Do car designers not learn from past mistakes?
Discussion
Main point here is access and maintenance.
Basically all cars will need maintaining, and as a rule pretty much all cars are not scrapped after 3 years, so will enter the vast used market.
And I'm not talking about complex internal engine designs here, I'm meaning simple things - like changing a bulb.
Surely after over 100 years of car production to our history - not a single car should ever be built that compromises on actually using and maintaining it?
Do we learn nothing?
Or more worryingly, is there a single car built today that actually incorporates fixes to past mistakes? I'm not talking about what the car looks like, or even how fast it goes.
-oil filters
-air filters
-oil...
-plugs
-leads
-brake pads
-discs
-bulbs
even
-shocks
-struts
-bushes
-springs
Are all things that need to be replaced on a fairly regular basis. So why are so many cars designed to make these tasks difficult or sometimes near impossible?
Again I'm not talking about needing 'special' tools for dealerships to profiteer from, either through selling the special tools or the fact more people will take their car to them.
I'm just talking about making things accessible (with the right tools). For example, you can't get to the off side front sidelight on a smart Roadster. What a stupid friggin design.
On many a Land Rover it's near on impossible to get a spanner where it is needed to undo a nut.
Headlight units seem to require you to spend 40 mins dismantling 30+ components just to get to the bulb.
Basically all cars will need maintaining, and as a rule pretty much all cars are not scrapped after 3 years, so will enter the vast used market.
And I'm not talking about complex internal engine designs here, I'm meaning simple things - like changing a bulb.
Surely after over 100 years of car production to our history - not a single car should ever be built that compromises on actually using and maintaining it?
Do we learn nothing?
Or more worryingly, is there a single car built today that actually incorporates fixes to past mistakes? I'm not talking about what the car looks like, or even how fast it goes.
-oil filters
-air filters
-oil...
-plugs
-leads
-brake pads
-discs
-bulbs
even
-shocks
-struts
-bushes
-springs
Are all things that need to be replaced on a fairly regular basis. So why are so many cars designed to make these tasks difficult or sometimes near impossible?
Again I'm not talking about needing 'special' tools for dealerships to profiteer from, either through selling the special tools or the fact more people will take their car to them.
I'm just talking about making things accessible (with the right tools). For example, you can't get to the off side front sidelight on a smart Roadster. What a stupid friggin design.
On many a Land Rover it's near on impossible to get a spanner where it is needed to undo a nut.
Headlight units seem to require you to spend 40 mins dismantling 30+ components just to get to the bulb.
Quite the opposite, designers appear to be learning how to make it harder and harder for you or me to work on cars!
Remember it is VERY profitable for a manufacturer if a car is required to go to the dealer just to have a bulb changed. One bulb @ £20(that's cheap these days) charge labour @ £70-100+ per hour and it require the front bumper to be removed = £££ for the dealer/manufacturer.
Yes I am a cynical b
d!
Remember it is VERY profitable for a manufacturer if a car is required to go to the dealer just to have a bulb changed. One bulb @ £20(that's cheap these days) charge labour @ £70-100+ per hour and it require the front bumper to be removed = £££ for the dealer/manufacturer.
Yes I am a cynical b
d!I would imagine that cars are designed for ease of production as much as anything else .
Many years ago I worked on the production line at Toyota . Anything that could shave a second off here or there was implemented .
I thought I was having a heart attack , the production line was not stopped
Many years ago I worked on the production line at Toyota . Anything that could shave a second off here or there was implemented .
I thought I was having a heart attack , the production line was not stopped
I agree with you, but fear that making things 'easy' for home maintanance is very low down the designers list...
If the packaging makes assembly quicker / easier - win
If it means service bills are high at the dealership - win
It's a short sighted view though as the value of certain cars will plummet due to shocking service bills for routine stuff (I'm looking at you, Renault).
O/T, but show me any commercial organisation who puts long-term customer win ahead of grabbing a short term dollar...
If the packaging makes assembly quicker / easier - win
If it means service bills are high at the dealership - win
It's a short sighted view though as the value of certain cars will plummet due to shocking service bills for routine stuff (I'm looking at you, Renault).
O/T, but show me any commercial organisation who puts long-term customer win ahead of grabbing a short term dollar...
doogz said:
Quite often, an engine is designed by the engine design team. The rest of the car is designed by a different team. The engine is possibly also to be used in a few different cars, by a few different manufacturers.
So things aren't always going to be easy to get to, was discussing it recently wrt a timing belt tensioner and water pump on a 306. Pain in the ass to get at, but the engine wasn't specifically designed only for that car.
Oh I understand and get all this. I just think it's quite saddening that we've been building cars for over 100 years and still seem to fSo things aren't always going to be easy to get to, was discussing it recently wrt a timing belt tensioner and water pump on a 306. Pain in the ass to get at, but the engine wasn't specifically designed only for that car.
k up on some basic common sense design.I know money, committees and deadlines all interfere too. But it's still such shame that we haven't been able to evolve beyond this.
doogz said:
Headlights these days are a good example of what you're saying though. With my Audi, her Kia, and various other things we've had, you end up removing the light unit from the car, then end up having to get the chalk and measuring tape out and drawing on the garage door in the dark, to get them re-aligned properly!
aka_kerrly said:
Quite the opposite, designers appear to be learning how to make it harder and harder for you or me to work on cars!
Remember it is VERY profitable for a manufacturer if a car is required to go to the dealer just to have a bulb changed. One bulb @ £20(that's cheap these days) charge labour @ £70-100+ per hour and it require the front bumper to be removed = £££ for the dealer/manufacturer.
Yes I am a cynical bd!
+1Remember it is VERY profitable for a manufacturer if a car is required to go to the dealer just to have a bulb changed. One bulb @ £20(that's cheap these days) charge labour @ £70-100+ per hour and it require the front bumper to be removed = £££ for the dealer/manufacturer.
Yes I am a cynical b
d!Companies make it very easy to buy a new car on a PCP deal or 3 years finance, then they put a little doubt in your mind about the longevity of the car to encourage you to buy another new one.
They resell your trade in with a shorter warranty on it, and keep you coming back as long as possible for servicing / repairs to get as much money as they can out of you.
In the meantime they just simply 'dial in' the lifetime of the part when its being made - too good a quality and they dont make money on spares, too poor and they have to repair it under warranty.
No conspiracy, just prioritisation. Serviceability will be considered in terms of marketing, both in terms of cost to replace and if something was so stupid that it gave the vehicle a bad reputation.
Good example would be the fuel pump belt on the Disco 3, it only needs changing every 105,000 miles so probably only once or maybe twice in the car's life, it doesn't even damage the car if it fails, but because of a few dramatic pictures of cars with the body off for what is really routine servicing it gets a bad reputation.
However, they had an off-the-shelf engine and a design that had to work with two vehicles, so clearly the cost of changing it was very significant.
Good example would be the fuel pump belt on the Disco 3, it only needs changing every 105,000 miles so probably only once or maybe twice in the car's life, it doesn't even damage the car if it fails, but because of a few dramatic pictures of cars with the body off for what is really routine servicing it gets a bad reputation.
However, they had an off-the-shelf engine and a design that had to work with two vehicles, so clearly the cost of changing it was very significant.
Thats one thing I love about my old Forester, I haven't yet encountered anything fiddly to get at. I've had to do brakes, brake pipes, rear shocks, couple of bulbs and a service. It's all been easy to get to and work on. Just wish other motors were as simple.
Used to think the E46 wasn't bad when I had it, until the resistor for the heating packed up and I had to delve behind the dash. Nightmare job involving an hour of contortions in the footwell, you'd need to be a double jointed gymnast to have any chance of doing it without removing what felt like half the interior
Used to think the E46 wasn't bad when I had it, until the resistor for the heating packed up and I had to delve behind the dash. Nightmare job involving an hour of contortions in the footwell, you'd need to be a double jointed gymnast to have any chance of doing it without removing what felt like half the interior
300bhp/ton said:
So why are so many cars designed to make these tasks difficult or sometimes near impossible?
The engineering targets aren't the same things as your targets. They can be excellently designed but still a bd to work on, not because of any conspiracy, just because new car buyers want cheap good looking cars which do well in crash tests and don't care how easy it is to fit a light bulb. Although obviously when reliable LED headlights go mainstream all this bhing will stop, because engineering.Engineering a car is really simple and obvious and JLR are hiring like mad at the moment.
I'd start the interview with "you retards put the engine snorkel higher than the driver's nose", then belm at them.
They do know how to do it simply. The sidelights and indicators on the front light cluster on our car are a piece of cake to replace. You just twist it 90o to the left and out they both pop. The back of the bit the bulb goes in, is even ridged, so that it's even dead easy to twist.
The headlights are a whole different matter. Took me 3 days, numerous attempts and a severely cut hand to get the bd thing back in.
So if they can design the other lights to be dead simply, why do they make the headlights such a bh?
The headlights are a whole different matter. Took me 3 days, numerous attempts and a severely cut hand to get the b
d thing back in.So if they can design the other lights to be dead simply, why do they make the headlights such a b
h?doogz said:
Captain Muppet said:
The engineering targets aren't the same things as your targets. They can be excellently designed but still a bd to work on, not because of any conspiracy, just because new car buyers want cheap good looking cars which do well in crash tests and don't care how easy it is to fit a light bulb. Although obviously when reliable LED headlights go mainstream all this bhing will stop, because engineering.
Engineering a car is really simple and obvious and JLR are hiring like mad at the moment.
I'd start the interview with "you retards put the engine snorkel higher than the driver's nose", then belm at them.
Surely the answer to that is just to supply the driver with a snorkel of his own. Perhaps one that could clip onto the dash and double up as a curry hook?d to work on, not because of any conspiracy, just because new car buyers want cheap good looking cars which do well in crash tests and don't care how easy it is to fit a light bulb. Although obviously when reliable LED headlights go mainstream all this bhing will stop, because engineering.Engineering a car is really simple and obvious and JLR are hiring like mad at the moment.
I'd start the interview with "you retards put the engine snorkel higher than the driver's nose", then belm at them.
doogz said:
Captain Muppet said:
The engineering targets aren't the same things as your targets. They can be excellently designed but still a bd to work on, not because of any conspiracy, just because new car buyers want cheap good looking cars which do well in crash tests and don't care how easy it is to fit a light bulb. Although obviously when reliable LED headlights go mainstream all this bhing will stop, because engineering.
Engineering a car is really simple and obvious and JLR are hiring like mad at the moment.
I'd start the interview with "you retards put the engine snorkel higher than the driver's nose", then belm at them.
Surely the answer to that is just to supply the driver with a snorkel of his own. Perhaps one that could clip onto the dash and double up as a curry hook?d to work on, not because of any conspiracy, just because new car buyers want cheap good looking cars which do well in crash tests and don't care how easy it is to fit a light bulb. Although obviously when reliable LED headlights go mainstream all this bhing will stop, because engineering.Engineering a car is really simple and obvious and JLR are hiring like mad at the moment.
I'd start the interview with "you retards put the engine snorkel higher than the driver's nose", then belm at them.
Obviously, this being PH, we must blame the relentless pursuit of safety and fuel economy too. The engine has to be a certain distance from the top of the bonnet so it gets moved lower and closer to the bulkhead... the starter motor is usually somewhere in between! The widespread use of turbo chargers means more and more stuff is getting crammed in. Also enclosing the whole engine bay with shields and undertrays improves fuel efficiency and noise which are very important to the manufacturer and the consumer.
HustleRussell said:
Also enclosing the whole engine bay with shields and undertrays improves fuel efficiency and noise which are very important to the manufacturer and the consumer.
Actually it's mostly the EU that cares about noise.No one really cares about the drive-by noise of their own car.
HustleRussell said:
The widespread use of turbo chargers means more and more stuff is getting crammed in. Also enclosing the whole engine bay with shields and undertrays improves fuel efficiency and noise which are very important to the manufacturer and the consumer.
Was going to say, engine bays seem so much more crammed in modern cars compared to older ones, it's probably a challenge getting everything needed in place.300bhp/ton said:
-oil filters
-air filters
-oil...
-plugs
-leads
-brake pads
-discs
-bulbs
even
-shocks
-struts
-bushes
-springs
Are all of these things actually harder to replace than they used to be ?-air filters
-oil...
-plugs
-leads
-brake pads
-discs
-bulbs
even
-shocks
-struts
-bushes
-springs
E.g. brake pads/discs haven't really changed - wheel off, caliper off, disc off and then do the reverse to re-assemble.
Same goes for air/oil filters and plugs - I don't think they've changed.
Instead of removing a lead, you remove a coil pack.
Shocks/Springs ? I think they are easier..
Old days : Wheel off, brake caliper off, undo strut from top mount, undo tie rod, split lower joint, remove driveshaft from hub, pull strut out.
Now: Wheel off, undo top mount, undo pinch bolt on the hub, pull strut out.
The difficulty comes when, in order to reset the computer controlled suspension struts you need a proprietary diagnostic tool to connect so you can tell the ECU that controls them that it nhas a new shock and clear fault codes etc. Currently (AFAIK) there is no standard for the various ECUs in cars like there is for engine ECUS (i.e. OBDII).
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff