| clare@snyder.on.ca: Nov 06 02:01AM -0500 On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 14:59:13 +1100, Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> wrote: >it's bye bye. I'll work on other people's cars but I expect my own to be >reliable and trouble free. When they are in excess of 150k kilometres, >they are, as far as I am concerned, on their last legs. I (generally) buy then at roughly 100000klm and drive them another 100 or so - generally with VERY little repairs and problems.The current one was over 10 years old with 54000 KM - now up to 112000 and I plan on keeping it another year or two. My wife would like a newer car. Likely won't end up putting it over 200,000km - possibly not over 150,000. I bought my truck at 307000km and 16 years of age. 354000km on it now, with only very minor issues. Still original rear brakes and just about everything else. 47000km in 5 years - so it's not heavily used and I hope to keep it going at least another 5 years. My cars have always been reliable and virtually trouble free because I stay ahead of them. |
| Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au>: Nov 06 06:01PM +1100 On 6/11/2017 5:35 PM, RS Wood wrote: > the time I suppose). I'm just saying that warp doesn't happen for the most > part in street cars (I already have a half dozen references) and yet > *every* idiot out there *thinks* his rotors warped. Warped rotors will cause steering shimmy but not brake pumping. I haven't seen many but I have seen some. -- Xeno |
| clare@snyder.on.ca: Nov 06 02:03AM -0500 On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 15:03:55 +1100, Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> wrote: >> elastic. >The go with any Mitsubishi timing chain system was to use *only* >Mitsubishi genuine spares. None of the aftermarket crap was up to spec. The oem stuff was crap too - and the biggest problem was Chtysler didn't encourage people to change oil on the "extreme" schedule. Changing the oil often with good oil extended the lifespan significantly - but they were still trouble with a capital T. Can't sell a Mits around here - even with their extreme warranty every dealership around here has failed. |
| Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au>: Nov 06 06:05PM +1100 > Detonation is generally not an issue at higher speed, so the > stratified charge provides the advantage I ststed. Under full throttle > at speed homogenous charge is not a problem. It is the stratified charge that *removes* the possibility of detonation. You can only generally get detonation with homogeneous charge. -- Xeno |
| Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au>: Nov 06 06:06PM +1100 >> Changing camber on a strut still changes toe. > I didn't say it didn't. camber has a lot less effect on camber, and > vice versa on a strut system than on a double wishbone system That depends entirely on *where* you adjust that camber on the strut. -- Xeno |
| clare@snyder.on.ca: Nov 06 02:08AM -0500 On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 15:16:20 +1100, Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> wrote: >>> schedule - and they were a LOT of work to change. >They were underrated for the task. It's something that immediately came >to my notice the first time I did a timing chain change on one. The problems they had with lubrication to the balance shafts didn't help the bicycle chain they had driving them and the oil pump >> Otherwise, time isn't the issue. >I consider my *time* as being valuable and I have many better things to >do with it than work on servicing my own car. I actually enjoy doing some of it - been 26 or 27 years since I did it for a living - in my retirement as long as I have place to work, I don't mind. |
| clare@snyder.on.ca: Nov 06 02:57AM -0500 On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 04:48:28 +0000 (UTC), RS Wood <rswood@is.invalid> wrote: >I'm not gonna disagree that we all can see the mark of good quality on some >things when we have two to compare in our hand, but it's too late if you >order on the net. And only a total fool buys everything on the net. I can generally buy off the shelf for close to the same price, with no hassle returns and I get to see-feel EXACTLY what I'm buying. >> trouble with, and which ones they don't. >Yup. I have nothing against good suppliers. I use Brembo and Meyle but if >someone else gave me a rotor at a better price, I'd consider them too. Can't even BUY Brembo for my daughter's car. >That's not the measure of warp. >Warp is measured on a flat bench. >Just like head warp is measured. Not in the real world. On a large percentage of rotors doing it your way is totally impossible. And my way (the industry standard) I can measure warpage/runout ON THE CAR and know if it's a problem before taking ANYTHING apart beyond moving the rim. >I think we're talking about two different kinds of disc brake systems. >I had the Nissan 300Z which had the rear disc also as the rear parking >brake, but my bimmer has the rear disc and a separate rear parking brake. Really crappy system - sorry. I've worked on everything from a moskovitch to a Rolls, with Jags, Rovers, Toyotas, Fiats, Ladas, VWs, Nissans as well as just about every North American brand >The piston arrangement is different as is the way to retract them. >You don't *twist* pistons in disc brakes that I own that don't have the >parking brake as part of the disc brake itself. I'm talking in general - not the limited vehicles of your experience. >> A somple dial indicator tells the tale >Nope. >How you gonna tell runut from warp with a dial gauge? \Measure in more than 2 places - >> surfaces - other times with about hald paralel and the other half >> "sloped" >Now you're straining credularity. No I'm not. Seen it many times >> That won't necessarilly tell you anything. The only way to KNOW is to >> use a dial indicator properly. >How you gonna tell runut from warp with a dial gauge? Watch the needle move. >> working lives. >On the entire freaking Internet, find *one* picture (just one) of a >technician actually properly measuring brake rotor *warp*. The internet doesn't show EVERYTHING. What you know comes from the web. What I know comes from tears in the trade (including teaching the trade) >That's not warp. >Nothing on this planet is going to fix warp. >There's not enough metal to remove. That is totally dependent on how much warp. And what, other than "warp" will cause a rotor to develop "runout" if it is totally true when installed. >3. Engine >4. Tires >5. paint Ond I've dome them all at least once. >I never once said "never" but "almost never" which is different, and we're >only talking street, and I have references that back up everything I say >whereas you provided zero references for what you said. You have references I have experience. >I'm not here to argue opinions. >I only argue using logic. Reality defies logic. ><http://www.brakeandfrontend.com/warped-rotors-myth/> >Raybestos Brake Tech School, Part One: Rotors Don't Warp ><http://www.hendonpub.com/resources/article_archive/results/details?id 87> Only the stop-tech article is written by a pro (Can't open the raybestos link so it's useless) The rest could be written by you - same level of cred. They are written by enthusiasts who have read articles. They are correct in most of what they say - but real warpage DOES exist, because not all rotors are properly manufactured and stress relieved and heat treated - like the problem Toyota had in the early '80s, and many of the "crap" rotors in the aftermarket - as I have explained before. In the "ideal world" they would never warp. Also, not all rotors spend their life in "normal" conditions - other problems in the braking system, or abuse, can cause a lot more heat than normal driving - which is why the accurate stement is: "Under normal operating conditions, properly manufactured and installed brake rotors very seldom actually WARP. Poor quality rotors can warp, as can rotors that are severely overheated due to abuse or certain braking system falures. When you experience brake pulsation, actual brake rotor warpage is UNLIKELY to be the problem - but stranger things HAVE happened. Uneven friction material transfer due to either poor intial bedding of the pads or improper use of the brakes is much more likely, and some brake pads are more prone to causing these issues due to their composition. In areas where winters are more severe and salt is used on the roads some pad compostions are more likely to cause problems - particularly the hard-spotting and pitting of rotors due to localized overheating caused by uneven friction material transfer. Many brake problems tend to be regional in nature for this reason. Rustout of cooling fins of a rotor, for instance, would be unheard-of in arizona or alabama, but fairly common in the northeat and the "rust belt". NEVER say never and ALWAYS avoid always. |
| clare@snyder.on.ca: Nov 06 03:02AM -0500 On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 04:48:30 +0000 (UTC), RS Wood <rswood@is.invalid> wrote: >I may be wrong but if someone says "any" scoring, that's just preposterous. >Let's see a manufacturer's spec for anyone who says that. >Sorry. It's just not logical that 'any' scoring fails a rotor. ANY mechanical damage fails the rotor on DOT test. Some smoth wear is allowed - but you NEVER install new pads on rotors that have an uneven friction surface because it is virtually impossible to properly bed the new pads to the uneven rotor withot localized overheating At the price of rotors today even on your Bimmer, it just is not worth it. The pads cost more than the rotors on MOST vehicles today. No reputable shop will do it because comebacks are expensive - and real mechanics KNOW the comebacks will happen if they do something stupid like installing new pads on badly worn rotors. |
| clare@snyder.on.ca: Nov 06 03:08AM -0500 On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 04:48:32 +0000 (UTC), RS Wood <rswood@is.invalid> wrote: >grow over time. I don't really understand why, but it does. It gets almost >imeasurably larger over time, until you finally feel it while braking at >speed. Not hard to understand at all. Uneven friction causes uneven heating, and localized overheating causes enhanced friction material transfer - which just cascades. >What's the solution? >Simple. >SHORT TERM: Scrape that deposit off. Short term? Gently re-bed the pads. Works high percentage of the time if you don't allow it to get progressively worse to the point you get cabide inclusions in the rotors. >> lady on the phone who told me the time. >I have a few Rolex watches (most received as gifts). >They suck at keeping time. The Rolex my dad bought when I was born (basic Tudor model - 1952) has been rebuilt twice and still keeps extremely accurate time. Also, ALL Rolex watches are made in Switzeraland - if it says Tolex Japan it is NOT a Rolex (I have one of those) |
| clare@snyder.on.ca: Nov 06 03:09AM -0500 On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 04:48:34 +0000 (UTC), RS Wood <rswood@is.invalid> wrote: >stringent adjustable-wrench control laws! >One rounded bolt head is too many. >:) One skinned knuckle is one too many!!! |
| clare@snyder.on.ca: Nov 06 03:11AM -0500 On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 04:48:35 +0000 (UTC), RS Wood <rswood@is.invalid> wrote: >In the case of my rear camber, it was maxed out at 0 degrees, so, in >hindsight, I guess I could have done it sans any measurement at all. >:) You paid $90 to find that out. Consider it money well spent and move on with your life. |
| clare@snyder.on.ca: Nov 06 03:26AM -0500 On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 04:48:45 +0000 (UTC), RS Wood <rswood@is.invalid> wrote: >5W30 has a spread of 25 >10W40 has a spread of 30 >30W40 has a spread of 10 <--- this has the lowest coking Never seen 30W40 and 0W30 is a synthetic, so MUCH more coke resistant than any conventional oil. Use the oil recomended by the manufacturer - in the case of my Fords and my daughter's Hyundai that is a 5w20 or 0W20 synthetic oil - which I change twice a year, which is less than 10,000KM per change >If we agree on that concept of coking:spread, then the question is how much >does coking actually matter and under what conditions does coking matter? No - "spread" does not cause coking. Heat and time does. The "spread" in conventional oil means the viscosity index will break down faster than a narrow spread - it will loose it's ability to maintain viscosity at temperature due to "shearing" of the long-chain polymers used in VI improvers. High spread synthetic oils suffer a LOT less from this problem - and in the vast majority of "coking" problems, the simple expediency of changing the oil on the "severe service" schedule will totally eliminate the ptoblem. Also, the use of the much more chemically stable synthetic oil virtually eliminates the problem. Even the "viscosity shear" is NOT a problem with 3000 mile or 5000km oil changes. EDxtended drain intervals have made garages more money, and cost car owners more money, that the money saved on oil changes by a pretty good margin. Coking matters - it reduces oil flow which causes higher temperatures which cause more coking, which further reduces oil flow, and if any of those "diamods" brak loose they play hell on bearings, or can cause pressure regulator valves to stick/leak, or tear the heck out of timing chain tensioners. |
| clare@snyder.on.ca: Nov 06 03:28AM -0500 On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 04:48:47 +0000 (UTC), RS Wood <rswood@is.invalid> wrote: >is sinking in a pond (pool in their case) where someone mentions to roll >down the windows ... heh heh ... >When's the last time you saw a roll-down window? Every car I've owned except for my Mark 1 Mini has "wind down" windows - just because they are electric doesn't change the fact they are "wind down" and the window motors WILL run under water - at least once. The mini had "sliders" |
| "Steve W." <csr684@NOTyahoo.com>: Nov 06 03:32AM -0500 RS Wood wrote: > 2. Both can ruin an interference engine if they break > 3. Repair hassle is probably about the same > The question is how long is the typical MTBF for a belt versus a chain? Depends on the particular engine. Most belts are around 60K change interval, and many are not hard to do. Then you have vehicles with chains, a good design will go 2-300K with no real issues. The shitty designs fail around 50-60K and do more damage than just the valves if it drops into the lower sprocket on a stick that rolls a bit. GMs 3.6 and some others use a VERY light chain that stretches and breaks. -- Steve W. |
| clare@snyder.on.ca: Nov 06 03:51AM -0500 On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 04:48:49 +0000 (UTC), RS Wood <rswood@is.invalid> wrote: >clare@snyder.on.ca wrote: Snipped for brevity >I don't think I've seen rust on my cars in decades, but when I lived back >east with my Z cars, they rusted out like crazy. >So a lot of this stuff depends on the environment. Corect >I haven't bought plugs in a while. >I'm thinking half the price you're quoting. >But it has been a while. Depends what you drive and what plugs it needs. Waste spark engines basically require double platinum plugs (they fire in both polarities) and 5.4 Tritons use a very specific specialized plug. >> conditions, the bigger motor will last longer / wear less than the >> smaller engine - whether the gearing is different or not. >I don't believe it. You don't have to. It's true - >A car engine is almost never run at full bore BHP. My mini and my bug were run wide open almost all the time. >And gearing makes a huge difference anyway. and the final drive gearing can be identical between engines - and if not the little engine is reving a lot higher. Gearing cannot change the power output - only the road torque. You trade rpm for torque by gearing. >> Things like load. Sure - if like MOST pickups on the road today they >> are never loaded or worked - no difference. >Exactly my point. But if loaded - BIG difference. >> difference. Neither one is ever being worked hard enough to hurt >> itself. >Exactly my point. Load that 2.4 liter PT cruiser with 4 adults and luggage for a 3 week road trip - then drive it throgh the laurentians and back through the appalachians and tell me it's not working like a sled dog. >Now if you use the truck at full bore BHP to pull an airplane to takeoff >speeds on the airport runway, then the bigger engine should last longer. >:) How about pulling a house trailer up 4th of july pass in idaho - something like 13 miles of 5% grade - or up the Coquahala at Hope BC. >But if you just tool around town, like I do, I can't imagine that a bigger >engine has any longevity over a smaller engine all else being equal. >Gears make a bigger difference. They make a bigger difference on my bicycle which I tool around town on - - - >> concern to me. >But have you needed to do any of these repairs? >1. painting Just some touchup where the tinted clearcoat pealed on the 02 Taurus >2. alignment Nope >3. replace/rebuild engine (or major work) Nope - not since replacing the heads on the 88 New Yorker 3.0 liter Mitsoshitty engine >4. clutch replacement (or major work) Paid my brother to replace the clutch when I bought the truck because I was busy earning money >5. tire mounting and balancing Nope - I paid to have my Haks and Michelins installed for the truck, and the Tiger Paws on the Taurus. Bought the used snows on rims for the taurus (virtually new) >6. timing belt Last one I did on my own car was the '81 Tercel. Haven't had a belt that required replacement since >To me, these half-dozen repairs almost nobody does at home, but I *wish* I >had done at home when I had the chance. Most people will never require 1,3, or 4 - and very few will require #6 either since so many have gone back to chains >My recommendation to a kid of 30 or 40 years old would be to *do* them when >he has the chance, just as I'd tell him to climb that mountain he always >wanted to climb. Only do it if theyenjoy it - rather climb that mountain in the time it would take to do the repair - and do what you do well and get paid well for - and use that money to pay the guy who does that job well. Thats what keeps the economy going. >When he gets older, he won't be able to do it anymore, and the economics of >the benefits will be less as he ages. The actual economics / benefits are often less than you think when all is said and done - - - Break off a bolt or a spark plug (thinking Triton 5.4 here) and the cost goes WAY higher than paying the guywho knows to do it right in the first place - - - - - |
| clare@snyder.on.ca: Nov 06 03:53AM -0500 On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 04:48:51 +0000 (UTC), RS Wood <rswood@is.invalid> wrote: >I think the main difference is that a lot of us have battery-powered tools >that we never had in days of yore. We also all have air tools now. >Did everyone at home have air tools in the olden days? Nope. They cost almost as much back then when the dollar was worth a LOT more. Didn't have Chines tools pushing the price down, and the volume up. |
| clare@snyder.on.ca: Nov 06 04:01AM -0500 On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 04:48:53 +0000 (UTC), RS Wood <rswood@is.invalid> wrote: >I disagree on the dealer being required for anything. >To me, the dealer is whom you go to when you're under the original factory >warranty and then that's the last time you ever go do the dealer. Thankfully many customers felt differently when I was in the dealership - where I made sure the customers got good value for their money and their loyalty. There are things the dealer KNOWS about the car that the average mechanic may NEVER know - things to look for to prevent problems from ocurring. - like making sure the diff vent valves on RWD Toyotas are free every time the car is on the hoist - meaning you virtualkly NEVER need to replace axle bearings and seals - which will leak quickly if the vent sticks. >I have nothing against the dealer except one thing, which is why they're >called the 'stealer'. But that's a biggie. Some are - some are not. I had the highest customer retention of any Toyota dealer in Canada - usually well over 100% - which meant we regularly serviced more cars than we sold - even after they were out of warranty. >stock where you need them now (e.g., you broke a bolt or forget a gasket >and you're in the middle of the job) but expect to pay more than double for >those parts than anywhere else. Not always true. I've found many parts are the same price or cheaper at the dealer than at the local jobber - and cheaper than buying from Rock Auto and payinf shipping and brokerage. >I go to an indy for alignment and clutch and tires, etc., where I couldn't >imagine payking the price for the same job at the dealer. A good independent and a good dealer can both come in handy. My brother operated an independent shop for several decades (after working for several dealers and independents) while I worked for both dealers and insdependents |
| clare@snyder.on.ca: Nov 06 04:04AM -0500 On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 04:48:58 +0000 (UTC), RS Wood <rswood@is.invalid> wrote: >I haven't bothered to search, but it's my understanding the car companies >did not do that out of goodwill toward us - but out of gov requirements >that they have to warrant the exhaust system for longer periods of time. They only need to warrant it to the last converter and sensor. |
| clare@snyder.on.ca: Nov 06 04:07AM -0500 On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 04:49:02 +0000 (UTC), RS Wood <rswood@is.invalid> wrote: >1. Material, size, and cross section of rings, then and now, or >2. Geometry inside the piston (e.g., number or spacing of rings) >What could possibly be better about rings today? As I posted earlier - a LOT. |
| clare@snyder.on.ca: Nov 06 04:14AM -0500 On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 04:49:07 +0000 (UTC), RS Wood <rswood@is.invalid> wrote: >Someone said the *duration* is longer nowadays, but nobody mentioned >current. >Is the current about the same? It is high enogh to kill you if it hits you at the right point in the heart-beat and actually flows through the heart (depends where you get grounded) 100 miliamps can kill you as dead as 100 amps. |
| clare@snyder.on.ca: Nov 06 04:23AM -0500 On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 04:49:14 +0000 (UTC), RS Wood <rswood@is.invalid> wrote: >I think the only reason manufactures went to belts is to increase their >profits, so I wonder if there is any value to a belt AFTER you look at the >tradoffs. No, chains stretch - belts don't. Belt timing is more accurate and consistant. Belts are more efficient at transmitting power. Belts are much easier and cheaper to replace >The real question for a repair group would be the main factors: >1. Reliability of chain versus belt It can be pretty much a wash >2. Damage potential of chain versus belt When a chain goes bad, it does more damage than a belt >3. Repair hassle of chain versus belt A lot more hassle when a chain brakes. >But.... >I posit that: >1. The chain is *far* more reliable than the belt Not necessarilly true >2. Both can ruin an interference engine if they break Correct - and the cain causes more damage and is more expensive to repair >3. Repair hassle is probably about the same Nope - an order of magnitude worse with a chain >The question is how long is the typical MTBF for a belt versus a chain? Belts - 60- 100 thousand Km in the past - some last a lot longer but don't take the chance on an interference engine. an hour or 2 to change it, and mabee 50 bucks for the belt vs 6 hours plus the cost of tensioners and sprockets and chain (often over $200) for the chain - which SHOULD last longer than 2 or 3 belts - but the average car will only have the belt changed 3 times in it's lifetime |
| clare@snyder.on.ca: Nov 06 04:26AM -0500 On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 04:49:16 +0000 (UTC), RS Wood <rswood@is.invalid> wrote: >Two vehicles that are worthless to me: >1. FWD >2. Belt Absoltely no biggy, on either count. I like FWD. I like RWD. in NORMAL driving, there is basically no difference - and the flat floor of a FWD is nice - and with the weight of the engine over the drive wheels traction is snow is MUCH superior to the traction of a rear wheel drive car with no extra weight in the rear - - - I've had my say on belts |
| clare@snyder.on.ca: Nov 06 04:33AM -0500 On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 04:49:21 +0000 (UTC), RS Wood <rswood@is.invalid> wrote: >2. Belt >3. Pushrod >Anything else? Pushrod can be gear or chain >1. Chain ? >2. Belt ? >3. Pushrod ? Chevy pushrod engines often took out the plastic timing gears in under 100,000 km. Lots of timing chains on pushrod engines never made 100,00 miles. >If the replacement isn't bad, then the belt isn't 'as' bad. >In the general sense though, belts, I posit, are bad news multiplied. >I try not to take things from the marketing-bullshit standpoint. The belt is just a maintenance item like plugs >My take is always from the *why* standpoint. >Why did the automakers go to belts over chains? Because in SO many ways they are better and they are not affected by lubrication issues. >My supposition is that they did it to save them money. >No other reason. You are wrong >The tradoffs are legendary where the owner is the one who loses in the end >calculation. Not necessarily >I try not to take things from the marketing-bullshit standpoint. >My take is always from the *why* standpoint. >Why did the automakers go to FWD over RWD? For many reasons which I have already given you. >My supposition is that they did it to save them money. >No other reason. Nope, >The tradoffs are legendary where the owner is the one who loses in the end >calculation (particularly since deep snow is still on the road for what, >maybe 10 days out of 365?) Not up here. and they make cars for world markets - >Just like anyone who mentions belts are "quieter" and "lighter" is doing. >The sole reason for belts and FWD is to increase manufacturer's profits. >Everything else is marketing bullshit because the tradeoffs are legendary. You can believe what you like - but my FWD cars get around in snow al LOT better than my old RWD cars. Try driving a new mustang or camaro in snow. |
| clare@snyder.on.ca: Nov 06 04:35AM -0500 On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 04:49:25 +0000 (UTC), RS Wood <rswood@is.invalid> wrote: >Maybe FWD is better now ... but I think I'll have to go to my deathbed >before owning a FWD car... simply because I don't want to fall for the >marketing trap that everyone else easily falls into. You are not drinking the coolade, but you are certainly falling for the bullshit. |
| clare@snyder.on.ca: Nov 06 04:35AM -0500 On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 04:54:55 +0000 (UTC), RS Wood <rswood@is.invalid> wrote: >drilled/slotted rotor makes *any* difference over a solid rotor in braking >performance, let me know. >I'm all about logic. Not for normal legal street driving |
| You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to sci.electronics.repair+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. |
No Response to "Digest for sci.electronics.repair@googlegroups.com - 25 updates in 1 topic"
Post a Comment