Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 19:31:10 +0200 From: Robert Brown <rjbnopsamvvtripnetvvvvvv.se> Subject: Re: SAAB & dealers - who is responsible?
Grunff wrote: > Louis Cornelio wrote: > > >>Given the age of the car, I doubt you'll have any luck. To be honest, my > >>view is that it was your fault anyway. When I buy a car with a belt, I > >>change the belt. End of story. I don't trust anyone else to have done it > >>in the past. > > > > > > Had I known it was such a CRUCIAL thing, I would have done so. But I > > only drive cars, just like computers, I dont know much about the > > mechanics. Besides if you take something to the DEALER one assumes they > > do the work. It seems you are saying everyone must be their own mechanic > > in the SAAB world......... > > Not just in the Saab world, but in the world as a whole. If you take the > approach "I only drive it, I don't know or want to know how it works", > you will come across similar problems all over the place, cars, > computers, washing machines, etc. etc. > > Why do people expect to be able to use technology and become totally > reliant on it for their day to day existence without learning the > absolute basics about the technology? And yes, cambelts are part of the > absolute basics - they are part of regular maintenance. > > -- > Grunff Get off your high horse Mr. Grunff. OK - having seen many people drive wonderful cars into the ground due to either a disrespect for the limits of engineering or just sheer neglect, I do agree with you a fair bit. "If you can't fix it then you don't deserve to drive it". But for those who for some reason or another cannot sit under their cars during weekends (I for one loved to do this all the time under my old 900 and 99 but now I have 2 small kids so I prioritise them), it seems a reasonable proposition to rely on the idea that 1) service by authorised dealers is done according to spec since 2) manufacturers have a pretty good idea when their parts will fail and have determined that it's better - businesswise - to check/replace certain parts instead of having someone come up with a more reliable though expensive design. So far so good, as long as the car is used "normally" and authorised shops do the job right. My view is that manufacturers should see their dealer and service networks as being part of the whole car concept (especially since this network often have exclusive use of these little rubber stamps used to certify that the "right" service has been done). If a dealer misses on their undertaking to service and a car breaks (and then the dealer goes out of business), then it should be in the interests of the manufacturer to foot the cost of the result, since it is they in the end who will pay for the consequences of having a bad total solution, where their customers walk away and buy a rival manufacturer's car next time. I've had doubtful experiences with Saab's network in Sweden. I now drive a 2 yr-old Audi A4 as a result. Though Audi's service leaves a lot to be desired - sometimes late, rude, and expensive - they at least fix the car. As far as Mr. Cornelio's situation goes, I hope he can get Saab to back down from their silly attitude. It will only damage their reputation further. If we're expected to get our hands greasy changing timing belts and the like, then why are we expected to pay Saab's service network for their existence as well? Regards, Robert Gothenburg (2001 A4 1,8Ts, 1983 900 GL R.I.P. 1983 99 GL R.I.P)
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
