Why can't car manufacturers get it right first time?

Submitted: Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 07:58
ThreadID: 66847 Views:3672 Replies:14 FollowUps:30
This Thread has been Archived
When I was a young fella I remember images on TV of motor vehicles being tortured to ensure that they were up to the task that they were designed for. Brakes, suspension, airbags, door slams, it seemed that we were in good hands because nothing was left to chance.

Then I started actually owning a car and experienced the reality. Take one of my more recent 'acquisitions' a Land Rover Freelander, which by the way has since entered the Car Industry hall of fame as one of the greatest lemons of all time.

My thoughts would have gone something like 'Land Rover' been around for ages, tough as, the military all around the world and NATO use them, must be good. So based on the history, the glossy brochure and boyhead memories of torture tracks to ensure that cars are sorted out for the customer.............I shelled out for one.

Big mistake! Within a short time I was receiving 'recall' letters from Mr. Land Rover informing me that I needed to take my car in to have this or that thing altered.

No joke, I was there so often that some of the staff thought I worked there.

Suffice to say that I grew weary of all that and traded it. I did hear back though that it wasn't long after trading that my little lemon's motor needed major surgery and within a short time after that it was gear box trouble. So I was well rid of it.

My question though is really about why car manufactures can't seem to get it right. What's so difficult about it all.

Humans haven't changed shape that much in over 50,000 years. One backside, two arms.......hang on then that's even more than 50,000 years. So why do cars need a bigger motor, more room, more cup holders?

Wouldn't a reasonable idea be to make a good car and simply improve it until it's close to perfect?

Case in point. In yesterday's newspaper Toyota have a recall on the 200 series fitted with their steel or allo bull bars. Seems it's prone to damage at their bracket.

Er is this the same Toyota that's been building tough as 4x4's for years & years. Seems that even this giant of the industry can't get it right. Is it really that difficult?
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: Member - Phil G (SA) - Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 08:33

Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 08:33
If you want to take a step back in time (like me) then you can buy a 79series LandCruiser

No armrests,
no cupholders,
quarter vent windows,
vinyl everything,
a timeless dashboard made of steel
air vents that were copied off a mark2 cortina
front mudguards that will hold a cup of coffee,
a front chassis that will take a long handle shovel
no ABS, no airbags, no crumple zone,
6 cyl factory TD motor (up to 2006)
factory snorkel
and theres a few around as long as you like white.

140,000k and 7 years - zero has gone wrong.

(I have to admit they got a couple of things wrong on the new V8's but are sorting it)
AnswerID: 354062

Follow Up By: Member - Wayne David (NSW) - Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 08:43

Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 08:43
Phil G (SA)

Sounds as though you're on a winner there mate.

Headlines in recent times have focused on fuel prices and fair enough but I am coming to release that fuel economy is just one part of the equation. The Freelander I mentioned was going through tyres as if they were licorice chews.

Glad you're happy with yours.

Happy trails.

0
FollowupID: 622222

Follow Up By: Member - Phil G (SA) - Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 08:53

Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 08:53
Your TD5 Defender is pretty similar. I like the aluminium body, plenty of rivets, and they copied the design off a standard house brick! Good stuff. Does it have cupholders? :-)))
0
FollowupID: 622225

Follow Up By: Member - Mark E (VIC) - Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 09:17

Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 09:17
Phil,

I would buy one in a flash, if they put the same stuff in a wagon. Bit hard to stuff the family in a ute! Would also be happier without the ECU controlling all the injection and engine stuff, though.

The 105 isn't far off the mark, just needs:

Stronger front diff (with lockers :-)
Factory uncomplicated turbo engine (no ECU)
Stronger gearbox, with proper 5th gear

Dreaming again.......................... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Cheers,

Mark
0
FollowupID: 622228

Follow Up By: troopyman - Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 09:27

Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 09:27
I made a vow to myself that whatever 4by i buy had to have a quarter pane window in it , cannot go wrong . My other vow was that my wife has to have a 5 star ncap rated car to drive the kids around in . cheers .
0
FollowupID: 622229

Follow Up By: Member - Phil G (SA) - Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 10:28

Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 10:28
Gday mark
"Bit hard to stuff the family in a ute"
Thats one of the reasons we now own one as the kids have grown up. We had 4kids and our vehicles were an 11 seater troopie and later a 61eries 8 seater sahara. Good thing about the troopie was that you could take another family away with you if you wanted to! Did that a few times, and pulled a trailer.

Troopyman, agree 100%. The hard part is helping the kids decide what they should be driving. All mine have at least a drivers side airbag now.
0
FollowupID: 622241

Follow Up By: Ozhumvee - Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 19:22

Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 19:22
My reason for getting the Humvee, built to last, pretty much indestructible drivetrain and no electronics. Still going strong at 21!
Peter
1996 Oka Motorhome

Member
My Profile  My Position  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 622326

Reply By: Axel [ the real one ] - Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 09:05

Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 09:05
My old man allways told us not to buy a new model vehicle untill at least 12 / 18 mths after release , most of the bugs are generally sorted by then ,
AnswerID: 354065

Reply By: Member - Mark E (VIC) - Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 09:11

Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 09:11
Mate, if they made cars perfect, the companies would eventually go broke,as they would only sell limited numbers and make nothing on spare parts, which as you would know cost multiples of what they really should.

I like your thinking though.

Cheers,

Mark

Ps Hey, why don't you go into the car industry and make us all one. There's a couple of thousand EO members who I'm sure would buy one.....though you might have to include a couple of cup holders.....
AnswerID: 354067

Reply By: Member - Kiwi Kia - Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 09:17

Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 09:17
I am no apologist for LandRover, I had one once and it was not a good experience compared to my mates with other brands.

However, I think that we often expect to much from our vehicles. The world market expectation for 4wd vehicles is that they are made to be used on hard surface northern hemisphere roads in winter snow conditions. The rest of the world market is minute compared to Europe and Asia. The modern 4wd almost without exception has NOT been made for back country dirt roads with 50 million corrugation's or to tow caravans or trailers. Very few countries actually have your average person owning a trailer, caravan or boat, or being able to head off into the 'bush' at will. The local country wide dealership and 4wd magazines are at fault for advertising these 4WD's as "The Greatest 4WD Ever" or, a go anywhere vehicle. I would suggest that the Freelander is probably one of the best 'Torak Tractors' of the decade, it's speed hump climbing ability is a legend :-))

.
AnswerID: 354070

Follow Up By: Member - Wayne David (NSW) - Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 10:09

Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 10:09
Kiwi Kia - I reckon you may have something there with markets that manufacturers aim at.

On the other hand the promotion & advertising of it certainly makes it look aimed at Australian conditions how many ads have you seen with Oz desert country, kangaroos, dust and harsh conditions? Plenty!

We're also being told that car companies use Australia to test out their vehicles and 'fine tune' them before release. Well if that's true how do they get through the test?


0
FollowupID: 622238

Follow Up By: Member - Kiwi Kia - Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 11:31

Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 11:31
Wayne David, You would be dead right.

Tv adverts often show vehicles splashing about in salt water as they speed up a long beach or bouncing down a steep rock slope. I would recommend people make a copy of those adds if they are thinking of buying the displayed vehicle. If it comes to a warranty claim the dealer might be hard pressed to refuse a claim on the basis that the vehicle was not being used for what it was designed for ! I would also point out that the design 'life' of a Japanese or European vehicle is said to only be about 6 years !

As a personal preference I would not buy a vehicle that does not have a full chassis if I wanted it for outback touring.

.
0
FollowupID: 622251

Follow Up By: get outmore - Monday, Mar 16, 2009 at 11:24

Monday, Mar 16, 2009 at 11:24
Not quite so kiwi Kia


i guess it shows but the cruiser 70 series was never built for the european/ asian or American market. it is not available in these countries
Im not sure exactly where it is available but AFAIK mainly africa and australia
0
FollowupID: 622431

Follow Up By: Member - Kiwi Kia - Monday, Mar 16, 2009 at 12:19

Monday, Mar 16, 2009 at 12:19
get outmore,

I did say;

"The modern 4wd almost without exception has NOT been made for back country dirt roads"

Note the "almost without exception"

I am told that there are plenty in Asia (never been there my self) and as you say mainly it would seem Africa and Australia. By the waiting list I would suggest that they are not a big ticket item for Toyota. It would be interesting to know just how many they actually produce in a year, may only be a few weeks production run at a time hence the delivery delays between assembly runs.
Also, I am not sure that you can really call the 70 series 'modern'.

That's why I have one :-))

.
0
FollowupID: 622447

Reply By: PradOz - Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 09:30

Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 09:30
i think your thoughts apply to a lot of things, take caravans for example. plenty of people complaining about warranty issues but people keep on buying new. can make the idea of buying a good secondhand model whatever seem like a good idea when you know what the bugs are or what your up for to get it up to standard.
AnswerID: 354073

Reply By: obee1212 - Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 09:38

Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 09:38
From reading history I learned what I already suspected. The British never could make a decent vehicle. I can only guess that the problem lay with the heavily unionised nature of the industry because some of the concepts were very good in their day. (land rover, mini,) Or maybe it was good old fachioned lack of quality control. It was the introduction of quality control in Japan (from America) that brought the japs to the fore.

The British government poured billions into the industry trying to keep it afloat but all in vain. I just read now that they are pumping the industry with "green" grants what ever that really means. Now we are getting the same problem with Australian car plants that are in deep. Funny how we whinge about the unemployed "dole bludgers" perception but stay silent when it comes to corporate handouts.

Owen
AnswerID: 354076

Follow Up By: Member - Kiwi Kia - Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 14:32

Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 14:32
The original Landrover was a direct copy of the Willies Jeep (which was taken from a Japanese design) and the mini was designed by an Italian who did not even work for the BMC design dept. he was contracted to do the work. :-))

I also believe that the industry problems start at the top not the bottom. To many over paid senior management wallies !

.
0
FollowupID: 622270

Follow Up By: OzTroopy - Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 14:43

Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 14:43
"The original Landrover was a direct copy of the Willies Jeep (which was taken from a Japanese design)"

??????????????????????????????????????


"I also believe that the industry problems start at the top not the bottom. To many over paid senior management wallies ! "

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
0
FollowupID: 622273

Follow Up By: Member - Kiwi Kia - Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 15:03

Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 15:03
Yep, check this out for part of the story.

http://www.winwaed.com/landy/history/series1.shtml

They were more of a copy then this article admits but I don't blame them. They could see a need for a farm vehicle, they had a work force and workshops so away they went. They also had a ready market for many years as the British Empire had to buy 'British'.

If you were wondering about the Japanese connection it's very interesting, do a Google search I am a bit busy at the moment.

.


0
FollowupID: 622275

Follow Up By: OzTroopy - Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 15:21

Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 15:21
Allready well aware that LR was based on WW2 willys / ford Jeeps - and more of an agricultural tool.

Also well aware that Jap' licensed version of Jeeps were manufacured ... Their Police and Military had them for years. Not to mention toyos vague 4wd beginnings.

What threw me was the comment that appeared to read ... Landrover grew from Jeep which grew from a Jap' design.

Jeep origins are actually from the prewar british Bantam.
0
FollowupID: 622278

Follow Up By: Member - Kiwi Kia - Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 21:19

Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 21:19
You have me searching now for my info on where Bantam got some of their ideas from.

It is my understanding that Suzuki and Datsun both produced vehicles based on Austin models around mid 1930's. I thought it was Datsun that made transmission developments that were later used by Bantam. The first Suzuki based on the Austin 7 was produced around 1938 and the Datsun version 1935 - well before the 2nd world war.

I will keep looking. You will have to admit that you can't just design a 4wd in as short a time as Bantam did for the US Army without having some previous development ideas up their sleeves.

.



0
FollowupID: 622363

Reply By: donks1 - Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 09:55

Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 09:55
G'day Wayne

The cruiser recall is not entirely Toyotas fault. It is a design problem with the bulbar which is made for toyota by Bocar.
By the way, as a result of the recall, Bocar has shut the doors to avoid paying the cost of the recall, and toyota now has to cover the cost of all repairs themselves. They have actually taken over operations of Bocar in an attempt to keep production going.

Donks1
AnswerID: 354081

Follow Up By: Member - Wayne David (NSW) - Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 10:22

Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 10:22
donks 1. Wow! Looks like hats off to Toyota for their actions.

However, on a recent 4x4 training course the new Toyota 200 had one of the worst hand brakes of the bunch. It just didn't seem capable of holding the vehicle on a steep incline.

The course instructors pointed out that most 4x4 were not aimed at too off road at all. This included suspension, hand brake, shockies and the list goes on. All of this it seems is aftermarket.

0
FollowupID: 622239

Reply By: Member - Marco T (VIC) - Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 10:39

Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 10:39
Wayne,

I could not agree more. I have a lemon of a model - currently running 4th on www.complaintscorner.com.au

I asked around and could not find much in complaints for the vehicle. It has been confirmed by a dealer that it has been designed for European conditions. Well we live in Australia where things are a bit rougher.

I have the opinion if you do something you should do it well. I am a builder and I make sure it is done well for my peace of mind. You would think they would have it right by now, know the pit falls and to not take short cuts as all these things only cost them money in the long run - if they stand by their warranty!

I have decided to trade my 4x4 in when the warranty is finished and buy a second hand no frills tough 4x4. Not sure what that will be though. Might have to start a thread on here to get some opinions.

All the best

Marco
AnswerID: 354085

Follow Up By: Member - Wayne David (NSW) - Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 10:55

Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 10:55
Marco T (VIC)

Sorry to hear about your lemon. Believe me I know the feeling and believe me when I tell you that when you finally get rid of it you will feel great. Well great right up until the next one starts it's antics.

But I reckon there are lemons and good to average cars. So all we can really do is research and stop watching those bloody TV ads & print media where the 4x4 is burrowing underground, climbing cliffs & swimming rivers.

Of course we know that much of that stuff is exaggeration but still I think there's a reasonable expectation (build qualilty, robustness, etc) by most buyers of 4x4's that manufactuers need to meet.

Well that's how I see it anyway.
0
FollowupID: 622244

Reply By: Member - Doug T (NT) - Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 11:03

Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 11:03
Wayne
When Landrover was Landrover and in the days when Len Beadell used them they they were tough, what you had was probably a Ford Landrover, now take these 2 vehicles depicted below, if the thumped a panel with your fist you would more than likely have to have to go to the Doc and get your hand in plaster, Do the same to the Freelander and you would take it to the panel beater to have the dent fixed,

Image Could Not Be Found
Image Could Not Be Found

But then most of the 50s Cars and 4x4s were TOUGH.

.
still going strong with 836,179 K's

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

AnswerID: 354087

Reply By: nowimnumberone - Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 12:18

Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 12:18
they did make the ultimate peoples car once but didnt make it to production it sent the company broke.
it was called a HOMER MOBILE.
designed entirely by homer simpson and had everything that was needed
cheers
AnswerID: 354096

Reply By: OzTroopy - Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 13:03

Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 13:03
" Why can't car manufacturers get it right first time? "

Sometimes they do ..... asisdes some little hiccups.

VW Beetle
40 series Landcruiser
2A Landrover
HQ Holden
Jeep XJ Cherokee

All still extremely popular and many still in regular use ..... would be a few others as well I guess.

Not a good way to sell vehicles tho .... people dont update ... e.g.

1982 I spied an excellent looking vehicle to buy new ....

Diesel / Dual Cab / Compact / Good looking enough for round town and still go bush ....

Walked in with the chequebook, hassled the salesman and found it only had a baby motor in it .... patiently waited as every new model came out waiting for a real engine .....

About twenty years later they finally got the power to weight ratio ( and the falling over problems ) sorted .... By then it was more ugly than the box I was driving in 1982 and not worth the coin they wanted for it .....

In the meantime .... advertising convinced the general public each new model was a nescessity ........ and they sold lots .... (wink)
AnswerID: 354101

Follow Up By: Member - Kiwi Kia - Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 14:40

Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 14:40
Hi OzTroopy,
I had a 2A Landrover and grass (weeds) grew in those blo... awful window slide tracks. It was the Holden motor conversion that made the 2A far more economical. They broke axles if you looked sideways at them and they always broke at the diff end.

I would also note that it was the Australian market that put wind up windows in the Mini and got away from those horrible slide tracks.

.
0
FollowupID: 622272

Follow Up By: OzTroopy - Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 14:52

Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 14:52
LOL ..... you had door tops ??????
0
FollowupID: 622274

Follow Up By: Member - Kiwi Kia - Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 15:05

Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 15:05
Yeah, New Zealand weather :-))
0
FollowupID: 622276

Follow Up By: Member - Axle - Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 17:12

Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 17:12
OzTroopy!, You mentioned HQ holden?


Solid body, Shocking thing to drive! plus...


Terrible steering

fuel economy there was none.

They where Holdens first attempt at pollution control no mixture adjustment on the carby, the 202 idled rough as guts

The ford of the same yr model was miles in front......lol.lol.

Axle.
0
FollowupID: 622296

Follow Up By: OzTroopy - Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 17:34

Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 17:34
Hey Axel,

Did I happen to mention ... some little hiccups .... LOLOL

Mainly referring to the longetivity of the original design basics of the earlier models compared to the constant chopping and changing and accessorising of the newer stuff ... and how many are still in use.
0
FollowupID: 622301

Follow Up By: Best Off Road - Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 20:53

Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 20:53
HQ?

Pig of a thing.

My Old Man had an EH, HK and an HT. Died in the wool Holden Man.

Then bought an HQ. The dsiastrous Trimatic (Traumatic). That poxy excuse for a V8, the 308, ate camshafts for lunch due to an inherent oil feed problem. Also had head gasket problems at low mileage.

Cheers,

Jim.

0
FollowupID: 622353

Follow Up By: Member - Luke (SA) - Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 22:28

Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 22:28
Don't go knockin the HQ! Very basic car but very good car in it's day. The HQ was Holdens biggest seller until the VT came along. There was nothing wrong with the trimatic. You still see them driving around today.

The trouble with some people is they bag the crap out of cars but forget the technology is nearly 40 years old.

The Holden was and still is (as Holden claim) a budget car to suit families. Was kept with low prices to make them affordable.

Axle,

The HJ was Holdens first attempt with the pollution, niether here nor there I know but FYI only

Cheers Luke
0
FollowupID: 622384

Follow Up By: get outmore - Monday, Mar 16, 2009 at 11:32

Monday, Mar 16, 2009 at 11:32
I seem to tremember from engines of that era
were well used by 100 on the way oyut by 150k and if you gor 200k out of a motor that was something worth talking about

changeover motors were common

how often do you hear of a vehicle these days dieing from the motor wearing out?
0
FollowupID: 622435

Follow Up By: OzTroopy - Monday, Mar 16, 2009 at 16:25

Monday, Mar 16, 2009 at 16:25
Axel .....

"Shocking thing to drive / Terrible steering" ..................
Was bought because it was much firmer on the road and the steering was much better than the vague, wandering meanderings of the falcons and valiants of the time.

"fuel economy there was none" ...............
My 202s got 25+mpg on a trip and idled as smooth as silk ... was quite good for its day I thought.
Ever give yours a tune up ??? ... lol

"The ford of the same yr model was miles in front......lol.lol.".......
Sheeesh ... its Bathurst all over again ... LOLOL

get outmore ..... comparing old age materials and production methods to todays is a bit onesided dont ya think ???? Bit like me saying that the old 2A never had problems with the onboard computer, electric fuel pump or its electronic control gear ... lol
0
FollowupID: 622511

Follow Up By: Best Off Road - Monday, Mar 16, 2009 at 19:58

Monday, Mar 16, 2009 at 19:58
Luke,

"Nothing wrong with Trimatic"

I remember having one behind a VK 308. Put it in for work and the Auto bloke showed me the drive body out of the Traumatic and one out of a Turbo 400. The one from the Traumatic was pressed tin, whereas the one from the 400 was solid steel about five times as thick.

It simply couldn't handle wear.

He also told me 50% of his business was Traumatics, and the other 50% was all other autos put together.

GMH tried to build V8's and autos and failed miserably. You'll note they've gone back to using Yank stuff.

Cheers,

Jim.

0
FollowupID: 622565

Follow Up By: get outmore - Tuesday, Mar 17, 2009 at 09:23

Tuesday, Mar 17, 2009 at 09:23
bit of an unfair comparrison
the TH 400 was probabally the most over engineered componant put into any standard vehicle ever and was almost exclusivly the first choice for modified vehicles running stupid horsepower

the traumatic wasnt the only crappy auto as the bog warner 35 put into many fords and valiants was no great shakes in the reliability stakes.

Ah got me thinking i reckon my bias against autos was born from driving vehicles with those well named slushboxes. They would 1/2 your power and even worse they would change into 3rd at 30kph and wouldnt kick back unless you mashed the accelorator to the floor
0
FollowupID: 622641

Follow Up By: Best Off Road - Tuesday, Mar 17, 2009 at 19:15

Tuesday, Mar 17, 2009 at 19:15
You've got to remember GMH was fitting the TH 350 or 400 (can't be sure which, failing memory LOL) to 308's in the VB Commodore.

At some stage, not sure exactly when (but definitely by the VK) they ditched the TH as a cost cutting measure and went back to the Trimatic.

I also had a VH 253 manual. They fitted the M20 four speed to that which wasn't up to the task. It should have had the M21 that was fitted to the 308.

And way back they fiited the bleep weak Opel four speed to 186S Monaros in the HK.

GMH had a sad history of fitting cheap (and weak) transmissions.

0
FollowupID: 622720

Reply By: Splits - Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 13:37

Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 13:37
"Wouldn't a reasonable idea be to make a good car and simply improve it until it's close to perfect? "

Wayne

Henry Ford tried to do that with his T model and nearly ruined the company.

Sales peaked at 2 million a year in about 1922. His nearest competitor was Chevrolet with around 500,000. Sales declined after that as the competition steadily improved. He claimed the car was very good and did the job so why did anyone need anything better?

By 1927 it was so bad he had to completely close down his factories for 6 months while his son Edsel frantically designed and built the A model.

He lost a lot of dealers during those months to other makes and never regained sales supremacy.

Cars constantly change because that is what people want. Each manufacturer tries to outdo the other by offering more while trying to keep the car within its price category.

A lot of the problems associated with 4bs are caused by taking them outside their design limits with overloading and too much speed on rough roads being behind a lot of the problems.

Take the first Holdens for example. I can remember seeing them being tortured tested in black and while newsreels at the movies on Saturday afternoon in the 1950s but they still had major problems in the early Redex trials in 1953, '54 and '55.

One of my books lists the details of the '55 trial. 42 Holdens started but only 12 finished. Those 12 had a total of 59 body and sub frame cracks plus other problems with springs/hangers, radiator mounts and shocks.

Ordinary families would not encounter faults like those but these were driven beyond their limits.

Brian
AnswerID: 354106

Reply By: Rolly - Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 18:57

Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 18:57
The answer is simple when you remember the ancient and venerable marketing 3B principle:

Bull$h1t Baffles Brains.

Always remember that.
AnswerID: 354155

Follow Up By: Member - Wayne David (NSW) - Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 22:59

Sunday, Mar 15, 2009 at 22:59
Crikey a bloke takes a few hours to help his dear old Mum and things go nuts around here.

Some great stuff on hear and wonderful humour too. Excellent!

Doug T (NT) - You mentioned the name 'Len Beadell'. Now there are bells ringing in my head but I just can't put a face to the name. Bugger old age.

Was it something along the lines of the Leyland Brothers?

Can you help me out? What was I saying again?
0
FollowupID: 622390

Reply By: Robin Miller - Monday, Mar 16, 2009 at 10:42

Monday, Mar 16, 2009 at 10:42
Wayne , with the petrol GU Patrol I think they have done that.
8 years old now , but which itself was a revision of earlier designs.

No major issues at all , with strong drivetrain, solid axles , and huge lazy inline 6 cylinder engine.

But still has same last centruy fuel consumption figures, and people seem to focus on this aspect alone which leads to high strung designs to solve the issue and this starts off another round of teething problems.
Robin Miller

Member
My Profile  Send Message

AnswerID: 354276

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (14)