Car designer should ahave to Intern in real shops, yearly

[rtimgray]

Nope. Not a plot. The "skid plate" is there to make the car more aero, to reduce drag of what NASCAR calls "dirty air" or turbulence, hurting drag co-efficient. Mileage improvement, which they measure in amazingly small increments. No plot to make you "give up and take to the dealer". OEM's don't make dime off the dealer repair/service centers. If it helps their fleet EPA mileage requirements, they don't give a flippin' nickel if it slows your access to the oil filter.

I guess the skid plate on the bottom helps reduce drag enough to cancel out the added weight of the engine cover that I also have to take off just to change the oil! I still think it's a conspiracy! (I'd put some smiley faces in here but I can't seem to find 'em).

 

[BobRip]

It sounds like the marketing guys need to work in the shop for awhile. But most important of all would be the management. If every body knows the CEO was going to have to change the air filter, oil, belts, etc. they would make it easier.

One hundred years ago, the CEO (owner) founded the company, designed the product, swept the floor and did the service. Today even if the CEO had done all that (very unlikely) it would have changed between then and now. Management gets very detached from the reality that they must know to make good decisions.

 

[archerm3]

I sincerely doubt that there is any engineer working for the automotive industry that doesn't do their own wrenching on the weekends...i just seriously doubt it. I know everyone in my mechanical engineering classes way way back in the day were ALL car guys. What few people i've met in the automotive industry....ALL car guys that were wrench turners well before the fancy jobs.

I think the problem is that most of us amatuer mechanics don't have all the slick tools we need, that designers/engineers expect a fully equipped OEM service shop to have. Or in some cases we are too lazy to remove ancillary stuff to get access to the parts we need to.

 

[Reg]

This topic seems to be based on an assumption that the design goals include serviceability, maintainability & ease of parts replacement.
I doubt that they do.

There is probably some interest in having "service" be proprietary, require the use of special tools and/or special (factory) training, single source (where that source is the manufacturer) parts, etc.

Why would they WANT Joe Backyard-Mechanic to be able to replace anything/everything with generic parts using a couple of crescent wrenches ? - and a vise grip on occasion.

 

[BobRip]

This topic seems to be based on an assumption that the design goals include serviceability, maintainability & ease of parts replacement.
I doubt that they do.

There is probably some interest in having "service" be proprietary, require the use of special tools and/or special (factory) training, single source (where that source is the manufacturer) parts, etc.

Why would they WANT Joe Backyard-Mechanic to be able to replace anything/everything with generic parts using a couple of crescent wrenches ? - and a vise grip on occasion.

Reg, it's trade offs. Make it smaller as the market, management, and designers demand and it takes more tools and more effort to maintain it. I expect (and have read) that companies have people who check for repeatability access. I have worked on projects where small was the biggest goal (not cars) and many tradeoffs were made to achieve this. The car companies want it repairable, but they have other things they want to. If it gets too difficult them it cost them extra effort in training, telephone support, and expert visit to shops. Remember they pay warranty repairs.

 

[Reg]

Reg, it's trade offs. Make it smaller as the market, management, and designers demand and it takes more tools and more effort to maintain it. I expect (and have read) that companies have people who check for repeatability access. I have worked on projects where small was the biggest goal (not cars) and many tradeoffs were made to achieve this. The car companies want it repairable, but they have other things they want to. If it gets too difficult them it cost them extra effort in training, telephone support, and expert visit to shops. Remember they pay warranty repairs.

Yeah, I kinda/sorta know that.
In a previous life I was a serviceability engineering development manager and spent a fair portion of my time/effort arguing the long term investment benefit of ease of service, the implied effect on warranty costs, risk to repeat business, etc.

I just doubt that it is high on the goals list at most auto manufacturers.
Just about everything on the line isn't worth holding up the line to fix, if it doesn't fit use a different one, but don't let THAT one back on the line, etc.

So much stuff doesn't need the service anyway, I honestly can't remember the last time I blew or burned out an alternator, probably sometime in the '70s.
Heck, heads don't come off on most engines these days until well after 100,000 miles, unless a timing chain didn't get replaced (-:
{say "Audi"}

 

[RoyJackson]

Back in the mid-90's, I was a Quality Engineer at an automotive stamping company.
Even after all the CAD models were made, analyzed, re-analyzed, etc.; the supplier had to scribe lines the length, height and width of the stamped component.
This was done so the fit up (how the parts aligned) could be determined during the pilot build of the vehicle.
So, with all those powerful CAD tools (Catia was the program then, although most suppliers used the less expensive AutoCAD), the end result was determined using ancient height gages, scribers and the calibrated eyeball.

 

[BobRip]

Yeah, I kinda/sorta know that.
In a previous life I was a serviceability engineering development manager and spent a fair portion of my time/effort arguing the long term investment benefit of ease of service, the implied effect on warranty costs, risk to repeat business, etc.

I just doubt that it is high on the goals list at most auto manufacturers.
Just about everything on the line isn't worth holding up the line to fix, if it doesn't fit use a different one, but don't let THAT one back on the line, etc.

So much stuff doesn't need the service anyway, I honestly can't remember the last time I blew or burned out an alternator, probably sometime in the '70s.
Heck, heads don't come off on most engines these days until well after 100,000 miles, unless a timing chain didn't get replaced (-:
{say "Audi"}

Sounds like you know a lot more that I. It's not that they don't want serviceability, it just not as important as all the other stuff (like you said).

 

[Carlaisle]

Ancient thread revival for ranting purposes.

"Packaging Group" you say? At least now I know at whom to direct my curses while attempting to complete what should have been a (relatively) easy bit of routine maintenance. I have been in the process of changing a timing belt for several weekends now. I understand that some compromises need to be made in the placement of certain components. My complaint is that a great many things in this job are needlessly complicated that could have been made much easier at absolutely no additional cost or effort. I can name at least a half dozen of them off the top of my head. For starters, they could have put the prop rod for the hood on the side of hood where all of the components you need to access are not. I would take great delight and pay a fair sum of money to sit in a lawn chair and watch a member of this illustrious packaging group change this timing belt, oil seals, and water pump. The next time I need to do any material maintenance to this engine it's coming out of the vehicle. This is ridiculous.

 

[ray66v]

For starters, they could have put the prop rod for the hood on the side of hood where all of the components you need to access are not.

They originally put prop rods on the side. People didn't see them, and often tried to close the hood, without putting the prop rod down, resulting in the hood bent in half.

The center offers the most support, and protection against damage from a wind gust.

Those of us who work on cars for a living, have a hood prop tool, which we can place in an alternate location, when necessary. Those who don't work on cars for a living, generally have something that will work too, a broomstick.

You seem to overlook the more obvious option here, why have a prop rods to start with? Gas struts work well for the most part, (excepting Chrysler products). Those who work on cars for a living, know what I'm talking about. Springs are clearly better.

I feel your pain. I have done low clearance timing belt replacements, in a home garage. It's a job that is designed to be done on a lift. Like all service work, they are easier, after you get past the learning curve from doing a few of them.

With the right equipment, and experience, you would be surprised to see someone who has done enough of them, do that job.