Hah. I know that was sarcastic…
But there’s no way Mary Barra can take Altman back. Fair or not, he’s now the symbol of what was wrong with GM: focused on pennypinching instead of quality and safety, saving 90 cents per vehicle while people are getting killed driving defective cars. They have to make an example of him and say, We’re not that kind of company any more.
Quote from jesmed: “As expected, one of them is Ray DeGiorgio, who quietly changed the switch design and later denied it under oath.” Unquote
Taking a contrary view, change is subject to interpretation. A small change to dimensions on the plunger, yet retaining its original appearance (don’t scale the enlarged part picture on the drawing) and the same for the associated spring would normally need only a letter or revision change on their drawings with no changes needed for the assembly drawing. That would be standard procedure. Changing these two small parts of an assembly does not change the overall switch design in my view. I would give Mr. DeGiorgio some slack for saying it both ways. In an engineering sense, the switch design was not changed or could, at the extreme, be said to have been changed an insignificant amount unworthy of an assembly part number change. In hindsight its impact on what happened later was profound and now the second guessers are coming out of the woodwork. Mr. DeGiorgio is being made a sacrificial goat as it is demanded that one or more be found.
For those who might not know, typically a part number is the same as its drawing number but would lack the size designation prefix of a drawing number.
Another Quote: “The redesigned part was assigned the same number. That is unusual, according to auto-safety experts, because the automaker, as well as dealers, repair shops and auto-parts stores, would have no way to tell the updated part from the old.” Unquote
I don’t agree. Put a key in the switch and turn it to know old or new.
A third quote: “In part, that was because DeGiorgio didn’t tell the investigators he had ordered the redesigned part without assigning it a new number, Cooper said last week in an interview at his office in Marietta.” Unquote.
Did anyone know to ask the question to start a discussion about drawing change procedures?
PS, One of our cars is an 09 Cobalt; we use only a single key in the ignition switch.
From the Bloomberg article:
““It’s pretty much standard procedure to make a part number change when they change the part like they did,” said Pat Donahue, a private engineering consultant who worked at GM for almost two decades until 2001.”
Seems like he should know. And Mary Barra, who also said the part number should have been changed.
Mr. Donahue is entitled to his opinion as all of us are. He may not work at GM again. It would be interesting to know why they have not needed his services since 2001 and how he feels about that. As for Mary Barra, she is playing to her audience and would be smart to fight larger battles, not one about drawing change procedures.
What do you expect from a company that paid retail to buy cars back off the road that were too well made? Cough-Chevette diesel-cough.
Chevette . . . I’m not sure that qualifies to even be called a car
That does NOT bring back fond memories
@db4690 A 50 mile per gallon car that did not rust. What a panic that caused at GM. We took them back in trade paying as much as 6400 dollars each with full reimbursement with no explanation given. My family has two legacy GM dealerships by the way. Another dealer told me they were even buying Chevette diesels from scrapyards to insure there were no rebuildables.
@rattlegas
I’m not talking about rust or fuel economy
I’m simply talking about an utterly junky car
So they bought back the diesel Chevettes, fine
That still leaves all the gas Chevettes
How come I don’t EVER recall anybody saying how much they loved those cars
Everybody I ever knew was embarrassed to be seen driving one, and this was in the late 80s or early 90s, when they weren’t even dinosaurs yet
I seem to remember the build quality was particularly atrocious. Talk about put together shoddily, using the junkiest materials available
@db4690 The diesels were special. The gas jobs were utterly a barbeque looking for a place to happen. I can still remember the mold smell every time I had to pry myself into one of those heaps.
I think the only car worse was the Renault LeCar.
Chevette . . . I'm not sure that qualifies to even be called a car
The Chevette was a throwaway car. First car I ever heard of before or sense where the back seat was optional.
@rattlegas, I thought the diesel Chevette recall was because of faulty rear brakes…not because it was a great car.
http://www.nytimes.com/1984/11/23/us/chevette-recall-suggested.html
My sister had a gas Chevette. We also had a Vega with an engine block that cracked. Both truly awful cars.
@jesmed I thought The Bible and the Qur’an was the same thing, only in different languages.
Having worked at a Chevy dealer at the time we all noticed very unusual pattern characteristics of the cars. The 1.8 Isuzu engine was bulletproof except for the glow plug controller, the mileage was insane and the cars had zero rust. And I do mean zero in a brand new car in the showroom kinda way. We had convinced ourselves they accidentally made the car too well.
I still have a new one in a barn in Texas, perhaps someday I can get my 300 bucks for it at the scarp yard.
Haha. Touche.
I have heard the diesel engine was bulletproof. I didn’t know the rest of the car was top-quality as well. That’s interesting about the zero rust. I wonder why that was different from the gas engine Chevettes.
Here’s an article about a diesel Chevette:
@jesmed My sister bought a Chevette in the 70s; it was a regular gasoline model. It was brutally uncomfortable, especially for tall drivers and rusted at about an equal pace as other cars, except Fords. The diesel model was not a sales success, but those that bought them found them reliable. The Isuzu engine was identical to the Chevette’s. Isuzus themselves were not bad for their time; I don’t know how well they resisted rust, especially around the Great Lakes, where almost everything rusted out quickly.
LeCar . . .
I clearly remember a comic on some popular late night show making fun of those cars
@db4690 If any car derves the name “bio-degradable crap”, its this one. I forgive the makers of Yugos and Ladas because they don’t know any better. Renault has been in business for nearly 100 years, has good enginers on staff and still willfully produced this garbage on wheels.
They have improved lately; I rented a Renault Megane, an intermediate hatchback, two years ago in Europe, and it was a nice car. Not sure how long it would last compared to a Toyota or Hoinda.
@jesmed We determined the diesel soot coated the car so well it prevented rust. One reason the cars always looked dirty and you could not keep the windows clean.
I don’t know if it’s true or if we were just baked.
@db4690 The LeCar had radial tires and a spare under the hood. I leaned on a tire under the hood and got bit by the HEI. My first experience with 50kv and one I will never forget.
Here’s more about GM’s internal investigation of the ignition switch problem. Even their own in-house investigator had difficulty figuring out when the revised switch went into production because the part number was not changed.
Again not to defend GM, but once Stoffer contacted Delphi, he had the answer in two weeks. The lawyer responded that he should have had the information in a week. This is typical lawyer badgering where you are wrong no matter how you answer or what you did. The guy was trying to figure it out but management was a revolving door during those days and he was unsure even who he reported to at times. Organizational chaos and failed communication between one unit with other units but I still don’t see the cover-up, just confusion.