Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Automotive
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-02-2009, 04:26 PM
 
Location: Northeast Tennessee
7,305 posts, read 28,231,171 times
Reputation: 5523

Advertisements

This is about the third time I had heard of this... this time its local. One of the local TV stations reported today that one of the local dealers were using that stupid chemical to disable an engine in what was probably a good car and the chemical exploded, caused the car to catch fire, leading to other cars catching fire, as well as some woods the cars were parked against.

I think this chemical/disablement that the government is requiring is one of the stupidest things I have ever heard of. The cars are going to be crushed, so why do they have to do this to the engine? Its dangerous, because many of the guys the dealers have do this are morons and get such enjoyment out of it that they are not doing it correctly. You are not supposed to rev the engine above 2K RPMS, but some of these morons are redlining them or very high RPMS which are causing severe engine heat buildup with that chemical and they are catching fire or exploding.

Everyone has their own opinion and I know alot of people were for this, but many were against it. I am tired of seeing NICE 1980s and 1990s model cars setting on these lots with CFC on the window. What a waste of money imo. Flame away, I dont care.

On one of our local lots at the Honda dealer is a LIKE NEW 1991 Chevrolet Caprice... gleaming paint, like new interior, etc.... CFC on the window.... sad part is, its twice the car of the 2009 car it was traded in on and you can take that to the bank.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-02-2009, 05:30 PM
 
2,023 posts, read 5,313,628 times
Reputation: 2004
Yep, a huge waste of our resources to destroy perfectly good vehicles for this high consumption economy. I guess they need to make cars that only last for about 40,000 miles till they fall apart now so they don't come up with these schemes. Here is an example of a perfectly good very low mile car that someone turned in.


YouTube - Cash for Clunkers: 1990 Ford Crown Vic with 4,939 Miles
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-02-2009, 05:34 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
5,994 posts, read 20,093,452 times
Reputation: 4078
Are you driving these cars to see what mechanical issues they may have?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-02-2009, 05:37 PM
 
Location: Tucson, AZ
1,389 posts, read 3,534,456 times
Reputation: 700
Save the world by getting clunkers off the road and burn up some forest land while you're at it eh!?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-02-2009, 09:32 PM
 
Location: Northeast Tennessee
7,305 posts, read 28,231,171 times
Reputation: 5523
Quote:
Originally Posted by 73-79 ford fan View Post
Yep, a huge waste of our resources to destroy perfectly good vehicles for this high consumption economy. I guess they need to make cars that only last for about 40,000 miles till they fall apart now so they don't come up with these schemes. Here is an example of a perfectly good very low mile car that someone turned in.


YouTube - Cash for Clunkers: 1990 Ford Crown Vic with 4,939 Miles
Ugh, thats enough to make someone vomit. Literally. 4900 miles. Its still a new car! What were the morons that owned it thinking? It will outlast any car they traded it in on. I also think they could sell it for more than $4500. The dealer is a moron too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by iTsLiKeAnEgG View Post
Are you driving these cars to see what mechanical issues they may have?
Me? No, but you can usually tell how a car looks. I am sure that not all of the CFC cars have mechanical issues.... nothing that major. One of the main points I am complaining of is the engine disablement. Seems childish, dangerous and foolish to me. I am sure that 4900 original mile car that 73-79fordfan had no issues.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chorizo View Post
Save the world by getting clunkers off the road and burn up some forest land while you're at it eh!?
Yeah, what a motto!

Last edited by Tennesseestorm; 09-02-2009 at 09:43 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-02-2009, 10:03 PM
 
48,502 posts, read 96,867,563 times
Reputation: 18304
This si like saying we shpould destroy all teh ford trucks that had igniton satrted fires because they are such a dnager. there certainly were alot of them too and the same igntion are showing up in other fires in other maerican makes now.One guy sets a fire when fuweling from static sparks ;so I guess serve stations should be closed too.Makes as much sense as this thread.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-02-2009, 10:18 PM
 
Location: Northeast Tennessee
7,305 posts, read 28,231,171 times
Reputation: 5523
Quote:
Originally Posted by texdav View Post
This si like saying we shpould destroy all teh ford trucks that had igniton satrted fires because they are such a dnager. there certainly were alot of them too and the same igntion are showing up in other fires in other maerican makes now.One guy sets a fire when fuweling from static sparks ;so I guess serve stations should be closed too.Makes as much sense as this thread.
Someones had too much to drink. Or I am totally out of it tonight, because I dont understand a word of this. lol.....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-03-2009, 01:55 AM
 
10,494 posts, read 27,247,301 times
Reputation: 6718
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tennesseestorm View Post
Someones had too much to drink. Or I am totally out of it tonight, because I dont understand a word of this. lol.....
His posts are always unreadable. Other posters have said Texdav is dyslexic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-03-2009, 01:59 AM
 
10,494 posts, read 27,247,301 times
Reputation: 6718
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tennesseestorm View Post
This is about the third time I had heard of this... this time its local. One of the local TV stations reported today that one of the local dealers were using that stupid chemical to disable an engine in what was probably a good car and the chemical exploded, caused the car to catch fire, leading to other cars catching fire, as well as some woods the cars were parked against.

I think this chemical/disablement that the government is requiring is one of the stupidest things I have ever heard of. The cars are going to be crushed, so why do they have to do this to the engine? Its dangerous, because many of the guys the dealers have do this are morons and get such enjoyment out of it that they are not doing it correctly. You are not supposed to rev the engine above 2K RPMS, but some of these morons are redlining them or very high RPMS which are causing severe engine heat buildup with that chemical and they are catching fire or exploding.

Everyone has their own opinion and I know alot of people were for this, but many were against it. I am tired of seeing NICE 1980s and 1990s model cars setting on these lots with CFC on the window. What a waste of money imo. Flame away, I dont care.

On one of our local lots at the Honda dealer is a LIKE NEW 1991 Chevrolet Caprice... gleaming paint, like new interior, etc.... CFC on the window.... sad part is, its twice the car of the 2009 car it was traded in on and you can take that to the bank.
Here is a good example of what you are saying. They blow up the engine, then crush it. It is completely pointless. Watch this video at your own risk. It is very sad and upsetting on what they did to this truck. Geez, I could have used it, as my car does not have air conditioning, and I live in Vegas.


YouTube - Cash for Clunkers: how to destroy Vehicle blow up engine crush kill truck Chevrolet crusher
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-03-2009, 05:28 AM
 
Location: Poway, CA
2,698 posts, read 12,175,341 times
Reputation: 2251
"The cars are going to be crushed, so why do they have to do this to the engine?" - Tennesseestorm

minor point, but i don't believe the drivetrain is left in a vehicle when it is crushed.

Mike
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Automotive
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:49 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top