Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





If I were an auto manufacturer, my New Year's resolution would be...

2»

Comments

  • euphoniumeuphonium Great Northwest, West of the Cascades.Posts: 3,320
    No more bailouts. If we can't make it on our own, we deserve to fail & should not be supported by taxpayers. Win or dissolve. ;)
  • drvettedrvette Posts: 99
    edited January 2012
    I find offense regarding your statement about Smokey Yunick being a cheater, as though cheating was his "way-of-life, removing any credibility to his patents etc .
    IN Racing, ALL competitors "bend" the rules AND Yes cheat as much as possible..

    Remember Dale Earnhardt and his illegal rear springs, allowing the car to drop down out of the slip-stream and pull away like he had an extra 50hp.

    And #24, Jeff Gordon, got caught with Ceramic Brake Rotors when one broke.

    #48 Jimmy Johnson with his illegal steering

    The list of NASCAR infractions is endless.

    Drag-Racing, Pro-Stock's most successful FAMILY, the Gliddens,,
    Rusty Glidden, son of Bob Glidden, stated ON-CAMERA,
    "They never found our Nitrous System, it was in the Hood Scoop"
    Instantly FIRED by ol Dad Bob.
    Team Glidden never dominated Pro-Stock again.

    NASCAR has always had a wink-and-nod relationship with cheaters in its ranks. Last year, NASCAR handed down 62 penalties for technical infractions at its 36 races.
    Many of those were considered inadvertent "mistakes"
    That's NASCARese for cheating.

    Historically, the rule of this road is that if you're not cheating you're not trying. .
    ALL RACE TEAMS "Bend" the Rules "Cheat" whatever the term you like.
    It is the Nature of the Beast, in all forms of motor racing.

    Do NOT single out the late Smokey Yunick as a "cheater" in General.
    In his dealings at his Diesel Engine shop and Chevrolet Engine design site in Daytona Beach Fla, Smokey was reputed as a honorable and trustworthy businessman..

    IMHO, he's a developer who should be in the ranks of the following,

    Felix Wankel
    Rudolph Diesel
    Nikolaus Otto [who "used' Lenoir's idea, so why is it called the Otto Cycle]
    Jean Joseph Etienne Lenoir.

    If not for Corporate Americas Hold on our bank accts, a Yunick engine would occupy your vehicle's engine compartment right now.

    Regarding Smokey's "Boom", all inventors have incidents,
    Edison had almost 10,000 failed experiments with the storage battery,
    Marconi was credited for the Radio, this was corrected in 1943, patent rights to Nikola Tesla.

    In the case of Nikola Tesla, he had no will, the US Govt confiscated all his documents, one of the most odd, his "Earthquake Machine
    link title
    Tesla, unlike Edison, was a true scientist.
    link title

    Nikola Tesla, Smokey Yunkick and others, worked long and hard discovering methods, inventions, and patents that will never see the light of day.
    Many purchased and locked up by Corporate USA.
    Or confiscated, "in the interest of National Security"

    Many inventors of fuel-saving devices have "vanished" one in the Western USA, of the many others to mysteriously disappear, was Rudolph Diesel.
    His engine was designed and intended to run on a version of Bio-Diesel, not Crude-Oil refined Diesel.

    To the Big-3 and Big-Oil, Smokey Yunick was of the most dangerous men in the world.

    Rusty Wrench
    aka DrVette
  • drvettedrvette Posts: 99
    Re; a Full Size RWD vehicle.

    The 1991-1995 Caprice with the 305 TBI engine, had a "Real-World MPG" of truly astonishing rates.

    Our 91, would get in combined driving, some 24-26 mpg, far better than my Dad's cousins cars from Japan with FWD, 6-cyl engines, far less room and comfort.

    OK, I admit the Caprice would pull a 0.4g on the skid pad, but this is not the point.

    A 4-week trip to Hollywood Fla and 2 full tanks consumed, yielded 30.~ and 31.2 mpg, from a "Full-Frame" RWD vehicle with a Cast Iron Headed and Block vehicle.

    Why did GM kill the Roadmaster, Caprice and the other "B"bodies.
    Simple, the assembly line was the same to make pickup trucks.
    A p/u truck's bottom line MARKUP is much more than the lowly automobiles.

    This and the fact of the lack of TSB's and a bullet-proof driveline in the B Body units.

    Check AutoTrader, these "old" 91-95 cars still command a premium compared to the FWD siblings with the typical FWD Transmission woes, not to mention the lack of durability of the FWD's powerplant.
  • drvettedrvette Posts: 99
    edited January 2012
    I totally agree, compact, simple, easy to service, easy to build.

    A platform for the masses, to replace the "Smart-for-two" and other Micro Cars,
    bring back the Datsun 1200, with modern TBI and computer controls, plus multiple overdrive manual transmissions.

    http://jalopnik.com/389398/1971-datsun-1200link title

    I worked at Datsun/Nissan for 4.5 yrs as a wrench, these vehicles were trouble free, ran perfect and wrecked well, for the day that is.

    My 1972 could get 48mpg on the highway "Without" Hypermiling !
    In 1973, the Datsun 1200 was the car with the highest fuel economy sold in the USA. [lower compression than 72]

    The 1200 had a
    "Push-Rod" engine,
    a Cast Iron Block
    aluminum head.
    No cam chain or belt to fail.

    It had NO engine vibration, slick and smooth, would pull to 7000rpm and had good torque off-the-line.

    They looked almost like the Mazda RX-2 with the Rotary Engine, this made the Mazda feel like it had 400 hp !

    The replacement for the 1200 was the B-210, an overweight, sluggish, pig of a car.
  • steverstever YooperlandPosts: 39,999
    edited January 2012
    IN Racing, ALL competitors "bend" the rules AND Yes cheat as much as possible

    That was Smokey's excuse. Doesn't make it right. And it casts a big shadow about his claims about his miracle engine.

    My favorite cheat of his was putting in the correct size gas tank in one of his cars, and then making a ~11' long, 2" tubing size gas line to the engine so he could stuff another 5 gallons of gas in the car. :D

    (like the way I edited the post title? ;) )

    Moderator
    Need help navigating? stever@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

  • Hello Rusty Wrench,

    You seem to have alot of information here. I have worked in the oil industry, and I sold directly to all major industrial sectors including the automotive industry & the related feeder industries.

    Do the oil industries and the petroleum industries work hand in hand?
    Based on historical analysis of automotive design and performance - I conclude that the answer is yes.

    Don't forget what happened to delorean and his experience with GMC.
    It is worth reviewing his story.

    We should also include a 3rd party in this, and that would be government.

    The automotive and petroleum sectors are major tax collectors for governments.

    There is alot of lip service regarding customer service, but customer service has been deteriorating for many years.

    Now what I am discovering is that the automotive manufacturers are giving a lot of lip service to design, performance, and environmental considerations; however, they are simply experimenting with cutting costs and cutting quality to increase their profit margins.

    I agree with another poster here, that most cars are junk even if you go to high end brands. Engines are burning out at 20,000 km, - 70,000 km.

    Are these engines being produced in China?
  • drvettedrvette Posts: 99
    edited January 2012
    Quote;
    "Do the oil industries and the petroleum industries work hand in hand?"

    A - "ALL" of the big corporations are in each others pockets.
    IMO, the Big-Oil tells the Big-3 how to design the vehicles to operate poorly, mpg, fuel used etc.
    Vehicle designs that last "too-long" {GM's TBI for example} are soon retrofitted with designs that may not be cheaper, but most certainly wear out sooner.
    For Example, In 1994 or 93 GM replaced the 4.3L TBI with the awful CPI [Central Port Injection] which was not only problematic, but did Not meet the CARB requirements.
    So all the 4.3L GM's sold outside" Ca were called the "W" motor with the CPI.
    Inside CA, they HAD to use the "OLD" 4.3L TBI "Z" motors to meet the stringent CARB standards.


    Quote;
    "Delorean and his experience with GMC,

    A - Sorta like the "Tucker" automobile, the Big-3 made sure his attempt was unsuccessful.
    Don't forget Stan Ovshinsky, who designed the NiMH Vehicle Battery system. Ovshinsky entrusted GM that his NiMH Vehicle Battery system would be manufactured and used in electric vehicles such as the successor to the EV-1.
    This was the final hurdle to the true "Electric Car"
    WRONG, GM sold it to Texaco.
    Read my post no. 10 on the 1st page of this thread.
    Now we're stuck with environmentally unfriendly LiON batteries that are Way Too Expensive and Prone to Fire.

    Quote;
    "We should also include a 3rd party in this, and that would be government"

    A - The US is no longer a Democracy but now a Plutonomy. The Government is run by the Corporations. Ever hear of the "Revolving Door" in Washington ?
    Leaders who were 'Public servants" are instantly VP's at some large Corp and should it fall, they most surely get a "Golden Parachute"


    Quote;
    "automotive manufacturers are giving lip service to design, performance, and environmental considerations;
    they are simply experimenting with cutting costs and cutting quality to increase their profit margins."

    A - I cannot put my hand on it right now, but somewhere in The Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) , "corporations" are now considered as "living entities" and as such, fall under the US Constitution with regard to rights.

    A - Also, somewhere deep in the CFR, is the legal "Mandate" that corporations "primary" or First responsibility is to the stockholders.
    AFTER that, comes the responsibility to the employee, the economy and the environment.

    Q/
    "Engines are burning out at 20,000 km, - 70,000 km.

    A - I've heard that some, including the Nissan Vista have short lifespan, however I cannot verify the validity of those stories.
    May be lack of proper "hot-tanking" which is the usage of high PH and high Temperature cleaner to remove machining grit and debris.
    I do know that 1988 and up GM full size trucks will easily run well over 300, 000 miles if you keep the intake gasket from leaking and change the oil.">link title

    Another issue regarding Ethanol, there are cheaper methods of inducing Oxygen agents into fuel. Ethanol is the "preferred" method by Big Oil cause it takes 3.5-4 BTU's to manufacture One BTU of Ethanol.
    Looks good to Big-Oil don't it.

    Fuel Oxygenates
    1 - MTBE - Super Nasty to the Environment, ugg
    2 - Ethanol - 4 BTU's to make 1- BTU of Ethanol, just who does that "benefit

    Ethanol makes the fuel burn cleaner but mainly in Cold Weather.
    So bring back the old style "Manifold Heat" to the intake in cold weather ?
    Thermostatically controlled.

    3. Ether
    4. Many others exist, some work, some work but have consequences, check the EU link for what they say.


    A link to the European Union on fuel additives


    Sorry for the lengthy post
    Rusty Wrench
  • steverstever YooperlandPosts: 39,999
    edited January 2012
    Big-Oil tells the Big-3 how to design the vehicles

    BP and Ashland aren't too happy with GM and their Dexos-1 requirements. They have filed comments with the FTC complaining about it. I guess only some oil companies got into GM's pockets. :)

    Moderator
    Need help navigating? stever@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

  • drvettedrvette Posts: 99
    edited January 2012
    WOW, it seems like every week I find some new data that is surprising.

    I "thought' you were referring to DexCool, until I googled it.

    Here's GM's official List of
    Dexos-1 Gasoline Approved Oils
    and
    Dexos-2 Diesel Approved Oils


    licensed GM Dexos™ products


    Quote From GM
    "Specifically designed to meet the needs of GM gasoline engines, dexos1™:

    * has improved viscometric properties, creating less friction in the engine which contributes to improved fuel economy.
    * resists aeration, which enables fuel-saving devices, such as Variable Valve Timing, to work optimally
    * offers improved oxidation and deposit-forming tendencies allowing emission systems to operate longer and optimally
    * resists degradation between oil changes, extending the time and mileage interval between oil changes"
    end quote

    I knew Ford had mandated change intervals at a frequent rate for the VVT assembly to stay free and working, GM added some "Legalese" to the wording to "help [Confuse] us

    As far as Ashland Oil and BP, "we" the untouchables will never be included in the upper echelon scum that knows who is or who isn't in "The Group"
    Maybe that BP is excluded from the "Good-ol-Boys" group due to their corp hdqrs are in the "Motherland.
    Ashland Oil is based in KY, maybe they were bought out like so many companies lately by the Chinese [j/k, but really WHO knows for sure]

    Rusty Wrench"
  • drvettedrvette Posts: 99
    Here's Ashland Oil's "partial" Comment;

    Quote;
    "Valvoline already meets all the requirements of the dexosTM2 specification with our SynPower MST 5W-30 . Valvoline began introducing oils meeting the dexosTM1 specification in October 2010

    SN and ILSAC GF-5.
    . GM is taking the unusual step of charging a very significant fee for licensing, an unwarranted cost increase to owners of GM vehicles. Valvoline has decided that we do not want to be a part of this."

    PS, this quote was edited for brevity.
    valvoline, a division of ashland inc.
    RE: GM dexos specification
  • steverstever YooperlandPosts: 39,999
    edited January 2012
    We're having a similar discussion over in Right To Repair - A Hot Issue or Big Problem with another auto tech; you should check it out. I think you'd enjoy Thecardoc3's point of view (certainly more than mine, lol).

    Moderator
    Need help navigating? stever@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

  • drvettedrvette Posts: 99
    edited January 2012
    fintail, what else did you expect?

    Ignorance begets ignorance

    This thread begged for:

    A - Posters with NO mechanical experience or knowledge
    B - Others with the viewpoint on Labor Unions formed by watching the Evening News
    [who is owned by Corporate America, remember what happened t Dan Rather ?]
    C - Opinions of OSHA thinking they are there for protection of the workers ?
    D - Statements about the Auto Industry "Bail-Out" with absolutely NO idea of the results, "downstream" jobs lost and failed businesses and millions of workers out of a job, YES including the Mexican, Canadian and Asian workers.
    E - Commentary on the "cute girl" are a bit OT, but still in good taste, IMO.

    Rusty Wrench
  • eharri3eharri3 Posts: 645
    edited January 2012
    To build great cars and let the bottom line take care of itself rather than to start with the bottom line and build cars around it.

    To break the tradition that says small, inexpensive, economical vehicles cannot look interesting and be attactive.

    To stop shipping vehicles to the United States, shut down all my factories, and fire all my American workers if the media tries to create a sudden unitended accelaration controversy with one of my models just one more time.

    To save money by not designing 3 times as many cupholders into a vehicle as the number of people it can hold, and to devote all those savings to designing awesome seats.
  • lemkolemko Posts: 15,120
    edited January 2012
    To build great cars and let the bottom line take care of itself rather than to start with the bottom line and build cars around it.

    I like that first one. Build them and they will come. Provide a good product and the profits will follow.
2»
Sign In or Register to comment.