Will GM's problems ever end?

[Ace-Garageguy]

The problem is that the transfer case in the trucks may electronically switch itself into neutral without action by the driver, according to GM. If it happens on the road the wheels lose power. If the truck is stopped or parked and brakes are not applied or the parking brake is off the truck could roll away.

Gee...it's SUCH a good idea to have everything electronically controlled, instead of using old obsolete Luddite things like mechanical linkages, right?

Tech-happy morons.

[Ace-Garageguy]

... Looked under car and saw most of the brake fluid. Yet to check to see if 2005 Builck's have a recall for rusty brake lines.......it had rotted clean off at the chassis.......

Some nickel-and-dime-obsessed bean-counter fool probably decided to save 2 cents per car by eliminating the zinc coating on the steel brake lines. And the donuts, bagels and bottled water they had at the meetings to save the 2 cents per car probably cost more than they saved.

[Harry P.]

I can't believe the incompetence of GM. I mean, it's across the board! It's not just limited to one or two models or one division... it's corporate-wide. Nearly FIFTY separate recalls for faulty vehicles throughout the divisions just in the first six months of this year alone!

It's absolutely mind-boggling.

The sheer pervasiveness of the incompetence throughout the entire corporation is hard to comprehend.

[Rob Hall]

Years of bad decisions coming home to roost...

[Joe Handley]

Gee...it's SUCH a good idea to have everything electronically controlled, instead of using old obsolete Luddite things like mechanical linkages, right?

Tech-happy morons.

Things like that are where I still prefer real linkages! I can trust electronics enough to control the fuel system and ignition and shifting gear to gear, but when it comes to throttle, brakes, shift levers, and even push button start, I'll take mechanical linkages any day!

[Longbox55]

Some nickel-and-dime-obsessed bean-counter fool probably decided to save 2 cents per car by eliminating the zinc coating on the steel brake lines. And the donuts, bagels and bottled water they had at the meetings to save the 2 cents per car probably cost more than they saved.

Not necessarily a GM problem in this case. I see just about as many Ford products of the same vintage with that problem, mostly the Taurus/Sable. With GMs, Buicks and Pontiacs seem to the most common offenders. Almost always a rear line. Perhaps a supplier issue?

[Longbox55]

Gee...it's SUCH a good idea to have everything electronically controlled, instead of using old obsolete Luddite things like mechanical linkages, right?

Tech-happy morons.

Things like that are where I still prefer real linkages! I can trust electronics enough to control the fuel system and ignition and shifting gear to gear, but when it comes to throttle, brakes, shift levers, and even push button start, I'll take mechanical linkages any day!

Same here. Guess that's why I don't own any car/truck made after 1985.

[Ace-Garageguy]

Things like that are where I still prefer real linkages! I can trust electronics enough to control the fuel system and ignition and shifting gear to gear, but when it comes to throttle, brakes, shift levers, and even push button start, I'll take mechanical linkages any day!

Yes, there's no doubt a computer constantly sampling air and coolant temperature, atmospheric and manifold pressure, exhaust gas oxygen content, throttle position, ad infinitum, and adjusting fuel delivery and ignition timing constantly, can do a better job than a carburetor and a mechanical-advance distributor. No argument.

But tech solutions for tech's sake are just stupid. There are LOGICAL places for everything, and just as carbon-fiber will NEVER replace the need for steel (they behave entirely differently and do different things well), electronic gadgetry is not always the best solution...especially when a simple mechanical linkage is cheap and idiot-proof, and stone reliable.

[Ace-Garageguy]

Not necessarily a GM problem in this case. I see just about as many Ford products of the same vintage with that problem, mostly the Taurus/Sable. With GMs, Buicks and Pontiacs seem to the most common offenders. Almost always a rear line. Perhaps a supplier issue?

Supplier issue perhaps, but where is the part of the ISO "quality management" protocol that's supposed to make sure bought-in parts and materials actually meet spec ??

And I'm certain GM has at least a few hundred people working specifically on ISO compliance and reams and reams of useless paperwork and documentation.

If It WASN'T useless, they wouldn't be having the problems they're having.

It's time to take stock of business practices, and to realize that too much busy-work management actually gets in the way of making a good product, by developing a false sense of security..."we're ISO 9001 (or whatever) compliant, so we MUST be doing a good job, right?"

Edited June 28, 2014 by Ace-Garageguy

[russosborne]

for the most part, ISO is BLAH_BLAH_BLAH_BLAH. All it really means if you are certified is that you are doing what you say you are supposed to be doing.

If you don't require incoming inspection in your procedures, there is no need to do it. If you say you only inspect 10%, that is all you have to do. Everyone sticks their head in the sand from 3PM to 3:05 PM, check. Etc. They are just checking to see if you follow your own procedures, so your customers don't have to if you are certified.

I've worked at several electronic manufacturers who are ISO certified. Trust me, it is a real joke most of the time. ISO inspection next week? Time to make sure it looks like we are doing the right thing. Get the test procedures out and make sure everyone has them on the bench. Make sure everyone can point to the Quality Policy. After the inspection, time to go back to sop. I'm sure that there may be some ISO levels that require companies to do stuff that is standard across an industry, but 9001 in my experience isn't one of those.

Russ

Edited June 28, 2014 by russosborne

[bobthehobbyguy]

From my experience the only value for ISO is a marketing sound byte. Sad thing is ISO could be a good tool right but there isn't any interest in do a good implementation.

[russosborne]

Yeah. I would have more good to say about it if the inspectors showed up at a company without any advance notice, but they always schedule the inspection months in advance.

Nice scam in my opinion.

Russ

[Dave Van]

Some nickel-and-dime-obsessed bean-counter fool probably decided to save 2 cents per car by eliminating the zinc coating on the steel brake lines. And the donuts, bagels and bottled water they had at the meetings to save the 2 cents per car probably cost more than they saved.

There is something wrong for sure. My 66 Mustang and 73 Javelin have their original brake lines and they look perfect. I know looks do not mean no issues ever.....but when I looked at the lines on step Mom's buick they looked like they had been on a vehicle that served a swamp and salt mine! Not on a vehicle with 50,000 miles on it, kept in a garage and babyed all it's life..

[Joe Handley]

Yes, there's no doubt a computer constantly sampling air and coolant temperature, atmospheric and manifold pressure, exhaust gas oxygen content, throttle position, ad infinitum, and adjusting fuel delivery and ignition timing constantly, can do a better job than a carburetor and a mechanical-advance distributor. No argument.

But tech solutions for tech's sake are just stupid. There are LOGICAL places for everything, and just as carbon-fiber will NEVER replace the need for steel (they behave entirely differently and do different things well), electronic gadgetry is not always the best solution...especially when a simple mechanical linkage is cheap and idiot-proof, and stone reliable.

I swear the "-by-wire" stuff is there primarily to make consumers, insurers/safety advocates, and the politians they vote for/buy while in office happy. Only viable excuse I see in "-by-wire" tech is that plugging in a bunch of brand new electrical connectors made of plastic into each other is easier than running then connecting throttle and shift linkages.

[Ace-Garageguy]

From my experience the only value for ISO is a marketing sound byte. Sad thing is ISO could be a good tool right but there isn't any interest in do a good implementation.

Yes, and very, very sad. I'm sure this country's businesses spend billions on it annually too...a cost that's passed on to the consumer and that accomplishes absolutely nothing, for the most part, but making business busy-work and wasting time, effort and money.

...for the most part, ISO is BLAH_BLAH_BLAH_BLAH. All it really means if you are certified is that you are doing what you say you are supposed to be doing... They are just checking to see if you follow your own procedures, so your customers don't have to if you are certified.

I've worked at several electronic manufacturers who are ISO certified. Trust me, it is a real joke most of the time. ISO inspection next week? Time to make sure it looks like we are doing the right thing... Make sure everyone can point to the Quality Policy. After the inspection, time to go back to sop....

Yup. But the big pretense is that it actually accomplishes something. Another case of monkey-see-monkey-do management and the "emperor's new clothes" syndrome.

EDIT: For anyone not familiar with the "emperor's new clothes" allegory, here's a synopsis from wiki-pee:

"A vain Emperor who cares about nothing except wearing and displaying clothes hires two swindlers who promise him the finest, best suit of clothes from a fabric invisible to anyone who is unfit for his position or "hopelessly stupid". The Emperor's ministers cannot see the clothing themselves, but pretend that they can for fear of appearing unfit for their positions and the Emperor does the same. Finally the swindlers report that the suit is finished, they mime dressing him and the Emperor marches in procession before his subjects. The townsfolk play along with the pretense, not wanting to appear unfit for their positions or stupid. Then a child in the crowd, too young to understand the desirability of keeping up the pretense, blurts out that the Emperor is wearing nothing at all and the cry is taken up by others. The Emperor cringes, suspecting the assertion is true, but continues the procession."

Edited June 28, 2014 by Ace-Garageguy

[Tom Geiger]

Aside from the GM factor, note that today's cars are 10 times (probably more!) complicated than cars of past eras and are 100 times more reliable and last longer too! The cars we all revere and lust after from the 1950s and 1960s were troublesome beasts that gave new owners problems right off the show room. They were basically designed to last through the 2 year payment plan, and rapidly depreciated after that. I remember cars that were 5 years old that had seats that were worn through and major rust holes.

I believe we can thank the Japanese for the level of quality we see in cars today. The late 70s Toyotas and Hondas set new levels of quality that Detriot had to sit up and take notice. In this era I worked for a home builder who was doing very well and bought many employees company cars. I was in charge of buying them and managing this fleet. When I'd take delivery of a new car, the quality was so bad then that I'd drive it myself for a few weeks before turning it over to the executive. I had new cars towed off the turnpike. I especially remember a new 1978 Buick that lost it's transmission. Another memory was a new Oldsmobile that had a loud rattle in the drivers door. Opening it up showed the steel beam was not welded in place. They replaced the entire door, but typical back then when they painted the new door they got paint all over the door handle gasket. And this was on a brand new car.

Typical performance of this fleet? I had to keep an extra Cadillac because at least one car was always in the shop. Dismal.

Then I got myself a 1978 Toyota Corolla wagon, 5 speed with a/c, and waited for problems... none! Nothing! The car just exuded quality. It felt tight and was fun to drive. It literally never went back to the dealer. I drove that company car hard and put over 100,000 trouble free miles on it in two years. That's what a car should do! Shortly after I got the wagon, one of the executives wanted a Honda Accord.. same thing! No problems, great little car.

Once the Japanese companies got entrenched and developed a reputation for value and quality, Detroit had no choice but to follow suit. They had several false starts, ignored the change in the market way too long and answered it with the wrong products much of the time. But today most US and foreign cars (hard to tell which are what these days) all have a quality level second to none and can be counted on to deliver great value for a very long time. My daughters have both bought cars in the last two years. One has a Fiat 500, an Italian car built by an American company in Mexico, and it's been flawless. My older daughter got a Ford Fusion. Neither has ever been back to the dealer for anything. My boss got a Fusion hybrid in January, and again it's been flawless.

Edited June 28, 2014 by Tom Geiger

[Ace-Garageguy]

There's no question that today's technology makes it POSSIBLE to deliver a product that's superior in almost every way to what was being built 50 years ago. But the corporate culture and the competence of management determines whether that POTENTIAL will actually make it to production vehicles en mass.

And for all the techno-hype, unfortunately, vehicles are really NOT markedly better or more reliable than what was being built 25 years ago. My 1992 GM truck, with 270,000 miles on it, still runs like a new one (the engine). It's had normal wear issues like ANY vehicle will have...brakes, universal joints, a couple of electrical switches, a starter and alternator, etc. But it's a good overall vehicle and gets very acceptable mileage for something big and heavy and as aerodynamically efficient as a barn door. It's NEVER failed to get me home, and it's never been in for a recall, even if there was one. And my 1989 GM truck, at 200,000 miles, even though it had been owned by morons and abused in every way imaginable, was stone reliable and solid until a massive failure, last week, of the onboard electronic engine management components. This excellent reliability is typical of reasonably well-maintained vehicles built 25 years ago.

If you read the history of the automobile industry, you'll find that it was W.E. Deming, an American, who was largely responsible for teaching the Japanese how to overcome their poor quality (both in reputation and in fact), which allowed the Japanese car builders to ultimately surpass the Americans. Deming's basic tenets (from wiki-pee):

1. That the problems facing manufacturers can be solved through cooperation, despite differences.
2. Marketing is not "sales," but the science of knowing what people who buy your product repeatedly think of that product and whether they will buy it again, and why.
3. That In the initial stages of design, you must conduct market research, applying statistical techniques for experimental and planning and inspection of samples.
4. And you must perfect the manufacturing process.

But piles and piles of regulation, statistical analysis and documentation do NOT guarantee a good car rolls off the end of the assembly line. It takes real commitment and UNDERSTANDING by management...not just endless lip-service paid to the concept of "quality".

Edited June 28, 2014 by Ace-Garageguy

[Harry P.]

Aside from the GM factor, note that today's cars are 10 times (probably more!) complicated than cars of past eras and are 100 times more reliable and last longer too!

Ten times more complicated means ten times more things to potentially break down. Electronic steering boxes, bad airbags, and a whole assortment of electronic gadgetry... today's cars may be more reliable in the sense that the engines run better and smoother and longer, but today's cars also break down in ways that cars from 30 years ago never did. So looked at in one way, yes, today's cars are more reliable... but they have a lot more potential breakdown points than cars used to have.

[Joe Handley]

Don't really see electric P/S as any better or worse than Hydralic, just something different to fail instead of something new.

[Ace-Garageguy]

...note that today's cars are 10 times (probably more!) complicated than cars of past eras and are 100 times more reliable and last longer too!

The cars we all revere and lust after from the 1950s and 1960s were troublesome beasts that gave new owners problems right off the show room. They were basically designed to last through the 2 year payment plan, and rapidly depreciated after that...

But in so many instances, the complication is NEEDLESS !! It's techno-gimmicks that do NOT make the car better...only perhaps more "fashionably-desirable" from a marketing perspective.

And today's vehicles are designed to last through the government-mandated emissions-related period, no more. That's interestingly about as long as you can finance one for, too. There is often very little engineering or design thought put into making vehicles SERVICEABLE; the primary thought is put into ease of assembly, not getting to things AFTER the car has been built.

Of course there are exceptions to these generalities, just as there are cars coming in to our shop constantly that have been running well for 50 to 70 years. It all has to do with the relative intelligence and mechanical understanding of the designers and owners, and how well the vehicles are maintained. Cars built in the '50s and '60s were NOT un-reliable junk, as some prefer to paint them. And pull up films of post-WW II L.A.., if you're interested. An awful LOT of cars going an awful LOT of places, and amazingly (if the un-reliable old car bull is to be believed) the sides of the road AREN'T clogged with break-downs.

As an automobile aftermarket-service professional and disgusted observer of the entire industry, I can say without reservation that it's vehicle abuse, poor maintenance and poor repairs that caused the major portion of vehicle down-time, until fairly recently...when vehicles became stupidly complex.

Edited June 28, 2014 by Ace-Garageguy

[Ace-Garageguy]

Don't really see electric P/S as any better or worse than Hydralic, just something different to fail instead of something new.

There are basically, currently, 2 kinds of "electric" steering. They both use an electric motor to augment and assist the normal mechanical linkage, just as the engine-driven hydraulic system does. If it's built sufficiently robustly, which it probably isn't, an electric-assist system should last indefinitely and be stone-reliable. Both systems also rely on many little plastic and metal parts that have a cross-industry problem with poor design and long term reliability, because of poor material selection or other design flaws.

The perceived benefit of "electric" steering is that, because it draws power from the vehicle's electrical system more-or-less on-demand, it allows for a slight fuel-economy improvement over a system that requires an engine-driven pump running constantly. Sufficiently developed, it also enables "self parking" features, for folks who just shouldn't be driving anyway.

Here's an informative overview, for anyone who's interested. http://www.caranddriver.com/features/electric-vs-hydraulic-steering-a-comprehensive-comparison-test-feature

Edited June 28, 2014 by Ace-Garageguy

[MrObsessive]

The perceived benefit of "electric" steering is that, because it draws power from the vehicle's electrical system more-or-less on-demand, it allows for a slight fuel-economy improvement over a system that requires an engine-driven pump running constantly.

My understanding about electric power steering (which my Saturn has), is that in case there's an engine shut off, one would still be able to steer the car without trouble because there's still current going through the mechanism-----as long as the key is in the on position.

At least that's what my owner's manual is telling me! I haven't had the engine shut off unexpectedly yet, so I can't vouch for this setup working or not. All I know is that I did get a recall notice for the steering, and I have to carve out some time (again) to take the car in and have this fixed.

[Ace-Garageguy]

My understanding about electric power steering (which my Saturn has), is that in case there's an engine shut off, one would still be able to steer the car without trouble because there's still current going through the mechanism-----as long as the key is in the on position.

Yes sir, that is absolutely a side-benefit of electric-assist on power steering...assuming , as you say, the key is on (also assuming the ignition switch isn't one of the automatic-unintended-shutoff versions that's the subject of the BIG scandal), and assuming the battery isn't dead, and assuming the power-supply to the steering isn't controlled by a computer-interface that's subject to glitches that can inadvertently turn it off...like the current transmission failure recall.

[Harry P.]

It's Saturday.

Any more recalls yet?

[Deano]

It's Saturday.

Any more recalls yet?

Aw, man! I thought you were keeping watch!