Re: Consumer Re****ts reliability survey for Cars

Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
> "Steve" <no@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> Same in reverse for Mercedes. Consumer Retards considers a broken radio
to 
>> be the same level of "unreliability" as a hole in the side of the
cylinder 
>> block where a connecting rod departed.... USELESS info. EVERY single 
>> person I know who owns a Mercedes would gladly own another. They're not

>> the heaps CR makes them out to be.
>>
>>
>>
> 
> Not so fast, Steve.  I owned one and have no desire to ever own one
again. 

Do I know you? ;-)


> Extremely expensive to keep up and repair and part costs are just 
> outrageous, and no more reliable than a Chevy.  I even bought a shop
manual 
> so I could tell the dealer how to fix some of the problems I had with
it.

No argument that they're no more reliable than a Chevy and that parts 
costs are stupid-high. But no LESS reliable either- everything from Kia 
to Toyota to Ford to Mercedes is really pretty comparable these days. 
But the people I know who own them consider the way they drive, the 
comfort, the quiet, etc. to be worth the cost of parts, but they 
typically have NOT had excessive problems. I'm not even arguing that its 
not placebo effect and status symbol effect that makest them like the 
cars (I sure as hell would RATHER have a Plymouth than a Mercedes, even 
if someone said "pick one of these for free) but my point is that the 
real world doesn't align with the CR world... again.


> Oh, and a broken radio would probably cost about the same as buying a 
> Pontiac to replace out of warranty. 

That's what Circuit City is for....