Comment by jacquesm
1 day ago
Modularity would be great too. Standardized connectors and outer dimensions for engines even between brands. Medium, large, small. You don't need 100 different types. Meanwhile, all this has been overtaken by the need to get away from fossil fuels as soon as we practically can. Oil should not be valued based on the cost of pumping it out of the ground but based on the cost of creating a liter of it from raw materials (CO2, lots of energy).
> Standardized connectors and outer dimensions for engines even between brands. Medium, large, small. You don't need 100 different types.
There aren't 100 different types of engines. At any given time each auto manufacturer only has a couple different engines in production. Different models can get different variations for performance or use targets, but auto manufacturers are very good at standardizing within their company.
Look at the list of Honda engines: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Honda_engines
Notice how they're grouped by series? All of the engines in each series share a common platform with minor changes from year to year. In many cases you can swap parts between engines within the same series. An engine series lasts 10-15 years. Some times the parts even carry over to the next series.
Swapping between brands is a pipe dream, though. Forcing everyone to fit their engineering into a bounding box that has to be agreed upon by all auto manufacturers around the world would only lead to either unnecessarily large vehicles with wasted space (to leave room for future engineering needs) or unnecessarily complicated engineering to fit everything into the pre-defined allowable engine envelope. All to accommodate engine swaps between manufacturers which is never necessary for consumer cars.
We can do just that in lots of other industries.
Why don’t we start with computers and software first? Let’s eliminate all these different laptop options and force every manufacturer to use 3 government-mandated chassis sizes: Small, medium, and large. Make parts interchangeable with standard connectors and power budgets. Nobody is allowed to innovate or customize because we must be standardized.
Where do you think we’d be now? Typing on our highly optimized MacBook Pros, or working on a clunky box with the fans whirring like a hair dryer because everyone had to fit a standard lowest common denominator design and changing it required years of regulatory work?
Or how about software and operating systems? We allow two OS types: Server and Desktop and they all have to work together within standardized interfaces. Nobody is allowed to innovate unless it’s within the regulated specs.
Doesn’t sound so good when it’s applied to topics we’re most familiar with.
In any industry with high performance machines like CNC machines, pick and place, or precision equipment you will find that the parts are not modular or interchangeable across manufacturers either.
6 replies →
> Modularity would be great too.
Unfortunately, that wouldn't pad the car companies' margins. What's best for th consumer is generally worse for the company.
Cars are highly modular. Parts are shared across as many models as possible. Engine series are designed to last 10-15 years.
The car makers increase their margins by keeping their cars modular.
You are talking about modularity of design, not aftermarket repairability.