|
Could be. If the rear axle wraps the leaf springs too much doing that, it can max out the angle of the ujoint and when it tries to turn it binds and rips off the ears on the yoke instead. I would expect it to be dangling at the other end then, however.
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2014 22:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 09:34 |
|
|
kastein posted:Could be. If the rear axle wraps the leaf springs too much doing that, it can max out the angle of the ujoint and when it tries to turn it binds and rips off the ears on the yoke instead. I would expect it to be dangling at the other end then, however. Aren't there typically uni joints at both ends of the driveshaft a quarter turn apart to iron out the vibration?
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2014 03:51
|
|
|
Not necessarily. On lots of vehicles the front of the driveshaft is just a splined sleeve that fits over the output shaft on the trans and slides back and forth to accommodate length changes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2014 04:03
|
|
|
They generally are in phase, not a quarter turn out - believe me, a quarter turn out results in even more vibrations. The ears on each end of the driveshaft should be at exactly the same angle, and the centerline of the pinion gear should be 1-2 degrees below parallel with the centerline of the transmission output shaft to account for pinion rise under acceleration. I'm not sure how you would do what Slavvy said without a giubo joint instead of a ujoint, because you'd end up putting a lot of side loading on the transmission output with no ujoint there. I have never seen the setup he's talking about, though I have seen a slip yoke on many vehicles - it still has a ujoint between the driveshaft and the slip yoke, however.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2014 04:38
|
|
|
Don't think this Focus starter motor will work, even after a hammer love tap
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2014 05:27
|
|
|
Slavvy posted:I love how the MDPS ecu is on the rack under the engine. MrYenko posted:There is a special place in hell for that engineering team. Its poo poo like this that makes me believe that engineering students need to follow a mechanic/technician around in the field for six months as part of their education to learn that just because you can design something like this doesn't mean that you should.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2014 05:39
|
|
|
Geoj posted:Its poo poo like this that makes me believe that engineering students need to follow a mechanic/technician around in the field for six months as part of their education to learn that just because you can design something like this doesn't mean that you should. I'm pretty sure the engineer knows what the right thing to do is. The problem is whether her boss (and her boss' boss) knows. Or cares.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2014 05:41
|
|
|
Seat Safety Switch posted:I'm pretty sure the engineer knows what the right thing to do is. The problem is whether her boss (and her boss' boss) knows. Or cares. The problem is that it saved two cents to put it there, so they did.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2014 06:05
|
|
|
Yeah, you nailed it. The guys who work on stuff like the Cavalier would probably fit in great at NASA because they could take us to the moon at least 75% of the time on forty bucks. "Do you guys really need all those days of oxygen? That poo poo is pricey."
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2014 06:09
|
|
|
Seat Safety Switch posted:Yeah, you nailed it. The guys who work on stuff like the Cavalier would probably fit in great at NASA because they could take us to the moon at least 75% of the time on forty bucks. You're saying no dumb design decisions have been made by bean-counters?
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2014 06:22
|
|
|
kastein posted:They generally are in phase, not a quarter turn out - believe me, a quarter turn out results in even more vibrations. The ears on each end of the driveshaft should be at exactly the same angle, and the centerline of the pinion gear should be 1-2 degrees below parallel with the centerline of the transmission output shaft to account for pinion rise under acceleration. Sorry, I'm a dumbass and you're right. But that type of driveshaft still has only one U-joint, which proves my point well enough.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2014 06:57
|
|
|
 PO did the braeaakssssss.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2014 07:05
|
|
|
Is that ... just completely the wrong pads? How do you even DO that?
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2014 08:14
|
|
|
correct pads, just not seated in the mount on the caliper, they were kinda sitting at a 15* angle, which I don't even know how the gently caress, but at any rate, I swapped the two pads around until I get around to ordering new pads/rotors for the rear cause gently caress these crusty looking turds.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2014 08:41
|
|
|
kastein posted:Don't think this Focus starter motor will work, even after a hammer love tap I'm at a loss here. Just.....how?
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2014 10:19
|
|
|
I used to own a Ford with a dual-mass flywheel. At around 70k miles, most of these flywheels would have gained quite a bit of play between the two plates, and would start grinding themselves into powder. Most of said powder seemed to end up in the starter motor. Mine ended up with enough metal filings in the starter to prevent the gear from sliding into place. It kinda looked like that picture when I pulled it, although mine was less exploded.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2014 11:42
|
|
|
I've seen starters eat poo poo when someone would hit it when it was already running or hold it on forever but that one is impressive. I almost thought distributor fire before I read what you posted.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2014 12:04
|
|
|
It looks to me like either what that guy said ^ or a few other things. Could have gotten stuck engaged and overheated + overrevved due to being on constantly while driving thus spreading its contents thinly over the inside of the housing, could have worn out and overheated and blew everything apart but that isn't likely. That is what's left of the commutator assembly spread/melted all over the end of the stator housing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2014 15:16
|
|
|
wallaka posted:You're saying no dumb design decisions have been made by bean-counters? I don't think any engineers worked on the Cavalier. That was all bean counters, the real stars of GM.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2014 15:20
|
|
|
Everyday Lurker posted:
I know someone that had the front u-joint on the front driveshaft of his Discovery give out while he was at freeway speeds and towing a trailer. The shaft ended up in the passenger's lap and left a gaping hole through the floor. That no one was injured and he didn't lose control with a trailer on the back was an absolute miracle. He'd had it in for service at the dealer just a few days prior and they, amazingly, covered all repairs. I think they were afraid of a law suit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2014 16:10
|
|
|
Seat Safety Switch posted:I don't think any engineers worked on the Cavalier. That was all bean counters, the real stars of GM. If the Cavalier had debuted and lived for four to six years as it was it would have been remembered as a solidly ok response to the rise of the Japanese auto manufacturers. The Cavalier was actually so good that it forced Ford to respond with the Tempo (which it killed in the sales numbers), the Cavalier lived three decades with little more than superficial changes, and was thought to be good enough to be branded a Cadillac. Two out if those three were wild successes from a financial standpoint, and like I said, at the debut of the Cavalier it was a pretty good car compared to the marketplace. The problem is that the Japanese came out with a substantially changed/better car every four years like clockwork. The Cavalier answer in response was cheap lipstick, when there even was one. The result: Cavalier is remembered as a cheap crapcan compared to the excellent Japanese crapcans available at the time of it's death.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2014 16:49
|
|
|
No, the problem is the cavalier is truly, desperately bad after a couple of years when you have to do literally anything other than oil changes to it. Japanese cars actually change very slowly in the mechanical sense and are put together with the aid of 'logic' and 'common sense' and 'parts made of metal and plastic instead of cheese'. As a brand new car, competing against brand new cars, none of this is detectable and the sales figures would have reflected this.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2014 20:46
|
|
|
Seat Safety Switch posted:I'm pretty sure the engineer knows what the right thing to do is. I'd say its likely a 50/50 split. I've interacted with way too many engineers who think they walk on water, and if someone has a problem with their design then they're a loving idiot and if they knew their rear end from a hole in the ground they'd have a masters in X engineering from Y university. Most memorable for me was an engineer who worked for Chrysler posting on another automotive forum I used to frequent, bitching that it was the massively incompetent UAW employees fault and not that of anyone who designed the Town & Country minivan when it went to production with the exhaust system and ductwork for the rear HVAC system occupying the same exact physical space underneath the floorpan. Because clearly, anyone who can't improvise and make the two systems fit when the vehicle stops for 30 seconds at their station on the assembly line is just a lazy sack of poo poo who wouldn't have their job if it wasn't for the union.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2014 22:13
|
|
|
Do you think you can look that post up again, because I've had to work on the rear hvac system of a Stow & Go Grand Caravan before and I have some extremely salient points that I'd like to impart directly to him. e: Like, with Grade 8 fasteners.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2014 22:29
|
|
|
Geoj posted:I'd say its likely a 50/50 split. I've interacted with way too many engineers who think they walk on water, and if someone has a problem with their design then they're a loving idiot and if they knew their rear end from a hole in the ground they'd have a masters in X engineering from Y university. I know a couple engineers and one's chock full of common sense. The others aren't safe on a sidewalk and I sure as hell don't want to ride in a car with them. Or let them make me a sandwich.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 00:01
|
|
|
It comes from having never worked on anything themselves, whether in the sense of manufacture or maintenance. Last week I encountered an entire team of engineers at an aero engine manufacturer who were arguing thousandths of a degree on an angle with me, because apparently they have forgotten GCSE trigonometry. Or to compare it to the angle it's meant to mate up to.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 00:06
|
|
|
Geoj posted:went to production with the exhaust system and ductwork for the rear HVAC system occupying the same exact physical space underneath the floorpan. Holy moly is this for real?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 00:07
|
|
|
If only CAD programs had some sort of interference detection tools. oh wait. How long ago was this?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 00:25
|
|
|
Obviously the answer is to combine the exhaust and HVAC systems so it vents into the rear cabin. It's a new heating system design 
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 00:42
|
|
|
That's why people say don't buy Chrysler.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 00:43
|
|
|
BraveUlysses posted:How long ago was this? Early to mid-2000s. IIRC the fix (until they got the design fixed and changed the supply chain parts) was to essentially run an extra shift and have a team of assemblers follow the vans down the production line doing on-the-fly modifications to the incorrect HVAC parts to make them work. Other than "random internet person claiming to be a Chrysler engineer and bitching about union assembly line workers" I can neither confirm nor deny the veracity of his story.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 00:44
|
|
|
I thought the practice of having the full current of blower motors running through knobs was pretty dumb. Welp, showed me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 00:49
|
|
|
Kill-9 posted:I know someone that had the front u-joint on the front driveshaft of his Discovery give out while he was at freeway speeds and towing a trailer. The shaft ended up in the passenger's lap and left a gaping hole through the floor. That no one was injured and he didn't lose control with a trailer on the back was an absolute miracle. He'd had it in for service at the dealer just a few days prior and they, amazingly, covered all repairs. I think they were afraid of a law suit. That's unreal, it's a drat miracle no one was killed.  A friend of mine had the rear u-joint in his Sonoma let go while he was on the expressway a few years back, note the distinct imprint of the drive shaft on both the muffler AND the gas tank shield: 
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 05:29
|
|
|
kastein posted:Don't think this Focus starter motor will work, even after a hammer love tap Everyday Lurker posted:I'm at a loss here. Just.....how? Add me to the list, because I'm looking at this and just not seeing a starter motor there. It's like everything that's supposed to be there has been ground to a fine powder and then had half a clock poured onto it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 14:49
|
|
|
You're looking at the remains of this, plus probably the bearings and brushes (and the springs that push them in.) Usually when a starter motor fails, it's either the brushes sticking up, the commutator getting arced/burned, or the contactor/solenoid sticking open. That's why tapping on it with a hammer can jostle things into working again. If the contactor sticks ON, though, and leaves the thing engaged... it'll overspeed since it'll still be engaged and running while you drive and cause real problems with the motor. I'm betting that's what happened here.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 17:55
|
|
|
InitialDave posted:It comes from having never worked on anything themselves, whether in the sense of manufacture or maintenance. I'm currently a Mechanical Engineering student and this is literally the entire problem. I have met exactly two other people who have any practical experience with working on anything. I got looks of pure amazement when I was able to walk into the machine shop and use a drill press and a band saw. Part of me wants to give up on robotics and go into the automotive industry just so I can try and get to design a car around ease of maintenance just to see how the market would react. Also, what kind of  motherfuckers were arguing about thousandths of a degree? I know precision is important in something that spins at thousands of RPM surrounded by exploding jet fuel, but I can't think of ANY instance where a few thousandths of a degree would make any actual difference.Content: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0-Lu0nknfA
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 18:20
|
|
|
Tactical Bonnet posted:I'm currently a Mechanical Engineering student and this is literally the entire problem. I have met exactly two other people who have any practical experience with working on anything. I got looks of pure amazement when I was able to walk into the machine shop and use a drill press and a band saw. Part of me wants to give up on robotics and go into the automotive industry just so I can try and get to design a car around ease of maintenance just to see how the market would react. Not to dissuade a wide-eyed engineering student, but should you go into automotive engineering you will find that ease of maintenance is not a priority when it comes to corporations designing cars. Corporate life as an engineer is not nearly as exciting as you might hope.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 18:24
|
|
|
How do you solve India's population crisis? Built a cheap car for the masses that slaughters the occupants in a low speed accident. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFWhuIDJJw0&t=16s
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 18:28
|
|
|
spog posted:How do you solve India's population crisis? They ARE sentient, of course. We just have a lot of them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 18:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 09:34 |
|
|
The Nano shouldn't really be compared to a normal passenger vehicle, it's so cheap it's meant to cross the divide between being on a scooter/motorcycle/rickshaw and a car. While I certainly wouldn't want to be in a collision in one, I'd rather that than getting hit on a scooter.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2014 18:31
|
|
