On 28/9/2022 5:04 am, harry hornsley wrote:
> Xeno said:
>
>> The engine is probably quite tired.
>
> The engine had I thought 250K but I looked and it's 270K but I've run
> vehicles well beyond that myself (not turbos, and not diesels though) and
> if it was properly maintained, that should be about the half life of an
> engine, shouldn't it be?
>
> I'm assuming FedEx maintained their engines well.
>
Never, never, never assume that! Also, never assume that the driver(s)
treated the vehicle with respect. If the vehicle was company owned, and
had multiple drivers, the plague would be a more preferable option. Ask
me how I know! I used to do vehicle fleet maintenance in my past
employment - cars, trucks, buses, earthmoving - the lot, I've seen it all.
>>>
>>>> Also he went to Home Depot & Ace to make the ignition & back door keys but
>>>> they don't have the blanks.
>>>
>>> No, they wouldn't, but it wouldn't do them any good anyway because they can't
>>> program the fob. A real locksmith may have the tools, as will a Mercedes
>>> or Freightliner shop.
>
> I don't know if the fob is electronic on the 2011 because certainly the
> back door key is not electronic. The ignition key swings out of the fob but
> I don't know if the fob is electronic other than it has buttons for opening
> and locking the doors.
If it has an immobiliser, it will likely have a chip in the fob. I'm
pretty sure immobilisers have been in vogue since the 2000ish.
>
> Do you know for sure that the 2011 has a chip in the key fob?
>
>>>
>>>> One last thing is it uses a quart or two of oil a week but it's not leaking
>>>> when he pulls into his driveway - is that normal?
>>
>> That's a lot of oil. Back in the good old days half a quart of oil
>> consumption per thousand miles was considered normal. There has been
>> nothing stated from the OP concerning just how many miles that POS will
>> do in a week currently. Does he do 100 miles a week, a 1,000???
>
> I had said this multiple times but I'll repeat it since you're trying to
> help. He is in remodeling. He's a single-man shop. He uses the truck to get
> to the daily jobs. Every job will be a different distance. The current job
> is 17 miles away from his home which he says is about average.
>
> With errands, that comes to roughly about 50 to 75 miles a day which we can
> say then is about 250 to 375 miles a week or so.
If he's running a business, why does he not buy a new or newer more
reliable vehicle rather than one that has had the life beaten out of in
a *commercial endeavour*?? All the people I know who run a business put
a *reliable* vehicle above a *cheap* vehicle. It is why the Toyota Hilux
is the most popular ute out there in *industry*. As a business, you're
not earning money when your vehicle is off the road getting fixed. The
older and more clapped out that vehicle is, the more downtime you accrue
- and the more *customers* lose faith in you. I thought this was a
common sense thing but it appears common sense might not be as common as
I thought.
>>>
>>> Definitely not, this is the sign of big trouble.
>>
>> Big expensive trouble that will exceed the residual value of the vehicle.
>
> It always amazes me when people care so much about "residual value" of a
> vehicle? Who cares about that? It's like buying a nail to use on a
> construction job and worrying about the residual value of the leftovers.
There are times when you need concern yourself with the concept of
throwing good money after bad. If you're running a business, ROI is a
critical aspect.
>
> A truck like that is a tool. Nobody sensible cares about the residual value
> of their tools, do they? Why would anyone make any decision based on
> residual value? Are they that greedy that selling all their tools is all
> that they care about?
You are displaying a clear ignorance of *residual value* so pointless
discussing this particular issue further with you.
>
> I'm sorry for going off on you on that so please just take it as a given
> that I've heard this residual value stuff for five decades and I just don't
> understand how a person thinks when they care about something that is so
> meaningless that I have to wonder what their brains are doing.
>
> If, for example, you need a roof rack or a hitch or a brighter headlight or
> a set of tires or a shock absorber, etc., you need it. You don't buy a
> "better one" just for "residual value". Do you?
If the better one will suit your needs better, then, yes, I would. But
it wouldn't be fitted to something that wasn't going to last the
distance - and that is my point - throwing good money after bad.
>
>>>
>>>> He's not mechanically inclined where I am a bit but I don't know anything
>>>> about diesels nor about commercial vehicles nor about German vehicles.
>>>
>>> He's not mechanically inclined and he bought a used fleet vehicle without
>>> having a mechanic check it out first?
>>
>> Yes, I thought that quite inane too.
>
> It's inane to you because you must have infinite money. If you don't have
> infinite money, then you buy a used vehicle.
If you don't have infinite money, and you need a *reliable* vehicle for
a business, then you *borrow* the money for the purchase and claim the
repayments against your tax. That's the way all the business people
operate that I know, to the extent they *lease* their vehicles.
>
>>>
>>> Your friend needs to find a local independent Mercedes mechanic and google will
>>> probably help him with that.
>>>
>> I somehow think he is beyond any reasonable help.
>
> That's unduly harsh.
> He is a business man who owns his own business.
> He doesn't have infinite money like you do.
> So he buys a used vehicle instead of a new one.