Dangers of DIY car brake maintenance

[briansnail]

Agree with the post Japanese cars were/are super reliable.Also
French cars had the best suspension systems
German cars were like rock indestructible
Italian cars were stylish
British cars had good design eg Mini
American cars were like buses large
****************************************
I ride Brompton and a 100% British Vintage

[peetee]

That's good, but on similar journeys an Audi estate we had (1.9l engine and no hybrid system) would return between 60 and 70mpg. It returned from Scotland once having averaged a little over 70mpg on the return trip, well loaded. Everyday use was typically 45-55.

I can support that statement. My 1996 VW Passat 1.9 TD averaged 57mpg in my ownership and returned 80mpg on one motorway trip in the slow lane all the way. Loaded with family and luggage it did 62mpg on a 550 mile weekend jaunt from Hampshire to Kent.
I’ve owned a few much smaller cars but none have been more frugal than that Passat.

[Biospace]

Agree with the post Japanese cars were/are super reliable.Also
French cars had the best suspension systems
German cars were like rock indestructible
Italian cars were stylish
British cars had good design eg Mini
American cars were like buses large
****************************************
I ride Brompton and a 100% British Vintage

I agree with most of that, just not so sure about German cars being indestructible. At their best, they were the best for Germany although very much lacking on less than German-perfect roads (where steering, suspension, tyre noise suppression and braking are more important) now that they're engineered for all markets, the quality does not match the reputation. In my opinion.

There was possibly a sweet spot in the late 80s and early 90s for Audi and Mercedes. And Italian cars were much, much more than stylish.

[jb]

The four wheel drive Ford Mondeo out classed anything BMW ever made, unfortunately it didn't have the same kudos. Shame really.

[pete75]

For modern ordinary small car engines the major alternative to chain drive of the camshafts(s) is belt drive, not pushrods.

Jonathan

I was correcting a slip of the keyboard a few posts up when I'd used pushrods to mean 'cambelt-less' rather than saying the chain driven cams are used on Toyota engines (and many more).

Said friend with his well over 200,000 mile 1999 Yaris had previously used a Vauxhall passed on to him from his grandfather, its chain was worn badly by 100,000 despite being serviced as recommended.

The chain is often small and single row. They should all be like the cam chain on a twin cam Alfa 75 I had some years ago - double row chain the same size as the primary chaine on a 650 Bonneville.

[Biospace]

I was correcting a slip of the keyboard a few posts up when I'd used pushrods to mean 'cambelt-less' rather than saying the chain driven cams are used on Toyota engines (and many more).

Said friend with his well over 200,000 mile 1999 Yaris had previously used a Vauxhall passed on to him from his grandfather, its chain was worn badly by 100,000 despite being serviced as recommended.

The chain is often small and single row. They should all be like the cam chain on a twin cam Alfa 75 I had some years ago - double row chain the same size as the primary chaine on a 650 Bonneville.

"Ratners" was the comment on seeing the size of the Vauxhall chain.

[pete75]

The GS was a small family car designed to compete with the likes of the Renault 12, not a sporting saloon. The P6 may have been marketed as something sporting but in reality the early models were just family saloons.

You're talking about the market sector the GS occupied on account of its physical size and price, not its marketing. As decision makers and trends changed, it was re-engineered, renamed and marketed as a good value family hatchback for the second half of its life.

Citroen a major French car maker is competing with Renault another major maker. Renault is enjoying sales succes with it's 12, an excellent, mid sized family car. Citroen have a model in development, the GS, which is similar in size and likley to be prove popular in the same market sector which is one of the biggest. It is four doored, a similar sized five seater and with a range of similarly low powered, economical engines. Do you really think the Citroen board decided it's market was Jacques Le Garçon, sporty car loving rivieria playboy or the much larger market sector containg the likes of Pierre Dupont, schoolteacher with three children. The car was never re-engineered just given a body face lift about half way through the production run - normal with most cars.

[Mick F]

Yes, chain cam, not pushrod. I think all the Prius models are chain, also.

Wrong.

The Toyota hybrid engine has no cam belt, no fan belt, no chains, no nothing.
The engine valves are electrically operated with computer controlled variable timing as is the ignition, and the water pump and brake servo are electric too.
No starter motor either - done when and if the engine needs to kick in using the main drive electric motors.
Climate control system is electric, so there's no mechanically driven aircon.

Main battery is under the rear seat along with a (tiny) 12v battery.
The 12v battery is a "keep alive" unit to unlock the car with the plip, and to start the main system.

[Jdsk]

Yes, chain cam, not pushrod. I think all the Prius models are chain, also.

Wrong.

The Toyota hybrid engine has no cam belt, no fan belt, no chains, no nothing.
The engine valves are electrically operated with computer controlled variable timing as is the ignition, and the water pump and brake servo are electric too.

There are various different IC engines used in Toyota hybrids.

Several use electrical modification of the valve timing, but that's different from fully electrical actuation.

Which engine (or model, capacity and year) uses fully electrical actuation?

Thanks

Jonathan

[Biospace]

Yes, chain cam, not pushrod. I think all the Prius models are chain, also.

Wrong.

The Toyota hybrid engine has no cam belt, no fan belt, no chains, no nothing.
The engine valves are electrically operated with computer controlled variable timing as is the ignition, and the water pump and brake servo are electric too.
No starter motor either - done when and if the engine needs to kick in using the main drive electric motors.
Climate control system is electric, so there's no mechanically driven aircon.

Main battery is under the rear seat along with a (tiny) 12v battery.
The 12v battery is a "keep alive" unit to unlock the car with the plip, and to start the main system.
IMG_0199.jpg



IMG_0201.jpg

Their top ends were driven by chains up to the point my knowledge drops off in that case - thanks for the correction!

I'm aware there is a new breed of Toyota engine with (possibly hydraulic and) electrical valve timing control, different swirl tech etc. but didn't realise they'd mechanically decoupled the crank from the cam. Long overdue, camshafts would have gone out long ago were it not for their efficiency and reliability compared with what used to be the alternative.

My interest is more in the combustion technologies and was fascinated that Toyota had applied Atkinson technology to the Otto unit through inlet valve timing and creating a 'virtual' compression ratio through timing of the valves when the Prius first emerged. The efficiency was raised to ~37% then, I think Toyota might have reached 40% now, which is diesel territory.

They also used Saab's idea for a while, holding coolant in a vacuum flask to keep it hot, I love that such a huge corporation is trying out new approaches all the time, even if they then drop them.

Here's an animation of one of Atkinson's engines, 1887.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Atki ... Intake.gif

[Biospace]

The GS was a small family car designed to compete with the likes of the Renault 12, not a sporting saloon. The P6 may have been marketed as something sporting but in reality the early models were just family saloons.

You're talking about the market sector the GS occupied on account of its physical size and price, not its marketing. As decision makers and trends changed, it was re-engineered, renamed and marketed as a good value family hatchback for the second half of its life.

Citroen a major French car maker is competing with Renault another major maker. Renault is enjoying sales succes with it's 12, an excellent, mid sized family car. Citroen have a model in development, the GS, which is similar in size and likley to be prove popular in the same market sector which is one of the biggest. It is four doored, a similar sized five seater and with a range of similarly low powered, economical engines. Do you really think the Citroen board decided it's market was Jacques Le Garçon, sporty car loving rivieria playboy or the much larger market sector containg the likes of Pierre Dupont, schoolteacher with three children. The car was never re-engineered just given a body face lift about half way through the production run - normal with most cars.

Again, I'll say that is how the P6 and GS were marketed, which does not imply those who are targeted by advertising are the only or most numerous customers.

Before the 60s, faster (not as in top speed necessarily, but more in an ability to cruise serenely at 90mph, say - not very common outside Italy for medium size cars in the 50s) cars with luxury features had mostly been large, powerful and expensive to buy and run. There was an emerging market which was seeking some of these qualities in a smaller car, something which BMC in part captured so cynically yet effectively with its various 'upmarket' version of the Austin/Morris 1100, with MG, Vanden-Plas and Wolseley badges.

Both Rover and Citroën (one once a bicycle manufacturer, the other a manufacturer in the old Clement bicycle factory), famous for their large, fast and comfortable cars were looking to this market a little less cynically with medium size cars engineered differently from the average Ford or Vauxhall, with a quality and comfort to match their famous badges. Both companies were very keen to target a more youthful market (they felt the more mature customer profile was affecting brand image plus there were more spending years in a younger clientele), the irony being the public ignored the marketing and both cars sold more to those over a certain age while maturing Saab and BMW captured the attentions of younger buyers in the 70s.

Most of the re-engineering when the GS morphed into the GSA was structural, the small boot opening turned into a roof-hinged tailgate, the tail of the car was lengthened and quality was reduced wherever possible. I see Wikipedia calls it a 'facelift' involving wheel trims, grille and handles etc.

[tim-b]

Which engine (or model, capacity and year) uses fully electrical actuation?

There is a digital camshaft piston engine, one example is https://camcon-automotive.com/ in Cambridge
Koenigsegg make a hybrid using similar technology from the Swedish company Freevalve, but I don't think that tech is commercially available from Toyota yet

[Jdsk]

I'm aware there is a new breed of Toyota engine with (possibly hydraulic and) electrical valve timing control, different swirl tech etc. but didn't realise they'd mechanically decoupled the crank from the cam.

Let's see if they have...

Jonathan

[pete75]

You're talking about the market sector the GS occupied on account of its physical size and price, not its marketing. As decision makers and trends changed, it was re-engineered, renamed and marketed as a good value family hatchback for the second half of its life.

Citroen a major French car maker is competing with Renault another major maker. Renault is enjoying sales succes with it's 12, an excellent, mid sized family car. Citroen have a model in development, the GS, which is similar in size and likley to be prove popular in the same market sector which is one of the biggest. It is four doored, a similar sized five seater and with a range of similarly low powered, economical engines. Do you really think the Citroen board decided it's market was Jacques Le Garçon, sporty car loving rivieria playboy or the much larger market sector containg the likes of Pierre Dupont, schoolteacher with three children. The car was never re-engineered just given a body face lift about half way through the production run - normal with most cars.

Again, I'll say that is how the P6 and GS were marketed, which does not imply those who are targeted by advertising are the only or most numerous customers.

Before the 60s, faster (not as in top speed necessarily, but more in an ability to cruise serenely at 90mph, say - not very common outside Italy for medium size cars in the 50s) cars with luxury features had mostly been large, powerful and expensive to buy and run. There was an emerging market which was seeking some of these qualities in a smaller car, something which BMC in part captured so cynically yet effectively with its various 'upmarket' version of the Austin/Morris 1100, with MG, Vanden-Plas and Wolseley badges.

Both Rover and Citroën (one once a bicycle manufacturer, the other a manufacturer in the old Clement bicycle factory), famous for their large, fast and comfortable cars were looking to this market a little less cynically with medium size cars engineered differently from the average Ford or Vauxhall, with a quality and comfort to match their famous badges. Both companies were very keen to target a more youthful market (they felt the more mature customer profile was affecting brand image plus there were more spending years in a younger clientele), the irony being the public ignored the marketing and both cars sold more to those over a certain age while maturing Saab and BMW captured the attentions of younger buyers in the 70s.

Most of the re-engineering when the GS morphed into the GSA was structural, the small boot opening turned into a roof-hinged tailgate, the tail of the car was lengthened and quality was reduced wherever possible. I see Wikipedia calls it a 'facelift' involving wheel trims, grille and handles etc.

If the GS was marketed as a sporty car I'd guess it was only in this country and not in France. Personally I think marketing means damn all. A bit of panel bashing don't amount to re-engineering.

According to my father it was the P6 which started Rover's decline from a quality manufacturer into something very different. He was familiar with the vehicle and had a drive in one well before they were actually put on sale. In his view the Triumph 2000 was a better car. One of the bosses at the factory where he worked drove a pre production P6 to Monaco and back for the Grand Prix. He was a man well into his sixties at the time but probably a lot quicker driver than your young sporty chaps, having set FTD many times at Shelsley Walsh and won many races at Brooklands, Donington Park, the Eifelrennen etc pre war.

I can't see many young buyers in the mid sixties being able to afford a P6. My father-in-law had one in 1965 as his company car and hated the thing. He was very pleased when it written off by a lorry and he replaced it with a Renault 16. He had about five of those in a row - they had much superior suspension to the Rover which was important to him, a corn merchant, because he did a lot of miles on country back roads and cart tracks visiting farms.

[Biospace]

Personally I think marketing means damn all.

That's what the point of my original comment was - both makers tried marketing something one way but the sales went the other.

... a P6... he replaced it with a Renault 16. He had about five of those in a row - they had much superior suspension to the Rover which was important to him, a corn merchant, because he did a lot of miles on country back roads and cart tracks visiting farms.

The Renault 16 was a better drive, engine, suspension and aerodynamics together made it far sweeter at speed - I've driven both for a good few thousand miles as bangers when a teenager.