Making carmakers use standard filters

The number of different filters in use is huge and it grows each year. Unless manufacturers can prove a need to generate new ones, why
shouldn't they be required to design around the common types already available?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
/rant on
Can you imagine the screaming about it? Even when the government legislates safety standards required, they DO NOT tell the auto makers how to go about it. All that is required is that standards are met.
I know what you are saying, and I think what the auto makers do is a joke too. However, it all had to do with a "me", "MINE" mentality. Just look at SONY. Sony really believes in their motto "THE ONE AND ONLY". So much so that they LOST the VCR wars. VHS was inferior but "free", and Beta was SONY "proprietary" and cost money. We know where that went. Apple makes a better computer, but also adopted the "apple only" mentality, and - quite frankly - I am surprized they are still in business. IBM and Micro$haft have pounded the crap out of them.
And then we come to a car. The car seems to be the direct opposite! EVERYTHING on a car is "proprietary" to start with. The more profitable items do eventually appear in the after-market, but in general, a lot of stuff is "dealer only".
To the filter thing, well, they want to make profit. What better way than to have a captive audience??? Remember when the imports first came here to North America??? I do. The after market had not pricked up on the parts yet. So even an air filter was "dealer only". When you could get a HUGE filter for a 455 V8 from the corner store for $1.99 (or less) these teeeny winie bizarrre shaped filters were going at the dealers for $15 a pop or even more! AND PEOPLE PAID IT! (Idiots). My dad's GM truck needed an regulator, $4.50. My mom's Volkswagen needed one about the same time - $35!!!
By always making something just a little bit different - even in the same product line and varience from year to year, then obsolescense is PLANNED into your car. With the ammount of money a car costs, this is GOLD IN THE MINE. Eventually, parts will be hard to find for you car, the after market will shrink, and the pragmatic person will be forced to get at least a newer one - if not a spanking new one, and the auto makers know this.
What ticks me off about it is, look at the damn WASTE as a result! Every time a new car comes out, a huge chunk of it is spent re-tweaking the same old design, re-hashing things that should be standardized once and for all, and left alone. The WASTED productivity is staggering. TIme that could be spent designing things that are truly NEW that could improve safety or efficiency or make a REAL difference to things is wasted while someone redesigns an air filter to fit the latest "cram as much as you can under the hood" model.
The other reason the industry does NOT want standardization is they don't want competition! Think of it! If there were, say, 6 different air filters, all in standard sizes and shapes, the design was standardized, and they all had to use one of them, then LOTS of companies could enter that market, and make them better and cheaper! If there were only 6 different kinds, then tooling would be paid for ONCE, and then no more re-tooling of the manufacturing lines! Distributors would not have to stock 10,000 different kinds! They could put other things on the shelf for us to buy! It would eliminate several layers of perrenial waste, reduce costs to the consumer, increase benefis for the parts dealers, and reduce the auto makers profits. This last one is the reason it will never happen.
What the auto makers fail to realize is that if they would standardize on the common stuff, then they could focus on making their vehicles more distinctive in ways that count, not distinctive because they manages to piss of their customer because he or she had to go to the dealer for a "dealer only" air filter.
Unfortunately, there is no law against waste, and pissing off customers. As long as profit is the sole motivation of industry, then we are doomed to accept waste year after year - as long as industry can make a buck at it,
/rant off
wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

We are talking about an air filter here. All the common vehicle models have air filters readily available in the aftermarket from multiple vendors.

Totally inapplicable. Air filters are readily available on the aftermarket.

That was then, this is now.

The aftermarket lives on parts that are rebuildable, parts that are easy to copy, and parts that are higher wear items. It always has.

It is the customers driving that, not the automakers. If the automakers could design a car shaped like a brick and make it for 20 years with no changes, and sales would hold up on it, they would do it in a heartbeat. Volkswagen did it with the VW bug when they got a chance. There are other models out there like that.

No they woudn't. Air filters are such a high volume now that just increasing production volume isn't going to affect their wholesale price that much, the companies making them are already operating pretty far along the curve.

This is stupid. If you really feel this way then just remove your air filter, and re-duct your engine air intake to your own design of airbox that uses a "cheaper and better" filter. In fact, if you want to save even more money, then use a bigger air filter. If you use for example an air filter with twice as much surface area it will probably last 3 times longer. And you could make a custom airbox out of sheet metal and a pop rivet tool in a short time.

ways that count to you.

because he or she was too lazy to use a substitute air filter.
Ted
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yes too bad, my beta Sony is still better than the two VHS units I've bought more recently.

Apple's computer and OS X are even better than ever and Apple is at an all time high. In the mod 90s Apple's very poor management almost sunk Apple, but better management and steadily improving technology are providing Apple significant growth. Apple certainly isn't close to M$ in size, but it is a mid Fortune 500 company. Apple's recent Intel CPU computers give the flexibility to run Windoz native applications efficiently as well. Apple is like Mercedes and other quality cars, superior product at a lower volume, appreciated by those who want something better than run of the mill. By the way IBM is pretty well out of the PC business, having sold it off to a Chinese company. IBM isn't even providing CPUs to Apple anymore, with Apple's move to the Intel CPU.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

With a modern merc, you get the beauty of knowing you're a cut above the rest, and the chance to show it off as you're stuck on the roadside, waiting for the tow-truck AGAIN.
Prime example of recent attention to detail in modern mercs - look at the back of an 8-ish year old s-class. $70+k to buy, and the plastic between the reversing lights has turned pink in the sun. Says it all really.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Comparing Apple with Wintel is hardly comparing like with like. If Microsoft enforced an MS-software-only policy then there would be no crashes and problems.
Anyway, MS owns a chunk of Apple nowadays, does it not?
DAS
For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling
--
"Spam Hater" < snipped-for-privacy@spam.net> wrote in message
news: snipped-for-privacy@news.telus.net...
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Dori A Schmetterling wrote:

Ha, ha, ha... That is funny!
Matt
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
All right then, far fewer crashes and problems.
You're a tad 'blindly biased', methinks?
DAS
For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling
--
"Matt Whiting" < snipped-for-privacy@epix.net> wrote in message
news:cG0jg.9582$ snipped-for-privacy@news1.epix.net...
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Dori A Schmetterling wrote:

No, just wrote software for a decade or so and have a read a little about Microsofts software development practices. The build and test every night to try to find the bugs vs. actually designing and coding to a spec is simply never going to produce anything approaching reliable software.
So, yes, I'm biased, but based on clear sight, not blindness.
Matt
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Apple doesn't restrict MacOS SW APPS to Apple only, but why would that improve the MS OS?
Apple actually makes much of it's OS design public, even allowing the Darwin OS X core to be downloaded by anyone.
MS keeps much of their OS design secret, frustrating those who want to create APPs for it. This was a significant part of the long running legal action against MS.

If they do, the investment world isn't aware of it. MS would be wise to own a chunk of Apple, considering how they get so many ideas from Apple.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

By whom? You think the government hasn't got enough to do without policing filters?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.