|
Don't believe it.
I daresay they'll avoid some useless features, but my useless feature is probably joe punters essential feature, and they aren't allowed to avoid things like TPMS because they are a legal requirement.
Because I buy old cars, the only useless feature I've personally suffered from so far, are "automatically adjusted" drum brakes, a Royal PITA.
If they bring back manually adjusted drum brakes I suppose I'll have to buy one.
|
|
"automatically adjusted" drum brakes, a Royal PITA."
I liked the old VW ones where you inserted a screwdriver through the backplate to turn the adjuster. Too simple and effective maybe, hence why it was dropped?
|
"automatically adjusted" drum brakes, a Royal PITA."
I liked the old VW ones where you inserted a screwdriver through the backplate to turn the adjuster. Too simple and effective maybe, hence why it was dropped?
That on some cars was a pain, though some auto adjusts were worse as they had to be stripped cleaned and refitted which a lot of mechanics of the day didn`t want to do, so took drum off and adjusted manually which still took time but bonus wasn`t as badly affected.lol
|
|
Memory fades, but I think the pre-auto cars (Marina 1800, Triumph 1300, and Lada 1200 Mk1) had a nut backed by an eccentric cam giving precise adjustment while spinning the wheel, but you needed to have access to a spanner.
IIRC they didn't lock in place, which could have been a problem, but wasn't.
The first auto I dealt with, on a Renault 5 Campus, was a thing of beauty made of exotic phosphor bronze alloys. Think Faberge clock. A friend who knows about such things opined that it probably cost more than the rest of the back hub assembly. And it absolutely refused to work, par for the course.
This is actually better than the damn things working, because then you have to try and defeat them by lock picking through a hobbits letterbox in the back of the hub before you can get the drum off.
The ceaseless vigilance of the Mary Whitehouse Module prevents me fully expressing my feelings on this topic, so I'll shut up.
Edited by edlithgow on 11/09/2021 at 01:41
|
Memory fades, but I think the pre-auto cars (Marina 1800, Triumph 1300, and Lada 1200 Mk1) had a nut backed by an eccentric cam giving precise adjustment while spinning the wheel, but you needed to have access to a spanner.
IIRC they didn't lock in place, which could have been a problem, but wasn't.
The first auto I dealt with, on a Renault 5 Campus, was a thing of beauty made of exotic phosphor bronze alloys. Think Faberge clock. A friend who knows about such things opined that it probably cost more than the rest of the back hub assembly. And it absolutely refused to work, par for the course.
This is actually better than the damn things working, because then you have to try and defeat them by lock picking through a hobbits letterbox in the back of the hub before you can get the drum off.
The ceaseless vigilance of the Mary Whitehouse Module prevents me fully expressing my feelings on this topic, so I'll shut up.
If you mean this type they were a pain unless nearly new as they siezed up and people used to round off the end so you had to tap around drum to gradually remove it, what fun
MORRIS MARINA, ITAL REAR WHEEL BRAKE ADJUSTER 37H6134 | eBay
|
Memory fades, but I think the pre-auto cars (Marina 1800, Triumph 1300, and Lada 1200 Mk1) had a nut backed by an eccentric cam giving precise adjustment while spinning the wheel, but you needed to have access to a spanner.
IIRC they didn't lock in place, which could have been a problem, but wasn't.
The first auto I dealt with, on a Renault 5 Campus, was a thing of beauty made of exotic phosphor bronze alloys. Think Faberge clock. A friend who knows about such things opined that it probably cost more than the rest of the back hub assembly. And it absolutely refused to work, par for the course.
This is actually better than the damn things working, because then you have to try and defeat them by lock picking through a hobbits letterbox in the back of the hub before you can get the drum off.
The ceaseless vigilance of the Mary Whitehouse Module prevents me fully expressing my feelings on this topic, so I'll shut up.
If you mean this type they were a pain unless nearly new as they siezed up and people used to round off the end so you had to tap around drum to gradually remove it, what fun
MORRIS MARINA, ITAL REAR WHEEL BRAKE ADJUSTER 37H6134 | eBay
Dunno. Don't remember that, and if it had given me any significant grief I probably would.
OTOH I had to remove a drum yesterday with automatic adjusters. No tapping around drum gradually involved. Hitting it with a BFH quite FH for quite a long time, OTOH, was.
Come to think ont, that might be another reason why my brake shoe liners keep coming off. A whole new reason to hate automatic adjusters.
Edited by edlithgow on 11/09/2021 at 16:00
|
|
But have they sneaked a 3cyl blown DI engine with potential timing chain issues under the bonnet?
|
|
Just a question on the thought of 3 cylinder engines,
Who has got them right?
GM and SAIC seem to have a broadly similar engine in the MG and corsa, corsa now using th PSA 3 cyl.
Ford any better, or Renault?
I don't read much about VW tsi 3 cyl problems, so have they got it right.
And finally, is it wise to have those 1.o litre3 pots in Bigger Heavier cars?
|
Just a question on the thought of 3 cylinder engines, Who has got them right?
Suzuki used them over 30 years back. But that was before almost every engine relied on a turbo for acceleration - the only way a 1-litre engine can shift a 1½-ton car.
|
Just a question on the thought of 3 cylinder engines, Who has got them right?
There is nothing fundamentally wrong with 3 cyl engines.
The problems with the Ecoboost are due to cutting corners with the engineering, nothing to do with the amount of cylinders. Same for the Puretech, and I'd bet its the same for the 0.9 Renault engine.
Presumably, the reason the VAG TSI 3 cyl engines seem to be reliable is due to them having learned their lessons with the timing chain problems of early 4 cyl TSI's. Again, nothing to do with the cylinder count.
If you look at the facelift version of the previous shape Sandero, going from the old (n/a) 1.2 4 cyl to a (n/a) 1.0 3 cyl might seem like a backward step, but look at the figures in more detail and you find the 1.0 offers more from less. 73bhp per litre rather than 65bhp per litre, and 97NM of torque per litre rather than 93NM per litre. Plus, the peak torque of the 1.0 arrives at 3500rpm rather than 4250rpm.
Suzuki used them over 30 years back.
Japanese manufacturers (including Suzuki) were using 3 cyl engines in small cars way before then!
|
|
I think the first was was the MK1 Daihatsu Charade in the late 1970s. They've certainly had long enough to perfect the design.
|
|
Not sure how this 3-cylinder thing is supposed to relate to the topic.
Is the 3-cylinder engine supposed to be the "useless feature" (mine is OK, though NA) or is it the fourth cylinder (which I'd have to say is not essential, but nice to have)?
|
Not sure how this 3-cylinder thing is supposed to relate to the topic.
Is the 3-cylinder engine supposed to be the "useless feature" (mine is OK, though NA) or is it the fourth cylinder (which I'd have to say is not essential, but nice to have)?
Yep. Ford eco boost, Puretech ( although more for cam belt reasons) to name just 2 There are plenty of reliable unblown indirect injection 3 cylinder toyota engines driving around so its not down to cylinder numbers. Shame they didn't drop in a something like a 1.5 Toyota engine. I am sure if you only plan to keep this car for a few years it will probably be fine but you must surely be aware of DI issues with carbon deposits. Have a look on here at the previous engine issues mentioned with regard to Dacia engines that are the views expressed by others. Shame because I would be more than happy with such a car if it had what I consider to be a durable engine.
i hope you can prove me wrong in the future. Good luck
|
Not sure how this 3-cylinder thing is supposed to relate to the topic.
Is the 3-cylinder engine supposed to be the "useless feature" (mine is OK, though NA) or is it the fourth cylinder (which I'd have to say is not essential, but nice to have)?
Yep. Ford eco boost, Puretech ( although more for cam belt reasons) to name just 2 There are plenty of reliable unblown indirect injection 3 cylinder toyota engines driving around so its not down to cylinder numbers. Shame they didn't drop in a something like a 1.5 Toyota engine. I am sure if you only plan to keep this car for a few years it will probably be fine but you must surely be aware of DI issues with carbon deposits. Have a look on here at the previous engine issues mentioned with regard to Dacia engines that are the views expressed by others. Shame because I would be more than happy with such a car if it had what I consider to be a durable engine.
i hope you can prove me wrong in the future. Good luck
Some misunderstanding. I don't have a Dacia. I have a 1986 Daihatsu Skywing (Mostly like a G11 Charade) which has a 3 cyl NA engine, carburetted fueling and contact breaker ignition) which I've had for about 8 years. Relatively deficient in useless features, apart from having automatically adjusted drum brakes.
|
I think the first was was the MK1 Daihatsu Charade in the late 1970s. They've certainly had long enough to perfect the design.
DKW were using 3-cylinder engines from 1953, these were the basis for the Saab 3-cylinder units from 1956.
|
|
