A good synopsis of modern engine failures
- Thread starter loneryder
- Start date
dnewton3
Staff member
There is absolutely nothing new or shocking in this video ... it's the same old topics in AI generated junk.
Here's a summary; modern engines are engineered to close to the edge of survivability because of CAFE efforts. Well ... DUH!
the talking points:
- thin oils
- lighter weight components
- high power density due to turbos
- start/stop tech
- cylinder deactivation
- etc
I'll save BITOGers the effort ...
It's not worth watching.
Here's a summary; modern engines are engineered to close to the edge of survivability because of CAFE efforts. Well ... DUH!
the talking points:
- thin oils
- lighter weight components
- high power density due to turbos
- start/stop tech
- cylinder deactivation
- etc
I'll save BITOGers the effort ...
It's not worth watching.
I can't believe that whoever made this didn't take the time to find a proper graphic of Direct Injection.
More like a what than a who. AI is OK for some uses but a lousy tool for others.
The main issues are, the use of wrong and inferior materials, cutting corners on as many places as they can, as its all about them saving $ every place they can, except on warrantys and recalls and of course their reputations. I suppose employees that give a crap also plays into it. And farming out the manufacture of parts and assembly to other country's is no help either.
Seems to me auto engineers believe all baloney talk they hear on the internet as well, seems to be a lot of monkey see monkey do with all the various automotive components nowadays. Like really how much thought has gone into it. Engines, Transmissions or what ever, just think over 100 years of automotive manufacturing and a stupid mouse still has more smarts, since no engineer knows how to keep them out of cars.
Seems to me auto engineers believe all baloney talk they hear on the internet as well, seems to be a lot of monkey see monkey do with all the various automotive components nowadays. Like really how much thought has gone into it. Engines, Transmissions or what ever, just think over 100 years of automotive manufacturing and a stupid mouse still has more smarts, since no engineer knows how to keep them out of cars.
Did I say there was anything new? No I didn’t. What’s got you on edge?
As if we didn't know already. Big DUH !!! FWIW, I have NO engine problems with my NA beaters. The miles on them just keep adding up, year after year. I have total piece of mind taking any one of them on a long road trip, and they all have a traditional automatic transmissionmissions.... No CVT's or other garbage transmission in my beater fleet. I do just basic maintenance on the engines and transmissionmissions, and have no issues.
As Jeremy Clarkson would say, it is the best of the venereal diseases. They are better than most, but probably because it is quite old and has been refined over many years. The 10R80 attached to it is another story. Too bad we can’t have that engine with the ZF8.
Even the first generation from 15-17 was really solid. They’re overbuilt and were designed from the ground up to be turbocharged. I had one, it was fantastic and better than any NA V8 I’ve had in a pickup. The only reason I got rid of it is I needed a truck with a bit heavier duty suspension.
I can’t comment on the 10R80, I never owned one though the couple I’ve driven seemed OK. The CDF drum issue is a bit worrisome but I wonder if it’s overhyped internet drama.
The 6R80 was awesome though and the ZF8 is the best auto I’ve ever experienced.
There has been a huge cost to the consumer for the small, incremental fuel economy increases in the past few years. They have come at the cost of intense engineering activity within the auto makers, more expensive components and materials, and increased maintenance.
I would love to see a cost benefit analysis that compares the total cost of all of these “improvements” to the personal fuel cost savings. Surely they allow the manufacturer to achieve their mandated CAFE requirements, but I struggle to believe it’s done anything beneficial to me as a consumer.
All that engineering time, effort and cost by the manufacturers could have been directed elsewhere, such as working to make a vehicle more reliable. Instead it’s being spent to eke out ever diminishing returns at ever increasing costs by increasingly sketchy measures.
This AI stuff is garbage! Anything AI, I move on.
I've long believed that long term reliability is related to power density. Power density goes up, long term reliability goes down. Throw in a lack of maintenance and it goes down even quicker.
dnewton3
Staff member
This ^^^
It's referred to as the law of diminishing returns. The closer you get to the edge of any performance envelope, the more costly each incremental improvement comes. It's often logarithmic in nature.
Additionally, because of the intense complexity of the systems used to achieve these results, the long term repair costs are also insanely costly as well.
I, for one, was duped into a very beautiful 2023 ES350; stunningly gorgeous car with tons of features. And then there were problems ...
Despite the loss in equity, I unloaded it and got an older RX350 (with less tech).
Vehicles these days are stupidly expensive, and yet after 7-10 years, they are going to become nearly unfixable due to a lack of available parts (no OE support) and a void of qualified techs who actually understand how to diagnose the real root cause of problems.
Heck of a plan ... ever more costly products which fail more often and cost increasingly more to repair before becoming useless heaps.
Building for the leasing crowd that has to have all the latest gadgets and shiny objects [plus auto journo hacks that look at anything inexpensive or not having a sunroof as being penalty boxes] is another factor. Pump and dump. There's not even an attempt at building brand loyalty, just make that "sale".
The public is doing all the Beta testing for the manufacturers, worse than ever before.
They're not building for me, someone who values simplicity, ease of repair, reliability with the objective of keeping a car for 10-15 years [or 20 or 25] instead of tossing something aside after 36 months for the next version of "latest and greatest".
Honestly safety stuff is adding complexity, too. In the same week I had to fix "Service Stabilitrak" in a GM and "Service Advancetrac" in a Ford. No, neither was just a wheel speed sensor.
Add in things like federally mandated backup cameras and manufacturers look to offset those costs by cutting corners elsewhere.
Look, ABS is fine. Airbags are fine. But I don't need traction or yaw control. I don’t need a BUC. I don't need blind spot monitoring or collision avoidance, or a windshield that requires "calibration" after replacement. The consumer thinks these things sound good, but if you can't DIY it increases the cost of ownership.
Add in things like federally mandated backup cameras and manufacturers look to offset those costs by cutting corners elsewhere.
Look, ABS is fine. Airbags are fine. But I don't need traction or yaw control. I don’t need a BUC. I don't need blind spot monitoring or collision avoidance, or a windshield that requires "calibration" after replacement. The consumer thinks these things sound good, but if you can't DIY it increases the cost of ownership.
Similar threads
