Fords, now with lasers!

[Pop_Rivit]

Originally Posted By: javacontour
It will still be in a very hot engine compartment. Lots of dust, water when it rains, snow.

This is a much more harsh environment than your typical data center, desk top, or home entertainment cabinet.


The same arguement was made when ECU's first started showing up in vehicles. My guess is that the engineers will design a system that will handle it. Maybe a few failures at first (like the early ECU's) but they'll overcome them in short order.

 

[Dualie]

Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Originally Posted By: Dualie
Originally Posted By: Ben99GT
It'll have to pass the durablity tests, so if it sees production you can bet it will have been thoroughly tested.



Like the 6.0L And 6.4L diesels


sorry i had to.


hanging head in shame


Both produced by International.

VT365 and Maxxforce 7.


Yes it was fords Programming that farked them up. IT was a joke though. I own 6 ford diesel's

 

[Colt45ws]

Really? When I worked with the County in Las Vegas they were always sending VT365 equipped International branded medium duty trucks to International for reprogramming. This was in '07.

 

[pzev]

I heard of many cases where international engine teams would head out to Ford dealers to personally inspect troubled engines.

Really sad about those engines.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: Dualie
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Originally Posted By: Dualie
Originally Posted By: Ben99GT
It'll have to pass the durablity tests, so if it sees production you can bet it will have been thoroughly tested.



Like the 6.0L And 6.4L diesels


sorry i had to.


hanging head in shame


Both produced by International.

VT365 and Maxxforce 7.


Yes it was fords Programming that farked them up. IT was a joke though. I own 6 ford diesel's


That caused many of the issues? Yes, I'm sure it did.

But it didn't cause EGR cooler failures, head gasket problems, or any of the other fun things that engine in its first few years of production was susceptible to.

 

[badtlc]

Originally Posted By: javacontour
Originally Posted By: badtlc
Good for Ford. Every part of the car should be questioned and looked at for advancement and improvement. There are always skeptics, though.


What you call skepticism, I call caution due to prior experience.

I've lived through:

1. Mid-1970's emissions. The Chrysler Lean Burn system, as well as their first attempts at an electronic ignition.

2. Early GM TBI fuel injection systems, when my mom's brand new Buick wouldn't start because of a failed sensor, day two of ownership.

3. Firestone 500 tires, Firestone's early adoption of radial tire technology for the consumer.

I can probably think of some others, but that's a good start for now.

I'm not a fan of being an early adopter for those reasons, not mention all of my early adopter experiences in IT.


That is just dumb all the way around. Without failure, there can be no progress. You can avoid being the "guinea pig" all you want, but if nobody does then hope is lost.

 

[javacontour]

Originally Posted By: badtlc
Originally Posted By: javacontour
Originally Posted By: badtlc
Good for Ford. Every part of the car should be questioned and looked at for advancement and improvement. There are always skeptics, though.


What you call skepticism, I call caution due to prior experience.

I've lived through:

1. Mid-1970's emissions. The Chrysler Lean Burn system, as well as their first attempts at an electronic ignition.

2. Early GM TBI fuel injection systems, when my mom's brand new Buick wouldn't start because of a failed sensor, day two of ownership.

3. Firestone 500 tires, Firestone's early adoption of radial tire technology for the consumer.

I can probably think of some others, but that's a good start for now.

I'm not a fan of being an early adopter for those reasons, not mention all of my early adopter experiences in IT.


That is just dumb all the way around. Without failure, there can be no progress. You can avoid being the "guinea pig" all you want, but if nobody does then hope is lost.


That's why there are so many different people. There are those who thrive on being on the bleeding edge. They are not wrong for wanting to be there if they can deal with the risks and drama that go along with that.

There are others who are more risk adverse, more cautious, who either can't or don't desire to experience life on that edge.

Neither is wrong, nor stupid as you so laughingly judge. I simply don't want to be an unpaid guinea pig for most new technologies.

I'm grateful there are those who do, very grateful. It keeps me employed. When we release a new product, there are those who just have to have it. More installation calls, more service calls as the bugs get worked out that were not found in engineering and testing.

It keeps me employed. But it also reminds me I don't have to have the latest and greatest on day zero.