>>> "Robert P. Agnew" <ragnew@islandnet.com> 05/14/97 03:51pm >>>
> At 04:27 PM 5/14/97 -0600, you wrote:
> >Of course, they told me next time I'm going to need to have the radiator
> >flushed. I'm pretty sure the manual does say to do that at 30k miles.
>
> Jason:
>
> That will depend upon how old your truck is and how often you changed
> your anti-freeze. Why don't you talk to a reliable mechanic or your CC
> dealer? They can give you good advice and often will do the service for
> the same price or less than these "Jiffy" places. For example, the CC
> dealer hear in Victoria, does an oil and filter change for $29.95 (including
> parts) plus an inspection.
My truck is a '95 model (built 12/94). I've had it since last September. I
haven't changed the anti-freeze, but I have no idea if the previous owner
ever did or not. I've usually assumed that he didn't do anything, just to be
safe.
I used to take my Neon to Hinckley's Dodge for oil changes before I
moved. They're the only 5-star dealer service center I'm aware of in the
state of Utah. Where I live now, it now takes between 45 and 60 minutes
each way to drive there, while Jiffy Lube is 3 minutes away. Hinckley's
charged $29.95, while Jiffy Lube charges $27 and puts out enough $3
coupons that I always have a current one.
The only Dodge dealer in this county is about 25 minutes each way. That's
far enough that I can't swing over there on my lunch hour. Besides that, I
took my Dakota there to get a transfer case leak fixed under warranty, and I
had to take it back four times because they either didn't have the parts or
the time to fix it, or they kept finding new oil and axle leaks that they missed
the first time they looked. Two months later when I found another oil leak, I
just drove up to Hinckley's, and they fixed it in one try and it stayed fixed.
I might call Hinckley's and see what they tell me about the rad flush,
though. Good idea.
> There is also a difference between a back-flush (with water) and a
> chemical rad flush ...using a fancy machine.
Is the chemical method better? It would seem so, otherwise why would
they bother with chemicals if they could do a better job with water.
Thanks.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:07:40 EDT