View Single Post
  #34  
Old 10-17-2012, 05:52 AM
sunny5280 sunny5280 is offline
Officially Welcomed to the 'Fest
Location: Denver, CO
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 3,608
Mein Auto: 2007 X5 4.8i
Quote:
Originally Posted by galahad05 View Post
Tolerance of risk and consequences for failure.

Like in software or (electrical) hardware design: is the product going to go into a remote control for a TV set or in a pacemaker?
In the first case, if something goes wrong, maybe the owner will just mash the volume button a bit longer. In the second case, someone dies.

Extreme example.
This is not an example of correlation between transporting an elderly parent across the county and radiator failures. The reality is there is no correlation. The radiator is just as likely (or not) to fail when transporting an elderly parent across the country as when not.

What you're referring to is the severity of the consequences should the radiator fail. It's my take DSXMachina feels the consequences of a radiator failure while transporting an elderly parent across the country warrant replacement of a perfectly good radiator based solely on the fact it has 120K miles on it. That seems to contradict his early statement about not recommending proactive replacement of parts which have not failed.

And if he's going to recommend replacement of the radiator will he also be recommending replacement of the water pump? Heater core? Expansion tank? All cooling hoses? What about the fuel pump? Or the various computers? Or how about the entire car (which is not as crazy as it seems because people do just that...when the mileage gets too high they replace the entire car)?

Last edited by sunny5280; 10-17-2012 at 05:54 AM.
Reply With Quote