[JoeFromPA]

Jake,

That was undoubtedly the most salesy post I've ever seen from you - and you've been an awesome source of info for the forum and broader community, besides the work you do and products you drive.

You use 3 failed cars as a case study with no evidence that your device would have prevented them besides the assertion. Fine - I can live with that.

But you say $45k worth of damage could've been saved by $1600 worth of parts and that those are the numbers that count. Huh? That's true if the failure rate is 1 to 1.

If the failure rate is 20 to 1, then $12,000 worth of IMSG systems need to be employed for each $15,000 worth of work saved within the community (assuming $600 for the IMSG with installation). The cost to the community is near parity with the cost of fixing the catastrophe in that situation.

I make decisions based upon rational analysis and not fear-mongering done by those who would profit from it. I don't care about the early cars that failed - I do care about how often it occurs today. I wish that information was available to me.

I have no clear indication of failure ratesand one of the people most in a place to sum up such information, you, has basically said "Failure rates are meaningless. Install my part". This does not pass my "i'm being scammed" detector. I'm not even saying you are scamming people - I am simply saying that your last post really does you a disservice.

My car is worth maybe $12k. With a blown engine, maybe $3-4k. My risk is $9k - for something that costs $2k+ to fix, $400+ to observe, and affects maybe 10% of the population.

I might eat crow one day, absolutely, but I do so with the knowledge that I made a rational choice based upon the best information I had available at the time.

Edit: oh, and if that information changes, I'll be happy to re-evaluate and potentially use your products. I have no dog in this fight besides trying to make a good decision for my own purposes.