It cheaper for the car maker. And yes that does make it cheaper for you. The money that might have been spent for warehousing, interest, and whatnot for alll those parts to repair the tank module had to come from profits. If we lower the amount spent on that, then the car maker can sell the car for less money and still make the same profit.
Probably doesn’t help much when your number comes up and your tank module fails, and the new one costs several hundred bucks, but that is the way of the world.
As Gary T pointed out, ease of service is not a design parameter. However with that said, some car makes are much better than others serviceability. Jags (and British cars in general) seem to have a contest going to see if they can design one part of the car that is just NOT serviceable. Some
American cars, IMHO make Jags look easy.
Oh, and
Don’t know which year / flavor XJ6 your buddy had but on any XJ6 from 75-85 (series 1-3) removing all FOUR (yes you read that right, there are 4 rear shocks) takes about 30 minutes tops. Then you have to remove the springs from around each shock and transfer them to the new shocks. Takes maybe 2 hours total. No removal of the rear axle needed.
I never worked on the late model XJs so I do not know what was required on those cars.
Well, let’s see if it’s cheaper for me. Right now the pump module costs $300 retail but if parts must be stocked separately suppose that cost becomes $325. Suppose the pump in the latter case retails for $165, the electronics for $107 and the sender for $53 and in my car the pump is bad. The dealer has to test to find that it’s the pump assembly and then test the assembly to find it’s the pump and the extra test costs $25. The pump now costs $180, electronics $114 and the sender $56. The dealer can then sell me the pump, it that’s the only thing bad, for $180. Labor is $300 and extra labor to replace the pump in the assembly might come to $50 additional. My total cost is now $530 as opposed to the $600 it actually cost. If it’s the electronics that are bad my cost is $464.
And if the design is such that the various parts can be replaced without removing the reinstalling the tank something can be done about that $300 labor cost.
It’s a little hard for me to believe that it’s cheaper for me. And in addition, under the present system perfectly good parts are discarded which is a waste of natural resources.
The bad module could be sold off to a rebuilder for reconditioning but I doubt that happens. I haven’t checked to see if reconditioned fuel pump modules are available but unless it’s through the dealer he wouldn’t install it and I and most other people can’t. If a reconditioned unit is available through the dealer he should have offered me that option.
What automaker in his right mind would make a car that would last a lifetime? "Yes, lets make a car that will last seventy years. " I just don’t see it, plus it would probably cost as much as your house. The dealership I work at will never ever put in used parts, unless it’s unavailable from Ford. The reason? If the part goes bad, the customer has no warranty, and the customer always, I mean ALWAYS says “But don’t you stand behind your work?” Why put up with the hassle.
He was a Jaguar specialist with 30 years of experience as a mechanic.
He was exactly the kind of mechanic that can beat the book 99 times out of 100. Jaguar has less models of car that most marques, and with his years of experience, I’m sure he’d taken every shortcut 100 times.
To be honest, he was British, cranky, and old. That was his way of saying he could beat the book time. There’s no one for being humorous and outspoken like a Brit…
Mmm, maybe, maybe not. Those “perfectly good parts” are perhaps more realistically viewed as “still functioning parts that have been used a lot.” Yes, it would be cheaper to be able to replace just the fuel pump rather than a pump/sending unit module. But if you do that, then when the sending unit gives out 3 months later you get to pay the replacement labor again, along with the diagnostic fee. Your total cost in the long run will be higher.
I have never heard of a reconditioned fuel pump for a fuel-injected vehicle, and never heard of a reconditioned sending unit for any vehicle. It is not feasible to rebuild those types of parts.
I would think that there would be some auto mechanics who would install used parts for the simple reason that there is a demand for the service (I know many people who use mainly used parts, but either they or family members install the parts for them).
The other “change” that seems to have occured is almost everybody charging “by the book” rather than by the hour. The local mechanic down the street who has owned a Marathon station for thrity years but is retiring told me that he switched to this system two years ago because it was far more lucrative, and that everyone else had done so. He said that he could easily change the struts on my 1994 Toyota Corolla (and in fact has done so before) in way under two hours, but that “The Book” indicates that he has to bill for about eight hours (he said he couldn’t give me an exception because he would then have to do so for everyone else). He said that it is basically a “back door” way of raising prices without being accused of price fixing because everyone does it. In addition, he said that liability was a concern, but that the biggest reason for not installing used parts was simple. Specifically, mechanics make a significant profit on parts and labor. In addition, he indicated that most people would not be willing to go to junk yards to find parts as am I. Basically, he told me that mechanics had become relatively more in demand than used to be the case, due in large part to the fact that it takes more training and intelligence to be a mechanic in todays digital age. Because the “supply” of mechanics is relatively more scarce they have made the kind of busienss moves that any smat business person does which is to get as much as the market will allow.
Well of course, all of the parts on my car (2000 Dodge Stratus) are “still functioning parts that have been used a lot.” Your hypothetical assumes that all the parts in the assembly are designed to have approximately the same life. I doubt that. I suspect the pump, or the electronics that control the pump had a latent defect.
And you scenario doesn’t mean that my cost is higher because of the increased overhead cost resulting from stocking more parts. My cost in your example would be higher because the parts fail. If your example is taken seriously then you should never replace just a single item because pretty soon another might fail. When something breaks, replace the whole car.
I didn’t mean rebuild the pump. Reconditioning the module would involve putting a replacement pump (new) into it. And I suspect there is no source for reconditioned parts like there is for alternators, starters etc. The dealers won’t do it, why should they? And dealers won’t install them nor can most people install them so there isn’t any market.
Used parts:
Most shops deal with used parts that they provide in situations where they feel it’s a good option. This will vary from shop to shop. For example, I have no qualms about used engines I get from a certain salvage yard I deal with. They have good quality control and a good track record. But I know of other shops, in other parts of the country, who refuse to deal with used engines because they’ve never gotten a good one from the yards available to them.
Parts provided by the customer is a different animal. With a few rare and specific exceptions, I don’t use parts that I don’t provide. I’m not selling labor here and parts there on a pick and choose basis. I’m selling repairs that consist of labor and parts together. I’m going to guarantee those repairs, and I’m ultimately responsible for their quality. The idea of “waivers” (mentioned in a previous post) doesn’t work in the real world. Human nature being what it is, most people blame the last person who had a hand in the deal (the installing mechanic) and the courts usually hold that person accountable. There may be a few exceptions, but I’m not foolish enough to take the risk, nor to relinquish control of choosing the quality and source of the parts used in repairs that I do.
Charging “by the book”:
I’ve been in the auto repair field for over 30 years, and I’ve never encountered a shop that charged by the clock other than for unestimatable each-situation-is-unique jobs like tracing wiring problems or extracting broken bolts. I know that some shops do charge by the clock, but they’re in quite the minority. The great majority of shops charge by the job, and the way they charge by the job is by using the “book.”
Many people have the impression that shops charge by the clock because they hear “that’s a 3-hour job” or they see a shop rate of “$x per hour.” However, the word “hour” in the context of auto repair is almost always shorthand for flat-rate hour, which is not a unit of time but a unit of work (just as a light-year is not a unit of time but a unit of distance). Shops have used flat-rate hour billing for decades; it’s the standard practice. Shops have also historically done a lousy, usually non-existent, job of making the distinction and explaining this to customers, thus perpetuating the misconception that they charge by the clock-hour. It simply ain’t so.
The “book” is a labor estimating guide, sometimes called a flat-rate manual, that lists “labor times” for various jobs. Again, although they’re called “times,” they do not purport to declare the actual clock time that a given job will consume. They can’t. That will vary depending upon who’s doing the work, how experienced he is, what tools he has, and other factors. The book provides a comparison of how much work one job entails compared to another, and gives a basis for billing those jobs.
Here’s how it works: Let’s say the book lists 2 (flat-rate) hours to replace the water pump on a given car. The price of the labor portion of the job is determined by multiplying the shop’s labor rate by 2. That’s what is estimated to the customer, and what the customer pays. How much clock time the mechanic takes is not an issue. A fast-working, experienced mechanic with some kick-butt power tools may get it done in an hour and a half, or even an hour. A slow-working mechanic who maybe hasn’t done that specific job before might take three or even four hours to do the same job. But either way, the customer pays the same amount for the same work, which is of the same value, and that amount can be accurately quoted beforehand. It’s an eminently fair system.
Some other things:
Roland, I only have what you’ve related to go by, and I don’t doubt your truthfulness, but a lot of what you’ve said here really doesn’t make sense. I find it hard to believe this fellow has charged by the clock for 28 years and then suddenly changed – it’s not impossible, but it would be rare. I find it harder to believe that he can do an 8 flat-rate hour job in “way under” 2 clock-hours – that strains credulity to the max. And this: He said that it is basically a “back door” way of raising prices without being accused of price fixing because everyone does it. makes the least sense of all. Raising prices is raising prices. If the price of a repair goes up, it goes up, whether by charging more flat-rate hours for a job or by charging more per flat-rate hour, and people are going to notice it – nothing’s getting snuck in through a “back door.” Raising prices in and of itself does not in any way constitute price fixing. And if price fixing were a concern, doing what “everyone” does is the most dangerous approach to take. That statement of his does not compute.
Although he didn’t say this I think there is another factor that accounts for why McClalip is so much faster than the book (actually why his two mechanics are faster since he doesn’t do much if any of the actual work himself anymore). There is the “book way” of doing a job, and there is the way it is “actually done in the field”. I think that the bigger (and yes probably better) shops, and dealers tend to come much closer to doing the job the “right” way. For example, if I were to give a patient a bath the way I was taught in nursing school it would take thirty to forty five minutes (it’s literally a 50 step process). However, in the real world of hospitals if you take more than about ten minutes per patient to give a bed bath you are going to get seriously behind (you get behind anyway, but I’m talking about the kind of behind that gets you in trouble).
I think it’s the same thing, but different with cars. The thing is I’m poor right now and just want a car that runs, gets me to school& work, and back home most of the time. I don’t care if they have to use chewing gum to hold the parts together, and if the thing breaks down I don’t mind paying to have it repaired again (if I can get the used part/ cheap hourly rate labor prices). I have AAA to cover those type of break downs. I don’t care if the heater works good, or if it rides like crap and sounds like a pregnant tank, and smokes like Margie Shotz with a new carton of Newport 100’s so long as it runs. I realize that I’m in the minority, but there are alot of other people out there just trying to get by. For those of us who live outside the city a car is as (or even more) important than a house (you can always live in your car, but your house can’t take you to work).