View Single Post
      08-24-2012, 12:39 PM   #84
bruce.augenstein@comcast.
Lieutenant Colonel
21
Rep
1,908
Posts

 
Drives: Legacy GT - 13.704@99.39
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Manheim, PA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
OK you have some anecdotal evidence that some form of hand fitting pistons might offer some benefits. What must be emphasized about this is that this is one particular case of hand fitting one component in contrast with a comparison to one particular process for machine fitting them. It says nothing about every form of hand fitting vs. a reasonable machine approach attempting to meet the same goals. I.e. there is no one singular hand fitting approach as there is no one singular machine approach. There are a plethora of variables, variations and options.
You can emphasize whatever you like. Just don't take my narrowly drawn example of how hand fitting of pistons can be of benefit and somehow broaden that to the point of my somehow believing that hand fitting of everything is superior to automation. Sheesh.

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
There is zero attempt to weasel out of anything. You clearly need a logic 101 refresher to elucidate the difference between "AND" and "OR". My original statement was 100% correct and factual, no if's and's or but's.
Again, you had your chance to back off that position, and didn't. Too late.

By the way, it's ifs ands or buts. These items are not possessive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
Again how do you possibly reconcile this with the plethora of cars using this engine, those known production volumes (quite high) and then either the raw feasibility or the economics of hand assembly? It just does not add up. It doesn't pass the simple litmus test of what is reasonable.
As if you had any idea of Mercedes costs for anything, unit by unit or over time.

Listen, let me concoct a Mercedes meeting back in, say, 2010. The bean counters are getting concerned because the 6.2 liter V8 is selling so well that they're leaving money on the table with each one by not automating.

Then the CFO says that within two years they'll begin ramping down 6.2 liter volume to a projected nnnnn units in 2012, reduced to nnnnn units in 2013, and phasing out totally by 20mumble-whatever. If that's the case, then would tooling up for volume production in this fiscal year of our Lord make sense?

Let's see, mumble-mumble, carry the two, mumble-mumble.

Nope! It's close, but we should carry on.

OK, I made that up, but what I'm trying to convey is that things are not as simplistic as you seem to (routinely) think.

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
And one off racing engines have what exactly to do with the needs, requirements, scale or economics of high volume passenger vehicle engine production?
Nothing. Just thought I'd convey that data point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
You are taking the words right out of my mouth.
Nonsense. I'm on record with this in note 28. You didn't fire up until a good while later.

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
This is also contradictory to your basic belief about what MB is doing with this engine.
Again nonsense. Neither you nor I nor anyone else in this string knows where the break points are, for this engine or for any other engine from anyone.


Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
And the reason is as much or more driven by economics than performance. Did you watch the video I posted prior? Do you think a race team can afford something like that? This is such an absolutely simple observation and common sense. VOLUME DICTATES ASSEMBLY TECHNIQUE.
I personally am in complete agreement with your first sentence, and have said so starting with note 28. I am of course in disagreement with your last sentence (partiularly in upper case format), as are you, judging by your first sentence. There's more, though. A manufacturer may think there's enough extra marketing pizazz generated by the "Hand Built!" words to justify the additional expense over a certain number of projected units. Mercedes, for example?

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
A pretty feeble attempt Bruce, really. All I believe about engine weights (or the weight of any other "thing" you want to understand) is that when they are made of nearly identical materials, with nearly identical components, in fundamentally identical configurations, that the larger of two items will be the heavier item. If the opposite turns out to be the case then most likely there is a different definition of what a complete item is comprised of. Does such common sense escape you? Now just to be clear I never said impossible, just very unlikely. You are probably one in a billion here who believes that marketing BS directly from the manufacturer is solidly and definitively more reliable than basic logic. It's really time for some more healthy skepticism from you. I know is is not beyond you.
I admit that I'm that one-in-a-billion person who might give more credibility to a major manufacturer than I give to, say, you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
Praise the lord, we are back on track. Wait, wait, what is it performance or money, what is the driver. Please make up your mind.

Money, performance, money, performance, money, performance.....
Are you off your meds? Starting back in note 28, I mentioned money and performance, in that order. Now I've got to make up my mind, because it can't be both?

Sheesh.

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
Yes, we all know that manufacturers all offer 20 year, 200k mile drivetrain warranties.... They don't care that much about an overall extremely reliable subsystem (main engine assembly) in the face of many dozens of drastically less reliable parts and components.

Believe what you want, it is a lot of traditional hod-rodder/race team type of mentality. For PRODUCTION vehicles the manufacturing is all about the volume, capacity, assembly time and last but still greatest COST.
Again, my position started with and stays with the fact that hand fitting of pistons may be of benefit. As volumes go up, that wouldn't change the benefit, but costs may get to the point of being unsupportable. The breakover point will depend on a number of things, varying by manufacturer and engine. Hot rodder/race team mentality has nothing to do with it.

Finally, an additional note on Chevrolet. The engineer and I didn't speak about this, but I'm pretty damned sure that the costs to run the Grand Sport stick engines through the hand build line were much less than they would've been had that line not been already justified to service the limited production Z06 and ZR-1 engines.

Last edited by bruce.augenstein@comcast.; 08-24-2012 at 01:29 PM. Reason: Spelling