Service economy inspires crappy design

Other discussions not related to the Permanent Portfolio

Moderator: Global Moderator

User avatar
doodle
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4658
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 2:17 pm

Service economy inspires crappy design

Post by doodle » Sat Sep 14, 2019 7:25 am

So Ive recently taken to start working on my own vehicle ( a beater that I decided to fix up)..and I'm shocked at how awful cars are designed when it comes to making repairs easy. Parts that engineers know will need servicing are buried under other parts which often necessitates hours of labor to replace a ten dollar part. I can only think that such crap design is allowed to proliferate because vehicle owners rarely do repairs themselves. If a car buyer knew that they would be servicing their own vehicle I think it would inspire demand for designs which incorporated future repair ease into the purchasing equation. Instead all the shitty work is offloaded on to mechanics who have no problem billing eight hours of labor for a job that should take 15 minutes given a halfway intelligent design which takes future maintenance into account. I can't help but think that there has to be demand for a simple, reliable, vehicle easy to repair, that will last a lifetime that contains little to no bells and whistles gets good gas mileage and whose sole purpose is to safely drive you at 70 mph from A to B. Why is this so complicated. I bought the beater because I couldn't justify spending the kind of money that car manufacturers want for a new car that contains a bunch of crap that I didn't want. Does anyone feel similarly? Seems like an untapped niche market.
User avatar
Kriegsspiel
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4052
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:28 pm

Re: Service economy inspires crappy design

Post by Kriegsspiel » Sat Sep 14, 2019 9:32 am

doodle wrote:
Sat Sep 14, 2019 7:25 am
So Ive recently taken to start working on my own vehicle ( a beater that I decided to fix up)..and I'm shocked at how awful cars are designed when it comes to making repairs easy. Parts that engineers know will need servicing are buried under other parts which often necessitates hours of labor to replace a ten dollar part. I can only think that such crap design is allowed to proliferate because vehicle owners rarely do repairs themselves. If a car buyer knew that they would be servicing their own vehicle I think it would inspire demand for designs which incorporated future repair ease into the purchasing equation. Instead all the shitty work is offloaded on to mechanics who have no problem billing eight hours of labor for a job that should take 15 minutes given a halfway intelligent design which takes future maintenance into account.
Seems right. I'm sure cramming all the required stuff in there while maintaining fuel economy standards is tough.
I can't help but think that there has to be demand for a simple, reliable, vehicle easy to repair, that will last a lifetime that contains little to no bells and whistles gets good gas mileage and whose sole purpose is to safely drive you at 70 mph from A to B. Why is this so complicated. I bought the beater because I couldn't justify spending the kind of money that car manufacturers want for a new car that contains a bunch of crap that I didn't want. Does anyone feel similarly? Seems like an untapped niche market.
It sounds like you're looking for something like a chopper motorcycle, where everything extraneous has been stripped away and you just have the parts that make it go. That's pretty close to my ideal in a car, though I still want AC/heat and a sound system. But I am not a fan of all the bells and whistles, like TVs in the back of headrests, bluetooth, adaptive cruise control, and the myriad of safety shit like backup cameras, automatic braking, line alerts, steering wheel vibrators, motorized seat adjustments.. and whatever else I can't even think of.

When you say "beater" do you mean a recent-vintage car that's been worked over, or an old car? I'd bet older diesel vehicles without many electronics would be easier to work on. I know of one guy who did a lot of modifications on his 1983 truck. He did it to improve gas mileage, but some of the stuff he removed would probably give you more room to get around in the engine compartment.
You there, Ephialtes. May you live forever.
User avatar
shekels
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 520
Joined: Sun Jun 02, 2019 9:01 am

Re: Service economy inspires crappy design

Post by shekels » Sat Sep 14, 2019 9:40 am

doodle wrote:
Sat Sep 14, 2019 7:25 am
So Ive recently taken to start working on my own vehicle ( a beater that I decided to fix up)..and I'm shocked at how awful cars are designed when it comes to making repairs easy. Parts that engineers know will need servicing are buried under other parts which often necessitates hours of labor to replace a ten dollar part. I can only think that such crap design is allowed to proliferate because vehicle owners rarely do repairs themselves. If a car buyer knew that they would be servicing their own vehicle I think it would inspire demand for designs which incorporated future repair ease into the purchasing equation. Instead all the shitty work is offloaded on to mechanics who have no problem billing eight hours of labor for a job that should take 15 minutes given a halfway intelligent design which takes future maintenance into account. I can't help but think that there has to be demand for a simple, reliable, vehicle easy to repair, that will last a lifetime that contains little to no bells and whistles gets good gas mileage and whose sole purpose is to safely drive you at 70 mph from A to B. Why is this so complicated. I bought the beater because I couldn't justify spending the kind of money that car manufacturers want for a new car that contains a bunch of crap that I didn't want. Does anyone feel similarly? Seems like an untapped niche market.
Have you tried the Yugo or the VW Beetle? Just kidding they were simple cars but comfort was not a big concern. There have always been vehicles that are a pain to work on. But I did run across a Toyota Camry it was fairly easy to do Preventative Maintainace
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
User avatar
doodle
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4658
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 2:17 pm

Re: Service economy inspires crappy design

Post by doodle » Sat Sep 14, 2019 1:03 pm

Take for example electric seats vs the manual adjusting variety...cheap, easy, works and if it doesn't can be repaired without any motors or electronics.... then apply this to every other system in the car. New trucks today cost upwards of 40k...for a vehicle I'm supposed to dump gravel in the back of. I purchased a 2007 Chevy truck....good ls engine, but abs brakes in and out...wish I could just tear them out... knock sensors are placed under intake manifold requring me to rip fuel rails and intake off, disconnect fuel lines, air intake etc...for a part that should have been bolted to side of block. These manufacturers have had nearly 100 years to figure out what works and what doesn't, how shit breaks and causes issues, but this knowledge doesn't seem to get passed on. Great easy efficient engines are created and then scraped for new designs full of problems that then are tweaked out over a decade, at which time the process begins again. I guess I get so frustrated by this because transportation in this country necessitates a car yet there is no "Volkswagen" so to speak...a people's car. Instead the cost of keeping and maintaining a car literally bankrupts most Americans. I know because not having a car for many years was one of the principal reasons I was able to save money so effectively.
User avatar
doodle
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4658
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 2:17 pm

Re: Service economy inspires crappy design

Post by doodle » Sat Sep 14, 2019 1:08 pm

https://images.app.goo.gl/SBXtVFQAXv2boSjL8

Citroen h wagon...love the panel approach....get a dent....no 1000 dollar body shop bill...just bolt another panel on
User avatar
Tortoise
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2751
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 2:35 am

Re: Service economy inspires crappy design

Post by Tortoise » Sat Sep 14, 2019 3:08 pm

I agree, doodle, and the maintenance costs are climbing even higher as more and more expensive electronic parts and computers are added to modern cars and trucks.

An automobile design focused on simplicity and ease of maintenance does seem like an untapped niche market. It would be great not only for people on limited budgets, but also for teenagers since they could learn the discipline of fixing their own car and keeping it running (without breaking the bank).
User avatar
Xan
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 4392
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 1:51 pm

Re: Service economy inspires crappy design

Post by Xan » Sat Sep 14, 2019 3:15 pm

Tortoise wrote:
Sat Sep 14, 2019 3:08 pm
I agree, doodle, and the maintenance costs are climbing even higher as more and more expensive electronic parts and computers are added to modern cars and trucks.

An automobile design focused on simplicity and ease of maintenance does seem like an untapped niche market. It would be great not only for people on limited budgets, but also for teenagers since they could learn the discipline of fixing their own car and keeping it running (without breaking the bank).
Sounds great to me. Would it be legal?
User avatar
Tortoise
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2751
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 2:35 am

Re: Service economy inspires crappy design

Post by Tortoise » Sat Sep 14, 2019 4:55 pm

Xan wrote:
Sat Sep 14, 2019 3:15 pm
Sounds great to me. Would it be legal?
Sure, why wouldn’t it be?
User avatar
doodle
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4658
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 2:17 pm

Re: Service economy inspires crappy design

Post by doodle » Sat Sep 14, 2019 9:05 pm

Simonjester wrote: in states like CA it would probably fail emissions... no legal registration..
Why would such a car fail emisions? Low maintenance four cylinder cars can easily achieve 40 mpg and I'm not advocating for eliminating catalytic converter or anything. Btw, the electronics and computer are really not a problem. In fact, they help with diagnostics immensely. It's the way that the car engines and engine bays are designed coupled with so much unecessary tech and gadgetry that gets cramed into cars that is sending prices to the moon...air conditioned seats and large touch screens, those stupid doorhandles and running boards that extend or poo out...expensive show led lighting that illuminates the ground with car logo when you open door...Another thing I don't understand is why they don't just substitute your phone for everything they put in cars....just have a connection and your phone then becomes your radio, on board navigation and it could even use voice controls. Does anyone even use the onboard navigation in their car vs phone apps like Google maps?
User avatar
Kriegsspiel
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4052
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:28 pm

Re: Service economy inspires crappy design

Post by Kriegsspiel » Mon Sep 16, 2019 3:16 pm

I'm guessing that the lack of ease in home maintenance is a trade off the car companies make in order to achieve optimized aerodynamics and weight. That would help explain why back when people worked on their own cars, they were landboats.
You there, Ephialtes. May you live forever.
User avatar
Tortoise
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2751
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 2:35 am

Re: Service economy inspires crappy design

Post by Tortoise » Mon Sep 16, 2019 3:28 pm

Kriegsspiel wrote:
Mon Sep 16, 2019 3:16 pm
I'm guessing that the lack of ease in home maintenance is a trade off the car companies make in order to achieve optimized aerodynamics and weight. That would help explain why back when people worked on their own cars, they were landboats.
And some of those landboats looked really cool!

Aerodynamics are an important part of fuel efficiency, but if you drastically reduce maintenance costs with a simplified, standardized, modular design it might be worth losing some aerodynamics.
User avatar
doodle
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4658
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 2:17 pm

Re: Service economy inspires crappy design

Post by doodle » Mon Sep 16, 2019 7:07 pm

Kriegsspiel wrote:
Mon Sep 16, 2019 3:16 pm
I'm guessing that the lack of ease in home maintenance is a trade off the car companies make in order to achieve optimized aerodynamics and weight. That would help explain why back when people worked on their own cars, they were landboats.
Doesn't even have to be a home maintenance scenario....when mechanic has to drop engine to change timing belt a 50 dollar repair becomes 1000. Worst of all, cars bascially have a monopoly on transportation options for americans. We need affordable simple cars as badly as we do affordable housing in this country. The combination of horrible trends in these two sectors of our economy are causing people to bascially bankrupt themselves.

It frustrates me mostly because other than finding an old car and stripping it down and rebuilding it, I'm forced to choose from a lineup of cars that are all full of crap that I don't want and cost twice as much as I want to pay for something that takes me from A to B.
User avatar
Kriegsspiel
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4052
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:28 pm

Re: Service economy inspires crappy design

Post by Kriegsspiel » Mon Sep 16, 2019 8:16 pm

Tortoise wrote:
Mon Sep 16, 2019 3:28 pm
Kriegsspiel wrote:
Mon Sep 16, 2019 3:16 pm
I'm guessing that the lack of ease in home maintenance is a trade off the car companies make in order to achieve optimized aerodynamics and weight. That would help explain why back when people worked on their own cars, they were landboats.
And some of those landboats looked really cool!
No doubt.
Aerodynamics are an important part of fuel efficiency, but if you drastically reduce maintenance costs with a simplified, standardized, modular design it might be worth losing some aerodynamics.
Worth it to the car companies? How would they profit from easier maintenance? The service center mechanics are employed by the dealerships, right? So the car manufacturers wouldn't see any labor savings that way.
doodle wrote:
Mon Sep 16, 2019 7:07 pm
Doesn't even have to be a home maintenance scenario....when mechanic has to drop engine to change timing belt a 50 dollar repair becomes 1000. Worst of all, cars bascially have a monopoly on transportation options for americans.
That's true.
We need affordable simple cars as badly as we do affordable housing in this country. The combination of horrible trends in these two sectors of our economy are causing people to bascially bankrupt themselves.

It frustrates me mostly because other than finding an old car and stripping it down and rebuilding it, I'm forced to choose from a lineup of cars that are all full of crap that I don't want and cost twice as much as I want to pay for something that takes me from A to B.
Well, no arguments that those are the two things that cost people the most money. It's compounded when people spend too much on either when they don't have to. Seeing the average buyer spends $34,000 blows my mind. You know Nissan makes a sub-$10,000 vehicle? They don't sell it in America. At one time I was excited for Elio Motors, who were going to sell what amounted to a 3-wheel enclosed motorcycle for like $8,000 but they're having problems bringing it to market.

That said, it's pretty easy to find a good vehicle for under $10,000 used. Like you mentioned earlier, it's the demand that isn't there. Not many people seem to want a cheap 4 cylinder econobox in America these days.
You there, Ephialtes. May you live forever.
User avatar
doodle
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4658
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 2:17 pm

Re: Service economy inspires crappy design

Post by doodle » Mon Sep 16, 2019 8:50 pm


That said, it's pretty easy to find a good vehicle for under $10,000 used. Like you mentioned earlier, it's the demand that isn't there. Not many people seem to want a cheap 4 cylinder econobox in America these days.-
Cause there is no honesty in marketing...and sadly none of us are immune from it's effects....how do we know what we really like? How is it that a kitchen that in 1980 would be on the cover of better homes and gardens as a model of elegant design would be seen as hideously outdated today? Does good design ever go out of fashion? If there is a flaw in capitalism it's that it isn't a system comprised of rational actors.
User avatar
Tortoise
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2751
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 2:35 am

Re: Service economy inspires crappy design

Post by Tortoise » Tue Sep 17, 2019 3:24 am

Kriegsspiel wrote:
Mon Sep 16, 2019 8:16 pm
Aerodynamics are an important part of fuel efficiency, but if you drastically reduce maintenance costs with a simplified, standardized, modular design it might be worth losing some aerodynamics.
Worth it to the car companies? How would they profit from easier maintenance? The service center mechanics are employed by the dealerships, right? So the car manufacturers wouldn't see any labor savings that way.
That's an interesting question. I wonder how much of the total profit on an average car comes from dealership maintenance over its lifetime. A lot of people go to independent repair shops, so for them it's zero.

I would imagine that for DIY cars, manufacturers could make money on volume and also by selling all the parts. They could even spice things up by selling some fun modification parts and accessories to make the car more unique, or faster, or more fuel-efficient, etc.

But that would be the budget tier. The manufacturer could still offer premium tier cars with much higher profit margins (from price, financing, and dealership maintenance). Lots of companies sell both budget tier and premium tier products rather than exclusively one or the other.
User avatar
doodle
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4658
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 2:17 pm

Re: Service economy inspires crappy design

Post by doodle » Tue Sep 17, 2019 7:19 am

Tortoise wrote:
Tue Sep 17, 2019 3:24 am
Kriegsspiel wrote:
Mon Sep 16, 2019 8:16 pm
Aerodynamics are an important part of fuel efficiency, but if you drastically reduce maintenance costs with a simplified, standardized, modular design it might be worth losing some aerodynamics.
Worth it to the car companies? How would they profit from easier maintenance? The service center mechanics are employed by the dealerships, right? So the car manufacturers wouldn't see any labor savings that way.
That's an interesting question. I wonder how much of the total profit on an average car comes from dealership maintenance over its lifetime. A lot of people go to independent repair shops, so for them it's zero.

I would imagine that for DIY cars, manufacturers could make money on volume and also by selling all the parts. They could even spice things up by selling some fun modification parts and accessories to make the car more unique, or faster, or more fuel-efficient, etc.

But that would be the budget tier. The manufacturer could still offer premium tier cars with much higher profit margins (from price, financing, and dealership maintenance). Lots of companies sell both budget tier and premium tier products rather than exclusively one or the other.
Being what the dealerships charge for maintenance, I cant imagine anyone would go there for repairs out of warranty period...in which case complicated maintenance undertaken at zero cost to customer hurts car manufacturers bottom line.

Trucks are absolutely the worst example of modern design gone haywire. I long for an engine bay that looks like this.
Image
Simonjester wrote: i would love to see modern cars built this way, i vaguely remember a concept car (pickup truck?) that was designed along these lines, detailed down to being serviceable with a mostly single size alan wrench and one or two size socket wrenches..

the modern pickup truck may be the absolute worst for this kind of crappy design, does a utilitarian vehicle really need a mess of non serviceable computers and plastic bumpers that are now more $ than an entire pickup truck used to cost.. one that would last three generations of farmers??
User avatar
doodle
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4658
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 2:17 pm

Re: Service economy inspires crappy design

Post by doodle » Tue Sep 17, 2019 7:28 am

Radio and speaker systems is another thing that could be eliminated from cars. A simple usb power port and consumers can bring their own portable speaker into car with them. Radios and CD players are already replaced by phone so no need to install that either...same with any sort of onboard televisions. I recently took a plane ride on Delta and they had placed onboard televisions on every headrest at significant cost Im sure. Then...on another flight a few weeks later...I believe American airlines...they simply had a little holder on back of headrest where you could hook your ipad or phone onto it and use your private device to watch movies. Probably cost 1/100th of the price and as technology improves or things break Delta will have to remove those televisions and upgrade or replace whereas American doesnt have to worry about any of that.
User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 14225
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: synagogue of Satan
Contact:

Re: Service economy inspires crappy design

Post by dualstow » Tue Sep 17, 2019 10:37 am

Although car dealers like obsolescence, it seems like there would be a market for this “econobox” with companies that offer fleets of car share autos.
RIP Marcello Gandini
User avatar
doodle
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4658
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 2:17 pm

Re: Service economy inspires crappy design

Post by doodle » Tue Sep 17, 2019 11:52 am

dualstow wrote:
Tue Sep 17, 2019 10:37 am
Although car dealers like obsolescence, it seems like there would be a market for this “econobox” with companies that offer fleets of car share autos.
Econobox would be a good brand name. Lol I've been trying to find statistics regarding number of car crashes per mile driven to see if any of this technology really improves crash avoidance.... I know fatalities per mile driven have dropped and surely airbags and improved seatbelt design have made a big difference, but I also wonder how much improvements in medical care and treatment account for this drop. With the exception of a few additions I'm not sure our cars really are all that much safer than they were 60 years ago.
User avatar
Xan
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 4392
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 1:51 pm

Re: Service economy inspires crappy design

Post by Xan » Tue Sep 17, 2019 12:12 pm

Speaking of 60 year old cars, how about a 1959 Chevy Bel Air? For the 50th anniversary of the IIHS, they crash-tested a new 2009 Chevy Malibu against a 1959 Chevy Bel Air. Sad that the Bel Air had to die (perhaps it had major mechanical problems or something...) but the resulting video is very informative as to which car you'd rather be in.
https://youtu.be/C_r5UJrxcck

Even among modern cars, there are some big differences. Here's a rollover comparison between a Volvo XC-90 and a Ford Explorer. The first 45 seconds during the Volvo test are pretty boring (which says a lot), but things get REALLY exciting in the second half when they do the Ford...
https://youtu.be/B6y3HR6b98E

So yes, the way a car is constructed makes a HUGE difference in safety.
User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 14225
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: synagogue of Satan
Contact:

Re: Service economy inspires crappy design

Post by dualstow » Tue Sep 17, 2019 3:20 pm

I jumped right to the Explorer in the second video. Whoa.
I've always heard that in general terms, if you want to survive you want to be in Volvo sedan. If you want to kill someone, you want to be in any SUV.
RIP Marcello Gandini
User avatar
Tortoise
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2751
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 2:35 am

Re: Service economy inspires crappy design

Post by Tortoise » Tue Sep 17, 2019 11:55 pm

Xan wrote:
Tue Sep 17, 2019 12:12 pm
Even among modern cars, there are some big differences. Here's a rollover comparison between a Volvo XC-90 and a Ford Explorer. The first 45 seconds during the Volvo test are pretty boring (which says a lot), but things get REALLY exciting in the second half when they do the Ford...
https://youtu.be/B6y3HR6b98E
The test setup in that video looks off to me. It looks like part of the reason why the Ford Explorer took a bigger beating than the Volvo was simply because its axis of rotation brought it closer to the sliding platform.

I mean, yeah, if you raise up the axis of rotation high enough, the rolling car will barely even touch the platform as it slides underneath (Volvo). And if you lower it enough, you'll pulverize the car (Ford Explorer).

Or am I mistaken about that test setup, and the distances were carefully calibrated for each automobile based on its size?
User avatar
Kriegsspiel
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4052
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:28 pm

Re: Service economy inspires crappy design

Post by Kriegsspiel » Thu Jan 09, 2020 6:51 pm

You there, Ephialtes. May you live forever.
User avatar
Kriegsspiel
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4052
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:28 pm

Re: Service economy inspires crappy design

Post by Kriegsspiel » Mon Dec 21, 2020 8:08 pm

Another kinda-related article, about laptops.

https://www.lowtechmagazine.com/2020/12 ... agazine%29
You there, Ephialtes. May you live forever.
User avatar
Xan
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 4392
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 1:51 pm

Re: Service economy inspires crappy design

Post by Xan » Mon Dec 21, 2020 8:55 pm

Kriegsspiel wrote:
Thu Jan 09, 2020 6:51 pm
Kinda related

http://www.startribune.com/for-tech-wea ... fresh=true
In Asimov's Foundation series, a galactic empire in decline is depicted. One of the things that seems backwards to readers is that the faction with the OLDER fleet is considered to have the advantage.

Maybe it doesn't seem so backwards anymore...
Post Reply