Quote:
Originally Posted by ArchHibb
Reserved for tomorrow morning...
Taking the information provided by the OP at face value, I don't see how one concludes that this car requires an engine out service. To my way of thinking, the seller deserves the benefit of the doubt given the buyer's knowledge of him and the car, and if he says the car was running in April, it's highly unlikely it developed an "engine out" problem since then.
I'm all for considering the worst case scenario and this might just be a case of glass half-full vs. half-empty opinions, but rolling out the laundry list of "while you're in there work" and "if you don't have to... rebuild the engine" is just overkill.
|
I concluded it because I believe that a car that had not been run up to operating temperature in 10 years is almost certain to leak like a bloody sieve because every gasket and hose is almost sure to be perished -- most especially the fuel hoses.
And that is something you don't want to mess with.
And by far the simplest way to replace what needs to be replaced involves dropping the engine. Having done it recently as a total newbie, it is not that complicated -- just time consuming. And that = expensive at a garage.
Noting that to a prospective buyer is not quite the same as suggesting the engine "might need a rebuild".
I have no doubt the buyer "might" be able to swap the DME relay, drain the tank, put in some new gas, and be able to fire it up and drive it around for a while. But that doesn't make a 10 year non-runner truly road worthy.
What I am talking about is pretty much guaranteed necessary work on a car this old that has not had routine maintenance -- and a buyer should go in with that assumption, and then be pleasantly surprised if all the rubber & gaskets are not brittle, cracked, and leaking. I'm happy to defer to more experienced posters. I just know what I found on a same year cab in better condition, with pretty up to date maintenance.