Oh you’re right I must have looked at the free trade agreement countries. They also raised some tariffs significantly for this year. Auto parts went from 0% to around 25%! Mexico has free trade agreements with 50 countries.
There was a huge increase in the vehicle tariff for this year. Mexico became the #1 importer of Chinese vehicles world wide, and the update to the tariffs aims to end that. Mexico’s new tariff：Summary & MEXCHAM’s position - MexCham
Todays cars suspensions aren’t designed like they used to. The tire, wheel, shocks/struts, brakes, rotor size/weight are all part of the extremely complicated formula to get the optimum ride the manufacturer is striving for. 99.99% of the work is done with cad systems and kinetic simulations. The Suspension Design Process
But you are talking about simplicity in design. Specifically, distributed processing versus discrete control, like the BCM example. The issue is that wiring is expensive in several ways; material cost, labor cost and weight. So the advent of distributed processing where you have a bus cable between local controllers and only local power control. This cuts down on heavy wiring throughout the entire vehicle.
Where it used to be relatively inexpensive to have a mechanic sit down and troubleshoot a wiring issue, it is now cost prohibitive. As mentioned, the modern electronics are pretty darn reliable. And when they do fail, it’s probably close to end of life anyway. I’ve owned plenty of used cars that got to 20 years old and not had any significant electronic issues with the control systems in them. They went to the junkyard fully functional in that regard. Something else caused them to be EOL.
+1
And, the same goes for chassis design.
Some modern-day automotive engineers have estimated that the step-down Hudsons of the late '40s-early '50s could have weighed ~1,000 lbs less if CAD had existed at that time. The Hudson chassis was over-engineered for rigidity, and because of the absence of modern computer-aided design, they wound-up with a far heavier car than was necessary for their goals.
Electronic components are cheap and labor is high. Even at minimum wage it’s cheaper to just throw the component out then it is to have someone repair it.
Although this process has changed in recent years, There are now companies that can repair these components cheaply - mainly due to their volume and the money they make from scavenging parts and precious metals.
Correct but only halfway there….
Good structure is key to providing a good ride. The car must be solid and stiff.
Good choices of all the other parts, too. Proper selection of spring rates AND stabilizer bar size… You don’t want a floppy ride. Proper selection of the strut and shock mounts. They need to be compliant but not too compliant. Proper selection of damping levels in the shocks and struts.
And things few consider… The proper rate subframe mounts and the proper rate engine mounts. The engine and transmission is the heaviest lump in the car. It can be used as a tuned mass damper to swallow up those impacts.
As for the tires themselves… don’t assume those 40 series tires have less damping that the 60 series. When Corvette went from 50 series tires to 40 series tires in 1988, those 40 series were more compliant and comfortable than the 50s. Goodyear tire wizards at work.
Having done that type of work, I’d reduce that number a bit to 80%, but this is otherwise correct!
Most people, looking at a fabricated object, would not understand the amount of engineering that actually went into the most mundane looking part. Especially taken out of the context of the whole system…
I think I mentioned it before but we had a project that would launch aboard the shuttle and the sub-package shock & vibration isolators had the shape and durometer of a hockey puck. I was a bit skeptical at first. These will deflect under launch conditions?? You better believe it!
Back in the late '60s-early '70s, one of my friends railed at the price of tires, claiming that tires were “just a hunk of rubber”. I tried to give him a basic orientation to the construction of tires, but he still thought that tires shouldn’t cost more than $10.
Cities filing lawsuits against a corporation is propaganda?
Now you’re discussing the reliability of one brand over another, that’s an entirely different subject. If you feel Toyota is better, buy one and not a Ford.
The whole point is to save the passengers, not the car. Again, you’re not keeping to the same subject.
Yeah but where would you mount the SRS sensors and power steering system and how would you keep it from being stolen?
I think @Mustangman can do that all in his driveway with a T-square, plumb bob, and level. 
I don’t underestimate many members of this forum
I can’t think of anything that I would ask The Invisable Snowman for advice about.
How to troll a forum…
Which manufacturers are NOT doing it this way? It’s a major cost and time saver.
They all are. No argument there. Just the 99% part.
Every manufacturer has development engineers who take those computer designed parameters and adjust them as required to get the car correct. Every manufacturer has testing grounds staffed with engineers who measure these parameters to feed back to the analysts who model the cars. It is a data feedback loop to improve the process. You can get close with simulation but since computers don’t buy the car, actual people have to have the final say.
I have a couple of examples that illustrate this; 1) I was working a suspension project on a Cadillac Seville. This was a complicated active suspension system we’d designed. We had the Cadillac development engineer drive the car over test roads to see how we were doing. The car has 6 subframe mounts for the engine and transmission. He asked what rates we used. They were 400 N/mm in all 6 positions. He told us to try 500 N/mm mounts in the center 2 positions. We did and it make a significant improvement - 20% - over small bumps. Clearly the cradle had bending harmonics within the assembly into the car.
