Originally posted by 84fiero123: You know your knowledge of the automotive assembly process and tests really does amaze me for someone who has never set foot in an assembly plant, especially about the inspection process and variables allowed. I said I was utility repair and that meant if the final line driver inspector was out I also did that job as well. That job for your information included driving the cars off the ends of final line onto roll test where they went on a dyno type setup machine where there was a guy in a pit under the car that did the alignment of the car while who ever it was doing the driving that day did the other roll test inspections. one of those inspections was for the speedometers accuracy. we had to watch the speedo in the car and a large one that in the early 80s was a clock type speedo and then went to digital, that was directly in front of and above the car. they had to be within so many MPH of each other or the car went to a repair bay. along with many other inspections that were done on that same station, But I suppose you already knew that with your vast area of knowledge and degree.
And just to clarify something, I was wrong about the speedos being lower, after thinking about that overnight they were higher buy a mile or more I forget the actual spec but the speedos were higher than actual speeds of the car.
Now the gas gauge it is the other way as has been said by others as well as me, My memory isn't always infallible like yours.
Exactly, your memory is not infallible, so stop acting like it is. I never claimed mine was either, but you sure do like to assume a lot of things.
The manufacturing tolerances are federal law for a reason. That reason has absolutely nothing to do with GM trying to cover their own asses if you buy a car and then go get a speeding ticket. The law allows 5% because the technology at the time the law was written, meant that a certain margin of error had to exist, as variations across the model lines of manufacturers such as tire size, meant it might read a little high or a little low, because it was impossible to get perfectly sized tires for the gears used. For current production cars, that law makes no sense. Every car produced can easily have a 99.9999% accurate speedometer, because it's no longer driven by a gear that sits in the transmission. It's a magnetic pick-up on the diff gear, so any changes to gear ratios or tire sizes can be programmed into the PCM, and the speedometer on the dash will always read accurately (unless changes are made without updating the programming). The speedometer in modern cars is driven by a serial bus.
Now, to clarify, because your reading comprehension skills are apparently quite lacking. I never once state that all speedometers and gas gauges were 100% accurate for all time. What I was raising the flag on, was your promotion of the buffering of the speedo and fuel gauge, as a means for GM to protect itself from people getting speeding tickets or running the tank dry. That is a poor assumption.
GM could care less if you run the tank dry and destroy the fuel pump. Because they won't cover it under warranty, and you'll be paying the bill to repair it. Like I said, the inaccuracy of the fuel gauge is all about the range of motion, and the design of the tank. It has nothing to do with any buffering. The speedo likewise in an 80s vehicle like the Fiero might have come from the factory reading 1% off depending on the configuration of the car, as a result of slight difference in tire size because they couldn't get the diameter of the tires to be exactly the same for 13" and 14" and 15" wheels offered on the car. GM doesn't care if you get a speeding ticket. 5% is not a large enough margin of error for you to be able to blame it on the manufacturer. Speed limits are not high enough for that to have any meaningful effect on whether you would have gotten pulled over or not. If you let your speedometer get inaccurate enough that you're getting pulled over when it says you're going the speed limit, then it's your own damn fault for not properly maintaining the car.
Damage to the fuel pump from running out of gas are overstated. Yes it's cooled by the flow of gas, but when the flow stops the engine quits...unless you have an engine that runs without the benefit of fuel. What's bad for the pump is if you sit there continually cranking the car with no fuel. That will fry the pump.
My 1997 Trans Am had a fuel guage that E meant E no kidding. I ran out of gas on my very first tank when the car was brand new. Walked to gas station, put in a gallon of gas and it fired right up. Never had any subsequent fuel pump issues.
What really annoys me about every fuel gauge that I have ever seen is they are non-linear. I mean most cars you can drive 50 miles before it even comes off F. then you can go another 150 miles to half. And you are lucky to get 50 miles on the last half. I mean what's up wth that? And new cars are still this way not just crappy 80s cars.
[This message has been edited by jscott1 (edited 08-03-2014).]
Ive never had a car (100s) that had an accurate gas gauge or speedo. I will say most are only 1-2 miles below what my GPS says, but just normal tire wear can cause that. Nearly every car Ive had, filled to past the full mark on the gauge...usually to where I could drive up to 75 miles before it dropped down to the full mark. Ive had quite a few run out of gas with 1/8-1/4 still showing. Also had them drive another 50 miles on empty. There only good for a rough estimate. My motorhome gas gauge moves 1/4 tank up or down (60 gal tank), on curves or stops. Its only accurate parked level or driving on a level road at a constant speed. My current Caravan is the only one in memory Ive had that shows less than full after topping it off, and then it dont move for the first 75 miles...even though the digital readout of miles left till empty does work accurately. I can top off, drive 100 miles with the gauge barely moving, but the readout drops by that 100 miles from till empty. It averages 25 mpg both by math and dash readout.
Does anyone else note the FD open the hood from the front? Hood is junk anyway but still funny that many think Fiero hood open from front. They likely got a shock that the engine wasn't there.
Exactly, your memory is not infallible, so stop acting like it is. I never claimed mine was either, but you sure do like to assume a lot of things.
The manufacturing tolerances are federal law for a reason. That reason has absolutely nothing to do with GM trying to cover their own asses if you buy a car and then go get a speeding ticket. The law allows 5% because the technology at the time the law was written, meant that a certain margin of error had to exist, as variations across the model lines of manufacturers such as tire size, meant it might read a little high or a little low, because it was impossible to get perfectly sized tires for the gears used. For current production cars, that law makes no sense. Every car produced can easily have a 99.9999% accurate speedometer, because it's no longer driven by a gear that sits in the transmission. It's a magnetic pick-up on the diff gear, so any changes to gear ratios or tire sizes can be programmed into the PCM, and the speedometer on the dash will always read accurately (unless changes are made without updating the programming). The speedometer in modern cars is driven by a serial bus.
Now, to clarify, because your reading comprehension skills are apparently quite lacking. I never once state that all speedometers and gas gauges were 100% accurate for all time. What I was raising the flag on, was your promotion of the buffering of the speedo and fuel gauge, as a means for GM to protect itself from people getting speeding tickets or running the tank dry. That is a poor assumption.
GM could care less if you run the tank dry and destroy the fuel pump. Because they won't cover it under warranty, and you'll be paying the bill to repair it. Like I said, the inaccuracy of the fuel gauge is all about the range of motion, and the design of the tank. It has nothing to do with any buffering. The speedo likewise in an 80s vehicle like the Fiero might have come from the factory reading 1% off depending on the configuration of the car, as a result of slight difference in tire size because they couldn't get the diameter of the tires to be exactly the same for 13" and 14" and 15" wheels offered on the car. GM doesn't care if you get a speeding ticket. 5% is not a large enough margin of error for you to be able to blame it on the manufacturer. Speed limits are not high enough for that to have any meaningful effect on whether you would have gotten pulled over or not. If you let your speedometer get inaccurate enough that you're getting pulled over when it says you're going the speed limit, then it's your own damn fault for not properly maintaining the car.
Have you EVER worked in an auto manufacturing plant?
Have you EVER driven on the auto manufacturers roll test after final line?
Do you have any experience at any auto plant?
You do know we have one hell of a lot of UAW members here that never say a word about their auto manufacturing experience because people like you who can never take what a UAW member says as right, because we are all nothing but useless peace's of trash in your mind anyway. But we have a lot of knowledge that the average person like you, even with your degree can never accept as anything but BS.
Steve
[This message has been edited by 84fiero123 (edited 08-03-2014).]
Originally posted by jscott1: What really annoys me about every fuel gauge that I have ever seen is they are non-linear. I mean most cars you can drive 50 miles before it even comes off F. then you can go another 150 miles to half. And you are lucky to get 50 miles on the last half. I mean what's up wth that? And new cars are still this way not just crappy 80s cars.
It's proportionate to the size of the tank and the fuel economy of the car. But if you get in a car that's really as bad as you are saying here, something is wrong with the float, gauge, or electronics. My Avalanche has about 50 miles left in it when the "almost empty" light comes on. The Cruze Eco I had got 40+ MPG, so of course it didn't move off F until about 50 miles in.
It should be roughly linear though. I don't know what cars you've been driving, but all the ones I've driven, ever, have all been pretty linear. If I bought a new car that wasn't, I'd take it to the dealer and make them fix it.
Have you EVER worked in an auto manufacturing plant?
Have you EVER driven on the auto manufacturers roll test after final line?
Do you have any experience at any auto plant?
You do know we have one hell of a lot of UAW members here that never say a word about their auto manufacturing experience because people like you who can never take what a UAW member says as right, because we are all nothing but useless peace's of trash in your mind anyway. But we have a lot of knowledge that the average person like you, even with your degree can never accept as anything but BS.
Steve
Have you ever thought that maybe you might be wrong about something, ever? Or do you just like to go on an ad hominem rampage against everyone who points out facts that say your bullshit is wrong? Can you get to the freakin' point already?
[This message has been edited by dobey (edited 08-03-2014).]
Have you ever thought that maybe you might be wrong about something, ever? Or do you just like to go on an ad-homonym rampage against everyone who points out facts that say your bullshit is wrong? Can you get to the freakin' point already?
quote
Originally posted by 84fiero123:
Have you EVER worked in an auto manufacturing plant?
Have you EVER driven on the auto manufacturers roll test after final line?
Do you have any experience at any auto plant?
You do know we have one hell of a lot of UAW members here that never say a word about their auto manufacturing experience because people like you who can never take what a UAW member says as right, because we are all nothing but useless peace's of trash in your mind anyway. But we have a lot of knowledge that the average person like you, even with your degree can never accept as anything but BS.
Your false appeal to your "authority" of having worked in a GM plant does not make your assertions about why the 5% error law exists, or why fuel or speedometers read incorrectly for some people, correct. This thread isn't about the education or experience of anyone participating in it. You made false statements. I attempted to point out their fallacy and correct them. If you want to argue whether or not I am correct, then do it, and provide some sort of proof as to why you think your magic buffer argument is true, such as perhaps an internal document from GM instructing all inspectors to ship cars that have fuel gauges and speedometers which do not read correctly. Don't try to claim that my argument is somehow wrong for some irrelevant reasoning. If you want to argue, learn how to do it first.
I'm sorry but the I know you are, what am I? argument was played out after third grade. If you want to make such arguments, third graders are our best opponents for going down that road.
Your false appeal to your "authority" of having worked in a GM plant does not make your assertions about why the 5% error law exists, or why fuel or speedometers read incorrectly for some people, correct. This thread isn't about the education or experience of anyone participating in it. You made false statements. I attempted to point out their fallacy and correct them. If you want to argue whether or not I am correct, then do it, and provide some sort of proof as to why you think your magic buffer argument is true, such as perhaps an internal document from GM instructing all inspectors to ship cars that have fuel gauges and speedometers which do not read correctly. Don't try to claim that my argument is somehow wrong for some irrelevant reasoning. If you want to argue, learn how to do it first.
I'm sorry but the I know you are, what am I? argument was played out after third grade. If you want to make such arguments, third graders are our best opponents for going down that road.
You first !
quote
Originally posted by 84fiero123:
Have you EVER worked in an auto manufacturing plant?
Have you EVER driven on the auto manufacturers roll test after final line?
Do you have any experience at any auto plant?
Steve
[This message has been edited by 84fiero123 (edited 08-03-2014).]
Originally posted by JohnWPB: That is really Odd, and you should get that looked at. When I have "around 9.5" Gallons of fuel in MY Fiero, my gas gauge shows FULL
Ha Ha. Not really. first part of this gives most a big clue...
quote
Originally posted by theogre: ... run out of gas 1 time and took 10 and tiny bit more. Gauge says "empty" at ~9 gal.
~ should be − Minus 9/9.5 means needs to add __ gallons to fill from gauge said empty or I've used __ gallons to reach empty. Big deal. I'm tired and my car lost l4 timing gear on Fri so I don't really care if posts has grammar/symbol error. Now I have to change engine or fix old one w/ 215,000+ miles on it. (No, I'm not going to use any upgrade engines. I only drive to Doctors and stores. That saves me from dealing w/ DART Paratransit bus.)
I attempted to point out their fallacy and correct them. If you want to argue whether or not I am correct, then do it, and provide some sort of proof as to why you think your magic buffer argument is true, such as perhaps an internal document from GM instructing all inspectors to ship cars that have fuel gauges and speedometers which do not read correctly. Don't try to claim that my argument is somehow wrong for some irrelevant reasoning. If you want to argue, learn how to do it first.
OOPS I am sorry I was not privy to internal GM documents just a lowly Line grunt who went from that to absentee, repair, and at times inspection but was there and know what I know because I was there, you obviously were not and are just going by what you learned in books. I was there ! And so was a witness to many things that never hit the tech updates or news,
Did you know in the early 80s they redesigned the door pads and one of the carrots that hold them on did not line up with the holes in the doors, so instead of sending someone like me around with a drill to drill the nonexistent hole in the door we built the cars and later glued the door pad on after final line?
Or that the backlight glass, rear window , had a 95% rejection rate at the glass factory before they ever sent any to us to install?
Or that our factory spent 2 months running at 24 hours a day changing rear glass Oldsmobile Cutlass Ciera because the opening was made to big? I got a million of those that most people outside the factory workers that did the actual jobs will never know. like rather than make the gas gauge more accurate they just let them read overfull and under full. Or that instead of allowing the variable on speedometer's to follow laws allowing a 5 or 10 % variable ether way they had the workers inspecting them only allow them to be over and not under.
Workers at factories are privy to things many people in the public will never know about. But like you think they know it all.
Steve, just ignore dobey. You're better than to continue these arguments with him. I got sucked into one. I haven't seen many threads where he posts that don't include an argument. This derails the thread. Sure, he can give me another negative.
The firemen obviously dont know how to open a Fiero hood, but like said its moot anyway. Either way they opened it, the battery cables they usually want to cut are in the back with the battery.
Originally posted by zzzhuh: Wait... You put the fiero together back in the 80's??
No not the factory that made the Fiero, CPC Framingham, MA. GM assembly plant and then the Saturn plant in TN. But we are talking about gauges right now and those are common to all the vehicles of the GM line. That are known to be inaccurate even today, all of the newer tech gauges especially.
quote
Originally posted by tshark:
Steve, just ignore dobey. You're better than to continue these arguments with him. I got sucked into one. I haven't seen many threads where he posts that don't include an argument. This derails the thread. Sure, he can give me another negative.
Anyone can only give another member one rating, so if he has already neged you the only other thing he can do is change that rating not give you 2 negatives or positives or 2 of any rating. He is one of those people who are not ever wrong because they know everything about everything because they have a degree.
Have you EVER worked in an auto manufacturing plant?
Have you EVER driven on the auto manufacturers roll test after final line?
Do you have any experience at any auto plant?
You do know we have one hell of a lot of UAW members here that never say a word about their auto manufacturing experience because people like you who can never take what a UAW member says as right, because we are all nothing but useless peace's of trash in your mind anyway. But we have a lot of knowledge that the average person like you, even with your degree can never accept as anything but BS.
Steve
I have no idea how any of the above makes your speedo buffer statement credible.
I have no idea how any of the above makes your speedo buffer statement credible.
Because I did the job, the inspection drive off final line to roll test and the specs were on the inspection sheet of when it should pass and when it shouldn't. Below-No GOOD Above-PASS
Because I did the job, the inspection drive off final line to roll test and the specs were on the inspection sheet of when it should pass and when it shouldn't. Below-No GOOD Above-PASS
Steve
Ok. This is interesting. So how fast did you drive them? You said " we were allowed to pass them if they were 3 MPH under but not 4 and had to flunk them if they were anymore than 1 MPH to accurate.". On a "roll" test at 5-10mph then 1mph error is like 10%-20% which is horrible. I used to work in manufacturing (QA). An inspection checklist doesn't mean it was designed like that on purpose. There are many other variables used to make those. Anyway, still find amazing them that my newer cars read the same as other sources I compare it to.
Is it just me or do these fire fighters look like they are 14 years old? If it wasn't so close to the pump I would say that this looks like a training exercise.
quote
Originally posted by CoolBlue87GT:
[This message has been edited by Big Paul (edited 08-05-2014).]
Is it just me or do these fire fighters look like they are 14 years old? If it wasn't so close to the pump I would say that this looks like a training exercise.
I thought they looked young too. Must be younger volunteers.
Is it just me or do these fire fighters look like they are 14 years old? If it wasn't so close to the pump I would say that this looks like a training exercise.
Even worse, that girl on the right looks like she's smiling????
Ok. This is interesting. So how fast did you drive them? You said " we were allowed to pass them if they were 3 MPH under but not 4 and had to flunk them if they were anymore than 1 MPH to accurate.". On a "roll" test at 5-10mph then 1mph error is like 10%-20% which is horrible. I used to work in manufacturing (QA). An inspection checklist doesn't mean it was designed like that on purpose. There are many other variables used to make those. Anyway, still find amazing them that my newer cars read the same as other sources I compare it to.
30 and then 60 MPH was the speed test speed on that test for the speedometer check.
Steve
[This message has been edited by 84fiero123 (edited 08-05-2014).]
Ok. This is interesting. So how fast did you drive them? You said " we were allowed to pass them if they were 3 MPH under but not 4 and had to flunk them if they were anymore than 1 MPH to accurate.". On a "roll" test at 5-10mph then 1mph error is like 10%-20% which is horrible. I used to work in manufacturing (QA). An inspection checklist doesn't mean it was designed like that on purpose. There are many other variables used to make those. Anyway, still find amazing them that my newer cars read the same as other sources I compare it to.
It's interesting, but it doesn't give credibility to the assertion that because an acceptable margin of error is written in law, and tested against in QA during vehicle production, that there is some magic buffer that makes the speedo read higher than actual speed, for the sake of keeping people from getting speeding tickets. Making such a statement is reaching pretty far.
It's interesting, but it doesn't give credibility to the assertion that because an acceptable margin of error is written in law, and tested against in QA during vehicle production, that there is some magic buffer that makes the speedo read higher than actual speed, for the sake of keeping people from getting speeding tickets. Making such a statement is reaching pretty far.
Seems everything you say is just BS because that is the way it was at the factory. Yet because as always you know it all you can't accept the FACTS.
Originally posted by 84fiero123: Seems everything you say is just BS because that is the way it was at the factory. Yet because as always you know it all you can't accept the FACTS.
Steve
Did you mean to reply to yourself there?
I only accept facts. Your reaching to associate the few times you sat in the driver seat of a car to test the speedometer, and being told that it is only acceptable to pass within a specified range, to mean something completely different is not a fact. Facts are provable via scientific rigor. If you can present some evidence to point to what you have said as fact, please do.
I can, and have. You on the other hand, have not. Your only "evidence" so far is your own (and self-admittedly) fallible memory. Hell, I can't even tell what you're trying to say is fact any more, because instead of comprehending any words posted on this thread, you seem to rather go and attack me for disagreeing and calling BS on your original accusation that GM gave a crap about whether you got a speeding ticket or ran the fuel tank dry.
edit: I just realized that you seem to be assuming that I'm somehow saying you didn't perform rolling tests for QA on the speedometers. I never once said that. Ever.
[This message has been edited by dobey (edited 08-06-2014).]
I think speedometer accuracy varies from car to car. As measured by a gps my 07 Mustang reads 3 mph too slow at 55 whereas my 85 2M4 reads exactly 55. That being said, its not really very important.
Ive had quite a few cars that didnt even have a working speedo in them. I never had a problem.
I wonder if this was really an accidental fire in a real gas station. All these 'firemen' look to be in high school or jr-high. Wonder how old you have to be to drive a fire truck...at least 16 in most states, lol. Almost looks like it was just a practice demostration.
[This message has been edited by rogergarrison (edited 08-07-2014).]
Maybe you can both jointly answer this question for me. Aren't the speedometers themselves tested for accuracy within the mandated 5% (or whatever the required percentage is based on application and required certification) individually on a calibrated test platform prior to release from the gauge manufacturer's facility? While the on car testing shows functionality, it seems largely irrelevant due to the large number of variable that change throughout the life of the vehicle. Generally it's the gauges that are stamped for a given accuracy...not the whole vehicle.
Maybe you can both jointly answer this question for me. Aren't the speedometers themselves tested for accuracy within the mandated 5% (or whatever the required percentage is based on application and required certification) individually on a calibrated test platform prior to release from the gauge manufacturer's facility? While the on car testing shows functionality, it seems largely irrelevant due to the large number of variable that change throughout the life of the vehicle. Generally it's the gauges that are stamped for a given accuracy...not the whole vehicle.
I don't know if the speedos were tested to fit that 5% margin by Delco or not, prior to them being installed to the gauge panels. Even if they were, calibration could be lost during transport due to vibration in the vehicle carrying them, and their being installed in vehicles with varying transmission gear ratios and tire sizes would mean they likely need re-calibrated after installation anyway. So it would still make sense that the accuracy would need to be tested for in the actual vehicles.
Maybe you can both jointly answer this question for me. Aren't the speedometers themselves tested for accuracy within the mandated 5% (or whatever the required percentage is based on application and required certification) individually on a calibrated test platform prior to release from the gauge manufacturer's facility? While the on car testing shows functionality, it seems largely irrelevant due to the large number of variable that change throughout the life of the vehicle. Generally it's the gauges that are stamped for a given accuracy...not the whole vehicle.
I have no idea, I didn't work there. I do know we had different speedos that were calibrated for the police cars we made at our assembly plant so they must have been tested at the speedo factory somehow, but again there are variables to the accuracy of those, if you got one of those and put different tires on the car than it called for it would be off, or if the tires were worn those would also be off. My factory had been around since just after WWII and had built everything from the GTOs and 442 olds in the 60s. Talk about complaints from the neighbors, from the pollution of the burning tires to the noise of the squealing tires of the guys putting the cars on the transport trains and trucks.
flag on, was your promotion of the buffering of the speedo and fuel gauge, as a means for GM to protect itself from people getting speeding tickets or running the tank dry. That is a poor assumption.
