Topic: Subaru: it just sucks™
WSD !m2cp3rR5zw started this discussion 9 years ago #59,606
Having to take out the entire engine to replace a single spark plug is not a sign of good engineering.
Meta joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 6 minutes later[^] [v] #758,054
They can't even make windshields that don't break! ?
The Witch Doctor !6W1Zpe4MCM joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #758,086
@OPenis yeah, except you don't have to do that
WSD !m2cp3rR5zw (OP) replied with this 9 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #758,090
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #758,094
You could just remove the sump, crank, conrod, and piston then reach inside the cylinder head to access the spark plug.
The Witch Doctor !6W1Zpe4MCM replied with this 9 years ago, 9 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #758,100
@758,090 (WSD !m2cp3rR5zw)
No you do not. The boxer engine offers a low center of gravity, and stability.
No you do not. The boxer engine offers a low center of gravity, and stability.
WSD !m2cp3rR5zw (OP) replied with this 9 years ago, 3 hours later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #758,188
@previous (The Witch Doctor !6W1Zpe4MCM)
It also offers an engine that requires lifting out before changing a mere sparkplug.
It also offers an engine that requires lifting out before changing a mere sparkplug.
The Witch Doctor !6W1Zpe4MCM joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 9 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #758,200
squeegee the shaman joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 45 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #758,211
genuine question: what does it matter? i've never changed a spark plug. never needed to get to a spark plug. kinda figured the whole "spark plug problem" was mostly sorted on new cars? they're not like windshield wipers or oil filters. spark plugs are probably like something they do at a 100k maintenance mark or something? idk, i just wasn't aware that "spark plug accessibility" should even be a concern for the car owner. i could understand if i needed to change them every 3k or even 10k miles - the cost to pull the engine each time would be a bit excessive - but i doubt anyone will ever even touch the spark plugs in my current car before i end up trading it in.
shouldn't spark plug placement be secondary to efficient engine designs that prevent easy to access spark plugs? it is 2017 after all. i don't even change my own oil, why should i care about spark plugs?
shouldn't spark plug placement be secondary to efficient engine designs that prevent easy to access spark plugs? it is 2017 after all. i don't even change my own oil, why should i care about spark plugs?
The Witch Doctor !6W1Zpe4MCM replied with this 9 years ago, 13 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #758,213
@previous (squeegee the shaman)
Also, one does not, in fact, have to remove the engine to change the spark plugs on a Subaru.
Also, one does not, in fact, have to remove the engine to change the spark plugs on a Subaru.
WSD !m2cp3rR5zw (OP) replied with this 9 years ago, 31 seconds later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #758,215
The Witch Doctor !6W1Zpe4MCM replied with this 9 years ago, 3 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #758,218
squeegee the shaman replied with this 9 years ago, 36 seconds later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #758,220
i work with a specific type of machinery that's pretty interesting and there are just tons of variations on the thing and i've worked with quite a few so i have a very high level understanding of why they were designed the way they were. some are designed with absolute novices in mind, others were designed without any failsafe type features and you can totally fucking break them if you don't know what you're doing. but, you can't really fuck up the ones that were made to be easy to use and designed to be simple to repair. however, they are mechanically over complicated and are prone to manufacturing defects, they have a high failure rate, and consistency could be much, much better. sure, they're easy to maintain and relatively cheap and with lots of calibration be brought into line, but they need frequent calibration and eventually to be completely replaced. they are made to eventually be disposed of.
but, the "high end" machine is much simpler and much more robust, and to repair it or even do relatively simple maintenance requires a complete tear down and rebuild. but since it's simpler you almost never have to do that unless operator error fucks something up. and since it's more robustly built, i.e. truly heavy duty, long term wear is truly a long term problem. performance is improved in a simpler design too because you just have less going on. it's just consistent and reliable.
anyway, point being you can't always point to one design decision and say it's a mark of bad engineering. just because something is designed to be difficult to work with doesn't mean it's not as good as something that's designed to be easy. you always have to make compromises when you're engineering complex systems too. like if i need the absolute highest precision possible out of my equipment then i have to sacrifice ease of use. that's not a result of a bad design decision.
but, the "high end" machine is much simpler and much more robust, and to repair it or even do relatively simple maintenance requires a complete tear down and rebuild. but since it's simpler you almost never have to do that unless operator error fucks something up. and since it's more robustly built, i.e. truly heavy duty, long term wear is truly a long term problem. performance is improved in a simpler design too because you just have less going on. it's just consistent and reliable.
anyway, point being you can't always point to one design decision and say it's a mark of bad engineering. just because something is designed to be difficult to work with doesn't mean it's not as good as something that's designed to be easy. you always have to make compromises when you're engineering complex systems too. like if i need the absolute highest precision possible out of my equipment then i have to sacrifice ease of use. that's not a result of a bad design decision.
(Edited 2 minutes later.)
The Witch Doctor !6W1Zpe4MCM replied with this 9 years ago, 3 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #758,221
squeegee the shaman replied with this 9 years ago, 3 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #758,222
@previous (The Witch Doctor !6W1Zpe4MCM)
no, i work for like some kind of company, they do, like, i dunno, bunch of bullshit. you'd be surprised.
no, i work for like some kind of company, they do, like, i dunno, bunch of bullshit. you'd be surprised.
