Nick02Ram

^ ur the kind of guy that should be an ME. I went to school for about a year anda half to be an ME, couldn't handle the chem and math, lol. But I've always said that, too. You should have to work on previous models of a product before you are allowed to design somethin. For example, whoever came up with the idea of riveting in balljoints should be shot (my example, since i had to deal with em tonight at work) To me, though it makes no sense, it has to be an easier process to press in one balljoint, rather than buck-rivet on an assembly line... but who knows.

Anyways, I've had to do some minor repairs on one of these new MAXXFARCE engines, and it was a pain, I can't imagine having to get deep into one. But all engines are getting worseand worse to work on. Another fun one is doing an alternator on a Mack on the side of the road, only engine I've come across that puts it towards the bottom of the motor, I had to just about rip off the rad and intercooler to change an alternator. Or how about the lovely placement of cam/crank sensors on a 60 series Detroit? Who decided to put the one behind the air compressor?

Purplezr2

That is something I will never understand by any manufacture is putting high replacement parts in hard to service areas, if one engine makers was smart they would make all the common items easy to service and advertise the motor as such. I sure owner/operators would love it. Never under stood why the cam sensor on the vp trucks is under the vp44, makes it tough to get to which out taking the IP out.

Nick02Ram

LOL if that was the case, Dodge/Cummins should have mounted the VP on the hood

pind

Good point Nick.

Actually, anyone who has ever had the pleasure of changing out a compressor on a 70's era mack v8, at -40 with a wind, on the side of the highway....

They weren't all that groovy either.

I was at a tech course in Edmonton, about 9 years ago, and I ran into a buddy of mine, who was a J-man Heavy duty mechanic, and was going back to school for ME. I asked him why he decided, after 8 years in the field, to go back to school for that.

His reply was " I want to know find out what part of the course makes these ME's so stupid"

He wasn't a popular guy in his class after that one. However, he did come out with top marks and a good job in his field. And he understands the product he's designing, from both sides.

Good job guys.

Hvytrkmech

I am about to flip 27 years of wrenching on class 8 iron. I can tell you this, I am very happy to not have to do it full time any more. There have been many a day or night road servicing a unit on the side of the road cussing and, (well you get the picture). It would be very easy for me to tear apart a ME for the enormous amount of idiocracy they designed, engineered and placed into service. However on the flip side of that sword I will say that I have no doubt they must contend with their own bureaucracy forcing them to sacrifice smart choices for more cost effective choices. Things that we in the field never see or hear about.

I do agree with you guys though. To be a successful ME you should be required to work in the field doing hands on repairs from start to finish. After all, in the field is exactly where the engineering failures occur and in most cases a better more efficient solution is designed and implemented by a field service tech.

pind

Well said Tim.

For a lot of years, not sure if it is common practice anymore, japanese car manufacturers used this formula.

If you wished to become an engineer, you first had to work a combined 5 - 7 years on the floor as a mechanic, and on the assembly line watching how things fit together. Then, when you had a complete understanding of the product, you could go to school to be an engineer.

Judging by a lot of the japanese stuff I have worked on over the years, that program worked. You would look at something and go WTH, then notice a little rubber plug, or a snap in plate, or something of that nature, making the part easier to get at. The only major hassle that has been ongoing is Honda oil filter placement, but we won't even talk about that.

Lets just say that working on trucks in the winter, makes me appreciate working on the real iron in the summer.

klx650a2

At my previous job, I always took the engineering interns out with me to service the scales. After they were cutting 1/2 plate steel for 2 hours to get at the load cell, I would stop by and ask how things were going. They always asked how is the idiot who designed this and I always pointed back at them and said you. I also mentioned that something that looks good on the drawing board, does not always look good in the field.

NoSparkplugs

There are days where if I ever met the engineers who designed the equipment I work on (Cat, Volvo, Hitachi) I would be tossing wrenches at their heads and asking them if they sniffed glue in high school... For example, a coworker of mine was given a Cat D6N to do a valve set on today. No biggie, the guy has done countless of valve sets on 6N's... ALY series 6Ns that is. This was a newer DJY series with believe it or not, a 6.6l Perkins I6 stuffed in it. First off, they shoehorn the engine in there and make it virtually impossible to get at. Along with that, its completely backwards of any other valve set I've ever seen. Took a lot of rereading the manual and cursing to figure it out but he did. Definitely not like the standard I6 valve set. Swing and a miss Cat, swing and a miss.

Also I'd like to know Cat's reasoning as to why they need such a long breather hose on the 3176 in a D7R. We just had the engine in a D7R blow up because the breather was stuck in the mud in the skid pans, froze (gotta love -50*C weather) and pressured up the crankcase and grenaded the engine. The D7R I was working on today to replace the blown up D7R had its breather stuffed in the mud in the skid pan. I cut a good section of it off so we don't have a repeat of that, yeeesh.

Or how John Deere doesn't put fuel shutoffs on their 350D excavators but Hitachi does (John Deere and Hitachi's are the same except for the engine). Sure makes changing fuel filters a fun mess.

Oh I how hate engineers some days

HOHN

Maybe. I've turned wrenches since I was a teenager. I took the cylinder heads off my '67 Coronet just to look at the bores when I was 15. No, I couldn't drive it yet legally, but i paid for it myself- cash.

Does that mean I would be a good ME? Not necessarily. It is sufficient? Is it necessary? I'm not so sure.


My job isn't designing things. My job is "development." Translates from Cumminsspeak, that means I fix the problems and run the tests that prove a design is good or fix problems when the testing shows a design sucks or simply won't pass the abuse tests that say it's good.

But "good enough" is the target. Not bulletproof. Not flawless. In a perfect world, we could have fast, good AND cheap. But we can't. How many "perfect" ISXs would we sell if they were $50k each? NONE! Even if we could make them flawless for 500K miles, it's still too expensive.

The "art" in engineering is in finding the balance. Do use make a part from Aluminum, Cast Iron, or Ductile Iron? Do you sand cast, die cast, investment cast, or machine from billet? Exactly how strong does a cast iron support need to be, given that stronger parts weigh more (reducing fuel economy) and also cost more.

Cost matters. A LOT. If it didn't we'd all be carving heads from billet titanium. Remember, you don't just want to make a little money selling an engine, but you have to have enough money to stand behind it when stuff goes wrong.

Last year, Cummins was spending over $200k A DAY to pay out warranty coverage. This, even with parts that passed some really truly heinous testing. You simply can't make a perfect product. You might build 200 test engines in all your development stages. Then when you go into production, you'll be making 200-400 PER DAY. That means with just a 1% failure rate, you are sending 2-4 lemons out the door every day. Acceptable? Not a chance.

As a Six Sigma practitioner, Cummins is shooting for less than 4 defects per million opportunities. That means over 99.999% of your parts are in spec and pass inspection.

Take for example the ISMs built in 2001 and 2002. Statistically, these are some of the most trouble-free Cummins engines ever built. The statistics say that you'll spend (on average) somewhere around $400 in repairs over the entire life of an ISM. This is actually stellar performance, though it sure doesn't sound like it. It's useful to compare this to the selling price of the engine. Imagine if someone told you that you could buy a new ISB on a skid and only pay another 2% or so ($140) in unscheduled repair costs over the entire life of the engine-- that's about what you're talking about.

Engineering is based on science and lots of technical wizardry-- but there are very much elements of art involved.

I understand the frustration of having to work on some of these things. I've done it. I've hated it. But I also see the other side, too. There are often "better" ways to do things, but rarely is there a "best" way to do something.

I'm proud of the work we do at Cummins, and I'm very blessed to work with so many gifted people who really are fantastic engineers and just great people almost without exception.

JH

Hvytrkmech

Thanks for your post Justin. It shows two indisputable facts in there entirety.

1- You have unwavering dedication. (appreciated)

2- lack of practical experience, you state it through out your entire post.


In the real world you will spend 90k for a day cab tractor. If I were to purchase an OTR tractor with minimal frills I would spend 120k. If I were to spec out a decent owner operator spec OTR tractor I would spend at least 130k. So does 50k for a power plant that will give me 500k worth of reliable service seem to far fetched? I think not.

Realistically, we could go round and round on this matter, yet it will yield the same out come.

I wish you the best in your career.

Purplezr2

How much of the is engine, whats a engine cost now 15-20k, do you really think people would bay 120-130k for a daycab. I don't think so.

pind

a reman ISX here is 27k plus taxes for a long block. Brand new runs closer to 41k taxes in

we aren't that far off the 50K now, why not spend the little extra to make something that works

Hvytrkmech

You should reread my post

chaikwa

Funny you should say that. For the past month or so, I've been pricing out very basic day cabs. Single axle no less. Not that I'm going to buy one, but just trying to get a price reference point for a future grant proposal. The cheapest one I could find was just a tad under $80K. Decent sized Cummins power, 10 speed, air ride... the 'normal' stuff. I can easily see where a moderately heavy tandem axle with big power and just a few amenities would go well over $100k.

chaikwa.

twichit

yep you about par fur corse for the inersmashable's new truck that they came out with it's 130k mim it runs to about 150k or so could be more i have'nt cheacked recently ......mack's the new granit model dump truck runs about 75k to 130k depending on the set up of the truck ,needless to say "they ain't cheap anymore"