Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Ditto. When Mobil 1 5W-30 received Honda/Acura HTO-06 approval XOM released a flyer explaining what the standard required(essentially improved deposit control on turbocharger components). That's why my Mazda has received a steady diet of M1 5W-30.
Mine: 1995 318ti Club Sport; 2020 C43; 2021 Sahara 4xe 1996 Speed Triple Challenge Cup Replica Wife's: 2015 X1 xDrive28i Son's: 2009 328i; 2018 330i xDrive
Especially since, overall, I suspect there aren't that many people that experience lubrication-related failures in the first, say, 100K miles of service.
So, at the end of the day, maybe the old saying "parts is parts" may be more applicable than we realize...
BTW, I just returned from running a few errands, and on a lark, I stopped by 3 auto parts stores (all chains) and none of them had the Pennzoil needed for the Abarth on the shelf. I'm sure they could probably order it....
So much for "energy saving" oil, lol.
The only places I've seen Pennzoil Ultra 5W-40 for sale are Pennzoil's own web site and Amazon...
Mine: 1995 318ti Club Sport; 2020 C43; 2021 Sahara 4xe 1996 Speed Triple Challenge Cup Replica Wife's: 2015 X1 xDrive28i Son's: 2009 328i; 2018 330i xDrive
http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-02-28/pricey-apps-dated-software-may-s- top-the-connected-car
Don’t be fooled by that new car smell. The in-dash operating system of the most sophisticated new cars runs on a “software kernel” that is at least five years old, says Derek Kuhn, vice president for sales and marketing at auto software developer QNX (BBRY), which has provided software for Mercedes-Benz (DAI), Audi (NSU), and BMW (BMW). That makes the technology about as old as that second-generation iPhone sitting unused in your bottom drawer.
Reliability is important—and boring. Swapping out your car’s OS every 18 months for a new one is not a business carmakers want to be in. There’s a reason for that: Automakers need reliability more than they need to satisfy consumer demand for the latest tech features. Yes, software updates can be downloaded onto the car’s OS, even over the air. But during the typical seven-year life span of a car, automakers fear, a major bug might knock out the software that controls everything from diagnostics to apps. “We cannot have a scenario where 300,000 cars have to go back to the dealership at once to have the SIM card replaced,” says Marcus Keith, head of project at Audi Connect.
I predict that in 5 years time we will begin to see some newish cars declared "unfixable", and that they will have to be shipped back to the automaker for repair--either as a buy back under warranty arrangements (possibly a new kind of warranty), or as a pro-rate by time used (like a battery), and then re-sold as "reconditioned". This won't be the same as lemon buy back---this will be a car actually shipped back to the factory.
This will happen because circuits will become so integrated that dealership technicians won't be able to accurately diagnose them anymore, or the diagnosis will be so painstaking that labor rates will approach repair costs at NASA.
Online flashing and updates and self-repairing circuits is what I'm holding out for. Probably won't happen for another generation though.
Well, I certainly agree that the traditional nature of a dealership service technician is destined to change dramatically, possibly by adding a new class of technician... One whose primary function and background is electronics, with little to no actual mechanical training.
In many cases, some repairs may be resolved by using a "team approach" of mechanical AND electronic trained service personnel... Which will surely result in higher costs for repairs.
I can only imagine the problems with online flashing for the consumer if it goes anything like a lot of updates from Microsoft for operating systems and some other programs I've used. Do an update and another bug is discovered in the updated software.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
... and, that's after a "successful" flashing, which isn't exactly a guaranteed outcome...
Bugs are a given, but that happens with parts too. They can be mis-designed initially or an "improved" version from the parts counter may wind up breaking too soon or may cause an unexpected issue with another system in your car.
Or maybe the improved oil spec that the engineers came up with didn't work so well in the real world, lol.
There's a Lexus ad that irritates the living carp outta me everytime I see it..this Asian chic is in a new Lexus showrm and slides in behind the wheel of....something..forget now...and her first and constant gaze for the rest of the ad is being fixated on the centre dash to let all the iCrap tantalizer her into making a purchase..Who freakin' cares if the heater outlet on the driver side roasts her right foot, or the defrost vents blow higher than where the frozen wiper blades are hopelessly encrusted in 3" of frozen snow and ice...as long as she can distract herself appropriately by 'connecting' in the home away from home. Ya...that'd be the one traveling umpteen feet a second without nary a glance at the road..
PPfffffttttttt..
not really that much different than a local shop outsourcing to Cardoc's shop for the complicated diagnostic work. Only difference is, instead of him doing the steps himself, it will be telling someone else what to do.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
Slippery slope. Both of them help mask incompetence, and often has them crashing anyway..but at a higher speed.
Question...what are the odds that someone who has new tech in their car like Subaru's Eyesight, will actually allow themselves to spend more time with their eyes off the road because they have the confidence in the tech? How can that be a good thing?
The systems are there for online reflashes, in fact GM's Onstar has been tested extensively. But there are some issues that have to be dealt with, it's one thing to download and install software in a shop. We manually shut down specific systems when necessary because they can start communicating during the reflash event and crash the update which risks bricking a module. We also supplement battery power with a dedicated clean power source.
When it comes to remote programming you have the problem of the car needing to be powered up, and depowered during the update, as well as make sure that the system voltage doesn't fall below a minimum.
Then we have the little problem about an update occurring, and the owner just happens to need to use the car in the middle of the event.
Then you have cars like BMW, and if you need to update one module, the system updates all of them and it takes a number of hours to do that.
Yea, that's correct. Right now the manufacturers are all setting up to actually build the 2014 models. The 2015's and 2016's are well down the path of design and engineering to the point that prototypes are built and being tested. The 2017's and even potentially 2018's are the only cars that really still have room to design in today's electronics technology. That means they are four to five years "behind" by the time the cars actually come out. While I would expect the manufacturers are adjusting the time tables for the electronics and basically adding as much of that stuff as late as possible they still have to work with what they can find out there when that time comes.
Reliability is important—and boring. Swapping out your car’s OS every 18 months for a new one is not a business carmakers want to be in. There’s a reason for that: Automakers need reliability more than they need to satisfy consumer demand for the latest tech features.
Have you ever heard of a vehicle that while driving down the road suddenly all the gages go to the bottom, then swing all the way to the tops, and all of the dash lamps" test", and then the cluster starts to work normally again? That is the classic description of the instrument cluster module having to, or being forced to reboot. The fun part is that could be a problem inside the cluster, and it could be external to the cluster.
If you really caught what I've been talking about the complexity has been there for more than the last decade, and when the cars present with these mind numbing problems the techs are usually left holding the bag and aren't paid correctly to even bother trying to solve these problems. It's always spun on them that "If they knew what they were doing, blah, blah, blah".
Meanwhile there is always going to be someone else who still thinks that the computer will just spit out a code and tell them what is wrong. (aka what part to replace) How many times have you seen me write that we can't attract the people that we need? We really don't have anything to offer them compared to what they can make in other careers.
I predict that in 5 years time we will begin to see some newish cars declared "unfixable", and that they will have to be shipped back to the automaker for repair--either as a buy back under warranty arrangements (possibly a new kind of warranty), or as a pro-rate by time used (like a battery), and then re-sold as "reconditioned". This won't be the same as lemon buy back---this will be a car actually shipped back to the factory.
The real picture is that its cheaper to buy back a car once in a while than it is to completely train and then carry a fully capable group of technicians that can handle those kinds of problems. But what happens when there is no longer a warranty on the car? Now the buy back possibility is off the table, and eventually the owner has to find someone who can and will spend the time to fix it. Consumer experts have no idea what it takes to make yourself, and/or your shop capable of being that answer and they turn around and so they give consumers advice that works to push the consumers away from us. Its been pretty much a thankless pursuit to train and be equipped to be that shop, we just came back around to the build it and they will come idea.
While I can't say that there won't be straight electronics techs who can't slap a set of brake pads on a car, I'm inclined to say that for the most part it won't work. That tech wouldn't produce enough revenues in a typical shop, and they would ultimately starve him/her right back out of the door. (if they didn't throw them out first). On top of that we aren't even considering how bad the competition is between techs inside a dealership, and how dealer politics would come into play.
In many cases, some repairs may be resolved by using a "team approach" of mechanical AND electronic trained service personnel... Which will surely result in higher costs for repairs.
It would definitely cost more to do that but management isn't ready to pay just one of those people to solve the kinds of problems that cars can present with today. They darn sure aren't going to pay two of them.
There was one noteable case where an attorney filed for herself and won, only for it to be overturned. Honda quoted fuel mileage as directed by the EPA, the methods for predicting fuel economy have recently changed and are still evolving.
Honda's hybrid battery was failing prematurely, that's why there was the software change. Extending the life of the battery did result in a decrease in over all fuel economy.
The big problem as the link's title suggests is that there is a huge market for intentionally doing it incorrectly. When you run the numbers, your talking triple what my shops total revenues are for the same time period, and they didn't have to spend anything to do it.
Try and picture how it feels on my side when at 9AM this morning I'll be having a long lost customer come in for a evaporative emissions diagnostic. (It's already had the gas cap replaced, four times and no I'm not kidding). It's also had the cannister assembly replaced, the filler neck, and the cannister vent valve somewhere else.
I know going in the job is a loser, and being successful won't convert her back to a full customer. She's moving away.
The Honda case got the attention of the automakers. Honda did a lot more than recite the EPA numbers though, and that's why they settled the bigger class action suit that Peters dropped out of. Honda puffed about the mpg before the reflash, but it was the reflash that really hammered most owner's mpg.
Ford is offering $50k help people learn how to save gas. The reward is likely going to go to a software app developer. (Denver Post).
Oh, welcome back.
Well this comes right back to my dire prediction of some months ago---when a 2013 car, out of warranty in 2018, develops massive electronic problems, it will be discarded, like that flat screen TV you put in the dumpster when little white spots starting darting across the screen.
OR, as consumers become enraged when their $40,000 purchase is a useless pile of scrap metal and plastic after only 5 years, perhaps the government will compel manufacturers to buy them back on a pro-rate, and, of course, build this expense into the purchase price of the car.
Before you balk, consider that this is probably what Apple does already. Surely that little tablet computer can't cost $800 to build.
While I can't speak for independent shops, I do see the real possibility in the future of dealership "classification", in which the top-tier dealers have electronics specialists, and are regionally located... Perhaps receiving monetary support from the manufacturer to act as a regional support center for lower tier dealerships (and by tiered, I mean as in service level competence approval) and also an actual secondary service support center where vehicles that can't be repaired by lower tiered dealerships are flat-bedded in order to be repaired.
I'm just not ready to accept the possible feasibility of junking a 4-5 year old $$$ car because the local dealership can't figure out what's wrong.... At least, not yet.
I may change my opinion as time passes...
So, unless someone really wants to "gut" a vehicle's capabilities, the days of relatively easy engine/drive-train swap outs are long gone...
Well, its certainly possible, given enough time, money and effort.
Still, there are lots of information-exchanging subsystems that are expecting to talk to each other, and when some of those inputs are removed, lots of things no longer work as intended. Sometimes, they no longer work at all.
It's light-years different from when I was a teenager in the late 1960's and early 1970's, when all it took to was to have access to a machine shop and someone with the ability to make items like motor mounts and adapter plates.
Of course, if reliability isn't a factor and time is unlimited, one can eventually get it to work, at least partially. It's nothing I would want to attempt personally, unless I had access to a lot of qualified technical advice.
Just look at how difficult it is to make some cars work correctly and reliability today, and those cars have been engineered from the bottom up to have each subsystem interface with each other correctly.
Mr. Computer is not going to like that new engine at all, so Mr. Old Computer will have to be used, and he'll have to be taught how to talk to the rest of the car.
Good luck with that.
I think you reach a point where there is no point.
This one tested out quite normally, it clearly had a leak, and the P0440 means its a large leak tank area on a 2000 Camry. It was a bit troublesome after that because using the smoke machine, the pressure being delivered was clearly dropping, but the smoke wasn't visible. So out comes the head phones and the ultrasonic microphone. The leak could be heard at the filler cap. Close examination of the new filler neck showed damage that looks like it was dropped at some time before it was installed. It isn't real obvious until you really study it but it is bent and the cap simply can't seal the system.
So now it goes back to the other shop to have it replaced again.
The owner had replaced the ignition module, coils, plugs and wires. In fact he had changed the module and coils several times with used parts. The trap when that happens is people often add a problem on top of the original one.
When you look at the scope captures, the red trace is the coil current through the module taken with the low amps probe. The on time, and the timing of the coil command events are erratic and that is his misfire. The rest of the diagnostic is to find out why that is occurring.
Enjoy
http://jimroal.com/repair.html
http://www.normantaylor.com/mechanics_flat_rate_pay_system.html
Having made an entire career repairing cars when I look at what is said on those two sites I know that there is even more to the story than just what you see on them. Back when we had to fight through problems like that 92 Buick Park Avenue misfire, and we weren't paid diagnostic time, a tech like myself could spend several hours working to find out exactly what the problem was, only to then have the customer do what that guy did and say he was going to fix it himself. Even if I had gotten to repair it back then, the repair only paid for the replacement of the computer. The time spent cleaning and tightening the ground connections wouldn't have been paid for either.
Today, not only isn't there proof that any of the labor times in the books have been created by a legitimate time study, many of the labor times are nothing less than fraud. Something that really needs to be done is a real time study for specific repairs and then get the manufacturers to explain why the times that they quote are wrong. You want consumers to have quality repairs? Help to expose and fix all of the problems that the trade faces and progress will be made towards that goal.
On a recent repair that I did, a heater core in a Mazda B3000 (Ford Ranger) a warranty company was involved and they claimed that the labor guide quoted the whole repair at 7 hours. Meanwhile Mitchell showed 7.1 hours, and was very explicit that the time did not include the recovery, evacuation and recharge of the AC. When this was pointed out the warranty company representative tried to claim that the AC didn't need to be discharged to replace the heater core. Well, since he had Alldata I made him look up the procedure and then he saw that the evaporator core under the hood did need to be removed to access the bolts that held the plenum assembly to the firewall. He tried to go from one old flat rate cut the time trick to the next. In the end I wrote the entire exchange into the statements on the work order explaining to the customer why the bill was different than what the warranty company was going to pay. The customer accepted the fact that any help paying for the repair was still help.
Here's my nomination for quote of the day:
"It is amazing the time and effort Chrysler went through to make sure these vehicles could not be serviced." (link)
Having replaced a couple of those steering racks, they aren't any more difficult than most any other. My normal routine is to connect the steering shaft, then the lines, and then you bolt the assembly to the K-frame (sub-frame) or cradle. That is not how its described to do in a service manual. His problem is that he's probably has it bolted to the K-frame already so yea, he's struggling to attach the steering lines. I might be able to look up the labor times, in fact I'll try to do that in a little bit. Off hand I expect to find that the customer pay rate for that job will be about 2.5 hours, allegedly including adjusting the toe-in angle. (That's NOT an alignment) The warranty time for the exact same job is going to be about 1.5 hours. My average time for a steering rack, without the alignment is right about 1.5 hours.
You can tell him what he needs to do to connect the steering lines, which is unbolt the rack and connect them first. Then see how reacts to the suggestion that the whole job should have taken less than two hours.
A former NAPA ASE Tech of the year Greg M. is quoted as saying money broke this trade and its going to take money to fix it.
Techs are always finding better ways of doing repairs that save them time and money. That motivation isn't there for the manufacturers - they want the parts designed for fast assembly on the line. So we're back to the money issue - how do you motivate an engineer to design for ease of repair after the sale?
"Lucky for them I love my 96 Caravan. But, I curse this design! I had to replace my steering rack on my '93 Caravan and it only tool a couple of hours. So, I do know what I am doing. Please help"
This job, repairing cars, will find ways of making anyone look like they "don't know what they are doing" all the time. It simply comes down to the number of chances someone has. I can say that no major league pitcher ever managed to strike me out, and I never made an error at shortstop. Both are true statements, but neither of them actually describe my athletic abilities. They only attest to the lack of sufficient chances. (that would be none BTW) That posters claim of knowing what he is doing would be the same as me using my two baseball statements as if I was some kind of a baseball superstar. :sick:
I can't think of any that would be seen as ethical, moral, or humane....
Neither are techs, but when the blame game starts all four of those groups attack them first.
It's the old "can't they design the engine so that there's more room to work in there?"
Sure they can, if you want 2" less legroom!
Ease of assembly will always trump the ease of repair, if for no other reason than in assembly, every part has to be "touched" in every vehicle assembly...100% of the time. It would be a rare circumstance indeed in which a single part would have to be "touched" in every vehicle for service at some later date down the road. So, cut a guaranteed cost now as much as possible, or engineer for cutting a possible cost that may never materialize in the future.
Regarding the published "time to repair guesstimates", I'm reminded of a recent 30 page-long article about the costs of medical care that TIME magazine published.
In it, the researcher continuously spoke of the "Charge Master", which is the "official price list" of all items and services provided within a hospital, as well as the initial point of negotiation in contracts with insurance companies, those paying individually, etc.
The "Charge Masters" have been around, and in use for so long, no one seems to know exactly when, how or who created them, yet they remain the basis for all costs determinations that are hospital-related. They are so imbedded within the system that no one is willing to re-examine their actual validity in today's terms.
Just guessing, but that seems to share a lot of characteristics with the "time to repair" estimates used in auto repairs...I
And, if it's any consolation, those savings do get passed on to the consumer. As much as we might gripe about the high cost of living, cars are actually pretty cheap, when you take into account all the safety features and equipment that's standard these days.
Back in 1985, my Granddad paid around $13,500 out the door for his 1985 Silverado, which I still have. Last fall, I bought a 2012 Ram for $20,751 out the door. Adjusting for inflation, that Silverado would be around $29,000 today! Adjusting backwards, the other way, my Ram came out to around $9600 in 1985 money.
Now, for a 1985 truck, the Silverado is pretty well equipped. Power windows, locks, cruise, nice (for the time) stereo, tilt wheel, upgraded interior with cloth and carpet on the door panels, 15x8 Rally wheels, 2-tone paint, etc. But a LOT of technological advances have been made since 1985...ABS, traction control (also takes some of the fun out of spirited winter driving), a transmission with 3 extra forward gears, an engine with cylinder deactivation, airbags, tire pressure monitoring system, and Lord-knows how many computer controls, and other advancements.
I'm sure that if the auto makers hadn't found ways to cut costs in assembly, my $20K truck would have been closer to $40K.
So if "doc" were a real doc, he would take in your car and 3days later your bill could be $275 or $43,000.