"Jim Yanik" <jyanik@abuse.gov.> wrote in message
news:Xns96A47F50FF19jyanikkuanet@129.250.170.84...
> "Steve Bigelow" <stevebigelowXXX@rogers.com> wrote in
> newsdadnVehus3aRHHfRVn-gQ@rogers.com:
>
>>
>> "Jim Yanik" <jyanik@abuse.gov.> wrote in message
>> news:Xns96A3D50822383jyanikkuanet@129.250.170.83.. .
>>> "Steve Bigelow" <stevebigelowXXX@rogers.com> wrote in
>>> news:gvqdnUTaMpe6nHHfRVn-hQ@rogers.com:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:elmop-E6BE88.18342330072005@nntp1.usenetserver.com...
>>>>> In article <kknne1t1eropvvu7f34ufmjs6lgtq80uct@4ax.com>,
>>>>> Elliot Richmond <xmrichmond@xaustin.xrr.xcom> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Here is what Toyota has to say about battery replacement
>>>>>> and recycling:
>>>>>
>>>>> Spun like a member of the Clinton family.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you believe Toyota's PR spin 100%, you're in for a big surprise.
>>>>
>>>> ....and?
>>>> That's it?
>>>>
>>>> Please enlighten us with your wisdom on the subject.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> NiMH and NiCd can only be recharged a number of times before their
>>> capacity
>>> drops off,and L-A batteries suffer from sulfation,electrolyte
>>> loss,and vibration/shock damage(material falls out of the lead
>>> grids,shorts the cell). Hot environments like the Southwest and
>>> Florida will shorten battery
>>> life further.
>>> I don't know of any rechargeable battery chemistry that can be
>>> recharged 100,000 times.
>>
>> Well, a hybrids' certainly wouldn't need to unless it only got 3 miles
>> per charge.
>
> They get charged before they run completely down;partial charges,"topping
> off".They still are charge cycles.
>
However, they are not failing. Try googling "prius battery fail" and you
will see about 10K hits with a ton of speculation about when the battery
will fail and about failures of the 12 volt aux battery (which is as
vulnerable as the 12 volt battery in conventional cars)... but good luck
finding a report of one that has actually died a natural death. Then google
"acura transmission fail" and you will get about 22K hits; why the
transmissions are failing, what to do about the transmissions failing. One
member of the Yahoo Prius group just had his150K mile service done on his
2001 and has done nothing but scheduled maintenance and tire replacement -
no battery failure yet. That figures since Toyota warranties the hybrid
system, including battery, for 8 years/100K miles (150K miles in CA).
Even the original Prius, sold since 1998 in Japan, has no battery failure
issues.

There is nothing in chemistry that limits the number of charge cycles for a
primary cell. Edison cells, for example, have no natural limitations on
charge/discharge cycles and usually last for decades but have poor energy
density. We are familiar with lead acid and NiCads which have serious life
limitations because of their particular chemistry so we assume all
rechargables do. Then we look at the batteries in portable electronics -
they are designed to charge as quickly as possible, have the highest
possible energy density and be profitable to replace - and we decide no
rechargable battery could last longer than a couple years... just as we
might watch sprinters and conclude no human can run more than a mile.

When it comes down to it, the experiment is on the roads and has been
successful for 7 years. At least one Prius has exceeded 200K miles
http://www.hybridexperience.ca/Reliability.htm

Mike

 

On Mon, 1 Aug 2005 05:45:33 -0700, "Michael Pardee"
<michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote:

>"Jim Yanik" <jyanik@abuse.gov.> wrote in message
>news:Xns96A47F50FF19jyanikkuanet@129.250.170.84.. .
>> "Steve Bigelow" <stevebigelowXXX@rogers.com> wrote in
>> newsdadnVehus3aRHHfRVn-gQ@rogers.com:
>>
>>>
>>> "Jim Yanik" <jyanik@abuse.gov.> wrote in message
>>> news:Xns96A3D50822383jyanikkuanet@129.250.170.83.. .
>>>> "Steve Bigelow" <stevebigelowXXX@rogers.com> wrote in
>>>> news:gvqdnUTaMpe6nHHfRVn-hQ@rogers.com:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:elmop-E6BE88.18342330072005@nntp1.usenetserver.com...
>>>>>> In article <kknne1t1eropvvu7f34ufmjs6lgtq80uct@4ax.com>,
>>>>>> Elliot Richmond <xmrichmond@xaustin.xrr.xcom> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Here is what Toyota has to say about battery replacement
>>>>>>> and recycling:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Spun like a member of the Clinton family.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you believe Toyota's PR spin 100%, you're in for a big surprise.
>>>>>
>>>>> ....and?
>>>>> That's it?
>>>>>
>>>>> Please enlighten us with your wisdom on the subject.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> NiMH and NiCd can only be recharged a number of times before their
>>>> capacity
>>>> drops off,and L-A batteries suffer from sulfation,electrolyte
>>>> loss,and vibration/shock damage(material falls out of the lead
>>>> grids,shorts the cell). Hot environments like the Southwest and
>>>> Florida will shorten battery
>>>> life further.
>>>> I don't know of any rechargeable battery chemistry that can be
>>>> recharged 100,000 times.
>>>
>>> Well, a hybrids' certainly wouldn't need to unless it only got 3 miles
>>> per charge.
>>
>> They get charged before they run completely down;partial charges,"topping
>> off".They still are charge cycles.
>>
>However, they are not failing. Try googling "prius battery fail" and you
>will see about 10K hits with a ton of speculation about when the battery
>will fail and about failures of the 12 volt aux battery (which is as
>vulnerable as the 12 volt battery in conventional cars)... but good luck
>finding a report of one that has actually died a natural death. Then google
>"acura transmission fail" and you will get about 22K hits; why the
>transmissions are failing, what to do about the transmissions failing. One
>member of the Yahoo Prius group just had his150K mile service done on his
>2001 and has done nothing but scheduled maintenance and tire replacement -
>no battery failure yet. That figures since Toyota warranties the hybrid
>system, including battery, for 8 years/100K miles (150K miles in CA).
>Even the original Prius, sold since 1998 in Japan, has no battery failure
>issues.
>
>There is nothing in chemistry that limits the number of charge cycles for a
>primary cell. Edison cells, for example, have no natural limitations on
>charge/discharge cycles and usually last for decades but have poor energy
>density. We are familiar with lead acid and NiCads which have serious life
>limitations because of their particular chemistry so we assume all
>rechargables do. Then we look at the batteries in portable electronics -
>they are designed to charge as quickly as possible, have the highest
>possible energy density and be profitable to replace - and we decide no
>rechargable battery could last longer than a couple years... just as we
>might watch sprinters and conclude no human can run more than a mile.

oh dear, the old 'we're all familier with X, which is kinda like Y,
and so what we know happens with X, we also assume happens to y -
Sorry, thats complete and utter, unadulterated BULLSHIT. Save your
pop-psychology for the easily impressed - such as any children under
10 you might have.

NIcads and NIMH have lmited charge cycles. Why? conductive crystaline
formaton int he cell, producing an effectively 'shorter' cell. can you
fix this? yes you can, alsthough its tricky to do, and risky - you zap
the cells.

>
>When it comes down to it, the experiment is on the roads and has been
>successful for 7 years. At least one Prius has exceeded 200K miles
>http://www.hybridexperience.ca/Reliability.htm

Whoopdie do. One has managed 200k miles, conrgatulations, pat on the
back there. I've a first gen caravan thats managed that too, doesn't
make it a particularly good van. Second, you keep making this song and
deal about a vehicle that is expensive to make, would have to be run
for over 300,000 miles before its actually more efficient in TOTAL
than a similarly sized conventional car, and which would probably be
more efficient if you just ran it as a straight petrol engine. Want to
be fuel efficient, two easy rules
1) be smooth with driving, and make speed ransitions smooth and slowly
2) remove any unneccesarry weight. - less weight = less fuel needed.
Take out the weighty electrical system, and you'll probably get around
the same mpg.


Lets look at it another way, EPA rating for prius 51mpg (very
optomistic rating, as with all EPA ratings) I've seen an Audi A8
(thats the big one) with a 4l V8 twin turbo engine (thats a big engine
too) return 40mpg. A car designed to be big, heavy, smooth,
comfortable - ANYTHING but fuel efficient - can get such figures
speaks volumes. i will admit that was highway driving, if you'd rather
have a small car, and think about fuel economy from the get-go, VW
group also make a lupo - agains non-hybrid - thats RATED at 65mpg.

People with hybrids can be described in one word - poser. "Look at me,
i'm driving a hybrid, aren't I trendy, trying to show i'm conserned
with the enviroment, but cool, and have money to waste" - what a right
old load of bollocks it is.

>
>Mike
>

 

On Mon, 1 Aug 2005 05:45:33 -0700, "Michael Pardee"
<michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote:

>"Jim Yanik" <jyanik@abuse.gov.> wrote in message
>news:Xns96A47F50FF19jyanikkuanet@129.250.170.84.. .
>> "Steve Bigelow" <stevebigelowXXX@rogers.com> wrote in
>> newsdadnVehus3aRHHfRVn-gQ@rogers.com:
>>
>>>
>>> "Jim Yanik" <jyanik@abuse.gov.> wrote in message
>>> news:Xns96A3D50822383jyanikkuanet@129.250.170.83.. .
>>>> "Steve Bigelow" <stevebigelowXXX@rogers.com> wrote in
>>>> news:gvqdnUTaMpe6nHHfRVn-hQ@rogers.com:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:elmop-E6BE88.18342330072005@nntp1.usenetserver.com...
>>>>>> In article <kknne1t1eropvvu7f34ufmjs6lgtq80uct@4ax.com>,
>>>>>> Elliot Richmond <xmrichmond@xaustin.xrr.xcom> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Here is what Toyota has to say about battery replacement
>>>>>>> and recycling:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Spun like a member of the Clinton family.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you believe Toyota's PR spin 100%, you're in for a big surprise.
>>>>>
>>>>> ....and?
>>>>> That's it?
>>>>>
>>>>> Please enlighten us with your wisdom on the subject.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> NiMH and NiCd can only be recharged a number of times before their
>>>> capacity
>>>> drops off,and L-A batteries suffer from sulfation,electrolyte
>>>> loss,and vibration/shock damage(material falls out of the lead
>>>> grids,shorts the cell). Hot environments like the Southwest and
>>>> Florida will shorten battery
>>>> life further.
>>>> I don't know of any rechargeable battery chemistry that can be
>>>> recharged 100,000 times.
>>>
>>> Well, a hybrids' certainly wouldn't need to unless it only got 3 miles
>>> per charge.
>>
>> They get charged before they run completely down;partial charges,"topping
>> off".They still are charge cycles.
>>
>However, they are not failing. Try googling "prius battery fail" and you
>will see about 10K hits with a ton of speculation about when the battery
>will fail and about failures of the 12 volt aux battery (which is as
>vulnerable as the 12 volt battery in conventional cars)... but good luck
>finding a report of one that has actually died a natural death. Then google
>"acura transmission fail" and you will get about 22K hits; why the
>transmissions are failing, what to do about the transmissions failing. One
>member of the Yahoo Prius group just had his150K mile service done on his
>2001 and has done nothing but scheduled maintenance and tire replacement -
>no battery failure yet. That figures since Toyota warranties the hybrid
>system, including battery, for 8 years/100K miles (150K miles in CA).
>Even the original Prius, sold since 1998 in Japan, has no battery failure
>issues.
>
>There is nothing in chemistry that limits the number of charge cycles for a
>primary cell. Edison cells, for example, have no natural limitations on
>charge/discharge cycles and usually last for decades but have poor energy
>density. We are familiar with lead acid and NiCads which have serious life
>limitations because of their particular chemistry so we assume all
>rechargables do. Then we look at the batteries in portable electronics -
>they are designed to charge as quickly as possible, have the highest
>possible energy density and be profitable to replace - and we decide no
>rechargable battery could last longer than a couple years... just as we
>might watch sprinters and conclude no human can run more than a mile.

oh dear, the old 'we're all familier with X, which is kinda like Y,
and so what we know happens with X, we also assume happens to y -
Sorry, thats complete and utter, unadulterated BULLSHIT. Save your
pop-psychology for the easily impressed - such as any children under
10 you might have.

NIcads and NIMH have lmited charge cycles. Why? conductive crystaline
formaton int he cell, producing an effectively 'shorter' cell. can you
fix this? yes you can, alsthough its tricky to do, and risky - you zap
the cells.

>
>When it comes down to it, the experiment is on the roads and has been
>successful for 7 years. At least one Prius has exceeded 200K miles
>http://www.hybridexperience.ca/Reliability.htm

Whoopdie do. One has managed 200k miles, conrgatulations, pat on the
back there. I've a first gen caravan thats managed that too, doesn't
make it a particularly good van. Second, you keep making this song and
deal about a vehicle that is expensive to make, would have to be run
for over 300,000 miles before its actually more efficient in TOTAL
than a similarly sized conventional car, and which would probably be
more efficient if you just ran it as a straight petrol engine. Want to
be fuel efficient, two easy rules
1) be smooth with driving, and make speed ransitions smooth and slowly
2) remove any unneccesarry weight. - less weight = less fuel needed.
Take out the weighty electrical system, and you'll probably get around
the same mpg.


Lets look at it another way, EPA rating for prius 51mpg (very
optomistic rating, as with all EPA ratings) I've seen an Audi A8
(thats the big one) with a 4l V8 twin turbo engine (thats a big engine
too) return 40mpg. A car designed to be big, heavy, smooth,
comfortable - ANYTHING but fuel efficient - can get such figures
speaks volumes. i will admit that was highway driving, if you'd rather
have a small car, and think about fuel economy from the get-go, VW
group also make a lupo - agains non-hybrid - thats RATED at 65mpg.

People with hybrids can be described in one word - poser. "Look at me,
i'm driving a hybrid, aren't I trendy, trying to show i'm conserned
with the enviroment, but cool, and have money to waste" - what a right
old load of bollocks it is.

>
>Mike
>

 

"flobert" <nomail@here.NOT> wrote in message
news:aaase1lg0i6amans69chnlh9ujmubv6hb8@4ax.com...

> People with hybrids can be described in one word - poser. "Look at me,
> i'm driving a hybrid, aren't I trendy, trying to show i'm conserned
> with the enviroment, but cool, and have money to waste" - what a right
> old load of bollocks it is.

I have a solution for you!
Don't worry about what other people drive.

 

"flobert" <nomail@here.NOT> wrote in message
news:aaase1lg0i6amans69chnlh9ujmubv6hb8@4ax.com...

> People with hybrids can be described in one word - poser. "Look at me,
> i'm driving a hybrid, aren't I trendy, trying to show i'm conserned
> with the enviroment, but cool, and have money to waste" - what a right
> old load of bollocks it is.

I have a solution for you!
Don't worry about what other people drive.

 

"Sid Schweiger" <spam@this.cretin> wrote in
news:SL6dnW0aLqcf-nDfRVn-3w@comcast.com:

>>>Tobacco companies had data,too,yet still told people smoking was
>>>safe.<<
>
> I deeply appreciate you making my point for me. Just as multiple
> disinterested parties came up with the data to contradict the tobacco
> companies (which is what got them to admit that they had the same
> data), I'm still waiting for Elmo P. Anonymous to come up with the
> data to contradict Toyota.
>
>

I note you edited out the comments about auto companies knowing about
product defects in their vehicles(hidden warranties),yet not revealing them
so they would not have to correct them at their expense,until enough
'incidents' occur and public indignation forces them to correct them,hoping
that the owners would fix them themselves at their own cost.Also,the
"lemon" laws that had to be passed to get auto companies to replace
vehicles with major recurring defects.


Actually,disgruntled tobacco employees revealed that the companies had the
data for many years.

It's also like the recent cellphone while driving debate;It's common sense
that it's a dangerous distraction,and the data has not been collected
sufficiently to prove it,but rational people still know that CP use while
driving is dangerous.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

 

"Sid Schweiger" <spam@this.cretin> wrote in
news:SL6dnW0aLqcf-nDfRVn-3w@comcast.com:

>>>Tobacco companies had data,too,yet still told people smoking was
>>>safe.<<
>
> I deeply appreciate you making my point for me. Just as multiple
> disinterested parties came up with the data to contradict the tobacco
> companies (which is what got them to admit that they had the same
> data), I'm still waiting for Elmo P. Anonymous to come up with the
> data to contradict Toyota.
>
>

I note you edited out the comments about auto companies knowing about
product defects in their vehicles(hidden warranties),yet not revealing them
so they would not have to correct them at their expense,until enough
'incidents' occur and public indignation forces them to correct them,hoping
that the owners would fix them themselves at their own cost.Also,the
"lemon" laws that had to be passed to get auto companies to replace
vehicles with major recurring defects.


Actually,disgruntled tobacco employees revealed that the companies had the
data for many years.

It's also like the recent cellphone while driving debate;It's common sense
that it's a dangerous distraction,and the data has not been collected
sufficiently to prove it,but rational people still know that CP use while
driving is dangerous.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

 

In article <-KGdnU0oo_hCj3PfRVn-pg@sedona.net>, "Michael Pardee"
<michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote:

> "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
> news:elmop-B9841B.15504631072005@nntp1.usenetserver.com...
> > I simply said "beware, and investigate it more". You, on the other
> > hand, appear to be saying that there's no need to investigate it
> > more--that everything they say in that PR piece is 100% the truth, the
> > whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
>
> Well, since Toyota has put their side in black and white, it's up to you to
> to do the investigating and come up with something concrete. So far the
> assertion that they are lying through their teeth (as they must if the claim
> they are recycling the batteries is false) is weaker than the "who shot
> Kennedy" conspiracy theories. Give us something we can use. Either you can
> catch them in a huge lie or you are blowing smoke.
>
> Mike

Mike,
It's difficult for most of us to conduct that sort of research. Perhaps a
disgruntled (sp??) employee might eventually sneak data out of the company
and release it to the news media. If that never happens, we will probably
never learn the true facts related to this issue. A Federal investigation
might also force them to release the true facts. On the other hand,
perhaps Toyota is being totally honest related to the data that they
release to the news media and post on the internet. Do you really believe
that any company is totally honest related to information they release to
the news media or post on the internet? I doubt it. There is a conflict of
interest involved.
Jason

--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.

 

In article <-KGdnU0oo_hCj3PfRVn-pg@sedona.net>, "Michael Pardee"
<michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote:

> "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
> news:elmop-B9841B.15504631072005@nntp1.usenetserver.com...
> > I simply said "beware, and investigate it more". You, on the other
> > hand, appear to be saying that there's no need to investigate it
> > more--that everything they say in that PR piece is 100% the truth, the
> > whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
>
> Well, since Toyota has put their side in black and white, it's up to you to
> to do the investigating and come up with something concrete. So far the
> assertion that they are lying through their teeth (as they must if the claim
> they are recycling the batteries is false) is weaker than the "who shot
> Kennedy" conspiracy theories. Give us something we can use. Either you can
> catch them in a huge lie or you are blowing smoke.
>
> Mike

Mike,
It's difficult for most of us to conduct that sort of research. Perhaps a
disgruntled (sp??) employee might eventually sneak data out of the company
and release it to the news media. If that never happens, we will probably
never learn the true facts related to this issue. A Federal investigation
might also force them to release the true facts. On the other hand,
perhaps Toyota is being totally honest related to the data that they
release to the news media and post on the internet. Do you really believe
that any company is totally honest related to information they release to
the news media or post on the internet? I doubt it. There is a conflict of
interest involved.
Jason

--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.

 

In article <aaase1lg0i6amans69chnlh9ujmubv6hb8@4ax.com>,
flobert <nomail@here.NOT> wrote:

> People with hybrids can be described in one word - poser. "Look at me,
> i'm driving a hybrid, aren't I trendy, trying to show i'm conserned
> with the enviroment, but cool, and have money to waste"

They don't call it the Toyota "Pious" for nothing.

 

In article <aaase1lg0i6amans69chnlh9ujmubv6hb8@4ax.com>,
flobert <nomail@here.NOT> wrote:

> People with hybrids can be described in one word - poser. "Look at me,
> i'm driving a hybrid, aren't I trendy, trying to show i'm conserned
> with the enviroment, but cool, and have money to waste"

They don't call it the Toyota "Pious" for nothing.

 

jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in
news:jason-0108051107000001@pm4-broad-9.snlo.dialup.fix.net:

> In article <-KGdnU0oo_hCj3PfRVn-pg@sedona.net>, "Michael Pardee"
><michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote:
>
>> "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
>> news:elmop-B9841B.15504631072005@nntp1.usenetserver.com...
>> > I simply said "beware, and investigate it more". You, on the other
>> > hand, appear to be saying that there's no need to investigate it
>> > more--that everything they say in that PR piece is 100% the truth,
>> > the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
>>
>> Well, since Toyota has put their side in black and white, it's up to
>> you to to do the investigating and come up with something concrete.
>> So far the assertion that they are lying through their teeth (as they
>> must if the claim they are recycling the batteries is false) is
>> weaker than the "who shot Kennedy" conspiracy theories. Give us
>> something we can use. Either you can catch them in a huge lie or you
>> are blowing smoke.
>>
>> Mike
>
> Mike,
> It's difficult for most of us to conduct that sort of research.
> Perhaps a disgruntled (sp??) employee might eventually sneak data out
> of the company and release it to the news media. If that never
> happens, we will probably never learn the true facts related to this
> issue. A Federal investigation might also force them to release the
> true facts. On the other hand, perhaps Toyota is being totally honest
> related to the data that they release to the news media and post on
> the internet. Do you really believe that any company is totally honest
> related to information they release to the news media or post on the
> internet? I doubt it. There is a conflict of interest involved.
> Jason
>

There's certainly enough evidence that auto companies have had "hidden
warranties" to fix problems they do not want the public to know about.
And that they usually fight any effort of the consumer groups on class
actions concerning major auto problems.(like wheels falling off)

So,one should blindly trust the auto companies??

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

 

jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in
news:jason-0108051107000001@pm4-broad-9.snlo.dialup.fix.net:

> In article <-KGdnU0oo_hCj3PfRVn-pg@sedona.net>, "Michael Pardee"
><michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote:
>
>> "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
>> news:elmop-B9841B.15504631072005@nntp1.usenetserver.com...
>> > I simply said "beware, and investigate it more". You, on the other
>> > hand, appear to be saying that there's no need to investigate it
>> > more--that everything they say in that PR piece is 100% the truth,
>> > the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
>>
>> Well, since Toyota has put their side in black and white, it's up to
>> you to to do the investigating and come up with something concrete.
>> So far the assertion that they are lying through their teeth (as they
>> must if the claim they are recycling the batteries is false) is
>> weaker than the "who shot Kennedy" conspiracy theories. Give us
>> something we can use. Either you can catch them in a huge lie or you
>> are blowing smoke.
>>
>> Mike
>
> Mike,
> It's difficult for most of us to conduct that sort of research.
> Perhaps a disgruntled (sp??) employee might eventually sneak data out
> of the company and release it to the news media. If that never
> happens, we will probably never learn the true facts related to this
> issue. A Federal investigation might also force them to release the
> true facts. On the other hand, perhaps Toyota is being totally honest
> related to the data that they release to the news media and post on
> the internet. Do you really believe that any company is totally honest
> related to information they release to the news media or post on the
> internet? I doubt it. There is a conflict of interest involved.
> Jason
>

There's certainly enough evidence that auto companies have had "hidden
warranties" to fix problems they do not want the public to know about.
And that they usually fight any effort of the consumer groups on class
actions concerning major auto problems.(like wheels falling off)

So,one should blindly trust the auto companies??

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

 

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
news:elmop-FDB330.08234501082005@nntp1.usenetserver.com...
> In article <-KGdnU0oo_hCj3PfRVn-pg@sedona.net>,
> Let me put it this way: when President Bush puts something in black and
> white like that, do you agree that one should be careful and not
> necessarily accept what he says at face value?

Back to the issue....
Let me put it this way: all Toyota has to do is enter into a contract with a
company to handle the recycling on a per-unit basis and add the cost of that
and the $200 deposit to the battery. Then they can make the claim in good
conscience. It greatly limits their liabilities and costs them nothing at
all. They would be incomprehensibly stupid not to... so what on earth would
make you think such a thing?

Mike

 

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
news:elmop-FDB330.08234501082005@nntp1.usenetserver.com...
> In article <-KGdnU0oo_hCj3PfRVn-pg@sedona.net>,
> Let me put it this way: when President Bush puts something in black and
> white like that, do you agree that one should be careful and not
> necessarily accept what he says at face value?

Back to the issue....
Let me put it this way: all Toyota has to do is enter into a contract with a
company to handle the recycling on a per-unit basis and add the cost of that
and the $200 deposit to the battery. Then they can make the claim in good
conscience. It greatly limits their liabilities and costs them nothing at
all. They would be incomprehensibly stupid not to... so what on earth would
make you think such a thing?

Mike