Making carmakers use standard filters

The number of different filters in use is huge and it grows each year.
Unless manufacturers can prove a need to generate new ones, why
shouldn't they be required to design around the common types already
available?

 

/rant on

Can you imagine the screaming about it? Even when the government
legislates safety standards required, they DO NOT tell the auto makers
how to go about it. All that is required is that standards are met.

I know what you are saying, and I think what the auto makers do is a
joke too. However, it all had to do with a "me", "MINE" mentality.
Just look at SONY. Sony really believes in their motto "THE ONE AND
ONLY". So much so that they LOST the VCR wars. VHS was inferior but
"free", and Beta was SONY "proprietary" and cost money. We know where
that went. Apple makes a better computer, but also adopted the "apple
only" mentality, and - quite frankly - I am surprized they are still
in business. IBM and Micro$haft have pounded the crap out of them.

And then we come to a car. The car seems to be the direct opposite!
EVERYTHING on a car is "proprietary" to start with. The more
profitable items do eventually appear in the after-market, but in
general, a lot of stuff is "dealer only".

To the filter thing, well, they want to make profit. What better way
than to have a captive audience??? Remember when the imports first
came here to North America??? I do. The after market had not pricked
up on the parts yet. So even an air filter was "dealer only". When you
could get a HUGE filter for a 455 V8 from the corner store for $1.99
(or less) these teeeny winie bizarrre shaped filters were going at the
dealers for $15 a pop or even more! AND PEOPLE PAID IT! (Idiots). My
dad's GM truck needed an regulator, $4.50. My mom's Volkswagen needed
one about the same time - $35!!!

By always making something just a little bit different - even in the
same product line and varience from year to year, then obsolescense is
PLANNED into your car. With the ammount of money a car costs, this is
GOLD IN THE MINE. Eventually, parts will be hard to find for you car,
the after market will shrink, and the pragmatic person will be forced
to get at least a newer one - if not a spanking new one, and the auto
makers know this.

What ticks me off about it is, look at the damn WASTE as a result!
Every time a new car comes out, a huge chunk of it is spent
re-tweaking the same old design, re-hashing things that should be
standardized once and for all, and left alone. The WASTED productivity
is staggering. TIme that could be spent designing things that are
truly NEW that could improve safety or efficiency or make a REAL
difference to things is wasted while someone redesigns an air filter
to fit the latest "cram as much as you can under the hood" model.

The other reason the industry does NOT want standardization is they
don't want competition! Think of it! If there were, say, 6 different
air filters, all in standard sizes and shapes, the design was
standardized, and they all had to use one of them, then LOTS of
companies could enter that market, and make them better and cheaper!
If there were only 6 different kinds, then tooling would be paid for
ONCE, and then no more re-tooling of the manufacturing lines!
Distributors would not have to stock 10,000 different kinds! They
could put other things on the shelf for us to buy! It would eliminate
several layers of perrenial waste, reduce costs to the consumer,
increase benefis for the parts dealers, and reduce the auto makers
profits. This last one is the reason it will never happen.

What the auto makers fail to realize is that if they would standardize
on the common stuff, then they could focus on making their vehicles
more distinctive in ways that count, not distinctive because they
manages to piss of their customer because he or she had to go to the
dealer for a "dealer only" air filter.

Unfortunately, there is no law against waste, and pissing off
customers. As long as profit is the sole motivation of industry, then
we are doomed to accept waste year after year - as long as industry
can make a buck at it,

/rant off

 

We are talking about an air filter here. All the common vehicle models have
air filters readily available in the aftermarket from multiple vendors.

Totally inapplicable. Air filters are readily available on the aftermarket.

That was then, this is now.

The aftermarket lives on parts that are rebuildable, parts that are easy to
copy, and parts that are higher wear items. It always has.

It is the customers driving that, not the automakers. If the automakers
could design a car shaped like a brick and make it for 20 years with
no changes, and sales would hold up on it, they would do it in a heartbeat.
Volkswagen did it with the VW bug when they got a chance. There
are other models out there like that.

No they woudn't. Air filters are such a high volume now that just
increasing production volume isn't going to affect their wholesale
price that much, the companies making them are already operating
pretty far along the curve.

This is stupid. If you really feel this way then just remove your air
filter, and re-duct your engine air intake to your own design of
airbox that uses a "cheaper and better" filter. In fact, if you want
to save even more money, then use a bigger air filter. If you use
for example an air filter with twice as much surface area it will
probably last 3 times longer. And you could make a custom
airbox out of sheet metal and a pop rivet tool in a short time.

ways that count to you.

because he or she was too lazy to use a substitute air filter.

Ted

 

By whom? You think the government hasn't got enough to do without policing
filters?

 

Yes too bad, my beta Sony is still better than the two VHS units I've
bought more recently.

Apple's computer and OS X are even better than ever and Apple is at an
all time high. In the mod 90s Apple's very poor management almost sunk
Apple, but better management and steadily improving technology are
providing Apple significant growth. Apple certainly isn't close to M$ in
size, but it is a mid Fortune 500 company.
Apple's recent Intel CPU computers give the flexibility to run Windoz
native applications efficiently as well.
Apple is like Mercedes and other quality cars, superior product at a
lower volume, appreciated by those who want something better than run of
the mill.
By the way IBM is pretty well out of the PC business, having sold it off
to a Chinese company. IBM isn't even providing CPUs to Apple anymore,
with Apple's move to the Intel CPU.

 

With a modern merc, you get the beauty of knowing you're a cut above
the rest, and the chance to show it off as you're stuck on the
roadside, waiting for the tow-truck AGAIN.

Prime example of recent attention to detail in modern mercs - look at
the back of an 8-ish year old s-class. $70+k to buy, and the plastic
between the reversing lights has turned pink in the sun. Says it all
really.

 

Comparing Apple with Wintel is hardly comparing like with like. If
Microsoft enforced an MS-software-only policy then there would be no crashes
and problems.

Anyway, MS owns a chunk of Apple nowadays, does it not?

DAS

For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling

 

Ha, ha, ha... That is funny!

Matt

 

All right then, far fewer crashes and problems.

You're a tad 'blindly biased', methinks?

DAS

For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling
---

 

No, just wrote software for a decade or so and have a read a little
about Microsofts software development practices. The build and test
every night to try to find the bugs vs. actually designing and coding to
a spec is simply never going to produce anything approaching reliable
software.

So, yes, I'm biased, but based on clear sight, not blindness.

Matt

 

Apple doesn't restrict MacOS SW APPS to Apple only, but why would that
improve the MS OS?

Apple actually makes much of it's OS design public, even allowing the
Darwin OS X core to be downloaded by anyone.

MS keeps much of their OS design secret, frustrating those who want to
create APPs for it.
This was a significant part of the long running legal action against MS.

If they do, the investment world isn't aware of it.
MS would be wise to own a chunk of Apple, considering how they get so
many ideas from Apple.