Why the hate for Craftsman stuff?

[kythri]

Seems you can't hardly find a socket set that doesn't skip several metric sizes or have the same sizes in both shallow and deep for example.

Well, you could buy this set:

http://www.sears.com/shc/s/p_10153_12605_00935299000P?prdNo=1&blockNo=1&blockType=G1

It goes on sale for a pretty fair discount. I don't think it's skipping any sizes.

Even at that price, you're averaging about $1.60/socket.

 

[porphyre]

Except, it's totally relevant. When YOU argue that they've "cheaped out" on the ratchets, it's a perfectly valid statement to point out that the ratchet that you claim is "better" actually cost more, inflation-adjusted, than the ratchet being sold today.

Per this catalog:

http://www.roseantiquetools.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/craftsman1954.pdf

In 1954, a 3/8's raised-panel ratchet cost $3.40.

Adjusted for inflation, that ratchet would cost $28.68 today, but instead, it's $15.99, and typically on-sale for less.

Inflation-adjusted, today's $15.99 would be $1.90.

So, while Sears has "cheaped out" on the production of that tool, they've also made that tool CHEAPER for people to buy - and for a lot of people, they've got no performance issues with that tool. They use it, they abuse it, it works.

No, you don't understand. The price in 1954 is TOTALLY IRRELEVANT!

So tell us, Porphyre, why is the price in 1954 TOTALLY IRRELEVANT?

Because, Dear Reader, the decision to cheapen up the ratchet WAS NOT MADE IN 1954.

The only inflation adjusted price for the ratchet the matters is the price it was selling for when the decision was made to cut manufacturing costs.

The reason that is the only inflation adjusted price that matters is because that specific price - and therefore profit margin - is the one that caused the executives to make their decision to cut costs.

Or are you going to say that the older ratchets are "better". That '66 is better than '85, even though they're both the same all-metal construction?

If the same all metal ratchet was sold in 1966 and was sold in 1985, if the inflation adjusted price in 1966 was $15,000 and in 1985 was $28... so what? New things always carry a premium. Manufacturing costs come down over time (especially talking about multiple decades) while maintaining, or even IMPROVING, quality.

That same 1954 catalog advertises an electric impact gun for $130 (pg 10). That's over $1000, inflation adjusted. Are you going to tell me that has some sort of bearing on the quality of the currently available Craftsman Electric Impact (model #6903) which retails for $139.99? That we should expect the 1954 wrench to be better because it cost so many inflation adjusted dollars?

 

[kythri]

Actually, what I'm saying is "Get over it."

You don't like the tool. That's hunky-dory. A lot of us DO like the tool, we don't have issues with it, and we use it with "all those plastic parts cheapening it out" with a great outcome.

You complain that the tool has been "cheapened." You were countered with "yup, it has, and, inflation-adjusted, it's also cheaper than "back in that magical day when all tools were forged by the gods and never broke."

You don't think it's relevant. That's fine, it's OK to be wrong. We all are, sometimes.

 

[porphyre]

Actually, what I'm saying is "Get over it."

You don't like the tool. That's hunky-dory. A lot of us DO like the tool, we don't have issues with it, and we use it with "all those plastic parts cheapening it out" with a great outcome.

You complain that the tool has been "cheapened." You were countered with "yup, it has, and, inflation-adjusted, it's also cheaper than "back in that magical day when all tools were forged by the gods and never broke."

You don't think it's relevant. That's fine, it's OK to be wrong. We all are, sometimes.

You're just trolling me now, aren't you? I've clearly explained why your inflation adjusting ideas are flawed.

As to the ratchet itself.... there's "Good" and "Good Enough". I guess it's "Good Enough" for you. I believe that Craftsman would have a better reputation if their entry level ratchet wasn't **** as compared to similarly priced import ratchets.

 

[kc-steve]

I would agree the ratchet has been "cheapened" by virtue of the selector which is now made of plastic but the new ratchets are not even close to the old box-head ratchets made by Moore Drop Forge in 1954. Yes, Moore became Easco then Danaher, but it still isn't the same company or the same ratchet. It's like comparing apples to oranges.

On the other hand, price comparisons whether inflation corrected or not assumes they ALWAYS used accounting measures to determine their retail pricing. They probably used accounting measures in 1954, but not likely today. I wrote an economics book in 2001 where I show most companies today actually determine retail prices (and production costs) by what the market will bear (not by using accounting measures). Today, accounting measures are primarily used only as a method of staying profitable at the "popular" price by adjusting production costs. So the inflation thing is irrelevant except maybe when determining what people are willing to pay.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/0595204406/?tag=atomicindus08-20

Cheers,
Steve

 

[kythri]

You're just trolling me now, aren't you? I've clearly explained why your inflation adjusting ideas are flawed.

Not trolling you at all. I'm simply telling you that you're wrong. I don't agree with you at all. You're not right.

 

[kythri]

So the inflation thing is irrelevant except maybe when determining what people are willing to pay.

Regardless of how the price is determined, the fact is, that, adjusted for inflation, the earlier ratchet cost more than today's ratchet.

Therefore, complaining about "cheaping out" on the ratchet while pointing out that the very ratchet, for whatever reason, is cheaper, is perfectly relevant.

What's irrelevant is how the price was determined. Be it because it's cheaper to manufacture (a couple of plastic parts), or because a bean-counter dictates it, it really doesn't matter to the end user, the buyer.

 

[Matt018]

Look i dont feel like reading a bunch of people bitching about how the ratchets are cheaper or whatever, Lets get real Raised panel ratchets will turn a bolt but wont look really nice doing it or feel as good in the hand, I know that. I dont give a **** about plastic parts. In this day and age plastics are so advanced that they can make some of the most reliable pistol frames in the world with polymers. So if a plastic lever works just as good as the metal one whats it matter? The only exception to that thinking would be if the plastic is terrible and broke easily. And there RP wrenches will obviously spin bolts but wont give you the lverage or comfort of use that a proffesional would dessire if he were to use them all day, I suppose thats why some genious at craftsman decided to make some nice chromed ones that were finished nicely and a little bit longer. And if the sockets will fit the fastener and not break under regular force why would i need to buy snap on? So lets get real guys. If I was to go out right now and buy 3/8 and 1/4 drive full sets of 6 pt chrome sockets would i really be doing myself a dis-service?

 

[4x4gearhead]

Re: Why The hate for Craftsman stuff?

I dont see why you would ever need to use an open end wrench under allot of torque, The only time you need to put allot of force on an open end wrench you could just use a flare wrench. I always break a bolt loose with a box end then turn it with the open end untill its loose enough that I can use my fingers.

I need good open end wrenches for hydraulic work. Flarenut wrenches dont fit over the collar of a hydraulic hose like they do tubing. You will also find that there are situations that you have a fastener so tight against a surface that the box end doesnt even fit around the bolt/nut in this case you also need to apply a pretty substantial amount of torque to the open end of a wrench. Just so ya know that is why people who use tools every day appreciate quality tools. Im not a huge craftsman hater I like some of their things like my 3/4 drive ratchet set. For the money you wont find a better american made socket set and ratchet. At the moment that is all I can think of that I have and still use a lot that I bought at sears. A lot of it has been retired to my home set, which is fine for farting around on the weekends.

 

[kc-steve]

Regardless of how the price is determined, the fact is, that, adjusted for inflation, the earlier ratchet cost more than today's ratchet.

Therefore, complaining about "cheaping out" on the ratchet while pointing out that the very ratchet, for whatever reason, is cheaper, is perfectly relevant.

Your logic escapes me. The 1954 ratchet was better quality by ALL standards except maybe the 22-tooth mechanism if you are a fine-tooth fan. Even the chrome was better in 1954, before the environmentalists became a factor in production.

What's irrelevant is how the price was determined. Be it because it's cheaper to manufacture (a couple of plastic parts), or because a bean-counter dictates it, it really doesn't matter to the end user, the buyer.

The method for the pricing is MOST important because today the buyer determines the prices even though corporate management "thinks" that is the determining factor, management ultimately has the final say. It doesn't have to be that way though. And I'll repeat it again, when the price is relatively "fixed" by buyers then production costs and quality MUST be reduced when inflation causes higher prices for steel and etc, the stuff ratchets are made of.

However, when the production costs determine the price (as in the past) of what management thinks is what the buyer wants, then the price is much higher and a better quality ratchet, in general. Competition has changed things in the real world.

Although you are wrong, maybe you should write your OWN book on economics.

TO ALL OTHERS HERE: Don't get me wrong, I'm not a "hater" of Craftsman tools. I just think management have their competitors and priorities wrong. Instead of competing with Harbor Freight they should be competing with American tool companies for pricing.

Steve

 

[porphyre]

Not trolling you at all. I'm simply telling you that you're wrong. I don't agree with you at all. You're not right.

Not agreeing with me does not, in fact, make me wrong. Furthermore, you haven't yet put forward any logical framework for why your opinion is correct. You've simply kept say "No, no, no"

I think we'll both agree that the all-metal 36-tooth pearhead was introduced some year (1966?), produced for some number of years (1985?), then cheapened up with a design change. Yes?

Using pipster's theory (which you are now championing), the fact that the first year ratchet retailed for more inflation adjusted dollars than the final year ratchet means that the first year ratchet is better and higher quality.

Do you agree with that statement?

 

[kythri]

Not agreeing with me does not, in fact, make me wrong.

Understood. I now realize that not agreeing with you makes ME wrong. I apologize profusely.

Using pipster's theory (which you are now championing), the fact that the first year ratchet retailed for more inflation adjusted dollars than the final year ratchet means that the first year ratchet is better and higher quality.

Do you agree with that statement?

I do believe that, in this very thread (if not another recent thread of a similar nature) that I have outright said that, yes, today's Craftsman is of a lesser quality than yesterday's.

If folks would actually read my full statements, instead of picking and choosing, then they'd also realize that I've not taken issue with the claim that it's of a lesser quality, that instead, I take issue with the rampant hyperbole and outright lies that the ratchets are all but sacrificing babies and impregnating daughters.

Furthermore, you haven't yet put forward any logical framework for why your opinion is correct. You've simply kept say "No, no, no"

And, with that complete and utter misrepresentation of what I've said, I'm done talking to you. There's no point in even attempting to debate when someone is demonstrably dishonest.

Good day.

 

[kythri]

Although you are wrong, maybe you should write your OWN book on economics.

We get it. You wrote a book. You've advertised it about 100 times.

Give me a few minutes, I'll get something up on CreateSpace and be back to advertise my tripe, too.

Appeals to authority don't really work out...

 

[kc-steve]

We get it. You wrote a book. You've advertised it about 100 times.

Give me a few minutes, I'll get something up on CreateSpace and be back to advertise my tripe, too.

In an odd way, that sounds like you admit you were wrong then.

EDIT to YOUR EDIT: There is no "appeal to authority" here, but I do prefer to quote my sources which seems to be something you evidently cannot do or won't do. That won't work in a book if you try writing one. If you have a problem with me quoting my sources, then simply select to "ignore" me in user CP. Even I would enjoy that.

Steve

 

[porphyre]

I do believe that, in this very thread (if not another recent thread of a similar nature) that I have outright said that, yes, today's Craftsman is of a lesser quality than yesterday's.

Oy vey. That's not what I was asking if you agreed with.

 

[zues]

Sears is what drags craftsman down.

 

[WRX/Z28]

Sears is what drags craftsman down.

Makes absolutely no sense.


My "horrible" raised panels have take many many bolts off and put them back on, trouble free. The plastic selector, and course tooth mech haven't hindered me while working at all. Anyone that really has a problem with either of these things must not work with tools very often. Either that or they must intentionally abuse and try to damage the things they own.

The intake manifolds on a lot of cars are now a composite material instead of the aluminum of yesterday. Is that due to "cheapening" the car? or advancements in plastics/technology?

It's amazing how many guys that are claiming they're terrible and yet they don't use them or even own any, meanwhile those of us that actually turn wrench's on a daily basis can't find any true faults with them.

I love the vague and generic "they're lower quality than the old ones" statements that have no facts or statistics to support it other than the occaisional "Plastic selector" complaint. Facepalm to all you guys that jump on the bandwagon...

 

[kc-steve]

Makes absolutely no sense.


My "horrible" raised panels have take many many bolts off and put them back on, trouble free. The plastic selector, and course tooth mech haven't hindered me while working at all. Anyone that really has a problem with either of these things must not work with tools very often. Either that or they must intentionally abuse and try to damage the things they own.

The intake manifolds on a lot of cars are now a composite material instead of the aluminum of yesterday. Is that due to "cheapening" the car? or advancements in plastics/technology?

It's amazing how many guys that are claiming they're terrible and yet they don't use them or even own any, meanwhile those of us that actually turn wrench's on a daily basis can't find any true faults with them.

I love the vague and generic "they're lower quality than the old ones" statements that have no facts or statistics to support it other than the occaisional "Plastic selector" complaint. Facepalm to all you guys that jump on the bandwagon...

He-he-he-he, I'm not trying to get between you and "zues" but it sounds like you are too young to remember that auto intake manifolds in production cars were once made of cast iron, during my lifetime! Back then aluminum manifolds were used in high-performance applications to reduce weight.

You better believe those plastic manifolds are not only CHEAP but don't last much more than 6 to 8 years. I've owned cars from all those eras and was really pissed when I had a plastic manifold crack on a 7 or 8 year old car, leaking coolant into the cylinders. My mechanic friend tells me he replaces them frequently. That never happened with a cast iron manifold and doubtful it ever happens with aluminum either. Howz that for being explicit?

No one says you can't live with it. But the manufacturers are only killing themselves. I like Craftsman but hate to see them destroy their products and themselves while trying to compete with Harbor Freight.

Steve

 

[TWX]

Sears is what drags craftsman down.

It's probably safer to say that Kmart, who bought Sears several years ago, is who is dragging Craftsman and Sears down.

Sears still has several very popular product lines, among them Craftsman and Kenmore.

 

[GoBlue]

He-he-he-he, I'm not trying to get between you and "zues" but it sounds like you are too young to remember that auto intake manifolds in production cars were once made of cast iron, during my lifetime! Back then aluminum manifolds were used in high-performance applications to reduce weight.

You better believe those plastic manifolds are not only CHEAP but don't last much more than 6 to 8 years. I've owned cars from all those eras and was really pissed when I had a plastic manifold crack on a 7 or 8 year old car, leaking coolant into the cylinders. My mechanic friend tells me he replaces them frequently. That never happened with a cast iron manifold and doubtful it ever happens with aluminum either. Howz that for being explicit?

No one says you can't live with it. But the manufacturers are only killing themselves. I like Craftsman but hate to see them destroy their products and themselves while trying to compete with Harbor Freight.

Steve

There have been some issues with the G.M 3.8L Series II plastic intake failing causing hydro lock but no other repeat offenders i have seen. This part was revised fixing the issue and the new part was also plastic. For the most part i have seem more issues with cast intakes (due to the fact they have been used longer no doubt). This leads me to believe that the issue is not the material but the design of the intake. Look at the GM 60 degree v6's. When G.M switched to dexcool extended life coolant, these otherwise bullet proof engines had all kinds of issues with the intake manifolds leaking and they were/are cast aluminum. The 2.3/2.5 Ford I4 used in rangers and other small vehicles also has a propensity to leak at the intake and they are cast. I have seen issues with plastic ford intakes cracking or more accurately being cracked by blunt force, but as someone who looks at these things all day i can honestly state that intake material has little to do with service life. Its all about the engineering.
Modern polymers have come a long way. While many "old timers" (no offense) have a hard time accepting them, this is nothing new. I still get the random curmudgeon in my shop who tells me how great it was when everything had a carb though the owner was lucky if he could get it to last 100k, or how his computers are messed up causing his car to not start (this always makes me laugh when people think something is bad because they dont understand it). Technological advancements are our friends. While i myself like a lot of older things for a lot of reasons, i can not discount the fact the best vehicles ever being built are being built right now.

 

[chevy302dz]

There have been some issues with the G.M 3.8L Series II plastic intake failing causing hydro lock but no other repeat offenders i have seen. This part was revised fixing the issue and the new part was also plastic. For the most part i have seem more issues with cast intakes (due to the fact they have been used longer no doubt). This leads me to believe that the issue is not the material but the design of the intake. Look at the GM 60 degree v6's. When G.M switched to dexcool extended life coolant, these otherwise bullet proof engines had all kinds of issues with the intake manifolds leaking and they were/are cast aluminum. The 2.3/2.5 Ford I4 used in rangers and other small vehicles also has a propensity to leak at the intake and they are cast. I have seen issues with plastic ford intakes cracking or more accurately being cracked by blunt force, but as someone who looks at these things all day i can honestly state that intake material has little to do with service life. Its all about the engineering.
Modern polymers have come a long way. While many "old timers" (no offense) have a hard time accepting them, this is nothing new. I still get the random curmudgeon in my shop who tells me how great it was when everything had a carb though the owner was lucky if he could get it to last 100k, or how his computers are messed up causing his car to not start (this always makes me laugh when people think something is bad because they dont understand it). Technological advancements are our friends. While i myself like a lot of older things for a lot of reasons, i can not discount the fact the best vehicles ever being built are being built right now.

No the plastic intakes are just lousy. Why do you think Ford started making the front section of their composite intakes out of metal. Cast intakes may leak due to gasket issues but rarley due to the intakes themselves unless severly overheated. I have nothing against advancing technology with the exception that in many cases companies try to use these advancments before they're ready because they are cheaper not better.

 

[TWX]

There have been some issues with the G.M 3.8L Series II plastic intake failing...

I helped a friend with a Buick LaSabre, probably '95 or so, that had an intake manifold leak causing it to stumble. A new gasket set fixed that. IIRC it was plastic.

I had a booger of a time getting my old 360's intake to sit properly. It just never wanted to, always slightly off.


My point is that if the engineer who designs the part designs it right then it should work fine. If they fail to take into account some key aspect of a part, whether it be dissimilar materials causing thermal expansion, galvanic action, corrosion due to fluids, or something fragile sandwiched between rigid parts, failure can occur.

I fought with Carter Thermoquads for many years, and while I love how they run, I HATED constantly having to repair them or to change out the plastic center sections. On the other hand, the Holley that was on the car before was actually worse and semi-stripped at the fuel inlet fitting. My '93 Thunderbird was retired when it blew a head gasket due to a bad gasket design sandwiched between a cast-iron block and aluminum heads. Nothing plastic took out that car...

 

[hershey66]

The plastic intake gaskets on my 4.3 chevy v6 failed and GM fixed the issue by superceeding them with traditional gasket material. I do not trust dexcool whatsoever.
My truck had 30,000 miles on it when they failed. I don't see how intake gaskets are relevant to this thread but I thought I would comment on your post.

I love Snap On for the feel,comfort,quality,warranty,customer service on the truck and the pride I have in owning professional quality tools and feeling like a real professional.
Im a journeyman body man/painter and I enjoy opening the drawer on my new Snap On tool box everyday to take out a brand new Snap On tool and knowing I work with the best tools everyday and that Im at that point in my career I dont have to work with cheap tools anymore.
I would never feel that way walking into Kmart grabbing a cheap looking ratchet and having some minimum wage girl ring me up at the register and working with that tool everyday knowing every other wannabe at home mechanic in town uses the same tool.
I think that is a very good explanation of why I think Craftsman *****.

 

[blarf]

Plastic's great for some things. Not for others. Intake manifolds? Some are definitely better than others, but the impression I get is that plastic just doesn't tolerate heat cycling and organic solvents the way that aluminum or iron would.

That said the plastic intake manifold on my car is ~11 years old and seems to be doing just fine. Likewise, just because GM, Ford, and Chrysler can't get their acts together doesn't make iron block + aluminum heads a bad idea. I owned a bunch o' cars with turbocharged iron+aluminum engines, friends too. I took the head off of one because I stripped the spark plug threads... the other head came off because the car was being (knowingly) driven with a frozen wastegate actuator.

 

[TWX]

That said the plastic intake manifold on my car is ~11 years old and seems to be doing just fine. Likewise, just because GM, Ford, and Chrysler can't get their acts together doesn't make iron block + aluminum heads a bad idea. I owned a bunch o' cars with turbocharged iron+aluminum engines, friends too. I took the head off of one because I stripped the spark plug threads... the other head came off because the car was being (knowingly) driven with a frozen wastegate actuator.

I haven't had any problems with my '97 Stratus, and I'm pretty sure it's an iron block with an aluminum head. Before I bought it the poorly designed original head gasket was replaced by a different design under recall, but I bought the car with 48K miles and it was changed well before then.

I've had friends with the 2.0L SOHC and DOHC engines in the same family and they haven't had problems between the head and the block either. Only problem I'm aware of is that the 2.0 had press-fit spark plug tubes, and the glue sealant would eventually fail at the bottom, letting oil into the plug tubes and causing an electrical problem. The solution is to pull the valve cover, carefully pull the tubes, dry everything out, apply new adhesive, and carefully tap the tubes back in.

 

[GoBlue]

There are a lot of ideas about why dexcool created so many problems, but the most widely accepted in my parts is that it was corrosive or non compatible to some extent to the plastic gaskets used. Keep in mind these gaskets were used with both cast and composite intakes and had nothing to do with the intake its self for the most part. The 3800 seriesII was a heat issue as they would burn through at the egr port. If composites did not work well, i dont see why every automaker seems to be going to them. They have literally been used for years and years at this point. Failures do occur however and they are not perfect by any stretch, though they have improved with time. Interestingly enough, GM's final fix with the 60 degree v6s (think 2.8, 3.1,3.4,3.5,3.9) was to eliminate coolant in the intake at all! Their current version (3.5 and 3.9) have coolant bypass pipes!

At the end of the day...i dont like dexcool either and though its been a good while since i have seen issues on a newish car, i still replaced my dexcool with global in both my wife's Northstar, my 3.5 lze, and my vintage tbi 4.3.

 

[GoBlue]

Other than the Ford 3.8l v6 (which is one of the worst American engines of all time in the modern era and blew head gaskets regularly) i think the aluminum head cast iron block thing has been blown out of proportion. While they may be more prone to warpage, this would really only occur in an overheating situation. There are a ton of great motors that are cast iron and aluminum. The LS series v8's as well as the current Hemi's come to mind. Again...proper engineering is key here.

 

[kc-steve]

The plastic intake gaskets on my 4.3 chevy v6 failed and GM fixed the issue by superceeding them with traditional gasket material. I do not trust dexcool whatsoever.
My truck had 30,000 miles on it when they failed. I don't see how intake gaskets are relevant to this thread but I thought I would comment on your post.

That's what I have heard as well. My mechanic flushed that **** and installed the old-fashioned "green" coolant.

I think the problem that young people have today is too much faith in science and technology, or ANYTHING that's new for that matter. The only difference between me and them is that I have seen the so-called "miracle snake oil" materials and technologies come and fall by the way side when time, sooner or later, shows all the warts and blemishes. The old timers were a lot smarter than people today give them credit for, and that's a real problem for young people because they will repeat the mistakes of the past.

I bet you will never see a "classic" car with plastic engine parts (or polymer, whatever the latest fad happens to be.)

Cheers,
Steve

 

[otis66]

Plastic's great for some things. Not for others. Intake manifolds? Some are definitely better than others, but the impression I get is that plastic just doesn't tolerate heat cycling and organic solvents the way that aluminum or iron would.

That said the plastic intake manifold on my car is ~11 years old and seems to be doing just fine. Likewise, just because GM, Ford, and Chrysler can't get their acts together doesn't make iron block + aluminum heads a bad idea. I owned a bunch o' cars with turbocharged iron+aluminum engines, friends too. I took the head off of one because I stripped the spark plug threads... the other head came off because the car was being (knowingly) driven with a frozen wastegate actuator.

I still hate Craftsman tools.

 

[GoBlue]

That's what I have heard as well. My mechanic flushed that **** and installed the old-fashioned "green" coolant.

I think the problem that young people have today is too much faith in science and technology, or ANYTHING that's new for that matter. The only difference between me and them is that I have seen the so-called "miracle snake oil" materials and technologies come and fall by the way side when time, sooner or later, shows all the warts and blemishes. The old timers were a lot smarter than people today give them credit for, and that's a real problem for young people because they will repeat the mistakes of the past.

I bet you will never see a "classic" car with plastic engine parts (or polymer, whatever the latest fad happens to be.)

Cheers,
Steve

If that was directed at me...im not that young...and old cars didnt last very long either and i dont mean the bodys. I will agree that old timers were smarter than we gave them credit for, but not everything new is confagnled snake oil. This a progression of design and manufacture.

I also bet you will not see classic cars hold up to road salt as well as a new car, get 40mpg with better performance and run well in 200ks without a couple overhauls...and they start right up every morning regardless of the weather

Sure it takes more than a monkey wrench, hammer, and a pack of luckys to work on them but modern vehicles are better for the environment, safer for the driver, much more durable, and substantially more refined. Granted tastes vary...but common

P.S...i love classics...esp. Detroit muscle not a hater

 

[blarf]

If composites did not work well, i dont see why every automaker seems to be going to them. They have literally been used for years and years at this point.

Weight, heat insulation (thus efficiency), and cost.

That's what I have heard as well. My mechanic flushed that **** and installed the old-fashioned "green" coolant.

Check the label. Your "old-fashioned" green coolant is probably very similar (HOAT) or even more similar (OAT) to the DexCool stuff. You'd have to try pretty hard to get something that doesn't use an organic acid nowadays.

 

[hershey66]

That's what I have heard as well. My mechanic flushed that **** and installed the old-fashioned "green" coolant.

I think the problem that young people have today is too much faith in science and technology, or ANYTHING that's new for that matter. The only difference between me and them is that I have seen the so-called "miracle snake oil" materials and technologies come and fall by the way side when time, sooner or later, shows all the warts and blemishes. The old timers were a lot smarter than people today give them credit for, and that's a real problem for young people because they will repeat the mistakes of the past.

I bet you will never see a "classic" car with plastic engine parts (or polymer, whatever the latest fad happens to be.)

Cheers,
Steve

Haha I am a young person (under 30) I was 26 when I replaced the intake gaskets on my 03 silverado and switched to the antifreeze that mixes with all types. Just cause GM says you have to use it doesn't mean I have faith in it and will. What are the consequences of using the wrong type of antifreeze? gaskets failing. Well that happened with the factory dex cool. So what did I have to lose. Engineers screw up too.

 

[otis66]

If that was directed at me...im not that young...and old cars didnt last very long either and i dont mean the bodys. I will agree that old timers were smarter than we gave them credit for, but not everything new is confagnled snake oil. This a progression of design and manufacture.

I also bet you will not see classic cars hold up to road salt as well as a new car, get 40mpg with better performance and run well in 200ks without a couple overhauls...and they start right up every morning regardless of the weather

Sure it takes more than a monkey wrench, hammer, and a pack of luckys to work on them but modern vehicles are better for the environment, safer for the driver, much more durable, and substantially more refined. Granted tastes vary...but common

P.S...i love classics...esp. Detroit muscle not a hater

I was just joking nothing aimed at you. The thread started out about craftsman tools but some how ended up about cars. This happens all the time

 

[kythri]

I love Snap On for the feel,comfort,quality,warranty,customer service on the truck and the pride I have in owning professional quality tools and feeling like a real professional.
Im a journeyman body man/painter and I enjoy opening the drawer on my new Snap On tool box everyday to take out a brand new Snap On tool and knowing I work with the best tools everyday and that Im at that point in my career I dont have to work with cheap tools anymore.
I would never feel that way walking into Kmart grabbing a cheap looking ratchet and having some minimum wage girl ring me up at the register and working with that tool everyday knowing every other wannabe at home mechanic in town uses the same tool.
I think that is a very good explanation of why I think Craftsman *****.

I think that is a very good example of why most people think Craftsman *****.

 

[bhclark]

I thought this was a Craftsman thread? Now it's all about intakes?

 

[wave180]

I think that is a very good example of why most people think Craftsman *****.

+1...

 

[byoungblood]

I love the vague and generic "they're lower quality than the old ones" statements that have no facts or statistics to support it other than the occaisional "Plastic selector" complaint. Facepalm to all you guys that jump on the bandwagon...

There does seem to have been a change on the way the gear teeth are milled on the newer ratchets. Ironically the pawl isn't that much different in design than the SO 36 tooth ratchets, but there is a HUGE difference in the profile of the teeth and the spring tension on the pawl. I'd guess those two items are the source of about 95% of the complaints of the RP ratchets self-reversing and skipping teeth.

 

[bhclark]

I think that is a very good example of why most people think Craftsman *****.

So, basically, you're stuck up....

 

[kxxr]

Re: Why The hate for Craftsman stuff?

I drive a 1998 Eddie Bauer Explorer, Rusty 197K beater.

My wife drives a 2009 BMW 5 series, so pretty that I'd bang it if it came with a ******.

My explorer has just about every option her Beemer has and does the exact same thing... Gets me where I need to go.

Her car just does it with more refinement and comfort.



I think of my Explorer as a RP Craftsman and her car as a Flank Drive Plus.

Same outcome at the end, only difference is comfort getting there.

Wait a sec, for all that money, you're saying bmw's don't have vaginas?

 

[TWX]

I bet you will never see a "classic" car with plastic engine parts (or polymer, whatever the latest fad happens to be.)

Does the Carter Thermoquad count?

I've seen many classic cars with that carb.