the original comment was about hitting 250K by WCBF. didn't think it would get done, now it looks like a certainty.

This wasn't about total miles, because I expect it to go for at least double what it is now, and if it does die, it will be reborn.

Plus, it'* a 97, not a 90. I think there is a distinction from a 20 yr old car with 300K and a 10 yr old with 300K

Sorry, but I'm not sure I understand the comment, are you saying that cars we're built better in 90. or rather it'* easier when you spread the miles over 16 years rather than 10. I'm not disputing, just trying to understand your point.

Thanks.

I think he is saying that the 90 has had a few more years to build up the miles.

its harder to put on 300K in 10 years that it is to put 300K on in 16

Ok... I got your point now. You would figure though that if you put more miles in less time than there is a great chance that they're highway miles, which are actually better on the car. Either way.......Point taken.

Good luck and hope it doesn't give you to many problems.

Thanks

Not sure with the condition of Travis' car where the miles are put on.. It should be highway..but the car doens't have any of the usual highway road rash.

Eh? :P

I have a giant car treadmill in the garage. I let it run 8 hrs a day on the mill.

Bill............has anyone ever told you yet?


Frig, I forgot.......I have to add a smiley or else he thinks I'm serious.... :P How about only half of one?

HAHA. It seriously looks like it though. my car with 112k has like 10 times more road rash than yours does.

at the rate i'm going, I will catch up in around 20 years.