988. It cost me $165. I could have
> >> picked up a battery at Canadian Tire for $70. Service manager said it
> >> would be a lower quality battery. Lower quality than the one that died
> >> after 6 months?
> >>
> >> They also charged me an hour for labour... and a battery can be change
> >> din 10 minutes. The real kicker was the $46.95 test for the AVR test.
> >> When I questioned that he told me it was the amperage voltage and
> >> resistance test. Yes... I know that... why am I being charged and why
> >> is it $46.95. He asked if I thought that had a meter that with a couple
> >> clamps they attached?.... Yes... that it exactly how it is done.
> >>
> >> I told them to watch me going out because they would never see me coming
> >> back in. I didn't exactly keep that promise. A few years later I stopped
> >> by and asked the manager to come out and see my new van.... a Mazda.
> >
> > I did that with Volvo years ago - the damn thing was always running up
> > bills and the worst thing was screechy brakes. The last crunch was
> > going for a service and getting them to put the snows on. When I
> > collected it, as usual the service was about $230 and I was advised
> > that a belt had gone in one of the tires - so why had they put them
> > on? I asked the manager to put the all seasons back on, then he
> > wanted to charge me for that and I left.
> >
> > Within a couple of days we had bought a Honda Accord and as the Volvo
> > mans office was on the corner nearby with plate glass, I drove up
> > beside it, waited til he was watching me and gave him the finger.
> >
>
>
> Volvos are supposed to be good cars. Two of my brothers bought new cars
> a few years ago. The bitch inlaw demanded that one get a Volvo because
> their son had one and he always has the best of everything. The other
> bought a Nissan. The closest Volvo dealer is in Hamilton, 40 miles away
> so when he took it in for his first oil change and inspection the bill
> was over $400. The other took his Nissan to the local dealer and paid
> about $40.

I never got the appeal of Volvos. They seemed unrefined, as if they were meant to be operated by people wearing snow gloves. They are Sweden's answer to the American Chevy. I guess that's fine if you like Chevies. The only thing special about them to me is that they have a Volvo plant in my step-mom's home town.

On Wed, 27 May 2015 09:58:20 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 >
wrote:

> I never got the appeal of Volvos. They seemed unrefined, as if they were meant to be operated by people wearing snow gloves. They are Sweden's answer to the American Chevy. I guess that's fine if you like Chevies. The only thing special about them to me is that they have a Volvo plant in my step-mom's home town.

There was a time back when Volvo had those commercial of one going off
a cliff and showing how the front end absorbs all the damage, that my
son (who so badly wanted me to be part of the crowd) campaigned for me
to buy a Volvo wagon when I was looking for a new car. I bought a 2
door Lancia hatchback with a sunroof instead (no air-conditioner or
auto-transmission). It was fun and utilitarian too. Those were the
days when I had a decent tan just because of the amount of time I
spent driving around in that car with the sunroof open.

--

sf

On 5/27/2015 10:06 AM, sf wrote:
> On Wed, 27 May 2015 09:58:20 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 >
> wrote:
>
>> I never got the appeal of Volvos. They seemed unrefined, as if they were meant to be operated by people wearing snow gloves. They are Sweden's answer to the American Chevy. I guess that's fine if you like Chevies. The only thing special about them to me is that they have a Volvo plant in my step-mom's home town.
>
> There was a time back when Volvo had those commercial of one going off
> a cliff and showing how the front end absorbs all the damage, that my
> son (who so badly wanted me to be part of the crowd) campaigned for me
> to buy a Volvo wagon when I was looking for a new car. I bought a 2
> door Lancia hatchback with a sunroof instead (no air-conditioner or
> auto-transmission). It was fun and utilitarian too. Those were the
> days when I had a decent tan just because of the amount of time I
> spent driving around in that car with the sunroof open.
>

I like to drive over the mountain in the morning with the moonroof open.
It's quite a pleasant drive. I'm not getting a tan from that drive though.

Years ago, I was looking for a Lancia Zagato. Fortunately, I was never
able to find one at a good price. Hee hee.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ei-IezGYgvU

On Wed, 27 May 2015 10:52:12 -1000, dsi1
> wrote:

> Years ago, I was looking for a Lancia Zagato. Fortunately, I was never
> able to find one at a good price. Hee hee.
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ei-IezGYgvU

That model is so much better than any T top I've seen in person,
because the T stays in place.

--

sf