What Irked You Today?

[peteski]

18 hours ago, espo said:

RAIN and more RAIN. I like rain as much as most people and I realize the importance of having rain so I'm normally good with it. Almost all day yesterday and now this morning it's raining in what might best be described as Biblical proportions and thunder and lighting that reminds me of an old black and white horror movie. This is the type of thunder that has the windows rattling and the house vibrating.  

In New England the last weekend was the 1st rain-free weekend we had for months!  It seems that rain would arrive just in time for most of the Summer's weekends (and we often had some during the week too), but not as bad as other parts of the U.S.  It has been a very wet Spring and Summer here.

[Toner283]

14 hours ago, Ace-Garageguy said:

Yup, there's that...AND...the manufacturers claim that starter life won't be affected, which is absolutely ridiculous. We're seeing them fail VERY early. Stands to reason that if the starter engages 10 to 50 times more frequently than it would on a normal vehicle, it would wear out sooner, right? But "reason" has fallen out of favor, now even within the engineering community. Stupid knee-jerk "environmentalism" and "safety" concerns that can be exploited by marketing morons who convince the clueless populace they're "necessary" now rule the show.

In spite of the fact these newer starters typically use different brush, commutator and bearing materials to try to fend off early failure, it's still STUPID.

And when the starter fails, it's MUCH more expensive than earlier designs to replace...not to mention the poor likelihood that cheaper offshore replacements will be made to 100% specification compliance (which is already a serious problem for the automotive repair industry, as anyone within it who has a brain and who's not lying will admit).

Then there's the heavier drain on the battery and charging system, with more expensive batteries failing earlier, and modified system architecture to support all the additional idiocy required to keep the wipers, heat, and AC functioning with the engine OFF...as well as restart the engine 10 to 50 times more frequently.

Several years ago, Mazda's Robert Davis suggested that the advantage might amount to 0.1 mpg on the EPA city cycle, an improvement that could be achieved at less cost using different technologies.

ONE TENTH of a mpg over an entire driving cycle...at the cost of idiotic levels of complexity and much higher repair costs.

But the manufacturers don't have to fix 'em once they're out of warranty, so they don't care.

And Mary Barra STILL makes $20+ MILLION dollars a year.

EDIT: Yes, there is some fuel savings for people who value their time on Earth so little that they're somehow content to sit in heavy commuter traffic, idling and creeping, or are too damm lazy to get out of their cars and walk into McD's.

To add to all of the above - how well is this technology going to work in a few years once the vehicles are not in top shape mechanically? I am sure that everyone has seen and heard older/higher mileage vehicles that turn over and over and over and over before they finally start. Are you really going to want to wait in traffic for 15 or 20 seconds (or more) for your engine to finally start. You will have people behind you laying on the horn and swearing at you in some places. There should be an option for the owner of the vehicle to turn that particular bit of tech off completely. My father-in-law's new truck has it I've driven it a couple times and it's annoying. One thing I have found though, when it is in tow/haul mode with the trailer behind it, it does not shut off in traffic.

[Jim N]

On 8/26/2019 at 8:35 PM, Ace-Garageguy said:

Yup, there's that...AND...the manufacturers claim that starter life won't be affected, which is absolutely ridiculous. We're seeing them fail VERY early. Stands to reason that if the starter engages 10 to 50 times more frequently than it would on a normal vehicle, it would wear out sooner, right? But "reason" has fallen out of favor, now even within the engineering community. Stupid knee-jerk "environmentalism" and "safety" concerns that can be exploited by marketing morons who convince the clueless populace they're "necessary" now rule the show.

In spite of the fact these newer starters typically use different brush, commutator and bearing materials to try to fend off early failure, it's still STUPID.

And when the starter fails, it's MUCH more expensive than earlier designs to replace...not to mention the poor likelihood that cheaper offshore replacements will be made to 100% specification compliance (which is already a serious problem for the automotive repair industry, as anyone within it who has a brain and who's not lying will admit).

Then there's the heavier drain on the battery and charging system, with more expensive batteries failing earlier, and modified system architecture to support all the additional idiocy required to keep the wipers, heat, and AC functioning with the engine OFF...as well as restart the engine 10 to 50 times more frequently.

Several years ago, Mazda's Robert Davis suggested that the advantage might amount to 0.1 mpg on the EPA city cycle, an improvement that could be achieved at less cost using different technologies.

ONE TENTH of a mpg over an entire driving cycle...at the cost of idiotic levels of complexity and much higher repair costs.

But the manufacturers don't have to fix 'em once they're out of warranty, so they don't care.

And Mary Barra STILL makes $20+ MILLION dollars a year.

EDIT: Yes, there is some fuel savings for people who value their time on Earth so little that they're somehow content to sit in heavy commuter traffic, idling and creeping, or are too damm lazy to get out of their cars and walk into McD's.

Hey Bill, how much sooner are you seeing these systems fail?

I bought a '17 Malibu about 2 years ago because a young guy totaled my '99 Lumina.  I creep a lot when driving this car.  If I see a light will change soon or the light has changed, and I am waiting for the line to start moving, I do everything I can to prevent the car from shutting down.  Some ridicule me for doing this, but I don't see how it benefits the car having it shut down and restart so frequently.

[TarheelRick]

A similar irk I have is with the 2019 Ford Ranger 10 speed transmission.  I do not own one, can't see paying on the high side of $35K for a four cylinder 10 speed.  In my thoughts this transmission will be constantly shifting to maintain a set speed on undulating terrain.  I used to ride a 10-speed bicycle and I know I did a lot of shifting on hilly roads.  The dealer (of course) assured me they were very dependable.  But in my limited mechanical thought, anything that has to move internal parts that much will wear out sooner than later.

[Ace-Garageguy]

8 hours ago, Jim N said:

Hey Bill, how much sooner are you seeing these systems fail?

I'll get to your specific question in a sec, but if you read your owner's manual, you'll probably find you have the option of turning the system off...but you have to do it every time you manually start the vehicle. At this point in time, I believe most cars so equipped have an "off" feature...but after 2020, they won't.

There is another option available to disable it. I'm not in any way affiliated with it, but it's worth looking into.               https://www.smartstopstart.com/

Hokay. I rarely see new cars still under warranty any longer. The shop I'm affiliated with where I come into close contact with late-model stuff is primarily a high-end independent body shop that also builds a few hot-rods (that's me). The newer vehicles we get in are primarily on their second owners, as most people still seem to take new cars to the dealer shops for collision work.

Problems seem to be showing up after about two years or so. The start-stop failures we're seeing range from odd software-related, "code-throwing" problems that even the dealers often can't diagnose (no surprise there), delayed re-starts, heavy vibration at re-start, transmissions shuddering and jerking into gear after re-start, complaints of inappropriate engine shutdowns leading to dangerous exposure in traffic, to needle-bearing failures on the armatures, brushes disintegrating, and battery issues.

As starters for these things typically range from $250 to well over $500, and OEM spec batteries are usually at least double the cost of old-school top-line lead-acid jobs, the payback from the maybe $50 a year savings on fuel doesn't work when the systems fail after 2-3-4-5 years. If the car's in warranty, and the warranty doesn't exclude these systems, fine. Otherwise, you're screwed.

And it's my understanding these systems add roughly $300 on average to vehicles so equipped. So there's that up-front cost to factor in as well.

For contrast, three of the vehicles in my personal "fleet" have well over 200,000 miles (one's pushing 275,000). Of these three, the newest one is 18 years old. The oldest is 30. They ALL have their original starters and are on their 3rd standard cheapo parts-store batteries. When I finally have to replace the starters (assuming I can't just put brushes or solenoids in 'em) they'll cost from about $50 to $150 per.

I used to have lotsa contacts within the car industry at several tiers. I'd get most of the actual truth of the issues being covered under warranty from dealership employees. I knew about GM's little ignition switch problem, and that they were hiding it, years before it blew up in their faces. Unfortunately, all the managers I knew are now retired or dead, and my info pipeline has all but dried up.

Manufacturers are understandably reticent about publicly sharing their oopses, and the early failures of many-speed automatic transmissions, the fact that several of the tiny turbocharged "eco" engines fail to return the mileage they promise...but wear out really quick...and things like needle-bearing failures on rocker arms in some "hemi" engines are not common knowledge. Point being that at this time, I just don't know how much warranty grief the start-stop systems are causing the OEMs...and they're not talking.

Also, today's motoring press is more about breathlessly (and often technically ignorantly) endorsing the latest-greatest useless technology or widget, and honest reporting on negative issues is all but dead.

And don't forget, the stop-start wizardry was brought to you by the same folks who thought, wrongly, that 5-mph bumpers would save a lot of money, and more recently, pushed the cash-for-clunkers program.

The start-stop system isn't really about saving fuel in any meaningful way anyhow. It's about fudging and juggling the car makers' CAFE numbers to comply with arbitrary knee-jerk standards set by a large group of the technically-ignorant, but duly empowered...pretty much the way everything works today.

 

 

Edited August 30, 2019 by Ace-Garageguy

[Ace-Garageguy]

6 hours ago, TarheelRick said:

A similar irk I have is with the 2019 Ford Ranger 10 speed transmission...The dealer (of course) assured me they were very dependable.  But in my limited mechanical thought, anything that has to move internal parts that much will wear out sooner than later.

Only time will tell. But to get ten-speeds-worth of mechanical guts packed into the roughly same size transmission, the internal parts have to be much smaller than what was in the old bulletproof Turbo 350 and 400, C-4, C-6, and 727 TorquefFlites that old codgers like me love. Those boxes would all happily go to 300,000 miles with decent upkeep (and non-idiot driving). Smaller parts are under more load, and so tend to wear out faster. Lots of today's many-speed boxes are going away much earlier, often around the 60,000 mile range. Parts and rebuild info is generally nonexistent (or was last time I looked in depth), so a second-owner, out-of-warranty vehicle will need an entire new gearbox, sometimes (including labor) exceeding the value of the vehicle.

Again, the reason for the insane complexity is to satisfy arbitrarily imposed CAFE requirements by achieving a minuscule fuel-consumption improvement during the specified drive-cycle, by keeping the engine closer to its torque-peak more of the time...which results in almost constant shifting.

Happy motoring.

Edited August 30, 2019 by Ace-Garageguy

[Jim N]

17 hours ago, Ace-Garageguy said:

I'll get to your specific question in a sec, but if you read your owner's manual, you'll probably find you have the option of turning the system off...but you have to do it every time you manually start the vehicle. At this point in time, I believe most cars so equipped have an "off" feature...but after 2020, they won't.

There is another option available to disable it. I'm not in any way affiliated with it, but it's worth looking into.               https://www.smartstopstart.com/

Hokay. I rarely see new cars still under warranty any longer. The shop I'm affiliated with where I come into close contact with late-model stuff is primarily a high-end independent body shop that also builds a few hot-rods (that's me). The newer vehicles we get in are primarily on their second owners, as most people still seem to take new cars to the dealer shops for collision work.

Problems seem to be showing up after about two years or so. The start-stop failures we're seeing range from odd software-related, "code-throwing" problems that even the dealers often can't diagnose (no surprise there), delayed re-starts, heavy vibration at re-start, transmissions shuddering and jerking into gear after re-start, complaints of inappropriate engine shutdowns leading to dangerous exposure in traffic, to needle-bearing failures on the armatures, brushes disintegrating, and battery issues.

As starters for these things typically range from $250 to well over $500, and OEM spec batteries are usually at least double the cost of old-school top-line lead-acid jobs, the payback from the maybe $50 a year savings on fuel doesn't work when the systems fail after 2-3-4-5 years. If the car's in warranty, and the warranty doesn't exclude these systems, fine. Otherwise, you're screwed.

And it's my understanding these systems add roughly $300 on average to vehicles so equipped. So there's that up-front cost to factor in as well.

For contrast, three of the vehicles in my personal "fleet" have well over 200,000 miles (one's pushing 275,000). Of these three, the newest one is 18 years old. The oldest is 30. They ALL have their original starters and are on their 3rd standard cheapo parts-store batteries. When I finally have to replace the starters (assuming I can't just put brushes or solenoids in 'em) they'll cost from about $50 to $150 per.

I used to have lotsa contacts within the car industry at several tiers. I'd get most of the actual truth of the issues being covered under warranty from dealership employees. I knew about GM's little ignition switch problem, and that they were hiding it, years before it blew up in their faces. Unfortunately, all the managers I knew are now retired or dead, and my info pipeline has all but dried up.

Manufacturers are understandably reticent about publicly sharing their oopses, and the early failures of many-speed automatic transmissions, the fact that several of the tiny turbocharged "eco" engines fail to return the mileage they promise...but wear out really quick...and things like needle-bearing failures on rocker arms in some "hemi" engines are not common knowledge. Point being that at this time, I just don't know how much warranty grief the start-stop systems are causing the OEMs...and they're not talking.

Also, today's motoring press is more about breathlessly (and often technically ignorantly) endorsing the latest-greatest useless technology or widget, and honest reporting on negative issues is all but dead.

And don't forget, the stop-start wizardry was brought to you by the same folks who thought, wrongly, that 5-mph bumpers would save a lot of money, and more recently, pushed the cash-for-clunkers program.

The start-stop system isn't really about saving fuel in any meaningful way anyhow. It's about fudging and juggling the car makers' CAFE numbers to comply with arbitrary knee-jerk standards set by a large group of the technically-ignorant, but duly empowered...pretty much the way everything works today.

 

 

Thanks for the information Bill.  I greatly appreciate it and will look into your suggestions.

I spoke to the dealership after I bought the car to see about disabling the system and the tech said I couldn't.  He said the the '18's and 19's can be turned off, but not the 17's.  I will be interested to see if I was told the truth.

[bobthehobbyguy]

Not today but Monday. Went to my sisters on Monday to watch drag race at Indy. Watched first rounds on FS1 (2 hrs). Switched to Fox for semifinals and finals(3.5hrs). Get to end of recording and miss top fuel final and funny car final becuase recording ends. The number of commercials were ridiculous and yhey couldn't make sure that all of the program fit. Exactly why I refuse to pay for tv programming. Theyve gotten way too greedy.

[Ace-Garageguy]

Finally got into my '92 Silverado that's been parked for several years. I thought she dropped a valve, and I'd just build her a new head (at least...and possibly swap a piston and rod), as I have 350 parts out the wazoo. I pulled the rocker cover on the noisy side, and the valves are still being held up by their springs...but one pushrod is down in the block, and another one appears to be kinda short.

It looks now like she broke the cam into several pieces, and ate at least one lifter and pushrod.

Won't know til I get the intake manifold off if the block is trashed, but either way, the engine needs to come all the way out. Really hoping the block is OK, as it's a 4-bolt and I only have 2-bolt cores. A 2-bolt will be fine really, but I'd like to stay 4 if possible...just 'cause.

The good news is that the heads are probably OK, as she didn't actually drop a valve, which usually ends up destroying the chamber and piston. The heads aren't any big whoop, but they're the late-model EFI heads, and the EFI intake won't bolt to the early heads (of which I have many) without a little magic.

She had well over 250K miles when she broke. I put a gearbox in her at around 200 (I bought her from a landscaping company that dogged the living hell out of the poor thing), and she was a good truck for over 10 years (after I fixed all the moron stuff the landscaping "mechanics" had bodged and buggered and rigged...which is why she was cheap).

I figger with a fresh engine, she'll go another 250K...and will probably outlive me.

She's also out of emissions, which means I can ditch the EFI and put a carb on her, like I did on the '89 GMC (after the EFI turned to smoke)...and which now runs great.

She also needs a pinion bearing and seal, a driveshaft intermediate bearing, and a set of UJs. She oughta feel like new after all that.

[ewetwo]

I had a 1960 Ford with the 292 cu in it that started skipping. Pulled the valve covers and found one push rod that seemed to not be where it should be. I put the push rod back in place. Adjusted the valves and she ran fine until her floors gave out and my girl friend skinned her toes on the pavement. Wish that was all your truck needed.

[Ace-Garageguy]

39 minutes ago, ewetwo said:

...Wish that was all your truck needed.

Thank you, sir. I wish that was all she needed too, but she'll be OK.

Funny about your "girl friend skinned her toes on the pavement". I bought a '60 Corvair that wouldn't run once for $5. The eccentric lobe on the cam that drove the fuel pump was worn flat. A cheapo electric pump fixed her right up though. Your story reminded me of the Corvair because I took it on a double date after I had it all cleaned up and pretty. The rear carpets looked OK, as did a quick glance under the car (for $5, I wasn't looking too hard) but when the girl got in the back, her leg went right through the floor. The cardboard, tape, and undercoating rust "repair" wasn't fully structural. 

[espo]

Years ago I bought a '53 Buick Special two door. I bought it cheap since it wasn't running at the time. After repairing a lot of basic maintains items it ran and now stopped on its own.   The big problem with winter arriving was the under seat heater was shot and the heater core had leaked and rotted out the floor around it under the passenger seat. I bought a cheapy Sears universal car heater and fashioned a floor patch out of a larger coffee tin and was good to go. I did seal the underside with some spray underseal.  

[LDO]

People who put the “R” in the first syllable of Mascarpone. THAT’S NOT WHERE IT GOES!!!

 

eh. First world problems.

[Snake45]

1 hour ago, LDO said:

People who put the “R” in the first syllable of Mascarpone. THAT’S NOT WHERE IT GOES!!!

 

eh. First world problems.

I had to google it. Have never heard of it, have never said it, will probably NEVER have occasion to say it, so it looks like I never have and never will irk you. 

[LDO]

Dessert tonight is crepes with mascarpone filling covered in cherry sauce.

They use it on Food Network a lot...and mispronounce it a lot. 

[Ace-Garageguy]

5 hours ago, LDO said:

People who put the “R” in the first syllable of Mascarpone...

...and people who use the non-word "maronaise" to mean both "marinate" and "mayonnaise".

Yes, really.

[LDO]

Are they marinating with mayo? Because that sounds nasty. 

[OldTrucker]

On 9/7/2019 at 10:20 PM, Ace-Garageguy said:

Thank you, sir. I wish that was all she needed too, but she'll be OK.

Funny about your "girl friend skinned her toes on the pavement". I bought a '60 Corvair that wouldn't run once for $5. The eccentric lobe on the cam that drove the fuel pump was worn flat. A cheapo electric pump fixed her right up though. Your story reminded me of the Corvair because I took it on a double date after I had it all cleaned up and pretty. The rear carpets looked OK, as did a quick glance under the car (for $5, I wasn't looking too hard) but when the girl got in the back, her leg went right through the floor. The cardboard, tape, and undercoating rust "repair" wasn't fully structural. 

My first Corvair you didn't dare open both doors at the same time or you couldn't get them closed without a jack or a couple friends to lift!LOL

[Ace-Garageguy]

4 minutes ago, OldTrucker said:

My first Corvair you didn't dare open both doors at the same time or you couldn't get them closed without a jack or a couple friends to lift!LOL

  I bought an S1 covered-headlight E-type Jag for $400 that had the same problem. Got it running and sold it on for $1000 and thought I'd done well.

Now I see what rough cars bring today...

[OldTrucker]

20 minutes ago, Ace-Garageguy said:

  I bought an S1 covered-headlight E-type Jag for $400 that had the same problem. Got it running and sold it on for $1000 and thought I'd done well.

Now I see what rough cars bring today...

My Vair was a convertible and ran and  looked near perfect but the floors were extremely soft! Only 38000 miles unfortunately all driven in Wisconsin!

[Ace-Garageguy]

30 minutes ago, OldTrucker said:

My Vair was a convertible and ran and  looked near perfect but the floors were extremely soft! Only 38000 miles unfortunately all driven in Wisconsin!

What year Corvair? That would be another nice one to have now.

[Rodent]

20 hours ago, Ace-Garageguy said:

...and people who use the non-word "maronaise" to mean both "marinate" and "mayonnaise".

Yes, really.

Folks talk funny in Georgia. Yes, I have been there. Kind of hard to understand sometimes. 

https://www.ajc.com/news/national/georgia-woman-orders-moana-cake-but-gets-marijuana-instead/T58OzuiNu4AH42JLg0IuxK/

My Alabama grandma used to say "camry" for the device that takes photos and she called her brother's large Chevrolet a "Capri".

 

[Ace-Garageguy]

7 minutes ago, Rodent said:

Folks talk funny in Georgia. Yes, I have been there. Kind of hard to understand sometimes. 

https://www.ajc.com/news/national/georgia-woman-orders-moana-cake-but-gets-marijuana-instead/T58OzuiNu4AH42JLg0IuxK/

My Alabama grandma used to say "camry" for the device that takes photos and she called her brother's large Chevrolet a "Capri".

 

Yeah, I hear "mirrow" a lot (for that scary thing that has reflections in it), and "draws", both for undershorts and the slidy-things you keep them in. 

[Rodent]

22 minutes ago, Ace-Garageguy said:

Yeah, I hear "mirrow" a lot (for that scary thing that has reflections in it), and "draws", both for undershorts and the slidy-things you keep them in. 

""Get the camry and I'll make yer pitcher!". She passed in 1993. Dumb as a bag of rocks, but a very sweet woman that knew nothing other than loving her family.

[Snake45]

1 hour ago, Rodent said:

Folks talk funny in Georgia. Yes, I have been there. Kind of hard to understand sometimes. 

https://www.ajc.com/news/national/georgia-woman-orders-moana-cake-but-gets-marijuana-instead/T58OzuiNu4AH42JLg0IuxK/

My Alabama grandma used to say "camry" for the device that takes photos and she called her brother's large Chevrolet a "Capri".

 

I've noticed in some areas of the South, "lawyer" and "liar" are pronounced exactly the same way. Coincidence? I think not.