I've seen the 9006 bulbs last over 100,000 miles.
The results of a CAD designed car
- Thread starter G-MAN
- Start date
- Status
I've seen the 9006 bulbs last over 100,000 miles.
yes,m my dodge has a distributor. the coil is built into the dizzy and is giving me problems. i need to change it but im putting it off ebcause its such a pain.
I've seen instances of poor "maintainability" from many auto manufacturer's. I blame neither the designers nor the tools. The problem is the customer. Most customers don't do repair work on their cars, don't know and don't care to know that their car is poorly designed from a maintainability standpoint. Then they cry foul when they see the bill to replace the water pump that's nearly inaccessible. Poor maintainability is one of the hidden costs of car ownership.
I really look at stuff like this when I buy.
I really look at stuff like this when I buy.
It has nothing to do with CAD software. CAD software(especially 3D) is light years ahead of manual drafting when it comes to designing a servicable machine. I hope your not suggesting they just design a car by just bolting stuff together.
Seriously, the reason it's cramped is simple: By maximizing the spaced used underhood gives you more space for other stuff.(passengers, features, ect) It may also have to do with the fact that the LH cars were based on an AMC/Renault car.
Does your's have the battery in the fender too? The stratus' and some of the Intrepids did I believe.
Seriously, the reason it's cramped is simple: By maximizing the spaced used underhood gives you more space for other stuff.(passengers, features, ect) It may also have to do with the fact that the LH cars were based on an AMC/Renault car.
That is baloney. Chrysler engineers and designers used the AMC Renault Premiere as a design inspiration for the 1st generation LH, but they were not based on that platform. And the second generation LH, which is what my 300M is, was a totally clean slate design from the ground up.
The AMC/Renault car in question: (what turned out to be) the Eagle Premier/Dodge Monaco.
What's really sad is that medium and heavy duty trucks are starting to look more and more like that car every year. When Chevrolet came out with their redesigned C-series medium duty trucks a couple of years ago I about fell over the first time I fliped open the hood and saw how buried the 3126 CAT was. One reason I am no longer working as a truck mechanic at a GM shop anymore. If I had wanted to work on a bird's nest like that I would have been a auto mechanic.
How is it ballony, I think we have a different idea of "based on". How far apart are "based on" and "design insperation"? They must have been so "inspired" that they scraped their design they had worked on for years and incorperated a front suspensions, engine configuration and transmission similar to the Premier. More info here.
As for the gen2 car, yes it was again "based on"(does not mean the exact same) the gen 1 car. Why would they start from scratch and end up with a car that's mechanically almost identical? Starting from scratch would mean no parts or designs are shared.
As for the gen2 car, yes it was again "based on"(does not mean the exact same) the gen 1 car. Why would they start from scratch and end up with a car that's mechanically almost identical? Starting from scratch would mean no parts or designs are shared.
To me, "based on" means you take an existing design, tweak it a little, modify it here and there, and voila, you've got a "new design." In the end, the two designs are clearly recognizable as being a "common design" from an engineering standpoint. This just isn't the case with the LH and the Premiere. I would, however, argue it is basically the case with the current LX platform and the previous generation Mercedes E-Class chassis.
Audi has used a north-south engine placement for its FWD cars for decades, but no one would claim the LH was based on an Audi design. What the Chrysler engineers did was look at some design aspects of the Premiere and use them in the LH. They did not just incorporate aspects of the Premiere into the LH. For example, they didn't just look at the suspension of the Premiere and say "We'll just modify this a little and use it." Example: the Premiere had a solid beam rear axle (like Audi FWD cars used to have). The LH has a multi-link independent rear suspension, a totally new design.
Chrysler did, however, incorporate the disc brake design of the Premiere in, of all things, the Viper.
Audi has used a north-south engine placement for its FWD cars for decades, but no one would claim the LH was based on an Audi design. What the Chrysler engineers did was look at some design aspects of the Premiere and use them in the LH. They did not just incorporate aspects of the Premiere into the LH. For example, they didn't just look at the suspension of the Premiere and say "We'll just modify this a little and use it." Example: the Premiere had a solid beam rear axle (like Audi FWD cars used to have). The LH has a multi-link independent rear suspension, a totally new design.
Chrysler did, however, incorporate the disc brake design of the Premiere in, of all things, the Viper.
G-Man-
I think the original poster in this thread has only himself to blame for buying that thing.
I certainly hoped that you raised the hood before paying the cash.
I think the original poster in this thread has only himself to blame for buying that thing.
I certainly hoped that you raised the hood before paying the cash.
Exactly, that is what they did with the LH cars. Some times things change a lot, some times they change a little. The front suspension of the LH is nearly identical to the Premier. If you've taken a close look at an Audi drivetrain, you'll see it is far from the LH/Premier, that's just generalizing. There is a lot more simularity in the Premier and LH then just the layout. Call is design inspiration, or evolution, it's part of the design process for everything.
An awful lot of this has to have something to do with aerodynamics, also. MPG rules all, baby. With this car, other cars, AND trucks!
Another factor not considered, in an impact there is NO room between components. Exceed the 5MPH bumper limits and this design has set up some extraordinary potential for damage from one end of the engine compartment to the other.
I suppose nothing in CAD, or the "Beancounter" bible accounts for any of that?
Gman, is your insurance per chance unfavorably disposed against this car for collision coverage? Past the bumpers, I cannot imagine the crunch that this car suffers that doesn't go 6 or 8 grand to repair.
Another factor not considered, in an impact there is NO room between components. Exceed the 5MPH bumper limits and this design has set up some extraordinary potential for damage from one end of the engine compartment to the other.
I suppose nothing in CAD, or the "Beancounter" bible accounts for any of that?
Gman, is your insurance per chance unfavorably disposed against this car for collision coverage? Past the bumpers, I cannot imagine the crunch that this car suffers that doesn't go 6 or 8 grand to repair.
- Status
