When Engineers Get Bored (or, another small part of why GM went bankrupt...)

2009 Pontiac G5 and 2006 Chevy Cobalt

On its own, engineering a vehicle is no easy task. Every component has to meet conflicting goals of being able to fulfill its purpose (whether it's an exterior part that simply has to look good and not weather fade in six months, or a suspension part that has to survive a decade or more of repetitive salt immersion and continual structural loading) while costing a minimum to produce, and increasingly, it has to do it while being as light as possible while remaining durable enough that it won't fail during its anticipated lifetime. I get this.

Typically, each and every part in an automobile, from the lowliest little clip, to major components like an engine block or body panel, has a part number, and those parts have to be cataloged, inventoried, warehoused, shipped, and carried by their respective dealerships. Imagine the costs involved just in that alone.

So redundancies would seem to be a costly, wasteful proposition, right?

Please note the two cars seen in the photo above. The foreground car is a 2006 Chevrolet Cobalt sedan. In the background is a 2009 Pontiac G5 coupe. Both of these cars are essentially identical, save for the body style (which just happens to vary in these two cars), and some minor trim and fascia parts. Both are built on the same version of GM's corporate platform known as Delta (first sold here as the Saturn ION), very probably in the same facility.

With so much commonality, you would expect that both of them would use identical parts, except where items specific to the two door/four door body and brand-specific differences came into play, right? That would just make sense.

Look a little closer. Notice anything?

One of these things is just like the other (but not)...

These two cars happen to feature an identical 16 inch wheel design (odd, as one is a Pontiac, and one a Chevrolet), fitted with the same 205/55/16 tires size, but they're actually not identical parts; count the wheel-nuts. They use two different bolt patterns. Which means that these cars will have, at the minimum, two different wheel hub/bearing assemblies - at each end, as front and rear are also different - and two different brake rotors (front) or drums (rear). Not to mention the wheels, which are not simply the same wheel with extra holes, as the back side of the casting is unique to each configuration.

Now, in fairness, this 2006 Cobalt has a marginally less powerful version of the same 2.2 litre four cylinder engine used in the 2009 G5 (which may actually have slightly larger rotors), but we're talking less than 10 hp and 5 lb-ft of torque, and in 2006, both four and five-bolt wheels were available in the Cobalt line using the same size brakes. (Later Cobalt SS/Sport and G5 GT models had yet again a different brake set-up, with even larger four-wheel discs.)

So it begs the questions: Who thought that it would be a good idea to engineer and produce two otherwise identical wheels with differing bolt patterns, and - this is the big one - why in hell would you spend the time and resources to create, produce, integrate into the production process, and stock two completely different sets of wheel-end components to meet the same engineering needs in a single vehicle line?

All non-supercharged IONs, even those with the Delta platform's "big" 2.4 litre engine, used four-bolt wheels, so I fail to see any engineering justification, other than perhaps to keep some engineers busy.

On its own, this pointless expenditure would be a drop in the bucket, but enough single drops together can break a dam, and there's little doubt in my mind that this and countless other questionable decisions contributed to GM's financial woes leading into the late 2000's recession and subsequent bailouts. While I'm just as certain that GM is far from being the only company to suffer from this kind of thing, these two cars illustrate the problem brilliantly.

Jackass Award/When Engineers Get Bored

2006 BMW 323i engine bay

Quick - can you spot the engine oil dipstick in the engine bay of this 2006 BMW "E90" 323i?

Tick, tock, tick, tock...

Trick question: there isn't one.


This is a combined "When Engineers Get Bored" and "Jackass Award" entry, because there was no real reason to eliminate the dipstick.

Although quite a good number of automatic transmissions have gone stick-less in the past decade or so, unless they're leaking, they don't consume fluid. Engines do. Engines also have their oil replaced fairly frequently. Transmissions? In a perfect world, not so much.

Bored BMW engineers obviously felt that they could save a few dollars by using electronics and sensors to replace the engine oil dipstick. Oh, wait, that actually wouldn't be cheaper, now would it?

So why do it? Good chance it will drive up service department business, I would have to think. Sure, it does keep the customer from having to open the hood and potentially get dirty checking their oil, but has that really been a problem for the last 120 years? I doubt it.

Eliminating the dipstick becomes a problem when a vehicle that is known to consume oil, and which has crazy-long service intervals that almost guarantee the need to add oil between changes (BMW actually sells an accessory spare oil bottle holder for the trunk for this purpose) then has no practical way of quickly and easily determining the oil level.

Or does it?

As it turns out, it does, kind of. In a bored engineer sort of way.

2006 BMW 323i oil level indicator. Yes, it's in the trip computer.

Built in to the trip computer is an oil level check function. Certain criteria have to be met (engine temperature, engine run time, etc.) before it will display the level, and - counter-intuitively - it has to be running to check the level. Doing an oil change? Better know how much oil this thing holds beforehand, because you're committed once you begin - you can't check the level until you start it.

If memory serves, the "min" and "max" indications are not 1 litre (quart) apart, as on most cars and trucks, either. No owner's manual? No service information? No familiarity? You're fairly much euchred. And that's if you can parse out the secret to activating this display in the first case.

Having something that warns the driver of a low oil level is no bad thing on its own. Sometimes we need to have our hands held for us, and excessively low engine oil is an expensive "oops". I'm more than OK with building that function in.

But eliminating as simple, effective, and cheap of a maintenance device as a dipstick is pointless at best, and it's a quick way to earn yourself a Jackass Award.

When Engineers Get Bored

Actually, this entry falls more into the "When Engineers Get Stupid" category, though you could argue that to be completely accurate I'd have had to title it "When Engineers Try Stupid Things To Try And Impress Someone In Accounting By Saving The Cost Of Three Fasteners".

Heater fan motor - pre-replacement

From an assembly standpoint, incorporating the heater fan motor assembly into the heater case itself makes a certain amount of sense. Unfortunately, these things do fail. I won't say "occasionally", because in certain applications, it isn't. Consequently, some provision has to made to service it (translation: replace it). In the case of this particular design, you actually cut the heater case open to access the motor assembly.

Now, to their credit, the designers of this farce have made cutting the case open fairly simple - there's a clearly delineated circle where you're meant to cut, and the plastic is molded thinner at this point to accommodate the process. A good sharp utility knife will do it, if you're careful not to snap the blade. As this particular part lives on the underside of the heater case, beneath the passenger side of the instrument panel, and is accessed from the passenger side foot-well (a common location for these things), it would help to be triple-jointed or perhaps a retired circus performer.

Cut here... carefully. Getting light-headed yet?

OK, so you've cut the blasted thing out. The problem is, now you've got to somehow install the replacement part. A hot glue gun won't make it happen. (Well, it might, but only if you're truly desperate.) If you've already quoted the customer on this job and the parts counter staffer missed the little footnote on the listing for the fan when you called, you just might consider that option. (Fortunately, we hadn't priced the job yet - we'd just been told to fix it.)

Something's missing here...

No, you need the $62 kit, which is comprised of a stamped steel ring that bridges the gap between the heater case and the piece of the case you cut out earlier (that the fan motor itself bolts to), eight self-tapping screws, a couple of strips of foam (to seal the opening), and an instruction sheet. At least for that price the adapter comes painted.

...that'd be it

Tada! You may now reinstall the new motor assembly and bask in the return of functional heating and cooling.

Fini.

In most vehicles, this sucker is held in by screws already. Undo them, remove the motor, reinstall, simple. In this one, someone at Delphi re-invented the wheel. It's half asinine, half brilliant. After all, not only do you have to buy a motor, but the adapter too! It's obvious that the whole thing is designed with this in mind - note the pre-molded screw holes. So deviously clever that I just can't bring myself to give it a Jackass Award.

Probably not too many of these cars out there.

So, what vehicle family might you find this in? That would be GM's Epsilon cars; this one was a 2007 Pontiac G6, but I'd bet that the Chevy Malibu and Saturn Aura of the same generation use the exact same setup. Probably not too many of those running around.

When Engineers Get Bored...

2009 VW Tiguan rear caliper (removed), illustrating servo motor

...they design things like electronic parking brakes, where through the miracle of technology, they replace perhaps $250 worth of handles/pedals and cables with well over $1000 worth of electrical switches, control units, wiring, and servo motors. That is, of course, if they don't also use cables, as in models like the 2010 Subaru Outback.

2009 VW Tiguan parking brake control switch (located in centre console)

Theoretically, an electric parking brake does allow certain things, such as automatic application when the vehicle is placed in park - none that I'm aware of will do that, even if many will release when the throttle is pressed. Auto Hold, as seen here, will hold the vehicle when you come to a stop (until you press the throttle) so you don't have to stay on the brake in traffic, as well as preventing roll-back on inclines. Didn't a manual handbrake also do those things?

Using a switch instead of a handle or lever also potentially frees up space in the centre console which... ...wait a second, the Tiguan's switch is where the hand lever would go. No space gained there.

Well, you do get some added coin storage, I guess, but look at how much coffee has already found its way into the switch due to the proximity to the cupholders. This would, at worst, make a handbrake handle sticky, but it could potentially spell intermittent operation or even death for these two switches, which are not likely cheap to replace.

Speaking of not cheap, when the time comes to replace the rear pads (with or without the rotors), you now need to command the parking brake servo motors open, which requires either a VW-capable bi-directional scan tool, or a specialized, purpose-specific control device, like the one seen below. There is no other way to do the job properly, and you can bet the shop's added costs in equipment will be factored into the job.

Strategic Tools' 30369600 VW/Audi EPB service tool

We won't even get into Volkswagen's corporate fascination with unusual fastener drive systems, such as the "triple square drive" bolts that retain the brake caliper bracket (and, it appears, the wheel bearing assembly too). Thanks for making me spend even more on yet another set of special sockets - they'll complement the metric Allen drive set that already gathers dust in my toolbox between German car repair jobs...

2009 VW Tiguan - rear upright as seen from inboard side

When Engineers Get Bored...

2011 Buick Regal

When engineers get bored, they needlessly redesign things. This may be to justify their existence, I really don't know.

This photo is of the left taillight of a 2011 Buick Regal, a car largely based upon the award-winning Opel Insignia. The Insignia is built in Germany and sold in a large number of global markets. This Regal, in fact, was also built in Germany, though production will soon shift to Oshawa, Ontario, Canada.

So why show this photo? That's easy. Assume that this car is one car ahead of you, so this is as much of it as you can see...

Quick! Is this Regal braking or indicating a turn?

The correct answer is "who the hell knows?!?", because some wise ass engineer decided to redesign the electrical system of this car to equip it with what's sometimes known as "combination lamps". Combination lamps are where a single red lamp (or group of lamps) performs the brake light and turn indicator functions for each side of the vehicle. Basically, they are a brake light unless being over-ridden for use as a signal.

Virtually no other world market allows this stupidity (or even separate red rear turn indicators), including the other markets that this vehicle is sold in, where this bulb would be orange/amber. Functioning only as a signal, no confusion would be possible.

The larger red portion of the lamp above it would be the brake lamp in the Insignia - and as seen in this picture, it does not function as a brake lamp in the Regal.

You could argue Buick tradition - the majority of Buicks have used combination lamps over the years, but there have also been numerous Buicks with dedicated orange signals (it was even a hallmark of the top "T-Type" models for a while), including the model one notch above the Regal in Buick's current model matrix, the Lacrosse.

As the red part of the lamp above it still contains a bulb (it's a parking light), it's not like GM saved any money on bulbs, and I doubt more than a few cents on wire. It looks pretty hokey too.

GM is not the only offender here, as most new Audi vehicles use combination lamps in the Canadian and US markets. BMW and Mercedes stop just short of that, equipping most of our models with red rear signals.

My big question here is: Why spend the money on redesigning these parts to make the car less safe?

When Engineers Get Bored...

...they complicate what should, or even used to be, something simple.

Case in point, a 2006 BMW 325i that I replaced the rear brake pads on yesterday. BMW is among several manufacturers that incorporate wear sensors into their brake systems, which in itself is not a bad thing. It's really simple, actually: a soft plastic piece with a simple loop of wire in it clips into one inner brake pad at each end of the car. When the pad wears, this piece hits the rotor, and eventually wears through. Once the wire loop either
a) contacts the rotor and grounds against it, or
b) wears through and opens the circuit,
it illuminates a warning light on the dash. Much more effective than squeaker tabs, the circuit "latches" once activated to prevent the light flickering on and off as the pad touches the rotor. So far, so good.


(Photo of E90 cluster from user "NoKids" at E90post.com -
http://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=291247 )

This is where it all goes wrong. In older BMWs, you'd replace the pads and the sensor (sensors are about $35 each, no big deal), then you leave the key "on" with the engine off for 10 to 60 seconds to reset the light. Not this one. In this version, the "E90" model, things are a little more complicated, and don't look for the procedure in the manual or in the Mitchell or Alldata information most shops use. You won't find it.

Here, courtesy of an online BMW fan forum (and much surfing), is the final operation required - unless you have a factory BMW scan tool:

- insert key fob into dash receptacle.
- push "Start" button, but do not have your foot on the brake at the time (this puts the car in "run" but not running).
- wait for "Service" warning message to go out in message centre, replaced by the clock and odometer display.
- immediately push and hold "BC" button on signal stalk until "Service" indicator returns.
- use up and down toggle switch on signal stalk to highlight the desired service reminder.
- push and hold BC button until "Reset" appears in display.
- release and reapply BC button until a rotating clock symbol appears and then goes out.
- you may now exit the menu, turn off the car, or restart it as desired. Test drive it to ensure that the service warning is actually is out.

Hey, that was easy! I'd probably have figured it out on my own eventually - you know, an infinite number of monkeys at an infinite amount of typewriters, and so on...

When engineers get bored...

... or in this case, creative, they design things like this: http://www.eta-hpb.de/

Stefan Riederer is one of BMW's engineers (and a heck of a nice guy), and in talking with him over dinner during the launch of the new (and impressive) ActiveHybrid 7, he mentioned that he designed and built the unusual bicycle-based hydrofoil seen in action below.

Completely human powered, it doesn't float at all, relying entirely on forward motion and hydrodynamics to keep it from sinking. Stefan used to work in BMW's aerodynamics lab, which no doubt helped in this pursuit.

What would he like to tackle next, were space and expense not major considerations? Human powered flight. Doubtless this man could do it...



(Photo courtesy of Stefan's website, found at the above link)

When engineers get bored...

...they design hubcaps with hubcaps, and then use plastic caps that thread onto the wheel nuts to hold the whole arrangement on...