Automotive

examples of differences between supposedly "same" specs and tolerances - HK original German rifles vs "licensed" versions (Greek, Pakistan, Mexico, etc) - pins can be pressed in, vs "tapped" in, on Oberndorf and HK in house production vs licensed...

Shoei tear offs vs aftermarket - cosmetically look close enough, but allows wind and "whistles" (tolerance issues)

BMW produced in Munich vs Spartanburg or Thailand...

Brembo brakes vs Aprilia and other "reverse engineered equivalents" - softer, less "feel"

Even Italian or British apparel - shoes, suits - made in Napoli or on Saville Row vs Mauritius, China, etc

What have been your experiences? Are there any differences? substantial? worth the "price difference?"

Cheers,

TM 

Components can be 'built-to-print', can they really replicate an original? I'm not so sure, but it's even more difficult to assess a system by looking at a single component - witness the discussion of Brembo brakes in another thread. Yes, opposed piston calipers can be more rigid, but brake system response and behavour is more than just the caliper; master cylinder size, lever ratios, line flex, mounting system, pedal flex, pads... all need consideration.


Guns? Wouldn't have a clue. They build AUGs here in Australia....never heard a complaint from mates who have to carry them.
Tear-offs? Never tried them.
BMWs. BMW tend to build for launches in Germany, then shift production to SA once all the launch lessons are learnt. (this is for the Australian market) I've inspected both, and wouldn't pick the difference. But how much of an SA built car is localised anyway? Robot welders don't care what country they're in
Brakes - Not sure what you mean here. See above. Aprilias do use Brembo. Less feel? It also depends what you like. A friend's RS was set up with a (for me) ridiculously hard lever, and very dead feeling pads, with no initial bite, but very consistent throughout the whole braking operation. Same base system as mine. Not bad, just preference.
Italian apparel. I can only vouch for the Dainese and Alpinestars stuff I've used. No difference in quality when they initially moved some of their stuff to Turkey and Hungary (early 2000s?)  Then, the leather quality started dropping (gloves got 'drier' feeling leather that holed faster/more easily - so a pair of gloves now only last one crash...) and logos that were stitched on started being printed on. I don't blame the factory location, I blame the brand for deliberately cheapening their product.

Hi, Ben,

I personally feel there are no universal "truths" (and find it offensive when some try to make statements as if there were, like "cheap Chinese knockoffs" or "prison slave labour" (in China, Mexico, TurkUzKazhakstan, etc) - as if all products from China or Mexico or Kazhakstan were of inferior quality, because Chinese or Mexicans or... are only genetically capable of making inferior product. Can you say, racism? Bigotry?

Clothes, cars, watches...I love it when Italian bike or car snobs, or American, or German...dismiss "Jap bikes" or "Chinese crap"...of course, there are the other side, who laugh and point at the Italian bikes "just waiting for it to break down or not start")

but of course there are trends and generalizations based on collective facts / historical data points.

Your last sentence is a particularly interesting one - "the brand"=management decisions? and the gap between what is intended and hoped for (lower labour costs, skilled and experienced labour; infrastructure and ambient conditions which are assumed to be comparable or can be accommodated?) and what is actually experienced / achieved.

Institutional limits (and advantages) like goverment subsidies and "official" strategic markets in command economies vs "laissez faire let the market forces decide" dynamics, which all figure into final product quality, as much or more so than "rational management decisions" like building to a price.

This being a PuristS community, we tend to shuffle the deck versus "most people" and place a higher priority on "quality" (whatever that means) than absolute (relative) price - ie, we tend to be more willing to pay price that is highly impacted by the law of diminishing returns (in quality, in measurable performance)

abrasion resistence in a jacket and pants? how well the stitching holds up? "well, for the price..."

But I'm a little uncomfortable with the very broad generalizations of Le Bim in the lower thread in his Japanese versus Italian / European makers. Again, maybe it is just an artifact of his (limited) examples - Honda and Yamaha versus Ducati and Bimota.

I remember back in the day, audiophiles used to exalt the cottage brands from America like Threshold (Nelson Pass) and Mark Levinson (Tom Colangelo) as "the unreined genius of individual fanatics" versus the "design by committee" corporate brands and products like Denon, Technics, Yamaha (which were misleading comparisons if I ever heard one, apples and oranges)

Ferrari under Fiat and Montezemolo?

Lamborghini under Audi?

Aprilia and Moto Guzzi under Piaggio?

Agusta MV, Cagiva, Ducati, et al?

Lange und Sohne under Richemont, or Breguet under Swatch?

hmmm...

(straying a bit from my original point, but oh well)

Back to my original point, which you and Ed addressed, even given "specs" it is interesting that production tolerances can vary so much.

Cheers,

TM

 

Going back to the 'original point' concerning production tolerances....

A good way to think of it:

Take a tolerance of 100mm +/-0.5. This tells you that it can be 99.5mm to 100.5mm.

But you probably need some experience and study to know what exact length is actually best and what you should aim for.

.

Interesting topic TM and would like to know more about what recent experiences have brought this up.

The HK example would be a really good reason for the argument of specs/tolerences being off compared to the licensed versions (Greek for SAR8, Pakistan for POF, etc).  My hands-on experience with this is the the tolerances vary and lack the consistency of HK.  For example, the Springfield SAR8 upper receiver.  The typical HK claw mount for optics will sometimes work on the SAR8 and others have shown that it was impossible to mount as the receiver mounting points had too much material in the lug area.  Same with Pakistan they are notorious for having wobbly HK94/.MP5 collapsable stocks.  But if you bring in price, then those POF parts work fine on a beater gun and probably doesn't really matter if you're just playing around and want to save some significant money.
Same with Colt 1911's verus the infamous Argentinian Ballister Monlina 1911 copies.  And can you spell NORINCO? LOL  The heat treating was so uneven that milling for Bo-Mar sights made it really interesting on the 3 axis mill.
And do I have to mention SIG Sauer?  Back in the day when the the P220/P226 etc were still made in Germany/Switzerland the triggers and overall quality was much superior.  Now the Exeter, NH produced ones are just average.
IMO this also applies to the mid-brand name clothing lines like off the rack suits by Armani and Hugo Boss.  The recent ones within the last 15 years made in Thailand and other places just don't have the same feel and wear characteristics as their European made products.

Regards,
ED-209

be willing to pay a bit more, and appreciate more highly, a Canali or Corneliani suit made in Italy or Boss made in Germany than same brand made in Turkey or Pakistan (specific locations randomly named, not necessarily specifically correct)

how much of this is regional snobbery and "image" cachet, and how much is truly substantive difference in quality and consistency?

That was my main point, mainly as a general question, with a bit of a personal conclusion.

If my life (or my friends and family's lives) depended on it, I would go for the Oberndorf HK without question, if I had a choice.

Thanks for giving additional data points to the general issue.

Cheers,

TM

Thomas, this thread could be endless ... so i will try to tell only what sticks to my mind best ... .

Good post, Bim.
The Japanese like using dry weight, which is not the test weight for the bikes but a completely dry weight - no coolant, no acid in the battery, no oil in the sump, no brake fluid, etc. Nice way for a bike to run

The funniest thing with the R1 when it was launched was that it advertised a wheelbase figure that was really short to show off how supposedly 'nimble' it was. That wheelbase figure was only achievable with the swingarm at full droop (and the shock taken out to get it there...) and the forks pulled up through the triple clamps until the tyre hit the radiator!
Similar story with the R6 from 2003(?) claiming a 17000rpm redline (who cares where it revs, it's how it revs!...but anyway) they got caught when the cut-out what chiming in somewhat below that. But I never listen to Journos as to how a bike performs. Ever. One year the YZGSXCBR999SPS will be the best ever, the next upgrade, they will list its terrible faults and how the new one is so much better. And that's from the ones that can actually ride a bit....

I completely agree on the R1 usable performance compared with 996, but an R1 can be easily set up to match a Duke of that calibre (OK maybe not an SPS...) for comparatively little - get some proper light wheels, some decent tyres, and actually get some springs that match the rider. It still amazes me that people will spend $$$ on a carbon fibre fairing but still run standard suspension on a bike. The rider accounts for over half the weight of some of those bikes (depends on rider and bike....)....and they expect standard suspension to do a good job? They'll get their bike dyno'd but never even try to do basic 30 minute stuff like setting the sag up correctly??

In any case...the most fun is going to track days and annoying people whose titanium Termignonis cost more than my entire bike. Going around the outside of big four-strokes and buzzing them with a lawnmower engine.
This message has been edited by BDLJ on 2012-04-09 22:44:53

this is an automotive forum afterall, and not Belles Lettres...

(aside - I've found that, in general, car, and even more so, motorcycle, guys, tend to be pragmatists, at least in terms of priorities with MEASURABLE benefits like performance figures and reliability. Phrases like "take it to the lights at the drag strip or the traps at the track" and of course, the obvious disdain, to the point of reverse snobbery - "look at all that money spent, but it's still slower than...")

I'm thinking Bim and Ben's comments which appear to be slagging Japanese makers (Yamaha specifically, and the R1 even more specifically) is an artifact of the examples and not indicating some underlying national (Italian vs Jap) or regional or even brand snobbery. (afterall, Bim obviously appreciates Subarus... )

If the underlying point is that there is a tendency of the Japanese brands to inflate or exaggerate performance or specs for the sake of commercialism - dry weight vs wet weight (I look at this as akin to the default having to "opt in" vs "opt out" of commercial programs - it indicates the mindset of the management) or horsepower figures (or even where it is measured - "at the crank" or at the wheels?) I agree there is a general problem overall, which is not only limited to Japan.

BMW speedo calibrations; Aprilia and Piaggio too - consistently +10% or more - why? to make their vehicles appear sportier than they are?

Versus M-B or Honda speedo calibrations, which I've found (and consistent with many journo's comments) - they tend to be more accurate.

Ben, this ain't as intellectually rigourous as I would like, as I'm very time limited right now, but my knee jerk reaction to yours and Bim's comments in this sub-thread is, "hmmmm...what do the results of the qualifying sessions and season opener results of MotoGP tell us...?"

We don't protect sacred cows around here (we might respect them, but we don't protect them...   ) and if you want to hold one brand or region or industry to a certain rigour, you need to do the same, and consistently, with all.

Cheers,

TM

...admiration for Japanese performance motorcycle engineering. My favourite bike, the one I will never sell, is Japanese.

The points of criticism of above are directed at my usual bugbear: Advertising/Marketing drivel. Drivel that does them a disservice as it allows for the reasonable criticisms Bim makes: Claims made, Claim not met, Disillusionment results.

I have no particular regard for Ducati, either. There are some lovely bikes out there such as the 888 and 916 (and the early bevel drives). But I've also seen the horror-shows inside a couple of the engines, some 'interesting' build issues and frame welds that look like they were done by an 8 year old. Not to mention crankcases that would last a single session. I don't buy into their Superbike superiority, they are consistently provided with 'concessions' to keep them 'competitive'.

As for their MotoGP efforts...that's a whole essay's worth. Suffice to say that Stoner's talent flattered them for too long, while Rossi is making a farce out of developing it into something more competitive

This message has been edited by BDLJ on 2012-04-10 17:36:33

Hi, BDLJ,

"The points of criticism of above are directed at my usual bugbear: Advertising/Marketing drivel. Drivel that does them a disservice as it allows for the reasonable criticisms Bim makes: Claims made, Claim not met, Disillusionment results. "

Completely agreed, and I share your bugbear.

Cheers,

TM

Late to comment but have read thread in its entirety. IMHO, tolerances achieved by robots are so close in modern manfacturing that BMW's from Germany, South Africa or Spartanburg would be near identical in tolerances. I no longer hear or read about blueprinting like in the 70's and early 80's ( when engine parts had wider tolerances ) to match parts to get closer tolerances for additional engine power. I recall an article I read back in the 70's or early 80's that Ford escort engines assembled in Taiwan produces more horsepower than the same engine assembled elsewhere including the UK. 

You're completely correct re Blueprinting and modern specs.

That whole exercise of getting conrods and pistons weight matched is now done pretty well by the factory. There a no longer wierd bits of casting to get your grinder on, nor badly mismatched ports and manifolds to smooth out. Modern engines just wouldn't get the efficiency they do if those basic defects existed. A lot of engine work is now just 'cleaning-up' what's there rather than wholesale improvements. I think I've harped on about this before

The question of different specifications (2 pot v 4 pot) for ostensibly the same model is a strange one. 

One guess (and I emphasise guess)  that it has something to do with production proliferation. In most car assembly plants the engine, gearbox, front suspension arms, including brakes are pre-assembled onto the front end cradle and the whole lot fed into the car.

If, for example, the engine spec for Australia is a slightly detuned (as per your VW Golf example) version, it may be that the aforementioned assembly only exists with 2 pots with that particular engine tune. Rather than adding the complexity of a unique-for-Australia assembly, our tiny market has to cop the lower spec.

Another guess (which contradicts the above) is that Subaru Australia asks for the lower spec to restrain costs (on their side), once again, our tiny market cops it.

This message has been edited by BDLJ on 2012-04-10 23:43:23

and offering your thoughts. I suspect it is cost cutting on Subaru Australia 's part, regarding only 2 pot callipers for Oz. Maybe Subaru Australia need to recoup the costs of complying with ADR ( Australian Design Rules ) given the small numbers imported. 

...for someone who had a 124

Hey Thomas,

....Speedometer errors are definitely vehicle dependent, while the error is always postive (speedo cannot under-read), brand new tyres running at decent temperature (and hence above cold pressure) will compensate somewhat for the error. If the manufacturer is a bit lazy the allowable error also lets them provide a single calibration for different tyre circumferences...It does seem strange that ABS systems are set up with sampling rates of hundreds of Hertz, yet a speedo has so much error...until you see tyres worn down to the wires...wierd wheel/tyre combinations...etc

140mph....where do find these roads? Or do you have good fake ID? 

Anyway, I would have thought your errors to be bigger...wheelspin makes the vehicle think it's travelled further...

for Victoria, Australia. A driver successfully challenged and had his speeding fine and demerit points overturned in court because he was caught speeding over 104 K ( you are allowed a 4 % , but previously 10 % ) but less than 110 K in a 100 K zone. He was driving a '96 car where there can be a 10 % error. He argued he depended on his car's speedometer. I was told The RTA's website explains how you can challenge to have speeding fine overturned.

....seems a strange defence. I think Kearon v. Grant still stands(???) So even if you reasonably made the mistake of speeding....it's still your problem. 

 So it's not much different than if you tried to get out of a drink driving case by pointing to your faulty home breathalyser....

[All those websites discussing speeding fines and cameras creep me out a bit, so I stay well away....]

This message has been edited by BDLJ on 2012-04-12 01:14:18

I remember doing 195 kph from a standstill in under 10 seconds .... while standing still .... in the snow

The major influence on quality is the owner of the manufacturer. The more firms are owned by hedge funds, pension groups etc. the more quality will suffer. The reason manufacture is transferred to Asia and South America is cheap, non-union labour, and the same profit maximisation philosophy applies to product quality i.e. they will make it as cheap as possible. Monetarist capitalism is geared to short term profit with little consideration for the future and even less for quality.

like in most things, especially in the area of generalizations, not necessarily a truism.

Many management gurus have already pointed out the dangers of short sighted profit maximization at the expense of "quality" (which of course needs to be defined, and then applied in a specific situation)

For me, it's a philosophical decision, which reveals the character and philosophy of the owners and company.  But of course, specific products are also the result of specific individuals and the production processes and specific parts for the day / period a specific product is produced.

As a consumer, I am often as guided by my perception of this "philosophy" as I am by the actual product itself. Stretched, this also can result in brand fan boyism...which I define as blind loyalty to a brand even if the specific results, whether they be goods or services, don't live up to the "promise" (and price premiums!) of that brand's products.

Most rationalist economists will say "phooey" and blah blah to all this; management decisions are rational.

If you are a brand owner with significant soft equity and premiums in brand reputation, it would behoove you to protect that brand equity, and not expose your brand equity to risk by allowing too much quality creep in the pursuit of lower cost production.

You also mention unions and cheap labour; I'm curious - do you believe in some magical "minimum wage" which is the baseline for a "minimally quality of life standard?" (this is slippery slope topic, of course; where does destitution vs "living wage" standards end and "luxury lifestyle" begin. Like art, I don't know, but I (in gross examples, know it when I see it.)

What owner would not want to pursue efficiency? (another word for lowering costs, or the flip side of a multi variable equation, increasing quality and / or performance while maintaining costs)

Is the priority to (solely) increase profits or to share the efficiencies in lower prices to the consumer while maintaining or increasing quality and performance?

Me'thinks it's not so simple...

Cheers,

TM

The vast majority of companies are owned by their shareholders. The major shareholders are financial institutions. The companies and financial institutions are run by employees who must comply with their business plans. In the case of the companies the business plan is to make the shareholders happy. In the case of the financial institutions it is to maximise the return from their investment. Even social costs ( Detroit, Chicago ) do not enter into the equation, let alone quality of product and the long term health of the company.
The concept of a sound business plan is false. All such plans are based upon ' ceteris paribus ' and are, therefore, merely hope. The banks had the most advanced plans of any sector and we all know what happened to them, and us.
The concept of the entrepreneur is largely redundant. Management is no longer a separate piece of the economic model, but just another part of labour.
A contented labour force is beneficial to all. A union presents a unified body for negotiations regarding working conditions etc. This should be seen as a good thing as one agreement covers all the labour force. This does not always happen, primarily because too many managers still adhere to the master/servant concept, even though they are employees and not bosses.
The fact there is a concept of a ' minimum wage ' indicates just how prevalent is the idea of exploiting the work force.
The bottom line is we are all being manipulated by a financial sector which is careering out of control and, because of the vested interests of our Governments, nobody's at the wheel.
Well, that's it then. A bit more than fifty words, buy who's counting?

"The concept of a sound business plan is false. "

Makes life and the world so much simpler, eh?

Alas, "real life" has a tendency to force me to face the reality that things are not quite so simple, both in concept (like "a contented labour force" and "beneficial to all" - define "contented" in a way that makes sense, in the specific and in general; define "beneficial"; define "all"; etc) and practice.

and yeah, that was a bit more than 50 words...

Call me an idealistic fool; call me a foolish romantic, but I do believe there are those driven by the pursuit of something other than (maximizing) profit, even beyond the rational economic model of "weighted returns" that take into consideration brand equity and the "economic" value that adds.

Otherwise, the only reason we don't rape and maim each other to take each other's property is fear of retribution.

As silly and quaint as it might sound, I do believe intentions count, as much as the "final results" and I do believe there are some people that agree with me. That's enough for me.

Cheers,

TM

Isn't it remarkable how one can gain the wrong impression? If I didn't know better I would swear you don't have a clue what you're talking about and are trying to hide your ignorance behind a smoke screen of nebulous pontification regarding the nobility of man and requests for clarification which could be provided by a little knowledge and a half decent dictionary. It just goes to show, first impressions can be so misleading.

Dear Stephenleslie,

I had no intention with my comments to make this a personal issue (as in, "you are stupid because"...or "you are an ass because"...) and my comments were sincere, as were my questions. My request to define "a contented labour force" was based upon my observations and studies that

1. "contentment" is fleeting and easily manipulated, individually and en masse

2. "a contented labour force" is actually quite an ambiguous concept and term, used quite differently by different parties, often even in the same discussion.

3. contentment is frequently illusory, and how quickly contentment turns to discontent, everything else being equal, underscores this point.

Similar thoughts underpinned my other requests for definitions or attempts at discussion.

I have no illusions about the nobility of man, despite my desire to continue believing in it (my personal form of "faith") - again, my statements in this regard were sincere.

It was not my intention to pontificate and I'm sorry if my comments came across as such.

I have no illusions about my many areas of ignorance, and am always appreciative when someone is willing to share their wisdom, even mere opinion, albeit in a not belittling or snide way.

Cheers,

TM