Joy,

I think your second point runs afoul of 'pot odds' (If I can mix a poker
term into Vanagon content), I mean, dropping $2000 dollars more in to a
$2500 van is a big outlay... but if you are already into your van for
$10000 (in purchase, repairs, upgrades and cushy modifications), you may be
willing to go $2000 more (since you've already got that ten grand "in the
pot").

Which, I guess, leads me back to my original point... is it a law about
vanagons, or about people.

Sorry for the post-Friday philosophical rant, but I'm waiting for my other
computer to finish a virus scan, and mentally prepping for a poker game
tonight, and one thought just lead to another.

PS - None of the numbers quoted reflect the reality of my own '85 westie,
or any required repairs thereto. I *very* carefully avoid adding up my
total cost of ownership, because denial is a valuable, often underrated
survival tool. :-)

Tim

At 04:54 AM 3/12/2005 -0500, Joy Hecht wrote:
>Second, one would expect that the more the van costs to start, the less
>the repairs should be after that, since presumably the cheap vans are
>those that need more investment.  So there would be some midpoint value
>where the cost of the van and cost of initial repairs should be the same,
>but for cheaper vans repairs should be higher, and for expensive vans they
>should be lower.