<<  <  Page 2/5  >  >>
User Rank
Not supposed to maintain...
kf2qd   1/10/2013 9:46:28 AM
Many cars don't seem to be designed for maintenance. I (or my kids) have had several GM cars where the oil filter is placed up behind the engine or covers that make it impossible to remove the filte and not dump oil all over the engine, your are and the ground. Why would you place the oil filter on the back of the engine with the rotation axis horizontal? Or on the right side of the engine(front wheel drive) where you WILL spill oil on the belts when removing the filter.(you had to turn the wheel hard to the right and remove a plastic flap to get at the filter) It was a throw away car.

Its not too hard to put the filter in a more accessable location - my Dodge and Fords cars have the filter behind, and slightly above the back of the oil pan and the axis of rotation is vertical so there is very little spillage and one can actually see the filter without mirrors.


User Rank
Re: Not supposed to maintain...
GTOlover   1/10/2013 10:05:10 AM
The filter location problem and dipstick location is not a new issue. Having owned a 1955 Desoto Fireflite with the 265 Firedome hemi, this was a disaster to change the oil. It was a canister that faced up. You would remove the center bolt (convientently pointed up so you did not have to go under the car) and the oil in the canister would spill all over the side of the engine and exhaust manifolds. I suppose the idea is you do not care and just change out the cartridge filter and let the warm engine 'burn' off the oil. However, you still had to go under the car to drain the oil pan. So the order of operation was important if you wanted to stay somewhat clean!

The transmission was OK but it was impossible to change the fluid or flush it without some crossmember disassembly. The point is, even in the 50's maintenance was not an engineered feature.

User Rank
Cars not designed for maintenance
FrankRoseEngineer   1/10/2013 10:32:20 AM
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.

User Rank
Re: Cars not designed for maintenance
BillFZ1   1/10/2013 1:10:03 PM
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.


Charles Murray
User Rank
Re: Not supposed to maintain...
Charles Murray   1/10/2013 9:20:01 PM
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.

User Rank
Well. what's new
Cadman-LT   1/12/2013 11:19:05 AM
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!

User Rank
Re: Not supposed to maintain...
richnass   1/12/2013 12:34:13 PM
GTOlover, there's actually a very simple solution to your problem. Just turn the car upside down.

User Rank
Re: One thing Dodge got right
lcormier   1/14/2013 8:31:56 AM
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.

bob from maine
User Rank
Re: Cars not designed for maintenance
bob from maine   1/21/2013 10:25:29 AM
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.

Larry M
User Rank
Re: What a pain (literally!)
Larry M   1/28/2013 3:28:16 PM
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?

Yes, it's a nuisance, but it's not anything new.

<<  <  Page 2/5  >  >>

Partner Zone
Latest Analysis
Eric Chesak created a sensor that can detect clouds, and it can also measure different sources of radiation.
Festo's BionicKangaroo combines pneumatic and electrical drive technology, plus very precise controls and condition monitoring. Like a real kangaroo, the BionicKangaroo robot harvests the kinetic energy of each takeoff and immediately uses it to power the next jump.
Practicing engineers have not heeded Yoda's words.
Design News and Digi-Key presents: Creating & Testing Your First RTOS Application Using MQX, a crash course that will look at defining a project, selecting a target processor, blocking code, defining tasks, completing code, and debugging.
Rockwell Automation recently unveiled a new safety relay that can be configured and integrated through existing software to program safety logic in devices.
Design News Webinar Series
3/27/2014 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York / 7:00 p.m. London
2/27/2014 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York / 7:00 p.m. London
12/18/2013 Available On Demand
11/20/2013 Available On Demand
Quick Poll
The Continuing Education Center offers engineers an entirely new way to get the education they need to formulate next-generation solutions.
Apr 21 - 25, Creating & Testing Your First RTOS Application Using MQX
SEMESTERS: 1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5

Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.
Next Class: April 29 - Day 1
Sponsored by maxon precision motors
Learn More   |   Login   |   Archived Classes
Twitter Feed
Design News Twitter Feed
Like Us on Facebook

Sponsored Content

Technology Marketplace

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)
Copyright © 2014 UBM Canon, A UBM company, All rights reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Service