Julie Bove wrote:

>> Obviously you never had properly made, cooked and served gnocchi, but
>> actually I couldn't care less

> To me they have no flavor.

Then you have an issue, be it those potatoes or your tongu: one can not fail
to perceive the flavor of potatoes. And... newsflash! People puts dressings
on them...

"ViLco" > wrote in message
...
> Julie Bove wrote:
>
>>> Obviously you never had properly made, cooked and served gnocchi, but
>>> actually I couldn't care less
>
>> To me they have no flavor.
>
> Then you have an issue, be it those potatoes or your tongu: one can not
> fail to perceive the flavor of potatoes. And... newsflash! People puts
> dressings on them...

I had them once in a restaurant and once at home. I bought them and put
tomato sauce on them. The sauce had flavor but the gnocchi did not.

It is difficult to cook food evenly in the microwave. The bulk of the meat determines the amount of time required to achieve the temperature needed to kill disease-causing bacteria to a large extent. Different types of meat have different safe temperatures, because they may have different types of bacteria.

Julie Bove wrote:

>> Then you have an issue, be it those potatoes or your tongu: one can
>> not fail to perceive the flavor of potatoes. And... newsflash!
>> People puts dressings on them...

> I had them once in a restaurant and once at home. I bought them and
> put tomato sauce on them. The sauce had flavor but the gnocchi did
> not.

Bad gnocchi, then, probably made with too much flour in order to save the
time needed to let the potatoes get old. Flour kills the potato flavor. Find
someone who can actually make gnocchi.

On Wed, 29 Aug 2012 04:12:37 +0000 (UTC), gregz >
wrote:


>As I explained, cooking most things, especially meat, does not heat the
>meat evenly. There are hot/cold spots. Some of the meat parts are going to
>be overdone to insure average temps.
>
>Greg

Cooking meat in a microwave takes a little more technique than just
tossing it in and setting the timer. Hot spots are much less than
years ago, but can still be noted. Cooking on lower power settings
overcomes that by allowing time for the heat to move to the other
spots.

If you really want to do it, meat can be fairly decent, but still not
as good as traditional methods. You never get that outside browning
and associated flavor.

Of course, cooking a steak to medium rare in uneven cooking too!

On 2012-08-28 20:37:58 +0000, said:

> On Tue, 28 Aug 2012 16:34:55 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>
>> gtr wrote:
>>>
>>> I don't have a micro-wave, and I never seem to need one.
>>
>> Good for you. I have the addiction though. When my last one quit, I was
>> quite miserable for a week until I replaced it.
>>
>> G.
>
> Wasn't until mine croaked that I realised how handy it had become, I
> thought I just used it to heat stuff but missed it on the cooking
> fish/veggies very much.

I use a Breville toaster/oven for both of these tasks.

On 2012-08-29 10:14:21 +0000, Ed Pawlowski said:

> On Wed, 29 Aug 2012 04:12:37 +0000 (UTC), gregz >
> wrote:
>
>
>> As I explained, cooking most things, especially meat, does not heat the
>> meat evenly. There are hot/cold spots. Some of the meat parts are going to
>> be overdone to insure average temps.
>>
>> Greg
>
> Cooking meat in a microwave takes a little more technique than just
> tossing it in and setting the timer. Hot spots are much less than
> years ago, but can still be noted. Cooking on lower power settings
> overcomes that by allowing time for the heat to move to the other
> spots.
>
> If you really want to do it, meat can be fairly decent, but still not
> as good as traditional methods. You never get that outside browning
> and associated flavor.
>
> Of course, cooking a steak to medium rare in uneven cooking too!

The last mwave I had was about 1989. It had a rotating plate in the
bottom. I guess "unevenness" is the reason why. I've never had any
problems re-heating, boiling or making popcorn without an micro, which
I think is what most people use them for.

Frankly I've always thought the concept of cooking with microwaves was
kind creepy, as I do the fact that we are bombarded with micro-waves
from phones and telecomm and everything else every hour of every day of
our lives. Not a big fear; just creepy when you think about it.

Then again, when I actually owned a micro, I never used it to actually
"cook food" I was going to eat. Just heating water, mostly. We have a
one gallon hot-water appliance, we use to make tea. When I need hot
water to make a quickee miso soup or something it's only a moment from
boiling when it comes out of that gizmo.

wrote:
>
> Scrambled eggs done in the nuker are delicious

I have to disagree here. Made in the pan might be messier but I think they
are much better. If you can see through the little microwave screened window
though, it's fun to watch them cook.

You scramble them in a bowl, put in microwave, then watch them cook. It's
like an alien thing as they start swelling up and up. Fun to watch.

G.

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
> On Wed, 29 Aug 2012 04:12:37 +0000 (UTC), gregz >
> wrote:
>
> >As I explained, cooking most things, especially meat, does not heat the
> >meat evenly. There are hot/cold spots. Some of the meat parts are going to
> >be overdone to insure average temps.
> >
> >Greg
>
> Cooking meat in a microwave takes a little more technique than just
> tossing it in and setting the timer. Hot spots are much less than
> years ago, but can still be noted. Cooking on lower power settings
> overcomes that by allowing time for the heat to move to the other
> spots.

Yes. For that chicken piece I cooked, I covered the plate with a bowl. I
actually cooked it for a bit, then let it sit a few minutes before cooking
more. I did this a few times until it was done. I liked it. It was like
poached chicken. No browning though.

I don't normally cook meat in the mv. This was just a quick meal thing.

G.

Gary > wrote:
> wrote:
>>
>> Scrambled eggs done in the nuker are delicious
>
> I have to disagree here. Made in the pan might be messier but I think they
> are much better. If you can see through the little microwave screened window
> though, it's fun to watch them cook.
>
> You scramble them in a bowl, put in microwave, then watch them cook. It's
> like an alien thing as they start swelling up and up. Fun to watch.
>
> G.

Most of us do this. Unfortunately, microwave leakage firstly, cooks your
eyeballs.

Greg

On Monday, August 27, 2012 4:07:02 AM UTC-5, Julie Bove wrote:
> The person who asked me this does very little cooking and mostly dines out.
>
> But he acted a bit shocked that I do not. I may have tried it once some
>
> many years ago when I first got a microwave. Back then I did eggs in it a
>
> few times. I made muffins. I made chocolate pudding. And cheese sauce.
>
>
>
> Mostly I do not use the microwave to cook stuff. I melt chocolate. I
>
> reheat stuff. I have made sweet potatoes for my daughter and she likes them
>
> that way. And I have made fresh broccoli and asparagus in there.
>
>
>
> But meat? Doesn't sound right to me. Do you do it?

No. Never. Raw meat should never be put into a microwave. Period.

--Bryan

On 8/30/2012 7:42 AM, Bryan wrote:

> No. Never. Raw meat should never be put into a microwave. Period.
>
> --Bryan


Earlier, I mentioned that I never cook meat in the microwave. This
afternoon, the ground chuck was only halfway defrosted, so I defrosted
the frozen portion of the meat in the microwave, using the Defrost
setting. It worked perfectly, the meat defrosted and the microwave did
not cook or brown the meat.

Becca

Ema Nymton wrote:
>
> On 8/30/2012 7:42 AM, Bryan wrote:
>
> > No. Never. Raw meat should never be put into a microwave. Period.
> >
> > --Bryan
>
> Earlier, I mentioned that I never cook meat in the microwave. This
> afternoon, the ground chuck was only halfway defrosted, so I defrosted
> the frozen portion of the meat in the microwave, using the Defrost
> setting. It worked perfectly, the meat defrosted and the microwave did
> not cook or brown the meat.
>
> Becca

I've done a nip of defrosting too. I've even softened a stick of butter by
microwaving for a few seconds.

That one time I cooked a chicken leg quarter in the microwave, I put a bowl
over it and did it in steps. Cook for a while, then let it sit for a while,
then cook some more. It wasn't so bad....kind of like poached chicken. I
was just pressed for time but it wasn't so bad.

Gary

On 8/31/2012 10:45 AM, Ema Nymton wrote:
> On 8/30/2012 7:42 AM, Bryan wrote:
>
>> No. Never. Raw meat should never be put into a microwave. Period.
>>
>> --Bryan
>
>
> Earlier, I mentioned that I never cook meat in the microwave. This
> afternoon, the ground chuck was only halfway defrosted, so I defrosted
> the frozen portion of the meat in the microwave, using the Defrost
> setting. It worked perfectly, the meat defrosted and the microwave did
> not cook or brown the meat.
>
> Becca
>

Being about to quickly defrost meat really increases your dinner
options. The last thing I defrosted was frozen hamburger buns. I zapped
2 in the microwave for 20 seconds and then finished them off in the
toaster. It worked pretty good.

I don't even reheat anything with meat, minus lasagna or something with tore up meat in scant amounts. Stews and soups, too.

On 8/31/2012 4:05 PM, dsi1 wrote:

> Being about to quickly defrost meat really increases your dinner
> options. The last thing I defrosted was frozen hamburger buns. I zapped
> 2 in the microwave for 20 seconds and then finished them off in the
> toaster. It worked pretty good.


We bought a great big 1250 watt Panasonic Inverter Microwave that was
around $180. It worked great, for just over a year, then it went kaput.
We replaced it with an 1100 watt GE for $90. I have used the defrost
setting several times, it works great. If this one croaks, then I
haven't wasted as much money.

Becca

On 8/31/2012 12:36 PM, Ema Nymton wrote:
> On 8/31/2012 4:05 PM, dsi1 wrote:
>
>> Being about to quickly defrost meat really increases your dinner
>> options. The last thing I defrosted was frozen hamburger buns. I zapped
>> 2 in the microwave for 20 seconds and then finished them off in the
>> toaster. It worked pretty good.
>
>
> We bought a great big 1250 watt Panasonic Inverter Microwave that was
> around $180. It worked great, for just over a year, then it went kaput.
> We replaced it with an 1100 watt GE for $90. I have used the defrost
> setting several times, it works great. If this one croaks, then I
> haven't wasted as much money.
>
> Becca

Sorry to hear about your Panasonic. That is a supa-powerful unit
alright. Our MW oven went nutz and blew its mind after about a year.
Sears wanted to charge me 75 bucks for a house call - I couldn't drop
the unit off at the service center. Ah shucks, it was already in the car
trunk. That's the breaks. That deluxe Samsung unit was tossed in the
nearest dumpster and I replaced it with an LG and got a service contract
for less than $150 total.

We probably have the same mindset about things like this. I didn't want
to dick around and fret about it cause we use that appliance a lot.
Hopefully the appliance gods will be kinder this time and the LG will
last a little longer.

I also have the cutest little Magic Chief unit in my office. I saw this
little beauty at Home Depot and fell in love with its sophisticated
brushed steel front panel and mirrored window. Well, mostly it was the
$45 price tag. :-)

On Fri, 31 Aug 2012 15:45:58 -0500, Ema Nymton >
wrote:

>On 8/30/2012 7:42 AM, Bryan wrote:
>
>> No. Never. Raw meat should never be put into a microwave. Period.
>>
>> --Bryan
>
>
>Earlier, I mentioned that I never cook meat in the microwave. This
>afternoon, the ground chuck was only halfway defrosted, so I defrosted
>the frozen portion of the meat in the microwave, using the Defrost
>setting. It worked perfectly, the meat defrosted and the microwave did
>not cook or brown the meat.
>
>Becca

Microwave ovens are great for defrosting, I use mine to defrost meat
and all kind of frozen foods... today I used it to partially defrost a
container of frozen strawberry yogurt.

On Fri, 31 Aug 2012 17:36:49 -0500, Ema Nymton >
wrote:

>On 8/31/2012 4:05 PM, dsi1 wrote:
>
>> Being about to quickly defrost meat really increases your dinner
>> options. The last thing I defrosted was frozen hamburger buns. I zapped
>> 2 in the microwave for 20 seconds and then finished them off in the
>> toaster. It worked pretty good.
>
>
>We bought a great big 1250 watt Panasonic Inverter Microwave that was
>around $180. It worked great, for just over a year, then it went kaput.
>We replaced it with an 1100 watt GE for $90. I have used the defrost
>setting several times, it works great. If this one croaks, then I
>haven't wasted as much money.
>
>Becca

My under counter GE has been working like a champ for over 30 years, I
wish it would go kaput so I'd have reason to buy a new larger more
powerful unit.

On 8/29/2012 4:24 PM, Gary wrote:
> wrote:
>>
>> Scrambled eggs done in the nuker are delicious
>
> I have to disagree here. Made in the pan might be messier but I think they
> are much better. If you can see through the little microwave screened window
> though, it's fun to watch them cook.
>
> You scramble them in a bowl, put in microwave, then watch them cook. It's
> like an alien thing as they start swelling up and up. Fun to watch.

Like a souffle, and I think they come out great. Better if you let
butter melt in the bowl first, then cook the eggs in a warm bowl coated
with butter.

On 8/31/2012 6:03 PM, dsi1 wrote:
> On 8/31/2012 12:36 PM, Ema Nymton wrote:
>> >On 8/31/2012 4:05 PM, dsi1 wrote:
>> >
>>> >>Being about to quickly defrost meat really increases your dinner
>>> >>options. The last thing I defrosted was frozen hamburger buns. I zapped
>>> >>2 in the microwave for 20 seconds and then finished them off in the
>>> >>toaster. It worked pretty good.
>> >
>> >
>> >We bought a great big 1250 watt Panasonic Inverter Microwave that was
>> >around $180. It worked great, for just over a year, then it went kaput.
>> >We replaced it with an 1100 watt GE for $90. I have used the defrost
>> >setting several times, it works great. If this one croaks, then I
>> >haven't wasted as much money.
>> >
>> >Becca
> Sorry to hear about your Panasonic. That is a supa-powerful unit
> alright. Our MW oven went nutz and blew its mind after about a year.
> Sears wanted to charge me 75 bucks for a house call - I couldn't drop
> the unit off at the service center. Ah shucks, it was already in the car
> trunk. That's the breaks. That deluxe Samsung unit was tossed in the
> nearest dumpster and I replaced it with an LG and got a service contract
> for less than $150 total.
>
> We probably have the same mindset about things like this. I didn't want
> to dick around and fret about it cause we use that appliance a lot.
> Hopefully the appliance gods will be kinder this time and the LG will
> last a little longer.

I wanted to fix the Panasonic but after looking at the service manual
and parts list, I found out that it had to be taken to a repair center.
Usually, the minimum charge these days is $75 labor plus parts. Screw
that. The GE we bought works well.

George L

On Sat, 01 Sep 2012 07:22:05 -0500, George Leppla
> wrote:

>On 8/31/2012 6:03 PM, dsi1 wrote:
>> On 8/31/2012 12:36 PM, Ema Nymton wrote:
>>> >On 8/31/2012 4:05 PM, dsi1 wrote:
>>> >
>>>> >>Being about to quickly defrost meat really increases your dinner
>>>> >>options. The last thing I defrosted was frozen hamburger buns. I zapped
>>>> >>2 in the microwave for 20 seconds and then finished them off in the
>>>> >>toaster. It worked pretty good.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >We bought a great big 1250 watt Panasonic Inverter Microwave that was
>>> >around $180. It worked great, for just over a year, then it went kaput.
>>> >We replaced it with an 1100 watt GE for $90. I have used the defrost
>>> >setting several times, it works great. If this one croaks, then I
>>> >haven't wasted as much money.
>>> >
>>> >Becca
>> Sorry to hear about your Panasonic. That is a supa-powerful unit
>> alright. Our MW oven went nutz and blew its mind after about a year.
>> Sears wanted to charge me 75 bucks for a house call - I couldn't drop
>> the unit off at the service center. Ah shucks, it was already in the car
>> trunk. That's the breaks. That deluxe Samsung unit was tossed in the
>> nearest dumpster and I replaced it with an LG and got a service contract
>> for less than $150 total.
>>
>> We probably have the same mindset about things like this. I didn't want
>> to dick around and fret about it cause we use that appliance a lot.
>> Hopefully the appliance gods will be kinder this time and the LG will
>> last a little longer.
>
>I wanted to fix the Panasonic but after looking at the service manual
>and parts list, I found out that it had to be taken to a repair center.
> Usually, the minimum charge these days is $75 labor plus parts. Screw
>that. The GE we bought works well.
>
>George L

I've been using the same GE for more than 30 years. Before this one I
had one of those humongous 2 cu ft GE units with a probe, worked great
but took up too much counter space and 99% of the time all I put in it
would fit in a saucer. GE makes wonderful microwave ovens, doesn't
have a turn table and still cooks very evenly.

On Sat, 01 Sep 2012 07:22:05 -0500, George Leppla
> wrote:



>
>I wanted to fix the Panasonic but after looking at the service manual
>and parts list, I found out that it had to be taken to a repair center.
> Usually, the minimum charge these days is $75 labor plus parts. Screw
>that. The GE we bought works well.
>
>George L

Unless it was the magnetron. They are often warranted for 6 years or
more. But it still may cost you $75 or so to find out it is not.

On 2012-08-31 22:36:49 +0000, Ema Nymton said:

> We replaced it with an 1100 watt GE for $90. I have used the defrost
> setting several times, it works great. If this one croaks, then I
> haven't wasted as much money.

I forgot about defrosting. That certainly was a handy use.

On 9/1/2012 2:22 AM, George Leppla wrote:

> I wanted to fix the Panasonic but after looking at the service manual
> and parts list, I found out that it had to be taken to a repair center.
> Usually, the minimum charge these days is $75 labor plus parts. Screw
> that. The GE we bought works well.
>
> George L

In my case, the 75 dollars was for the guy to drive to my house. Near as
I can tell, the plan is to make refusing the service contract an
unattractive proposition. Gotta buy that service contract!

On 2012-09-01 17:18:05 +0000, dsi1 said:

> On 9/1/2012 2:22 AM, George Leppla wrote:
>
>> I wanted to fix the Panasonic but after looking at the service manual
>> and parts list, I found out that it had to be taken to a repair center.
>> Usually, the minimum charge these days is $75 labor plus parts. Screw
>> that. The GE we bought works well.
>>
>> George L
>
> In my case, the 75 dollars was for the guy to drive to my house. Near
> as I can tell, the plan is to make refusing the service contract an
> unattractive proposition. Gotta buy that service contract!

I don't buy service contracts if there are no, or few, moving parts.
That's served me well over the years. At least 85% of the time.

On 9/1/2012 10:41 AM, gtr wrote:
> On 2012-09-01 17:18:05 +0000, dsi1 said:
>
>> On 9/1/2012 2:22 AM, George Leppla wrote:
>>
>>> I wanted to fix the Panasonic but after looking at the service manual
>>> and parts list, I found out that it had to be taken to a repair center.
>>> Usually, the minimum charge these days is $75 labor plus parts. Screw
>>> that. The GE we bought works well.
>>>
>>> George L
>>
>> In my case, the 75 dollars was for the guy to drive to my house. Near
>> as I can tell, the plan is to make refusing the service contract an
>> unattractive proposition. Gotta buy that service contract!
>
> I don't buy service contracts if there are no, or few, moving parts.
> That's served me well over the years. At least 85% of the time.

I don't buy service contracts either. OTOH, it's gonna break my little
heart if that microwave goes out and I'm put in the position of having
to pay at least $75 just for an estimate again. I'm betting Sears $39
that their MW oven is gonna break in two years. Sears is putting down
$80 or so that it ain't. Seems like a fair bet to me.

On Sat, 1 Sep 2012 13:41:22 -0700, gtr > wrote:

>On 2012-09-01 17:18:05 +0000, dsi1 said:
>
>> On 9/1/2012 2:22 AM, George Leppla wrote:
>>
>>> I wanted to fix the Panasonic but after looking at the service manual
>>> and parts list, I found out that it had to be taken to a repair center.
>>> Usually, the minimum charge these days is $75 labor plus parts. Screw
>>> that. The GE we bought works well.
>>>
>>> George L
>>
>> In my case, the 75 dollars was for the guy to drive to my house. Near
>> as I can tell, the plan is to make refusing the service contract an
>> unattractive proposition. Gotta buy that service contract!
>
>I don't buy service contracts if there are no, or few, moving parts.
>That's served me well over the years. At least 85% of the time.

I always buy the extended warranty on expensive electronics, ie. PC,
HDTV. It's inexpensive and well worth the cost for free tech
support/replacement.

On Sat, 1 Sep 2012 13:41:22 -0700, gtr > wrote:

>On 2012-09-01 17:18:05 +0000, dsi1 said:
>
>> On 9/1/2012 2:22 AM, George Leppla wrote:
>>
>>> I wanted to fix the Panasonic but after looking at the service manual
>>> and parts list, I found out that it had to be taken to a repair center.
>>> Usually, the minimum charge these days is $75 labor plus parts. Screw
>>> that. The GE we bought works well.
>>>
>>> George L
>>
>> In my case, the 75 dollars was for the guy to drive to my house. Near
>> as I can tell, the plan is to make refusing the service contract an
>> unattractive proposition. Gotta buy that service contract!
>
>I don't buy service contracts if there are no, or few, moving parts.
>That's served me well over the years. At least 85% of the time.

Never bought a service contract for anything. Put the money in a bank
account and you'll soon have enough to replace or repair any appliance
you own.

Service contracts and extended warranty is just a profit center for
the seller. In 46 years of home ownership, I've only had an appliance
repair person out three times. Once for a fridge, once for a dryer,
once for a dishwasher.

I bought a new car a few weeks ago. They tried to sell me an extended
warranty. I pointed out that last two cars I traded before the
warranty ran out. Why pay today for a contract I may never use?

I've been getting mail offers for coverage of my water main in case it
breaks. They want $75 for a year of coverage. At that rate (adjusted
for inflation) I'd have paid $3500 so far and never needed a repair.
I'll take my chances.

Car dealer says I should have fuel injection service every year for
$129. Never had a fuel injection problem. Two cars with FI for the
past 25 years would have cost me $6000 over time for no advantage. The
owners manual does not say I need that service either.

Ed Pawlowski > wrote:

>I've been getting mail offers for coverage of my water main in case it
>breaks. They want $75 for a year of coverage. At that rate (adjusted
>for inflation) I'd have paid $3500 so far and never needed a repair.
>I'll take my chances.

I get those too. I assume it covers the pipe, valves etc. from
the city water line to the service entry point at my house... maybe
25 feet of (currently) galvanized 1/2" pipe and one valve.

If replaced, the revised standard is copper, 3/4", valve, plus
added bulb-shaped earthquake shutoff valve. So if the near-worthless
insurance covered all that, it'd be less near worthless.

Every plumber, contractor, etc. visiting our house tells us we need
to upgrade the pipe. I figure instead I use the one I got till it bursts.

Steve

"Steve Pope" > wrote in message
...
> Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
>
>>I've been getting mail offers for coverage of my water main in case it
>>breaks. They want $75 for a year of coverage. At that rate (adjusted
>>for inflation) I'd have paid $3500 so far and never needed a repair.
>>I'll take my chances.
>
> I get those too. I assume it covers the pipe, valves etc. from
> the city water line to the service entry point at my house... maybe
> 25 feet of (currently) galvanized 1/2" pipe and one valve.
>
> If replaced, the revised standard is copper, 3/4", valve, plus
> added bulb-shaped earthquake shutoff valve. So if the near-worthless
> insurance covered all that, it'd be less near worthless.
>
> Every plumber, contractor, etc. visiting our house tells us we need
> to upgrade the pipe. I figure instead I use the one I got till it bursts.

A few years ago I had a leak in the pipe to the main line. I had to pay
$2,000 for one company to find the leak...they used a camera to look under
the ground...and another $2,000 for a plumber to fix it. Then the very day
after it had been fixed, Verizon came out and dug in our yard so they could
install their Fios cable. And no, we did not buy the Fios. Not only did
they accidentally cut into the pipe and cause another leak, which they fixed
but they made a mess of our yard. They cut up the grass but put it back in
a different order than when it came out. And our driveway was destroyed as
well because it was during the winter and when they did the patching, it all
sank down.

Two or maybe it was three years went by and again during the winter, I
noticed a huge patch of ice in our driveway. I was stumped as to why
because there didn't seem to be ice anywhere else. My gardener is the one
who told me what it was. A leak in the main line. Turned out to be TWO
leaks. Leaks that were so bad that when the weather warmed enough to melt
the ice, I had two little geysers out there.

My gardener thought he could help fix it for me but the friend that he
called didn't want to dig in such inclement weather so passed it off to this
other guy. That guy said I should just get copper pipe which he put in.
Total cost? $2,000. Had I done that to begin with, I wouldn't have needed
the second repair! He also fixed the driveway, included in that price and
installed a shutoff valve in an accessible area. The shutoff valve that was
here was under the house.

While he was here, he looked around the house to see how other things were
doing and he told me of some things that needed to be replaced. Including
the toilet in my husband's bathroom. I had just had a repair to the toilet
in my bathroom and it was $250! When my husband's toilet needed a repair, I
just called him and had him put a new one in. Cost me less than doing that
repair! So then when my fritzed out not long after I had him put another
new one in.

My friend was telling me a horror story last night of what happened to
another friend. Long story short, they need a new sewer pipe to the main
line. That will cost $10,000 which my friend thought to be excessive. But
I did some looking it up and it seems that it may not be. That is one super
costly thing to have done, especially if you have a long length of pipe and
digging that needs to be done in certain circumstances.

Ed Pawlowski wrote:

> Never bought a service contract for anything.

I bought an extended warranty on a new car once. It seemed like a good
deal, unlike most of them. But the car got stolen after 3 years, so
the money was wasted. I'm still trying to find the moral of the story.

On 9/2/2012 10:27 AM, George M. Middius wrote:
> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
>> Never bought a service contract for anything.
>
> I bought an extended warranty on a new car once. It seemed like a good
> deal, unlike most of them. But the car got stolen after 3 years, so
> the money was wasted. I'm still trying to find the moral of the story.


I've never bought a service contract for anything... except my current
car (2007Ford Taurus). I don't know why I did this time, but it was
about a wash financially. For some reason, two alternators have burned
out on this car and those two jobs were more than the cost of the
warranty when done at the dealer.

If I hadn't bought the warranty, I would have had the work done in a
local shop and it would have been less.

Ford Motors charging $350 for a replacement is outrageous. Non OEM
replacements can be found for less than $125.

The biggest rip-off is that the part that goes bad is the shaft bearing.
Used to be able to replace that for less than $10, now it is
non-replaceable so you have to get the entire alternator.

George L

On Sun, 2 Sep 2012 05:10:37 +0000 (UTC), (Steve
Pope) wrote:

>Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
>
>>I've been getting mail offers for coverage of my water main in case it
>>breaks. They want $75 for a year of coverage. At that rate (adjusted
>>for inflation) I'd have paid $3500 so far and never needed a repair.
>>I'll take my chances.
>
>I get those too. I assume it covers the pipe, valves etc. from
>the city water line to the service entry point at my house... maybe
>25 feet of (currently) galvanized 1/2" pipe and one valve.
>
>If replaced, the revised standard is copper, 3/4", valve, plus
>added bulb-shaped earthquake shutoff valve. So if the near-worthless
>insurance covered all that, it'd be less near worthless.
>
>Every plumber, contractor, etc. visiting our house tells us we need
>to upgrade the pipe. I figure instead I use the one I got till it bursts.
>
>Steve


I buy the service contract for my boiler and my A/C, well worth it
compared with paying for emergency calls and includes maintenence
service. I also buy the extended warranty for expensive electronics;
PC and HDTV... I typically get my money back several times over in
free in house repairs, and telephone techy help. The coverage doesn't
cost much, like $140 for three extra years. Every PC I ever owned
needed parts replaced after the regular warranty ran out, readers,
hard drives, even keyboards... replace a hard drive and you're ahead.
My last small HDTV got fully replaced with brand new because it died a
month after the regular warranty expired... that extended warranty
cost $39 for three more years. With the 55" HDTV I recently bought I
added the three year extended warranty for $119, a drop in the bucket
for a $1,500 set that comes with only a 1 year manufacturer's
warranty. I already had it replaced once because the one they
originally shipped didn't work at all... they shipped a new one, set
it up, and it works beautifully.

On Sat, 1 Sep 2012 23:20:56 -0700, "Julie Bove"
> wrote:

>
>"Steve Pope" > wrote in message
...
>> Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
>>
>>>I've been getting mail offers for coverage of my water main in case it
>>>breaks. They want $75 for a year of coverage. At that rate (adjusted
>>>for inflation) I'd have paid $3500 so far and never needed a repair.
>>>I'll take my chances.
>>
>> I get those too. I assume it covers the pipe, valves etc. from
>> the city water line to the service entry point at my house... maybe
>> 25 feet of (currently) galvanized 1/2" pipe and one valve.
>>
>> If replaced, the revised standard is copper, 3/4", valve, plus
>> added bulb-shaped earthquake shutoff valve. So if the near-worthless
>> insurance covered all that, it'd be less near worthless.
>>
>> Every plumber, contractor, etc. visiting our house tells us we need
>> to upgrade the pipe. I figure instead I use the one I got till it bursts.
>
>A few years ago I had a leak in the pipe to the main line. I had to pay
>$2,000 for one company to find the leak...they used a camera to look under
>the ground...and another $2,000 for a plumber to fix it. Then the very day
>after it had been fixed, Verizon came out and dug in our yard so they could
>install their Fios cable. And no, we did not buy the Fios. Not only did
>they accidentally cut into the pipe and cause another leak, which they fixed
>but they made a mess of our yard. They cut up the grass but put it back in
>a different order than when it came out. And our driveway was destroyed as
>well because it was during the winter and when they did the patching, it all
>sank down.
>
>Two or maybe it was three years went by and again during the winter, I
>noticed a huge patch of ice in our driveway. I was stumped as to why
>because there didn't seem to be ice anywhere else. My gardener is the one
>who told me what it was. A leak in the main line. Turned out to be TWO
>leaks. Leaks that were so bad that when the weather warmed enough to melt
>the ice, I had two little geysers out there.
>
>My gardener thought he could help fix it for me but the friend that he
>called didn't want to dig in such inclement weather so passed it off to this
>other guy. That guy said I should just get copper pipe which he put in.
>Total cost? $2,000. Had I done that to begin with, I wouldn't have needed
>the second repair! He also fixed the driveway, included in that price and
>installed a shutoff valve in an accessible area. The shutoff valve that was
>here was under the house.
>
>While he was here, he looked around the house to see how other things were
>doing and he told me of some things that needed to be replaced. Including
>the toilet in my husband's bathroom. I had just had a repair to the toilet
>in my bathroom and it was $250! When my husband's toilet needed a repair, I
>just called him and had him put a new one in. Cost me less than doing that
>repair! So then when my fritzed out not long after I had him put another
>new one in.
>
>My friend was telling me a horror story last night of what happened to
>another friend. Long story short, they need a new sewer pipe to the main
>line. That will cost $10,000 which my friend thought to be excessive. But
>I did some looking it up and it seems that it may not be. That is one super
>costly thing to have done, especially if you have a long length of pipe and
>digging that needs to be done in certain circumstances.

Not possible to cost $10K for someone to spend two hours with a
backhoe... I had a large culvert installed here, trenched with an
excavator, covered with ten yards of shale and another ten yards of
top soil, all graded and seeded, took three guys 4 hours, cost under a
grand to install a 24" culvert 24' long.

But there is really no need to do any major digging to replace that
waste line. When I lived on Long Island the water pipe from the main
in the road into my basement sprung a leak, was a very old pipe (some
80 years), was like a 100' run. They didn't dig up the front lawn at
all except for a relatively small pit hand dug with a shovel at the
front property line. They used a stream of high pressure water
through the new pipe to tunnel through, with some sort of laser
guiding device. They broke through the basement foundation wall
within two inches of the old pipe. This was about 12 years ago, cost
me $600, plus the water company split the bill for the extra water
that was lost from the leak. This was a rental, I only charged the
tenant the average of their last years bills, some $40... everyone was
happy, I got to write off the repair and the cost of half the wasted
water, about $100. I wasn't even there, the tenant related all the
details, she was amazed at how easy the job was to accomplish, and how
fast, she had nightmares about being with no water for days. And she
about shit when she got that water bill, that's how we discovered the
leak. I phoned the water company and they came out to inspect, they
found the leak right away with some kind of sonar thing. They said it
was a very common occurance with old water pipes, but the pipe from
the street main to the house belongs to the homeowner. The water
company said that sometimes the water pools at the surface but since
Long Island is mostly sand the water from a leak usually just seeps
down into sand.

On Sun, 02 Sep 2012 11:27:22 -0400, George M. Middius
> wrote:

>Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
>> Never bought a service contract for anything.
>
>I bought an extended warranty on a new car once. It seemed like a good
>deal, unlike most of them. But the car got stolen after 3 years, so
>the money was wasted. I'm still trying to find the moral of the story.
>

I guess the moral of the story is people sell them to make a profit by
taking in more than you'll usually use in service work. Self insure
and you'll e ahead of the game. Few people make out long term.

On Sun, 02 Sep 2012 10:53:59 -0500, George Leppla
> wrote:



>
>Ford Motors charging $350 for a replacement is outrageous. Non OEM
>replacements can be found for less than $125.
>

How about $105 to change a brake light bulb? Daughter got her money
back when she called the owner of the dealership and told him what the
service department did illegally. And it should have been covered
under warranty anyway. I have to wonder how many people got screwed
over time.

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
> On Sun, 02 Sep 2012 10:53:59 -0500, George Leppla
> > wrote:
>
> >
> >Ford Motors charging $350 for a replacement is outrageous. Non OEM
> >replacements can be found for less than $125.
> >
>
> How about $105 to change a brake light bulb? Daughter got her money
> back when she called the owner of the dealership and told him what the
> service department did illegally. And it should have been covered
> under warranty anyway. I have to wonder how many people got screwed
> over time.

$105 to change a brake light bulb? how sad. :-(

Ed Pawlowski wrote:

> >I bought an extended warranty on a new car once. It seemed like a good
> >deal, unlike most of them. But the car got stolen after 3 years, so
> >the money was wasted. I'm still trying to find the moral of the story.
> >
>
> I guess the moral of the story is people sell them to make a profit by
> taking in more than you'll usually use in service work. Self insure
> and you'll e ahead of the game. Few people make out long term.

That's the moral for somebody else's story. My story demands
recognition of the irony.

On 9/2/2012 5:27 AM, George M. Middius wrote:
> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
>> Never bought a service contract for anything.
>
> I bought an extended warranty on a new car once. It seemed like a good
> deal, unlike most of them. But the car got stolen after 3 years, so
> the money was wasted. I'm still trying to find the moral of the story.
>
>

The moral is that sometimes our best plans get messed up by the
unexpected. OTOH, don't try to find any meaning in this random event -
that would be descending into the dark realm of superstition.