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


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.
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
.... .
, all necessary fluids and half a tank of petrol (and it had a huge tank). I calculated the net weight without all of this (and checked on the scale at home) it weighed 159 kilos compared to the 'supposed' 180 kilo Honda 600 of those days ... The build quality was great except for the Japanese engine and electrics which failed constantly. It had floating Brembos, Paioli suspension and handled like a bicycle on steroids
... no need to tell you the extra money i had to pay was worth it.
... .
... . On paper the R1 had 20 horses more and weighed 10 kilos less than the Ducati ..... i've seen a lot of R1 disintegrating on our Belgian roads because when you put it to the concrete you had a 'total loss'. My friend heavily crashed his Ducati into a BMW 3-series, got away unharmed which was a miracle i guess, the BMW was a total loss but the Duc could be repaired for errrm 10,000 euro's, we couldn't believe how strong that frame was.
... only some very few 'off the line' people like myself smiled and understood even after i mentioned the real price ... .
..... maybe

) 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?? 
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 17:36:33Hi, 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
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
.... .
... seemed that for every 10 km my A3 rolled all the other cars did 11 km, a true 10 % more. So everybody was moaning about how wrong my German car was ( almost all the others were Japanese LOL).
.... the world had gone nuts that day.... like may other days i guess
....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...
....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....
]

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 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
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
? ...... Well, i am the guy that has more fun than the guys working in that 'big' company
... and doesn't like to advertise ... .