That is a good bargaining point. When I bought my last car, the fourth from the dealer, I had a good price but did not like the trade in money. The salesman said "that is what we'll get at auction" I reminded him my last trades were sold on their lot and this one would be too. He upped the trade and we had a deal. Sometimes you do get a return on maintenance costs.
My state's Safety Inspection requirements includes this:
"All brake lines and hoses - check for leaks, cracks, chafing, restrictions, and improper support"
Of course, it also includes this:
"Brake equalization - test vehicle for a straight stop without significant wheel pull."
I don't recall any vehicle I've ever had inspected being driven as part of the inspection process.
On the other hand, I always have my vehicles inspected by one of my 2 trusted indys who know that if the vehicle was pulling, I would have told them about it long before it became a safety Inspection issue.
And intake manifolds and gaskets, and timing cover gaskets - and basically anything that moves. In 100,000km I replaced the ball joints and other front end parts twice -0n the TranSport, while never replacing any parts in 240,000km on each of 2 Aerostarrs and 350,000km on the ranger, and over 240,000 on my last Chrysler (88 New Yorker) - and none in 150,000+/- on the PT Cruiser. And wheel bearings - at leasat 6 on the TranSport and none between the 3 Fords and 2 Mopars. A friend has an Impala, a Sierra and a Silverado - and with relatively low mileage on all three, has spent more on repairs on EACH of the vehicles than I have on my last 5. _ and that's not counting the warranty repairs. - and none of mine have had any warranty left when I bought them.
And that is TOTALLY different from required or specified "maintenance" And notice it doesn't manage rust - - - as long as it's not leaking "yet" it passes.
Here in Ontario visibly obviously rusted lines can be failed.
EVERY vehicle I ever inspected was driven as part of the inspection - without exception.. However the safety inspection is only required for transfer here in Ontario.
It's going to be interesting to see how popular the new Ranger really is. FWIG, the Ranger was discontinued because they were almost as expensive to make as the F150 and they couldn't get anywhere near the price so the margins weren't there. I don't see that as changing.
BTW, I had an '01 Ranger and replaced it with a '13 F150. I probably would have replaced it with a Ranger but I really like the F150. The back seats are actually usable (both extended cabs). ;-)
Of course, which is exactly why brake lines should be made from stainless steel and not from crap that starts to rust 3 minutes after installation.
At the time I didn't know I would be risking my life on substandard GM breaking systems.
One more think, if, just because you can hear it in central Ontario doesn't mean the same think here in the states...
I "think" you might be over thinking this....
First I ever heard of that.
Yet, they don't give a damn if your brake lines rot out, or ABS fires off randomly, reducing braking distance in half... Cool beans....
AIUI, brake fluid is hygroscopic.
Depends on the type
DOT5 brake fluid is hydrophobic:
nb
I think he might not be, but he might be punning?
The poster clare responded to had incorrectly used 'break' several places in the post where the OP mean to type "brake". Clare was playing on that original post.
Brake fluid is hygroscopic - it attracts moisture -and the moisture can cause corrosion inside the lines and cyls. The water tends to end up in the low spots. On newer vehicles where the master reservoirs are sealed much better thasn in the past (with rubber bellows etc) it is a LITTLE less critical (3 years rather than 2 often recommended). The new synthetic brake fluids stand up a wee bit better too.
It was my summation that they realize that it is not in their best interest to build cars that "last forever". This situation seemed to improve when some of the Asian competition started making them look bad.
Brake fluid absorbs moisture. When the master cylinder gets low, because it is not topped of on regular intervals, It becomes contaminated from the moisture in the air. If you have ever rebuilt wheel cylinders or a disk brake caliper, always lubricated with brake fluid, you will often find pitting on the cylinder walls. That is from the moisture in the brake fluid.
Which specific alloy of stainless steel should be used and why that alloy and not some other alloy? Engineering is always a compromise.
Chrysler does the same, steel, my BIL was driving his PU truck and went to hit the brakes.... NOTHING.. the lines blew from rust.
Not sure how the Japanese cars treat their brake components.
And a major factor in engineering is economics, always a compromise.
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required