- Joined
- Jul 26, 2011
- Messages
- 862
- Location
- Absurdy, new name of France
- Tagline
- You never have too much tapedecks ^^
Washing machines :(
- Thread starter Overundr1
- Start date
I chalk the John Deere service case up to corporate incompetence more than screwing their customers. You cannot fathom how much corporate incompetence exists out there...
Then there is the Heather Bresch Epipen scandal, where the price was hiked 5x because they could. That is screwing your customers. Where a vacuum is formed in the marketplace, something comes in to fill it.
Then there is the Heather Bresch Epipen scandal, where the price was hiked 5x because they could. That is screwing your customers. Where a vacuum is formed in the marketplace, something comes in to fill it.
100% agreed. That epipen pricing scandal was evil. As is the move by big pharma to buy up all the generic drug manufacturers for the sole purpose of jacking the price on their drugs. We all feel the effect of that at our age.
But back to John Deere. I'd like to hear more about your theory of corporate incompetence in this case, Joe. Seriously. That one farmer is not alone - he's just the example in the video. He represents thousands.
I see a deliberate attempt to enhance profits many times over by automating or adding computer controls to things mechanical which work perfectly well - and can be repaired readily - and controlling the customers' access to the repair. I see Monsanto claiming a "patent" over seeds which they never touched. I see all manner of electronic nanny crap on my wife's Subaru which we not only don't need, but have never used. But if it breaks, my mechanic of 30-plus year can't repair it because Subaru declares it proprietary. Just like every other modern automaker on that gravy train. These initiatives are too well organized for me to think incompetence is at work, here, as much incompetence as I know we all observe . I can't call it anything but corporate greed. And yes, I own equities in my 401k, so I'm not absolved.
But back to John Deere. I'd like to hear more about your theory of corporate incompetence in this case, Joe. Seriously. That one farmer is not alone - he's just the example in the video. He represents thousands.
I see a deliberate attempt to enhance profits many times over by automating or adding computer controls to things mechanical which work perfectly well - and can be repaired readily - and controlling the customers' access to the repair. I see Monsanto claiming a "patent" over seeds which they never touched. I see all manner of electronic nanny crap on my wife's Subaru which we not only don't need, but have never used. But if it breaks, my mechanic of 30-plus year can't repair it because Subaru declares it proprietary. Just like every other modern automaker on that gravy train. These initiatives are too well organized for me to think incompetence is at work, here, as much incompetence as I know we all observe . I can't call it anything but corporate greed. And yes, I own equities in my 401k, so I'm not absolved.
Hi Bob
The corporate incompetence stems from Deere's inability to maintain a service organization that can get to a farmers tractor repair in a very short period of time. In many corporate environments, the service organization is the red haired step child and practical thought processes are rare. If that farmer got swift service for the downed part, there would be no video. Like many organizations, the product development and sales and marketing organizations at Deere likely work great, not so much for their service org.
A lot of the computer controls employed are not because they want to but because of the regulations that are imposed on makers of things that emit carbon into the atmosphere. If the regulators would get out of the way, you would see a return to sanity. But that won't happen, it just gets worse every year. Look at all the computer controlled safety devices on the latest vehicles. Regulation produced that.
As far as programming, nobody lets that code out into the wild. All car dealers have a locked down code download protocol that protects them and their customers. With so much computer control in modern things, it becomes a liability not to closely control that. When your steering and braking is under computer control, no manufacturer wants the liability of rogue code being installed.
The sad part is the electronics are the least reliable parts of vehicles these days. That should be a major priority, to make electronics that last.
The corporate incompetence stems from Deere's inability to maintain a service organization that can get to a farmers tractor repair in a very short period of time. In many corporate environments, the service organization is the red haired step child and practical thought processes are rare. If that farmer got swift service for the downed part, there would be no video. Like many organizations, the product development and sales and marketing organizations at Deere likely work great, not so much for their service org.
A lot of the computer controls employed are not because they want to but because of the regulations that are imposed on makers of things that emit carbon into the atmosphere. If the regulators would get out of the way, you would see a return to sanity. But that won't happen, it just gets worse every year. Look at all the computer controlled safety devices on the latest vehicles. Regulation produced that.
As far as programming, nobody lets that code out into the wild. All car dealers have a locked down code download protocol that protects them and their customers. With so much computer control in modern things, it becomes a liability not to closely control that. When your steering and braking is under computer control, no manufacturer wants the liability of rogue code being installed.
The sad part is the electronics are the least reliable parts of vehicles these days. That should be a major priority, to make electronics that last.
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2011
- Messages
- 74,886
- Location
- Gillette, Wyo.
- Tagline
- Halfbiass...Electron Herder and Backass Woof
I would suggest tens of thousands of Ford product owners and mechanics may want to disagree with that statement.
Whoever thought the wet belt system would be of any benefit for longevity or anything else wants their head examining.
Oh but wait, of course we know the bean-counters and not the engineers decided it would be a good idea. Drrp
Whoever thought the wet belt system would be of any benefit for longevity or anything else wants their head examining.
Oh but wait, of course we know the bean-counters and not the engineers decided it would be a good idea. Drrp
A couple of reasons for the change, one was to greatly decrease the length of the "suction" side of the pump. This should, in theroy be beneficial for pump prime and reduce the possibility of any cavitation.
Apparently the reason for the changes in the first place was crankshaft harmonics that could fracture the georotor under high power conditions.... Hmmmmm ...
Slightly over spec # 1 main bearing clearance could alsp increase the chances of a georotor fracture.
The "They" people say the 5.0 is now good to over 1000 hp without worry of any oiling issues..
Hmmmm.
The belt is some space age Kevlar concoction...
This has been in every 5.0 since 2021.
Time will tell !
Last edited:
Thanks for the perspective, Joe. Figured if anyone had it, you would, given the world you work in. Your final two sentances say it all.
Would that I could, but I still can't buy quite all of it. I see corporations using a lot of excuses - and doing lots of lobbying to arrange for some of those regulations - to jack us up any way they can. I was around too many lobbyists years ago to not observe how that game is played. And I've yet to see anything unintentional about any aspect of it.
Would that I could, but I still can't buy quite all of it. I see corporations using a lot of excuses - and doing lots of lobbying to arrange for some of those regulations - to jack us up any way they can. I was around too many lobbyists years ago to not observe how that game is played. And I've yet to see anything unintentional about any aspect of it.
Reeks of built-in or pre-meditated obsolesence. We all know how poorly-maintained vehicles fail quicker and this just smacks of a design-technique to find profit via poor longevity through failure and re-purchase, especially if applied to the fleet market where maintenance regimens are almost always underfunded.
It already is. There's a youtube channel I watch from time to time called 'Salvage rebuilds'. A pair of cheeky chirpy Cockneys (Eat End London boys) who specialise in turning around written-off vehicles and re-selling for a profit. They're always lamenting wet-belt failures on Fords and Peugeots.
https://www.youtube.com/@sruk
It already is. There's a youtube channel I watch from time to time called 'Salvage rebuilds'. A pair of cheeky chirpy Cockneys (Eat End London boys) who specialise in turning around written-off vehicles and re-selling for a profit. They're always lamenting wet-belt failures on Fords and Peugeots.
https://www.youtube.com/@sruk
2017 BMW X3 (Wife's car) does the shut-off thing at stop lights but sometimes doesn't re-start and you're in park at the light with engine off...
Need a new mechatronic unit (transmission interface/controller) installed and coded to the car. yes, it's very expensive.
Learned today you cannot re-code good used ones to a different car- you must buy a brand new one and re-code that. Guess who is the only one that can code it? Yep. Dealer only. Same deal with engine DME. One and done. And these things are all engineered to last to the end of the warranty period...
Need a new mechatronic unit (transmission interface/controller) installed and coded to the car. yes, it's very expensive.
Learned today you cannot re-code good used ones to a different car- you must buy a brand new one and re-code that. Guess who is the only one that can code it? Yep. Dealer only. Same deal with engine DME. One and done. And these things are all engineered to last to the end of the warranty period...
