skylar2ups
Member
- :
- 2011 Mazda3 iSport
I would like to hear! : ) PLEASE!
I would like to hear! : ) PLEASE!
It may be cheaper because:
-it streamlines manufacture with one or one dominate configuration
-the crank arm, changes in the mechanics to attach something through the door panel, etc may cost more than a small electric motor and switches
-a motor can put out a more reliable range of forces than the human populations arm's allowing smaller tolerances in the mechanics
-- I am sure I can come up with a few more things but ..
Before that statement no you wouldn't have, now yes you would. You've lost all credibility.
that's a good explanation, but I bet you didn't know that the EDM/JDM 3s have auto up/down driver's window (yeah too bad the other windows don't have that either) as well as "anti-pinch" sensors for ALL the windows
mazda didn't put the s*** here because they were trying to keep costs down so that the car can sell competitively
Okay, sport... edit: let me just say that my "credibility" on an internet board in a one-sided argument with someone is the least of my worries. My only worry is how much money I can save my employer through optimization of our global manufacturing processes...
Last edited:
Ding Ding Ding... we have a winner! Generally speaking, the more things you put in a car the higher the manufacturing cost and subsequently the sale price. The first thing car companies start with is a price point to position themselves in a certain market. Then they build the car from the ground up to meet that price point. Would some people pay more for extra features? Of course. But Mazda, or any other car company for that matter, has to think about how to be competitive amongst the masses.
mysleeper6
Member
- :
- 2006 Mazdaspeed6
ehidle...(sorry can't quote from work): I'm going to say that it is poor internet etiquette to pick a fight (yes you did!) and then pontificate. Do enlighten us with your explanation of how having crank windows would "optimize Mazda's global manufacturing processes". You may be wasting your time, but, here you are, on a forum at 10 o'clock in the morning, so I'm not sure how that would be different from what you are already doing.
skylar2ups
Member
- :
- 2011 Mazda3 iSport
That was kind of rude, and he PM'd me with the info. Can we try not to get in fights over power windows vs crank windows?
As for price I guess it might be different if the 3's were made on home turf but they have to get shipped here from Japan, right?, so maybe the Mazda2 wanna be the Ford Fiesta will have more "upgrades" because it will be made in Mexico, so getting the cars here will cost less?
skylar2ups
Member
- :
- 2011 Mazda3 iSport
Do you _really_ want to get into an argument with me over this?
Ehidle picked the fight? I'm pretty sure I see a (dumb[sorry]) smiley face, he was joking, people have a way of only wanting to hear what they want I'm not saying it was AW's fight either I'm blaming it on the human race and the way our brains work. So perhaps we could just drop it now?
okay...
First, it is incorrect to think that having more than one build option adds appreciably to the cost in an optimized manufacturing process. A common platform with different build substitution lists and multiple part streams that is planned out in advance mitigates this fictional "increased cost of multiple options." A door is a door, and whether you stick electromechanical or manual actuators in it doesn't create a large labor difference to trained floor personnel.
For example, we offer a product that comes in different flavors. It consists of an electronic board, housing, connectors, and so on. There are three circuit boards in the product. Between all of the flavors, the circuit boards are exactly the same, and the only thing we change is which components get installed on the circuit board.
In a vehicle, the door is the door. The only thing that changes is whether the electrical 'stuff' gets installed, or the manual 'stuff'. The cost differential is in the components that are installed.
For a crank and linkage, you're probably talking about $3-4 in component cost. For an electric motor, that has a 7 year expected product lifetime, an automotive environmental rating (-40C to +125C), current and thermal limiting, transient protection, and safety logic in the case of the auto-up, the component cost is at least an order of magnitude larger. The installation time is not significantly different between the two with both component streams available at the point-of-installation.
The electrical components also have many more defect opportunities than the manual components, tracing all the way from the fuse to the switch to the motor. There are more warranty claims for an electric setup than for the manual setup, and the warranty claims will similarly be an order of magnitude larger for the power windows. Longer MTTR and shorter MTTF are the key issues here. Longer MTTR (Mean time to repair) means more time is spent diagnosing an issue, locating the defective component, and replacing it. In a manual setup, an issue is limited to something in the door. In a power setup, it could be anywhere from the battery to the door or anywhere in between. Shorter MTTF (mean time to failure) means the electric components fail more frequently and after a shorter time than the manual ones.
Now, let's take all of those people who want manual windows and tell them we don't offer them. They don't want to, and aren't going to pay for them. We're going to have to do one of two things: give them the power windows for free, encumbering ourselves with the past, present, and future burdened costs of them (past sunk cost on the balance sheet for setting up the process, present cost of components, and future cost of warranty claims), or, we won't sell the car, meaning an opportunity cost of whatever the profit is on the vehicle, or at the very least the dealer-incurred floorplanning cost and the time-value of money for the manufacturer that is incurred by selling the car later.
I could be a lot more detailed, but this isn't what I wanted to be doing on my vacation
But, I hope this gives you an idea that there's a lot more that goes into it than just considering the complexity of multiple component streams (which doesn't even really add much to the cost).
First, it is incorrect to think that having more than one build option adds appreciably to the cost in an optimized manufacturing process. A common platform with different build substitution lists and multiple part streams that is planned out in advance mitigates this fictional "increased cost of multiple options." A door is a door, and whether you stick electromechanical or manual actuators in it doesn't create a large labor difference to trained floor personnel.
For example, we offer a product that comes in different flavors. It consists of an electronic board, housing, connectors, and so on. There are three circuit boards in the product. Between all of the flavors, the circuit boards are exactly the same, and the only thing we change is which components get installed on the circuit board.
In a vehicle, the door is the door. The only thing that changes is whether the electrical 'stuff' gets installed, or the manual 'stuff'. The cost differential is in the components that are installed.
For a crank and linkage, you're probably talking about $3-4 in component cost. For an electric motor, that has a 7 year expected product lifetime, an automotive environmental rating (-40C to +125C), current and thermal limiting, transient protection, and safety logic in the case of the auto-up, the component cost is at least an order of magnitude larger. The installation time is not significantly different between the two with both component streams available at the point-of-installation.
The electrical components also have many more defect opportunities than the manual components, tracing all the way from the fuse to the switch to the motor. There are more warranty claims for an electric setup than for the manual setup, and the warranty claims will similarly be an order of magnitude larger for the power windows. Longer MTTR and shorter MTTF are the key issues here. Longer MTTR (Mean time to repair) means more time is spent diagnosing an issue, locating the defective component, and replacing it. In a manual setup, an issue is limited to something in the door. In a power setup, it could be anywhere from the battery to the door or anywhere in between. Shorter MTTF (mean time to failure) means the electric components fail more frequently and after a shorter time than the manual ones.
Now, let's take all of those people who want manual windows and tell them we don't offer them. They don't want to, and aren't going to pay for them. We're going to have to do one of two things: give them the power windows for free, encumbering ourselves with the past, present, and future burdened costs of them (past sunk cost on the balance sheet for setting up the process, present cost of components, and future cost of warranty claims), or, we won't sell the car, meaning an opportunity cost of whatever the profit is on the vehicle, or at the very least the dealer-incurred floorplanning cost and the time-value of money for the manufacturer that is incurred by selling the car later.
I could be a lot more detailed, but this isn't what I wanted to be doing on my vacation
But, I hope this gives you an idea that there's a lot more that goes into it than just considering the complexity of multiple component streams (which doesn't even really add much to the cost).mysleeper6
Member
- :
- 2006 Mazdaspeed6
Well then...I was really just missing my classroom days, working on my MBA. Thanks for taking me back.
And emoticons don't work from here either, or you would know I was really just playing.
Staycation or vacation?
And emoticons don't work from here either, or you would know I was really just playing.
Staycation or vacation?
Yeah, classroom "facts" are not the same as "real life" facts. And, everyone knows MBAs don't know squat about real life haha... sorry, couldn't resist.
Staycation... really.. just didn't feel like working today and I have a ton of days to burn before I lose them at the end of the year.
haha... sorry, couldn't resist. Staycation... really.. just didn't feel like working today and I have a ton of days to burn before I lose them at the end of the year.
mysleeper6
Member
- :
- 2006 Mazdaspeed6
Yeah, I use my Ivy League biology degree (Brown '88) and my state u MBA as insulation when I run into burning buildings for a living, so how smart am I, lol?
Supposed to be prepping for an 8 hour class I'm teaching the Federal Protective Service recruits tomorrow called "31 Chemical Families, or Two Years of Collegiate Chemistry in 8 Hours!" Well, just the 31 Chemical Families part.
Supposed to be prepping for an 8 hour class I'm teaching the Federal Protective Service recruits tomorrow called "31 Chemical Families, or Two Years of Collegiate Chemistry in 8 Hours!" Well, just the 31 Chemical Families part.
M
my3needsaname
DAMN! I just got (jacked)
M
my3needsaname
No big, now I just wonder if anybody knows what I'm talking about when I say Ford's message center...
skylar2ups
Member
- :
- 2011 Mazda3 iSport
I know but I'm glad ford has pretty much stayed out of Mazda even if it means we lose some of the goods.
mysleeper6
Member
- :
- 2006 Mazdaspeed6
My bad. (drunk)
M
my3needsaname
No problem.
More like the only good. Unless you count their current Navi system which is pretty sweet...and all of their current engines that are the 4.6L mustang V8 or 5.6L V8's and up to their V12 WOOT WOOT!!!
