My son’s car contains a fair amount of “Made by Monkeys” logic. One good example (or not so good, in my case) of this logic has to do with the transmission. It’s a 2001 Pontiac Grand Am, with more than 100,000 miles on it.
He came home from college last week and said that the car wasn’t running right, so I hopped in and took it for a spin. Sure enough, when you stepped on the accelerator, the transmission would spin far too freely.
Being a weekend mechanic, my first reference source is usually the Internet, preferably a source with a video. Unfortunately, there was no video available to help solve our problem, but there was a lot of advice in the user forums.
The first thing the forums had me check was the transmission fluid level. That seemed simple enough, so I went out to the car to look for the dipstick. It’s always at the back of the engine, near the firewall, right? And yes, I know the car has to be running, warm, and on flat ground (my dad taught me that way back when I got my first car). After more than a few minutes of searching for that dipstick, I came back to the Internet to find out where that bugger was hidden.
It turns out that this model (and most cars these days) has no dipstick due to the transmission being pressurized. The only way to check the level is to get under the car, find and remove some tiny screw, and see if any fluid spills out. While doing this, all I could think of is, “there has to be a better way.”
We did that, and sure enough, nothing came out, so we knew more fluid was needed. After searching for the filler cap for a while, I finally discovered it buried down in the engine compartment. When I reached in to remove it, I burned my hand. It’s nearly impossible to remove the cover -- and even harder to put it back on -- without removing a significant amount of skin from your hand.
But we did it, and the car now runs a lot better than it did before. I assume the skin on my hand will grow back in no time.
Tell us your experiences with Monkey-designed products. Send stories to Jennifer Campbell for Made by Monkeys.
Again, Larry, I am not a mechanic-type person and don't change my own oil! I leave that to the experts...so of course I wouldn't really understand this method for checking transmission fluid. I still think it's sounds a bit complicated and from the comments I've read it seems like there is.
The reason the dipstick was eliminated on this model is that most people do not relaize the extent to which ATF density changes with temperature. If the dipstick were checked cold, and the ATF level topped up cold, the fluid would grow in volume (lose density) to the point that rotating elements would be immersed, leading to foaming and the potential for slippage as a result.
Even a substantial number of dealer technicians were not checking the dipstick with engine running at full operating temperature, as specified.
Warranty claims went DOWN with dipstick elimination.
The ATF recommendation at release was "fill for life" except for towing or extreme high temperature service.
Elizabeth M wrote: I'm not an auto geek by any stretch of the imagination but that has to be one of the most poorly designed ways to check a car's transmission fluid level if I've ever heard one!"
The differentials on all cars are checked this way--you fill lubricant through the port on the side until it runs back out. And surely, Elizabeth, you check this level every time you change your oil. Why is is surprising that you might check the transmission lubricant the same way, and at the same interval?
Now that cars can go 100K miles without anything more than oil changes it doesn't make much sense to design maintenance access for a system that is not servicable. The economics makes sense; Save $3 per car by not installing access to a system that should never need attention outside of a garage. Now multiply this mind-set by 4 or 5 systems in a car (brakes, cooling system, spare tire) and spread that over 2 or 3 million cars and pretty soon you have saved enough to buy your way out of bankrupcy.
Transmissions have become the weak link in car reliability. Engines typically last >200K, so now the trannmissions have to last longer, but they do not. There are numerous models wiht transmission problems. Honda Odessy,2000-2003; MDX, 2001-2004; Ford/Mazda- lots. GM in particular has been mentioned here- I find their engines are faily good, but all the ancillaries, especiall electicals, do not last. Even their "solid" 3.8 engine had faulty intake manifolds, 1998-2005 why could they not fix the design in 10 years?! Car manufacturers simply do not care about the consumer. "Build 'em fast, build 'em cheap, to heck with the consumer" seems to be their mottos.
I guess they just want to make everything harder for the user. What's next? under the car to check every fluid so you don't do it, but take it in to get checked!? Crazy...no..BS!
Interesting observation, GTOlover. I always assumed that the "hard-to-work-on" phenomenon started in the 1970s. I had a '62 Impala that was pretty straightforward.
Don't consider this a purely domestic situation. Many of the Daimler Benz transmissions are sealed. In fact at Chrysler corp the transmissions first were sealed, no dipstick and filler, while Daimler owned them. I don't know if this was to prevent medling or simply that they expected the transmission to go high miles without maintance.
As some readers have pointed out, are not designed for maintenance, which can be infuriating at times.
I was told by a car buf once that the car companies aren't interested in designing cars that are easy to work on because they make MORE money when you bring the car to the dealership for repairs. Anyone who has taken their car to a dealer for a repair knows that the experience is more like being taken to the cleaners!
It's a shame that a country that put men on the moon, can't (or won't design cars that are easier to repair.
From Dell / Intel® New Paradigms in Design Work Scott Hamilton, vertical market strategist for Dell Precision workstations, 5/2/2013 5
Early in my career, I worked as a draftsman and remember the days of drawing on vellum with numbered pencils and Mylar with plastic lead. This was a fun experience in the sense that I ...
I've been using workstations for more than 10 years and love finding ways to get more performance from my system. With demanding professional applications that require more power each ...
A lasting memory from my first job as an engineer in an auto assembly plant is standing on hard concrete at six in the morning, vending-machine coffee clutched in hand, listening to ...
A quick look into the merger of two powerhouse 3D printing OEMs and the new leader in rapid prototyping solutions, Stratasys. The industrial revolution is now led by 3D printing and engineers are given the opportunity to fully maximize their design capabilities, reduce their time-to-market and functionally test prototypes cheaper, faster and easier. Bruce Bradshaw, Director of Marketing in North America, will explore the large product offering and variety of materials that will help CAD designers articulate their product design with actual, physical prototypes. This broadcast will dive deep into technical information including application specific stories from real world customers and their experiences with 3D printing. 3D Printing is
To save this item to your list of favorite Design News content so you can find it later in your Profile page, click the "Save It" button next to the item.
If you found this interesting or useful, please use the links to the services below to share it with other readers. You will need a free account with each service to share an item via that service.
Tweet This
7 
