Comments like this are always confusing to me, maybe because I’m a younger guy. I don’t understand how it is inherently scary that society is continuing to progress to greater levels of technology and automation, as we have done for the last few centuries. The automobile has always been about removing a certain level of manual effort and direct control from the driver; if you don’t want that, you should be riding a horse. Yes, electronics are newer and more pervasive than every, but it’s not incumbent on the driver to need to understand the theory behind every new system, just how to use it.
Maybe it’s rather that modern automobiles are finally forcing shadetree mechanics to deal with deep-seated issues of mistrust and paranoia about others, since there’s a level of trust involved when it comes to taking your car to a mechanic . But this isn’t the car’s fault
I grew up being able to fix most anything with wrenches and screwdrivers. I was an IT guy and bought a lot of used parts for computers, a 10 year old computer is like an antique. A 10 year old car sure we can probably find used parts, circuit boards a so integral to so many car functions is the scary part to me. I replaced many bad capacitors on dell computers for our security system. The software would not run on newer OS without a complete software upgrade, so I hope you can understand why I prefer wrenches and screwdrivers to circuit boards.
I think that kind of thing is often because a lot of “green” engineers spec components that just just barely meet the specs when new.
Then the components age a few thousand hours and failures start.
In the case of capacitors I always replace caps rated 85C temp with 105C, a hefty margin for voltage and ripple current, etc.
When I was in HS in the mid 1970s I built a $39 Heathkit oscilloscope.
Poking around I noticed one of the caps in the power supply rated 50V had 49V across it in operation.
So this kind of thing is nothing new.
Replaced it with a 100V cap.
Many years later the HV winding on the power transformer opened up.
I think this is one of those theories that sounds better than it has truth. For this to happen on any sort of scale would imply a disconcerting level of deficiency in the engineering education programs in the U.S. and abroad; in other words, students are only being taught about meeting the spec, and not about factors of safety, resiliency, or systems design.
I can’t personally speak to any other educational program or instructor, but I emphasize these principles to my transportation engineering students more than anything about specs or other stuff that can be found in a lookup table. I suspect most other programs worth their salt are the same way.
I’m skeptical. Engineers propose parts, then there is a design review where not just function, but cost is evaluated. A few cents more on one part isn’t much, but it’s a lot of money on a few million computers, especially if the part is used numerous times in the assembly.
I’ve worked as a lab manager in a University ECE dept for 29 years.
Before that in companies doing actual design.
Before that a metrology lab calibrating and repairing gear.
I can say from personal experience there are things the newly graduated have to learn on the job.
Most professors are first and foremost mathematicians; and the focus is on meeting the requirements for accreditation.
Most professors are first and foremost mathematicians; and the focus is on meeting the requirements for accreditation.
As an actual university professor, who is neither a mathematician nor is singularly focused on accreditation (which we only have to deal with once every 6 six years), I don’t believe this to be true. I think maybe it’s true for your particular ECE department, but most successful universities have pivoted to a much more industry-connected education model, with an emphasis on real-world projects and experiences prior to graduation.
The difference between 1959 and 1960 cars under the skin.
All Chrysler products went from generators to alternators and the six 6 cylinder models went from flathead designs to the OHV slant sixes.
Those are pretty significant upgrades. In the 50s and 60s it was common to put a camers in the car if it made it to 100,000 miles and take pics of the odometer rolling over from 99,999 to 00000. it was so uncommon for cars to make 100,000 miles that they did not have a odometer with enough digits to record the event.
I queried Toyota about how I was supposed to check the transmission as required 30,000 mile intervals on my 2012 when there was no dipstick or dipstick tube.
Their reply was that the required check was for leaks only and if the transmission fluid got low or dirty it would trigger a light because the fluid temp would go up and I should take it to the dealer then. Since I had a 10 year 150,000 mile warranty on the transmission, I decided not to mess with it until the warranty was up.
To me, the change on the Mopars were simply part of the normal evolution of engineering and design.
Not purely for “Greed” as stated the above post . Primary selling point of cars of that era was annual styling changes, different sheet metal, different chrome. Another example are the tri-5 Chevies, only significant change, going from 265 ci to 283 ci and offering FI as an option.
Well, big changes in 58 for Chevy, the first big block available, a really beautiful body and a whole new type of frame , the X frame, a design so bad that Nascar would not let them race. Every 58 Chevy in Nascar had to have a 57 frame under it. Not every change is an improvement.
Not that cars today aren’t worlds better than the 50s. You were fortunate if your 50s car did not get turned over to you needing repair.* went with a friend of mine and his father to pick up his brand new 57 Ford station wagon in Oct. 66. I had stopped to see my friend so they invited me along.
They regretted inviting me when I got in the car when I thought the metal sill plate crushed under my foot. I thought being stepped on was its purpose.
WE started down the road and there was a backfire , smoke and the paint on the hood started turning brown.
The father immediately pulled overand tried to get out and none of the doors would unlock. By the time we crawled out the windows and got the hood up, it only had a fringe of paint on it. zwe didcovered the air cleaner had blown off because of the backfire and there was a raging fire atop the carb.
Luckily it was only 2 miles from the dealership to his house so it was an easy walk
Yep, they sure don’t build them like they used to.
Lol, unless they think your crushing the sill plate caused some bad juju that led to the other stuff, I’m sure they appreciated having another piece of evidence to take back to the dealer. Were they able to get a refund or repairs made?
The dealer picked up the car where they left it in the road and ordered them another one because he could not find one locally with the same options. As far as the sill plate, the father did not say anything to me, just gave me a sour look. I only weighed 225 at the time and it sure looked like it was made to be stepped on. The father owned a small trucking company and bought all his trucks from that dealer. Ford used to have a thriving heavy truck business. I don.t know why they let it go.
I didn’t know Ford used to have a trucking business – I’m assuming you mean commercial/semi trucking. Guessing they dumped it because the profit margins were higher on the pickup/single-unit truck side of things, with some of these vehicles closing in on $100k now fully loaded. Maybe increasing emissions standards for the large trucks played a factor as well…
Somehow Daimler Benz wound up with Fords heavy truck business, then when Daimler bought Chrysler, it would not do to have Chrysler dealers selling Ford trucks so they were renamed Sterling Trucks. Haven’t heard about Sterling Trucks in a long time. I used to see some Sterling dump trucks but very few tractor trailers.
I have not see the production figures but I think that Ford sold more heavy trucks in the 50s through 70s than anyone.
else.
Freight Drivers liked them because freigh companies almost always bought cheap trucks and the Fords generally gave the driver more room and taller windshields than Chevy or GMC.
If you want to see a picture of Fords last successful truck design, google Ford Louisville.
. But this isn’t the car’s fault