69 replies to this topic

[ntsqd]

Tech isn't by itself responsible for the better reliability of modern vehicles. There is also a considerable amount learned from experience in the last 50 years of automotive design. Analyze why something failed and design to not have that failure mode.

 

Then again I'm reminded of this coder writer's t-shirt saying (sung to '99 bottles on the wall'):

 

99 bugs in the code,

99 bugs in the code,

Take one out & code over it,

132 bugs in the code.......

[Beach]

Well here it is almost August, so i thought I'd fess up. I pondered the advanctrac issue for a week and decided to have the repair done. The thought of driving the switch backs on f.s.roads in the mountains, maybe in the rain, got the best of me and also, as one person posted "if it's on the truck, I want it to work". Had an excellent 2 week trip to the S.C. and Tenn. mountains, no issues and never needed the advanctrac/anti lock system(knew I wouldn't if I had it fixed).

Edited by Beach, 30 July 2018 - 01:38 AM.

[nelstomlinson]

Tech isn't by itself responsible for the better reliability of modern vehicles. There is also a considerable amount learned from experience in the last 50 years of automotive design. Analyze why something failed and design to not have that failure mode.

Modern materials are a huge part of the reliability improvements, and modern design and manufacturing is another big part. A '50s truck made with modern materials to the original design would last longer than the original. A '50s truck with the design updated via modern methods - e.g., finite element analysis to identify weak spots - would last like a modern car, although there would be a few more consumables, like points and condenser, that modern cars don't have. A '50s truck with modern materials and updated design would weigh less than an equivalent modern truck, and probably get better fuel economy.

Most of the complexity we are fussing about has nothing to do with reliability - it's just complexity, done because cheap microcontrollers make complexity cheap, and because complexity makes for features to placate politicians and win over women.

[iowahiker]

Disagree.  Fuel injection CRUSHES carburetors and that is just the beginning.  My V-8 has oil pressurized cylinder rings instead of spring tension.  My duel overhead cam valves produce much more top end power because they breath (my old 350 died below 4000 rpm).  My old 350 (fuel injected) had tons of low end torque and as good or better durability than my 5.0 V-8 but the 5.0 is a rocket over 4000 rpm (mountain climbs on interstates in heavy traffic in third gear with the camper).  I am past 100,000 miles and no new tech failures just an old tech failure, fractured starter shaft.  No going back for me.  Love: FUEL INJECTION, dual overhead cams, variable valve timing, oil spray piston coolers, oil pressurized piston rings, anti-lock brakes, unleaded gasoline, in-tank fuel filters, stainless steel exhaust system, six and ten speed automatic transmissions, front wheel drive (in the snow), seat belts, side-impact safety bars, safety glass, radial tires, oxygen sensors, limiting automatic transmission gear selection (cutting out six or 5+6, or 4+5+6), galvanized sheet metal...   

 

The old tech limited slip rear end is still better than traction control but that is the only one that comes to mind.  I have both and traction control feathers all 4 wheels to be slipping while the limited slip rear end gives a yank to get me going.  Though, I dislike cylinder deactivation and engine start:stop.  The computer does learn my driving style and follows along and so it all works for me.

 

Leaded gasoline was a very poor fuel and the oil companies delayed removing lead as long as possible (Amoco Oil Co. did not use lead because it was a very poor fuel).  Today's evil would be ethanol which is better than lead but that is not saying much.  I run as much Exxon gasoline as possible to get rid of ethanol emulsion in my fuel tank because they add an emulsion breaker.

 

Actually, car companies (or oil companies) did not care much about me in the old days.  They knew exhaust systems rotted out but did nothing.  A lot of improvements came from competition and regulation.  I think a lot of people are voting to go back to the old Pinto days.  I have not replaced an exhaust system since lead was removed (regulation) and they switched to stainless steel (competition).  Leaded gasoline made an acid in the exhaust system and fouled spark plugs (and poisoned children).

 

I love my transmission: the manual says do not touch, look, or go near the transmission for 150,000 miles whether I haul a trailer or not while the old 350 transmission was serviced every 30,000 miles (the mechanic would sometimes forget to tighten the bolts  ).  Synthetic oil and better seals.

 

I have not had a rust through hole on galvanized sheet metal despite lots of road salt.  

Edited by iowahiker, 05 August 2018 - 10:06 PM.

[buckland]

Amen to all that... I never thought I’d have an automatic in my truck. But the 6 gear in my mini diesel is incredible. I don’t mind using DEF to keep breathing. I do love my old limited motorcycle but am happy with improvements made by smart people. I used to bicycle to work through the streets of London when they had leaded gas OMG ... I used a carbon mask that had to be changed weekly. Regulation is not a dirty word. :-)

Edited by buckland, 05 August 2018 - 09:37 PM.

[ckent323]

93 Dodge W250  LE extended cab, long bed - gear driven transfer case. Gear driven camshaft.   Very reliable - virtually bulletproof.  No chains or belts to break or replace in drive train.  Only belt is the serpentine belt driving the alternator, water pump, air conditioner and power steering pump. There are only a small number of sensors relative to present diesels.  Injection pump is mechanical and reliable.   It is far and away the most reliable vehicle I have ever owned.  

 

I have a friend with a 1993 Standard Cab W250 he agrees that it is the most reliable vehicle he has ever owned and he has owned at least a half dozen pickups and at least a dozen cars.

 

Cons - Stock it is noisy and the ride is very stiff.  Some folks have had problems with the ABS system - I fixed the sound issue with Sound Deadener Showdown materials.  I am planning to leverage suggestions from several folks including ntsqd to improve the ride. 

 

400,000 miles and still going strong.

 

I don't think any other 3/4 or 1 ton diesel has as good of reliability or is able to run as many miles before an overhaul based on the data I have seen.  I fully expect to get another 400,000 miles out of the engine.

 

This truck works great for me but maybe not for others.  We all have different needs and comfort levels.  

 

;-)

 

Cheers

Edited by ckent323, 06 August 2018 - 12:53 AM.

[craig333]

I've thought about putting in a switch to disable abs while offroad but since I do want it on road I need to figure how make it forget proof. 

Forget proof, I think I'll copyright that one

[cwdtmmrs]

I put 650,000 miles on a 1982 MBZ 240D diesel. Still have it.

[ckent323]

cwdtmmrs,

 

Ha!

 

my buddy with the 1993 Dodge W250 has three 220 D MBZs, two of them he bought for parts cars (he has a ranch and a big shop building).  They are gutless but get great fuel mileage and just keep going.

[nelstomlinson]

Iowahiker, what you are talking about is mostly modern manufacturing and modern materials.  Most of that could be done without a computer in the car, and most of that could be done with updates of older designs.

 

Complexity in the design and manufacture which delivers simplicity in the product is the optimum. Your piston rings that don't depend on spring tension are a great example of that.