Triton recalled
in [Aussie Drivers]
|
Prev: Feels like a soap opera.... Wagon again....
Next: Another epic yank lawsuit Woman hit by car sues Google over directions
From: John McKenzie on 4 Jun 2010 17:37 Noddy wrote: > > <OzOne(a)Crackerbox-Palace.com> wrote in message > news:gqeg069hihe7vp6go8sg16ua6pk9qsf90q(a)4ax.com... > > > Of course, your job was to make money for the dealer. > > It was essential that you ignore ite,s listed for inspection and > > charge for washer fluid top ups. > > > > I do understand. > > Um, no Ozliar, you clearly *don't* understand. He understads allright. all this bullshit will hopefully move attention away from him being proved a complete liar and imbecile on the race car spec, class and championship win, oh and the plane too. > You're not liking having your own bullshit fed back to you these days I > see... :) Don't ya get it? He can't fool anyone in real life. you just can't live under a sheet of corrugated iron in macquarie fields and say it's a darling harbour mansion, so usenet billionaire it is. The idiot would probably respond with 'I didnt say darling harbour, i live in sanctuary cove. Or some similar bullshit. Of course you do Oz, and your butler just got off the phone with the private detective, he's found your race car, it was ar the smithsonian in the US. Mostly due to it's incredible split weber 8 port intake conversion. One of a kind that one. And the Austalian skeptics society has honoured you with the helen dimidenko annual award. -- John McKenzie tosspam(a)aol.com abuse(a)yahoo.com abuse(a)hotmail.com abuse(a)earthlink.com abuse(a)aol.com vice.president(a)whitehouse.gov president(a)whitehouse.gov sweep.day(a)accc.gov.au uce(a)ftc.gov admin(a)loopback abuse(a)iprimus.com.au $LOGIN(a)localhost I knew Sanchez before they were dirty root(a)mailloop.com $USER@$HOST $LOGNAME(a)localhost -h1024(a)localhost abuse(a)msn.com abuse(a)federalpolice.gov.au fraudinfo(a)psinet.com abuse(a)asio.gov.au $USER(a)localhost abuse(a)sprint.com abuse(a)fbi.gov abuse(a)cia.gov
From: Feral on 4 Jun 2010 18:32 Noddy wrote: > Feral, I can't be bothered pal. If you think I'm an idiot then good on you. > However the fact remains that Sports Racing Closed was never an offical > class, and the more important fact is that whether it was or wasn't is > completely irrelevant as far as this conversation is concerned as it all > centres around Ozliar and his claims to have raced in that class. By your > own admission it ended and became Sports Sedan, and that happened in 1969 > which was some years *prior* to when Ozliar claimed he did his racing. One of the cites had pics and reference for 1973. Where did you get 1969 from? -- Take Care. ~~ Feral Al ( @..@) (\- :-P -/) ((.>__oo__<.)) ^^^ % ^^^
From: hippo on 4 Jun 2010 19:22 Noddy wrote: > > > <OzOne(a)Crackerbox-Palace.com> wrote in message > news:ddhg0695mqmda7uckha26gt5sr1cpcm2p1(a)4ax.com... > > > Of course...you find anything that you don't get, hilarious > > On the contrary Ozliar, I find most of what you say extremely amusing as it > makes about as much sense as an ashtray on a motorcycle. > > > Yeah...You sure are making up for it eh! > > Can'y help but comment on anything I post. > > If it bothers you, and it clearly does, then consider the conversation over > as of this instant. Make no further replies and that will be the end of it. > > The power is yours, but I'm not holding my breath waiting for you to > exercise it :) > > -- > Regards, > Noddy. > > > > Actually, an ashtray on a bike has a certain appeal, if I still smoked. I could aim it at the pricks who lob butts out of the window that then follow Murphy's Law and lodge in between your neck and the helmet strap! -- Posted at www.usenet.com.au
From: hippo on 4 Jun 2010 19:28 OzOne(a)Crackerbox-Palace.com wrote: > > On Fri, 04 Jun 2010 10:12:20 +1000, D Walford > <dwalford(a)internode.on.net> wrote: > > >On 4/06/2010 9:30 AM, OzOne(a)Crackerbox-Palace.com wrote: > >> On Thu, 3 Jun 2010 22:29:05 +1000, "Noddy"<me(a)home.com> wrote: > >> > >>> > >>> <OzOne(a)Crackerbox-Palace.com> wrote in message > >>> news:5u5f061s26iom77e82pc15b53fi3f09jco(a)4ax.com... > >>> > >>>> Indeed that's why I made my original comment. > >>> > >>> No it's not. > >>> > >>> You made your original comment in some pissweak apologist attempt to hose > >>> the problem down because it's a "Mitsubishi issue". If it was a Holden fault > >>> you'd be falling all over yourself to tell everyone how bad it is. > >>> > >>> Your original comment *also* showed everyone how little you know about what > >>> goes on when it comes to servicing cars. Be it by the book or otherwise. > >> > >> > >> No I made my comment to show that IF the first services were carried > >> out as directed then in this case Mitsu would not have a recall. > > > >I very much doubt they would have found the fault unless a bolt had > >become loose enough to be very obvious. > >It doesn't take many vehicles to show the fault for a recall to be > >issued especially after recent events with Toyota in the USA so the > >fault won't be evident on most vehicles. > >If a bolt was only torqued to half its spec it would not be seen with a > >visual inspection, a mechanic would have to check each bolt with a > >torque wrench to find the problem and we all know that that won't happen > >unless they are specifically told to. > > > > > >Daryl > > > But the bolts were coming loose and falling out. > That would have been picked up if a proper check was carried out, and > would have been corrected in service rather than a recall. > > > > > OzOne of the three twins > > I welcome you to Crackerbox Palace. > > FWIW, up to the late '70s at least, some Renault, BMC and Saab agents routinely did just that. 30 years earlier, *everyone* probably did, or else the cars would eventually have disassembled themselves - same with steam locos even today! Imagine what the average owner these days would say at current labour rates when presented with a $200 or more labour item on *each* service invoice for 'checking security of all bolts and fasteners'. Mmmm! -- Posted at www.usenet.com.au
From: hippo on 4 Jun 2010 19:34
Noddy wrote: > > > <OzOne(a)Crackerbox-Palace.com> wrote in message > news:kkhg06lp0toan0ar5mnnca83e90ppbcu6d(a)4ax.com... > > > " The principal focus was to relieve the > > customer of as much money as was humanly possible, and I'd imagine > > that to be exactly the same" > > Well done Ozliar. That's exactly what I said. > > There's no money in selling new cars. Selling them is a means to an end in > that with each one they sell gets a new customer into the service department > where their wallets can be raped en masse. It's the principal business > doctrine of car dealerships and it has been since the year dot. > > However, exactly what this little tidbit has to do with the topic at hand is > known only to you. More of your usual irrelevant focus shifting I > suppose.... > > -- > Regards, > Noddy. > > > > > > > That's not news though. Henry Ford said quite early on in the Model T's run that he would be prepared to give customers a *free* car provided they promised to only ever obtain spares and service from his company. -- Posted at www.usenet.com.au |