My point is you spent 10 hours fixing a broken washer. I value my time at about $70.00 an hour spending 10 hours diagnosing something on that basis I would be $375 in the hole. Actually I replace about half of them as a prophylactic measure. Only two absolutely needed to be replaced, the rest were well on their way to failing and at less that $1.00 each it was well worth replacing them all at the same time. The switch was dodgey and on it's way to failure as well. I could probably have monkeyed around with to make it work better, but only a couple of bucks extra it seemed a no brainer to replace it at the same time.
Tom C wrote: > I already told you, but what's your point? Mine is that I saved $325 I > didn't have free to spend on the unexpected problem. It's not that it was > hard, to fix because done once I could do it again in less than an hour. I'm > a clod when it comes to things mechanical. > > It sounds like you replaced lots of minor items without troubleshooting > them. Whereas I ran though the diagnostic flow chart, took off the drain > pump, checked it to see if it's clogged and operating correctly, etc. Much > of that, in the end, was time spent isolating the problem, not actually > repairing it. > > You can't make me feel bad about it. :-) > > Tom C. > > > >> From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net> >> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net> >> Subject: Re: Don't want to sound too alarmist but... >> Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 16:26:43 -0400 >> >> How many hours did you spend fixing your washer? I replaced every >> important sensor and a switch, (essentially rebuilding the electrical >> system), in less that two hours. Most of that was figuring out how to >> take the back off. >> >> Tom C wrote: >> >>> I think the new technology is often easily repairable. It's just that >>> >> most >> >>> of the electronics is now manufactured overseas and it's incredibly >>> >> cheap. >> >>> A company makes more profit replacing an entire circuit board that costs >>> >> $20 >> >>> and charging $250 + 1 hour labor, than they do trouble shooting the >>> >> board >> >>> for an hour and replacing $.10 and $1.00 parts. For the company, time is >>> money. Also, the customer unable to diagnose othe problem, is happy just >>> >> to >> >>> get the serviceman in and out. >>> >>> Tom C. >>> >>> >>> >>>> From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net> >>>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net> >>>> Subject: Re: Don't want to sound too alarmist but... >>>> Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 14:40:39 -0400 >>>> >>>> Front loads have been around for a long time, even here. The old >>>> technology is much easier to repair, and usually costs less than new >>>> electronic devices, which seem to designed to not be repaired. >>>> >>>> Tom C wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> Well I don't claim to be a rocket scientist. It usually take me 2 or >>>>> >> 3 >> >>>>> trips to the parts store or tool store before I get things right >>>>> >> because >> >>>> I >>>> >>>> >>>>> learn as I go. I was happy to have saved at least $325. >>>>> >>>>> Two advantages of the newer front load washers (long popular in Europe >>>>> >>>>> >>>> and >>>> >>>> >>>>> only becoming popular in the USA over the last decade for home use) is >>>>> >>>>> >>>> that >>>> >>>> >>>>> they use about 1/3 the water as older top load washers and are much >>>>> >>>>> >>>> easier >>>> >>>> >>>>> on clothes. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Tom C. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>>> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net> >>>>>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net> >>>>>> Subject: Re: Don't want to sound too alarmist but... >>>>>> Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 12:49:04 -0400 >>>>>> >>>>>> And it drys cloths no better than the 30 year old dryer I bought for >>>>>> $25.00 12 years ago, and fixed for less than $10. Replacing all of >>>>>> >> the >> >>>>>> temperature sensors and door switch in less than two hours. (I ended >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> up >>>> >>>> >>>>>> giving it away 6 months ago as I had no place to store it). >>>>>> >>>>>> Tom C wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> What all these problems really indicate is how cheap, low-spec most >>>>>>>> of the electronic components being used are, even in high-end >>>>>>>> cameras. Curiously, my 1966 RCA transistor radio that cost me $20 >>>>>>>> (expensive back then!) is still going strong. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Godfrey >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Likely planned obsolescence? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On a side note, I just fixed our 2000 Maytag Neptune washer which >>>>>>> >> had >> >>>>>>> stopped spinning clothes in the spin cycle. If it had failed about >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>> two >>>> >>>> >>>>>> yeas >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> ago I could have gotten it fixed for free under the terms of a class >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> action >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> lawsuit. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It was going to cost upwards of $400 for a service call, an entire >>>>>>> >> new >> >>>>>>> >>>>>> main >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> control board, and an item called a wax motor which is essential to >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> locking >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> the door. I replaced the wax motor (ultimate source of the problem) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> along >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> with a blown resistor and two transistors on the main board. In the >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> process >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> I ruined a metal 'leaf' spring that holds the wax motor in place and >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> super >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> glued a switch closed, until the new parts arrived. Cost of my >>>>>>> >> repair >> >>>>>>> including parts which I runied in the process was under $75 dollars, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> though >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> I have about 10 hours invested in it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Tom C. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> All dogs have four legs; my cat has four legs. Therefore, my cat is a >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> dog. >>>> >>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>>>> PDML@pdml.net >>>>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> -- >>>> All dogs have four legs; my cat has four legs. Therefore, my cat is a >>>> >> dog. >> >>>> -- >>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>> PDML@pdml.net >>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> -- >> All dogs have four legs; my cat has four legs. Therefore, my cat is a dog. >> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> > > > > -- All dogs have four legs; my cat has four legs. Therefore, my cat is a dog. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
