On 7/30/2013 4:22 PM, Adam Wilson wrote:
Indeed, the other things you listed are quite evil on the internals of the engine. Particularly going too long between oil changes. But compression braking isn't on the list from an engineering standpoint. The components of the transmission and engine and much beefier than they strictly need to be.
Eh, I'm less convinced about that. I've had two transmissions shatter going steady speed at 30 mph. I doubled the horsepower in my dodge, the first thing that needed upgrading was the transmission (replaced the whole thing). I also upgraded the springs, driveshaft, bell housing (don't want my feet cut off), flywheel & clutch, brakes, and mounts. Not to mention everything inside the engine is upgraded, such as going from a cast to a forged crank (3x stronger).
I didn't upgrade the differential and rear axle. Those do tend to be beefier than necessary.
If I went to more than double the power, I'd have to do things like weld extra bracing into the frame, "tub" the rear chassis, go to fat tires, put in a roll cage, etc.
No manufacturer wants THAT recall at 5k per repair. Essentially, it's not any different than driving forward, you are just reversing the stress on components that were engineered to handle it moving forward.
It also assumes that the profile of the gears and the hardening on them is symmetric. It probably is - but I don't know that for a fact.
And most people drive cars newer than 15 years, unlike the Crazy Leader of D Who Shall Remain Nameless. ;-)
There's just something about a hotrodder doing it by reflashing the SD memory that leaves me cold :-)
I just don't care for new cars. The only ones that piqued my interest are the retro Mustang and the retro Challenger. Not even the new Ferraris look interesting. I'll rent cars on trips, and I can't even recall what brand they were. Zzzzzzz.
I'll just conclude with a video on why electric cars will always suck and why Detroit has never made anything worth buying since 1972:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PsUnBQE8jhE
