
Originally Posted by
spudfan
I think cars and other stuff are designed to be assembled as quickly as possible. The ease of future maintenance or replacing parts is a minor consideration. Future labour charges don't generally enter customer's minds when making a purchase. How many people ask how easy it is to change a headlight bulb or how much time would be involved in changing a starter motor? Not many.
Probably the largest single cost in building a car is assembly. And this means it is the fruitful place to reduce costs, enabling the manufacturer to compete better. Henry Ford realised this before WW1, and from then on the most successful manufacturers were those who found ways to reduce assembly (as well as part manufacturing) costs.
A large part of this is achieved by designing for assembly - and this means the design is tailored to the assembly machinery and processes (and worker skills) that the factory already has. Unless it is planned to build a new, more modern or better designed factory for the new design. This has been done repeatedly through automotive history.
But this does not necessarily mean that the vehicle has to be hard to maintain or repair. This usually comes about either because the design process simply has not worried maintenance or repair, perhaps because it was rushed, or the designers/manufacturers were inexperienced, nut possibly more commonly, when there is strong pressure to put together parts that were not originally designed to fit with each other. A good example would be the puma engined Defenders, but there are lots of others I could have picked.
John
JDNSW
1986 110 County 3.9 diesel
1970 2a 109 2.25 petrol
Bookmarks