cars with good engineering
Discussion
American cars have always enjoyed good design, in that if anything broke or fell off, it could not only be easily replaced but easily upgraded in the aftermarket.
One design that gets little credit is the 1998 Camaro which had the epic compact but simple ohv all alloy 5.7V8 with direct ignition coils (inherited from the 1997 Corvette C5, also a good design). the Camaro (and Trans Am) had a steel "core" with steel rear wings but had plastic front and rear ends, plastic front wings and plastic doors and rear hatch.
There was no grille, as such, it took air from under the bumper and this went up into a front-mounted throttle body attached to a plastic intake.
the LS1 allowed for a low bonnet as the lack of OHC meant the engine was lower.
They ran 13s out of the box.
Though widely slagged off for interior "quality", that was not to be confused with durability and the interiors were extremely robust and nothing usually broke.
I'll accept that the looks divide opinion but that was 90s styling for you.
One design that gets little credit is the 1998 Camaro which had the epic compact but simple ohv all alloy 5.7V8 with direct ignition coils (inherited from the 1997 Corvette C5, also a good design). the Camaro (and Trans Am) had a steel "core" with steel rear wings but had plastic front and rear ends, plastic front wings and plastic doors and rear hatch.
There was no grille, as such, it took air from under the bumper and this went up into a front-mounted throttle body attached to a plastic intake.
the LS1 allowed for a low bonnet as the lack of OHC meant the engine was lower.
They ran 13s out of the box.
Though widely slagged off for interior "quality", that was not to be confused with durability and the interiors were extremely robust and nothing usually broke.
I'll accept that the looks divide opinion but that was 90s styling for you.
Hungrymc said:
How about some over engineering? There has been some discussion about 996 / 986 Porsche. To change the headlight bulb. You turn a fixing through 180 degrees, this turns a cranked arm which releases and moves forward the headlight unit and out she comes. The harness connector is automatically connected / disconnected when the lamp finds or leaves it's home position. I can't decide if the whole thing is genius or over complex.
If it doesn't break, leaving you stuck for changing the bulb, I'd say it's a perfect example of nice engineering. Maybe they could have made a simpler mechanism, but I sometimes think things like this are done to let the product design engineers have some fun. I imagine a few areas that the bean counters say "Here you go guys, this area needs a clever solution, and we've got enough budget left to let you have at it."
Most 90s jap cars seem to be very sensibly screwed together, interiors are usually held on by one or two different sizes of screws or bolts with very few interference fitted parts. Similarly underneath and in the engine bay you can get away with surprisingly few sockets / spanners and certainly as far as the MX5 and impreza go you have easy access to most regular service bits (spark plugs excepted on the impreza)
Theyre a world away from the clio and megane I've had the misfortune to work on
Theyre a world away from the clio and megane I've had the misfortune to work on
blueg33 said:
Not sure if this is true but i read a few years ago that a Toyota door handle has around five parts, a VW door handle that does the same job has around 30 parts.
At the time VW way less reliable than Toyota. Simple is better.
VW door handles terribly over engineered to no good effect with tendency to jam shut. if the child lock is on then it's a horrid job, taking door card off the jammed door from the inside. At the time VW way less reliable than Toyota. Simple is better.
sinbaddio said:
Left field choice, Peugeot 504. Why? Firstly as a kid my dads 504 estate carried the 7 of us in amazing comfort on many holidays. And it never broke down. Secondly, thousands of them still pound around Australia and Africa in the worst conditions clocking up hundreds of thousands of miles. Built to last by a company that probably isn't revered for that particular quality. Interesting read about a particular high miler and its life below:
http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/motoring/million...
The 504 was a very well engineered car.http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/motoring/million...
powerstroke said:
The defender must be the UKs overrated vehicle just dire and a sick joke in most countrys where a reliable vehicle is a matter of life or death ...
My Grandfather lived in Africa all his life and explored the continent widely, firstly as a hunter, then photographing wildlife. He was a huge Land-Rover enthusiast and would not have agreed with you.Poopipe said:
Most 90s jap cars seem to be very sensibly screwed together, interiors are usually held on by one or two different sizes of screws or bolts with very few interference fitted parts. Similarly underneath and in the engine bay you can get away with surprisingly few sockets / spanners and certainly as far as the MX5 and impreza go you have easy access to most regular service bits (spark plugs excepted on the impreza)
Theyre a world away from the clio and megane I've had the misfortune to work on
The early 90s Honda Accord wasn't. Unfortunately for Rover, that's what they based the 600 on. The Honda stuff was a nightmare.Theyre a world away from the clio and megane I've had the misfortune to work on
One nasty example was the front brakes. The discs were mounted inboard of the wheel hubs for some reason. To get the discs off, Honda engineered in removable wheel bearings. There were castings separate from the uprights which carried the wheel bearings and bolted together with 4 bolts around the CV joints.
It sounds neat, but never worked. If ever driven in the rain it all rusted together becoming impossible to separate.
To change the discs in real life you need a hub puller to pull way too hard at the hub having first removed the driveshaft preload nut. Basically, you need to pull the bearing races apart.
It was an absolute b
d of a car to work on.Another example: most parts on the DS are designed to be easily serviceable. For example, the rear wings have just one bolt to undo to get them off: https://youtu.be/N9zph6lb2rM
LuS1fer said:
American cars have always enjoyed good design, in that if anything broke or fell off, it could not only be easily replaced but easily upgraded in the aftermarket.
Though widely slagged off for interior "quality", that was not to be confused with durability
Good points. When you're hundreds of miles from the nearest dealer what really matters is that "it works"!Though widely slagged off for interior "quality", that was not to be confused with durability
dbdb said:
powerstroke said:
The defender must be the UKs overrated vehicle just dire and a sick joke in most countrys where a reliable vehicle is a matter of life or death ...
My Grandfather lived in Africa all his life and explored the continent widely, firstly as a hunter, then photographing wildlife. He was a huge Land-Rover enthusiast and would not have agreed with you.In terms of 'well thought out and screwed together vs cost ratio' I've never seen anything quite as robust as a Suzuki Ignis Sport.
It's a rare example of a homologation car that just adds immeasurably to the day to day ownership experience. Massively over-specced brakes and rally-bred components, bombproof Yamaha fettled engine. For what was a sub £10k car it was packing some very nice standard components.
It's a rare example of a homologation car that just adds immeasurably to the day to day ownership experience. Massively over-specced brakes and rally-bred components, bombproof Yamaha fettled engine. For what was a sub £10k car it was packing some very nice standard components.
lord trumpton said:
clockworks said:
2CV and the original Mini
What?There is nothing well engineered with those nasty little cars. The whole design leads to some horrendous corrosion breeding grounds.
Classic design and cult car etc, but generally s
t and very under engineered in many aspects 
In always admired the roof mech on these:
...this is 24 years ago remember.
Can't think if its over engineered nonsense or not, but its pretty transformers-cool!
https://youtu.be/v7pHdiqbh1Y
The B16a was a brilliantly engineered unit in itself.
...this is 24 years ago remember.
Can't think if its over engineered nonsense or not, but its pretty transformers-cool!
https://youtu.be/v7pHdiqbh1Y
The B16a was a brilliantly engineered unit in itself.
blueg33 said:
lord trumpton said:
clockworks said:
2CV and the original Mini
What?There is nothing well engineered with those nasty little cars. The whole design leads to some horrendous corrosion breeding grounds.
Classic design and cult car etc, but generally s
t and very under engineered in many aspects No car is perfect.
Krikkit said:
And although the Mini has some poor rust traps, it's also a masterpiece of packaging.
No car is perfect.
Oh yes they could rust without trying, but then most cars did when Minis were newish. great fun, though. Mercedes of the 80s probably best for engineering but.... turn the huge wheel, nothing happens for 20 secs then the fabled star begins to move as the beast sluggishly sighs away. Not piloted a liner but I suspect similarities.No car is perfect.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff