theoldwizard
-
Posts
5,727 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
5
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Downloads
Store
Posts posted by theoldwizard
-
-
11 hours ago, ausrutherford said:
Train Station is suppose to also be used for Ford's partners and suppliers to use.
It will be at least another 5 years, probably more, before any part of Michigan Central can be used for office space.
Those unfamiliar with this renovation need to look at a Google earth image (below). There is nothing there, including NO PARKING !
-
21 hours ago, jasonj80 said:
A Billion dollars really is not that much money anymore when you're dealing with a larger construction project.Tell that to the stock holders who are not getting any dividends !
-
On 8/29/2020 at 9:25 PM, Bob Rosadini said:
Interesting-not one word about the millions committed to the train station.
One of the key building in the Research and Engineering Center will meet the wrecking ball very soon. The Design Center has been the birthplace of every North American vehicle for more than the past 60 years.
This is part of the planned total R&E make over that will cost more than $1B !
Last I heard the train station, once fully restored, will also cost over $1B !
-
Sell or trade in the car. If will get worse. Much worse !
-
On 8/13/2020 at 9:13 AM, akirby said:
You can get away with a few servers in a closet for a very small non mission critical project but you can't do that with an entire IT department and suite of business applications.
Worldwide powertrain software and engine/transmission/emissions calibration is what I would call "mission critical". Probably less than a dozen servers running in floor space that would easily fit in a large closet.
Add another couple dozen highly customized "work stations" for software testing.QuoteYou also have to consider the network infrastructure and large storage devices for large databases.
Networking is split off from mainstream IT and has been for many years. The jumped on gigabit and fiber optics when they first became available. I would give them an A- (always some room for improvement)
Storage is another issue. They use MASSIVE NAS box (probably multiple petabytes). Acceptable for most application, but it fell flat on its face when doing multiple parallel "builds" of powertrain software.
QuoteNow I'm sure Ford's IT systems are much smaller and less complicated than what I'm deploying but it still costs millions when you factor in power, cooling (you can't run hundreds of servers without some type of cooling), network infrastructure and all the associated costs.
It is definitely a lot cheaper than it used to be but not quite as cheap as you're suggesting.
For the entire corporation, it is not. But corporate IT has lead shoes set in concrete. They can not react to engineering needs or timing. Many (most?) production are not designed, implement or run by IT.
Their entire focus is email (Microsoft Office/Outlook or whatever it is called these days) and making sure that financial systems meet the Sarbanes–Oxley Act and more recently that personnel system meet EU requirements. Important task, but engineering typically needs to find its own solutions.
-
17 hours ago, MY93SHO said:
Check out the video I just posted.
That is a GREAT video !
I always knew that worn parts were part of the death wobble problem. I always SUSPECTED that more caster would help and it was explained very well in the video.
-
1
-
-
On 8/11/2020 at 10:41 AM, Bob Rosadini said:
thx for the good info. When Hebe "bought" Ford's heavy truck business he sure did know what he was doing. And Jac the Knife? I don't think so. But as many regulars will say here..."well HD trucks made no money".
I was there when this happened. The quote from Jack Nasser was "HD truck only makes about 3%-5% profit. We could make more profit by putting that money in the bank !"
I don't know where the money went from the sale of HD truck, but that profit was year after year, with next to no engineering or production investment. And yes, it did help to see the Blue Oval on those rigs running down the road.
Class 8, like the old L-Series and AeroMax, is hard to make a profit when the customer demands certain engine, transmission axle combinations. Effectively there is no profit on component that are made by others. After the Blue Diamond disaster, Ford was smart by bringing back the F650/F750 with in-house powertrains. Being able to use the same "base" powertrain from Class 3 through the bottom of Class 8 is a brilliant idea.
The only thing holding Ford back from expanding deeper into Class 8 is the cost of developing an large, emissions compliant I6 diesel aimed exclusively at Class 4 and up and the cost of any necessary upgrades to their current 6R140/10R140 transmissions.
-
1
-
-
On 8/10/2020 at 9:06 AM, akirby said:
Hopefully they’re starting to use public cloud where you can bypass most of those IT roadblocks (but not all).The servers are cheap but once you add support costs, floor space and environmental you’re usually into the millions.
In a few small cases, they are using public cloud but only because IT can not react fast enough to purchase and install new equipment.
Your second statement is COMPLETE WRONG ! Again, I have first hand knowledge of this. 30+ years ago your statements are accurate. Today, with the PROPER personnel, design and implementation (admitted, not exactly up to Ford IT standards) less than a dozen people can support a key internal software development process (powertrain controls) on equipment that fits in 2 or 3 racks and would fit in a large closet. 30 years ago, this was 50+ people and server rooms the size of a couple of tennis courts ! I know this because I know the person who took over my job 13 years ago. The process has not changed much, but the equipment and personnel has.
-
2
-
-
One of the biggest Ford IT disasters was something called Everest. It was a purchasing system meant to replace the ancient IBM main frame system. It was meant to be a "no touch" system. Order were entered and when received at shipping and receiving were checked into the computer and the vendor was paid. That is how it was supposed to work ! The short version is it did not. "Non-production" turned into a nightmare for vendors who only did a few order with the company annually. Many did not get paid "net 90" and there was literally no one left in "accounts payable" for them to talk to ! Some just refused to sell to the company.
After about a year, when IT threatened to shut down the old system, assembly plant managers got involved. I don't know what their specific problem was, but Everest failed to solve it. When a plant manager says a plant will shutdown people listen ! After several months of fumbling around, IT said that V2 of Everest would address all issue AFTER more detail analysis of what the open issues were. The analysis and implementation phase were going to be much longer than V1 and cost much more than V1.
In the end, the decision was made to upgrade the IBM mainframes because it would cost a fraction of what the project Everest V2 upgrade was going to cost ! Everest, quickly amd quietly disappeared.
Automaker dumps Everest procurement system to revert to older technologies.
-
1
-
1
-
-
21 hours ago, akirby said:
There is a lot of overhead. Software requires developers and developers require compute and storage infrastructure. It requires less up front investment especially if you use public cloud but there is still significant overhead.Now you are talking about something I know about (this was my job before I retired and I still have friend working in this area).
First, the cost of computing and storage for software development for automotives is DIRT CHEAP theses days. Servers today cost $10-$20k. 20 years ago they were $100s of thousands ! A decent sized server room would fit in a large walk-in closet. 20+ years ago, you need a server room the size of a couple of tennis courts with multiple A/C units that were the size of 4 or 5 residential refrigerator.
Ford HAS recognized that they need a better, probably standardized, software development process than the dozen (or more) different "ad hoc" processes that they have. Some people are trying to "build empires" on this premise. Middle and upper level management don't want to touch this subject because it is so foreign to them.
The Ford IT Organization is a joke ! First level tech support is "off shore" and has no native English speakers. Second level support is local, but their response window is 48-72 business hours. Executives are insulated by having their own IT staff that is on call 24/7, including home support.
Worse, the Ford IT organization are nothing but a policing organization. They are great at telling you what you can not do and do nothing about helping you "get the job done".
21 hours ago, akirby said:
It really comes down to how much profit can be generated over the long term. It’s always somewhat of a crapshoot.-
2
-
-
On 8/6/2020 at 2:31 PM, bzcat said:
They need to invest in a new medium duty chassis to make investment in I6 make sense. Don't think I6 can fit in the E-series and if you have to spend money to make it fit, you might as well look at a modern clean sheet design.
I believe that with some minor modification to the E-Series dog house (at the expense of interior space) at "big" I6 diesel would fit. Not that expensive.
On 8/6/2020 at 2:31 PM, bzcat said:Right now, E-series + F650/750 + stripped chassis doesn't add up enough volume for Ford to make a clean sheet new chassis design so I don't see any new engine investment happening.
Concur !
-
19 hours ago, Bob Rosadini said:
For sure. As many on this site have questioned-what would it take to bring the 9L Duratorque over from Otosan? Or perhaps build off of its design?
My gut says that it is too old of a design (and too big for Class 4-7) to be worth investing in. Better off with a clean sheet.
19 hours ago, Bob Rosadini said:For sure.And given the success of the 7.3 I would have to believe that will displace a lot of potential diesel sales-in particular given the likely premium for a diesel option.
Do we know that yet ?
From my observation point, the usefulness of diesels in Class 4-7 is long past its peak. Emission has emasculated the power and fuel economy is nothing exciting (especially since diesel sells for more than regular around here). Add in the initial cost premium, the cost of DEF and those 4 GALLON oil changes with expensive filters and things don't look very promising for it future Diesels niche is very high loads and very long hauls (>50K/year).
10 hours ago, 7Mary3 said:Over the past 4 years, we have been phasing out our class 6 and 7 diesels, replacing them with CNG powered units.
Frito Lay delivery trucks in this area are all propane powered. While propane may be more expensive than CNG, if you have your own pumping station with a large storage capacity you can negotiate non-seasonal prices and the conversion cost is much lower.
-
3 hours ago, twintornados said:
I've always felt that the 3.2 5 cylinder diesel would have been a good fit in E-Series...
Not enough power for the E350 payload. I guess you could put a 4.10 or 4.33 rear axle in it and a limit the RPM so it does blow itself up.
-
1
-
-
19 hours ago, Bob Rosadini said:
For sure. As for the E-Series, a consideration for sure but as Transit gains a following I would have to think the E will end up very low on the priority list.
I don't know enough about the medium duty business, but I still see a lot of "box trucks" built on the E-Series chassis.
Anyone hoping for any significant upgrades on the Transit can forget about it ! Full frame ? Nope ! How about dual rear wheel that go outside of the body (like all dually pickups). Nope ! Why, ? Because EU is in charge of the Transit. Same reason there is RIDICULOUS second and third row seating.
Don't forget, E-Series is by far the most the most common platform for shuttle buses and Class C motor homes. Those are worthwhile markets as long as Ford does not have to spend a lot on unique upgrades.
-
Remember Kwick Fit ? (IIRC, it cost Ford $1M to buy it and $1M to sell it. These were just the bankers/lawyers fees !) Who in their right mind wants to go up against the likes of Google, Amazon and Apple ?
New Ford CEO Jim Farley plans to expand into technology fields
-
On 8/5/2020 at 10:06 AM, Bob Rosadini said:
" And Farley put greater focus on Ford's commercial vehicles business, an emphasis he repeated Tuesday."
If Ford wants to get serious about the "commercial vehicle business", maybe it is time to do a "real" commercial diesel, an I6 ! The only issue is, it has to fit in the E-Series.
Wouldn't that shake up the industry !
-
21 hours ago, kyle said:
My neighbor has an Econoline van and wants to upgrade to the larger vans out in the market-mentioned the Transit and he said not a chance-due to this issue-he's buddies with someone at one of our local dealer's and just said these driveshafts last about 30K. This is where Ford fails miserably and looks like they've learned nothing from previous fuck ups.
20 hours ago, Kev-Mo said:Apparently, this is why every van I see is a Sprinter or a Dodge.
Or maybe they have rear seats that are sized for American adults !
-
19 hours ago, JEMetzger said:
I also keep to factory recommended maintenance schedules as much as I can so hopefully that will reduce the possibility of issues and increase worn part detection.
Probably NOT ! I don't believe that the standard maintenance schedule says anything specific about testing front suspension components for wear,
-
I had never owned a SUV/CUV or truck (unless you count an E150 Club Wagon as a truck) until I bought a 2016 Edge. Still not a big fan of the body style, but I love the interior and the functionality of the hatch.
-
18 hours ago, jpd80 said:
The solution is a CV joint, Ford knows that but it keeps stalling on the permanent fix.
Hooke's Joint (a.k.a. U Joint) work fine as has been proven for many, many years !
-
1
-
-
On 7/17/2020 at 8:06 PM, Deanh said:
Anyone have any ideas...hes already going through the lemon law avenue, which sucks...
History has shown that Ford will not fix a serious problem like this until there are a significant number of buy backs.
-
1
-
-
Engineered in EU. They use small motors. They can not go that fast !!!
-
The lug nut issue has been around on different vehicles since the 1970 when GM started using chrome lug nut "covers" on standard lug nuts. If you have Lincoln Black Label service, the dealer should replace them, either as a warranty item or eat the cost.
-
In general, Ford used recycled plastic or parts made from "non-traditional" raw materials in areas that you do not see or come in direct contact. Recycled plastic does not always have uniform and consistent color.
-
1
-
NA Transit "abandoned" ?
in Transit Forum
Posted
Other than the redesigned driveshaft (which took years !) I have not seen any "significant" improvements in this vehicle (skipping over the soon to be released electric version). Heck, they even stopped offering a diesel engine option !
A couple of major areas of improvement come to mind :
I am sure there are other areas that need improvement.