On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 10:58:07 -0700, Evan Platt
wrote:

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 22:11:38 -0500, "s6sej73w9"
wrote:

When you sold the car you gave up recorse to the problem.

I wasn't going to keep a car that rattled the way this one did.

I doubt you'll be in any position to pursue your claim if the
car is no longer available for inspection. It's now a matter of who
said what some time in the past.

On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 10:58:07 -0700, Evan Platt
wrote:

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 22:11:38 -0500, "s6sej73w9"
wrote:

When you sold the car you gave up recorse to the problem.

I wasn't going to keep a car that rattled the way this one did.

I doubt you'll be in any position to pursue your claim if the
car is no longer available for inspection. It's now a matter of who
said what some time in the past.

On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 10:58:07 -0700, Evan Platt
wrote:

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 22:11:38 -0500, "s6sej73w9"
wrote:

When you sold the car you gave up recorse to the problem.

I wasn't going to keep a car that rattled the way this one did.

I doubt you'll be in any position to pursue your claim if the
car is no longer available for inspection. It's now a matter of who
said what some time in the past.

On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 00:16:17 GMT, wrote:

I doubt you'll be in any position to pursue your claim if the
car is no longer available for inspection. It's now a matter of who
said what some time in the past.

Well the issue has nothing to do with inspecting the car. I spoke with
a Ford customer service representative who stated the warranty was
void due to installation of the radios. So there's nothing to inspect
- they took my money when they 'shouldn't have' since my warranty was
void from the get go.
--
To reply, remove TheObvious from my e-mail address.

On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 00:16:17 GMT, wrote:

I doubt you'll be in any position to pursue your claim if the
car is no longer available for inspection. It's now a matter of who
said what some time in the past.

Well the issue has nothing to do with inspecting the car. I spoke with
a Ford customer service representative who stated the warranty was
void due to installation of the radios. So there's nothing to inspect
- they took my money when they 'shouldn't have' since my warranty was
void from the get go.
--
To reply, remove TheObvious from my e-mail address.

On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 00:16:17 GMT, wrote:

I doubt you'll be in any position to pursue your claim if the
car is no longer available for inspection. It's now a matter of who
said what some time in the past.

Well the issue has nothing to do with inspecting the car. I spoke with
a Ford customer service representative who stated the warranty was
void due to installation of the radios. So there's nothing to inspect
- they took my money when they 'shouldn't have' since my warranty was
void from the get go.
--
To reply, remove TheObvious from my e-mail address.

"Evan Platt" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 20:23:31 GMT, "Ralph Mowery"
wrote:

As the car did not come equiped with a ham radio, "F* off" and buy a
Toyota
the next time.

Oh, and what does Toyota have to do with ANYTHING?

Do Toyota's now come with Ham radios installed?

Chevrolets don't, either, but I have installing radios in Chevys for 35
years and none of them caused a problem--at least none that were not able to
be fixed. All minor glitches. Fords (at least during the earlier years I
owned them) had too many noise issues and repair problems. So I have
basically stuck with Chevy over the years as they have proven to be
reliable. One car I bought in '87 lasted 13 years and 199,000 miles--and
chock full of radios! LOL!

Now them "furrin'" cars I don't much cotton to. I'm still mad over Pearl
Harbor. LOL! (Whoa! Don't pounce--I know all about foreign content in
domestic cars, etc. I just prefer an American make made by Americans in an
American plant *IF* I can get it.)

73

Jerry


--
To reply, remove TheObvious from my e-mail address.

"Evan Platt" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 20:23:31 GMT, "Ralph Mowery"
wrote:

As the car did not come equiped with a ham radio, "F* off" and buy a
Toyota
the next time.

Oh, and what does Toyota have to do with ANYTHING?

Do Toyota's now come with Ham radios installed?

Chevrolets don't, either, but I have installing radios in Chevys for 35
years and none of them caused a problem--at least none that were not able to
be fixed. All minor glitches. Fords (at least during the earlier years I
owned them) had too many noise issues and repair problems. So I have
basically stuck with Chevy over the years as they have proven to be
reliable. One car I bought in '87 lasted 13 years and 199,000 miles--and
chock full of radios! LOL!

Now them "furrin'" cars I don't much cotton to. I'm still mad over Pearl
Harbor. LOL! (Whoa! Don't pounce--I know all about foreign content in
domestic cars, etc. I just prefer an American make made by Americans in an
American plant *IF* I can get it.)

73

Jerry


--
To reply, remove TheObvious from my e-mail address.

"Evan Platt" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 20:23:31 GMT, "Ralph Mowery"
wrote:

As the car did not come equiped with a ham radio, "F* off" and buy a
Toyota
the next time.

Oh, and what does Toyota have to do with ANYTHING?

Do Toyota's now come with Ham radios installed?

Chevrolets don't, either, but I have installing radios in Chevys for 35
years and none of them caused a problem--at least none that were not able to
be fixed. All minor glitches. Fords (at least during the earlier years I
owned them) had too many noise issues and repair problems. So I have
basically stuck with Chevy over the years as they have proven to be
reliable. One car I bought in '87 lasted 13 years and 199,000 miles--and
chock full of radios! LOL!

Now them "furrin'" cars I don't much cotton to. I'm still mad over Pearl
Harbor. LOL! (Whoa! Don't pounce--I know all about foreign content in
domestic cars, etc. I just prefer an American make made by Americans in an
American plant *IF* I can get it.)

73

Jerry


--
To reply, remove TheObvious from my e-mail address.

Snip
Radios do nothing to warrenty, Fords have been the choice for Cop cars
for a
long time.


That's because Ford Fleet Sales deeply discounts the basic Crown Vic and
makes it back up on the Police Package. (Actually, they break about even on
the sale) To them, it is worth it in passive advertising. It, however,
doesn't mean it is the better car. It was, for example, proven and
published in several automotive mags that the Fords were more labor
intensive. Hence, the ovewhelming dominance of Chevrolet Caprices in the NY
City cab fleet for MANY years. The Chevys simply took the punishment better!
Some of them are STILL out there
on the murderous potholes of NYC with 300,000+ miles on them!

During 1996 when Chevy fielded the heavy Caprice sedan, it had an enhanced
LT1 V8 that the Crown Vics couldn't keep up with! It would just plainly
scald the Fords and leave them in the dust! In the NC Highway Patrol fleet,
troopers begged not to have to give up their older Caprices and many served
well beyond the normal service life. Even today, you see an occasional '96
era Caprice serving as some State agency vehicle or DOT car.

Mustang? Forget it! For a time, NCHP had Mustang pursuit vehicles. But
they were getting outrun by kids in Camaros that would literally shoot the
cops the bird and walk away from them! No more! NC and SC now use Camaros to
pursue speeders, and while the Crown Vics are quick for their size, they are
no match for the Camaro.

Chevrolet has recently released a new version of the Impala SS. I have heard
that they are going to offer a Police Package version of this car. AND it is
supposedly QUICKER than the old Caprices and SS Impalas of years ago.

And I betcha you won't have much trouble with your radios in one of them
either. LOL!

Jerry