skylar2ups
Member
- :
- 2011 Mazda3 iSport
Volvo and Lincon designed the newest navigation system! Ford made the Sync system which I wear wooks pretty well. I can't wait to see the 2010 Mustang!
Volvo and Lincon designed the newest navigation system! Ford made the Sync system which I wear wooks pretty well. I can't wait to see the 2010 Mustang!
M
my3needsaname
Really? Volvo and Lincoln? But Volvo uses the pop-up Motorola designed navi system...and Sync does work pretty well but the text message reading is crap.
Doesn't Ford have pics of the 2010 up on their site? Or is it still teasers?
skylar2ups
Member
- :
- 2011 Mazda3 iSport
They have some but not like as a whole, I want to see it in person.
I know I asked the same thing about the Volvo thing but my aunt is in high places at ford and she is the one who told me. I guess Volvo has a different type then the rest of the company but Ford, Lincoln, and Mercury's gps's and it's based on Land Rover's, Jaguar's, and Aston Martin's plans for their gps/system before Ford sold them. Sync is based losely on these things too. They wanted to bring the high end to the lower priced cars... like that ugly Focus...
M
my3needsaname
Seems logical. I used the Volvo Navi recently in a 2007 S80 AWD V8 Sport (it was actually brand new, like 90 miles or so 2 weeks ago) and it was very pleasing to use. Nice and smooth. Even smoother than Acura's. It was quite surprising for a Motorola designed and built system.
If they wanted to bring high end aspects to low end cars then they should make the cars to a more high end standard first. Our Expedition is better built but in 2004 when we bought it, it was a $48K SUV. Whereas my sister owns a 2006 Fusion and it has a big need for some higher end, less crappy materials and build quality. But what can you do...
It's the VERY VERY VERY F**KING UGLY AS ALL HELL FUGLY Fukus.
skylar2ups
Member
- :
- 2011 Mazda3 iSport
Hahaha we totally took this thread off in another direction... my boyfriend has a 2005 Volvo S40 and the GPS in it is even flawless, so much better then anything Mazda has put out. His center dash design is awesome too I love Volvo's with their open behind dash but our cars drive alot alike mine is sportier but the layout is almost spot on, it's funny how much our cars look alike even parked next to each other.
I can't stand automotive NAVs. The interfaces are dumbed down to the point that I cannot use them. They've made them so "intuitive" that they are no longer intuitive, haha.
I like a Garmin 496 - works for air, land, and sea, gets XM Traffic, Weather, Lightning, Satellite, FCC Tower Database, Obstruction Database, and more..
It's generally an aircraft GPS, but the Road Mode is better than ANY automotive NAV I have seen, portable or factory.
To stay on topic, I'd like a flat touch screen and a PC in my car... factory or not hehe... Someone mentioned in another thread that there is a pre-fabbed kit for installing a touch screen. Anyone know where to find it?
I like a Garmin 496 - works for air, land, and sea, gets XM Traffic, Weather, Lightning, Satellite, FCC Tower Database, Obstruction Database, and more..
It's generally an aircraft GPS, but the Road Mode is better than ANY automotive NAV I have seen, portable or factory.
To stay on topic, I'd like a flat touch screen and a PC in my car... factory or not hehe... Someone mentioned in another thread that there is a pre-fabbed kit for installing a touch screen. Anyone know where to find it?
skylar2ups
Member
- :
- 2011 Mazda3 iSport
I tried to order it and they stoped my order...
Last edited:
skylar2ups
Member
- :
- 2011 Mazda3 iSport
My bad use THIS one!
http://www.caradvanced.com/products...een-with-GPS,-DVD-player,-bluetooh,-Ipod.html
http://www.caradvanced.com/products...een-with-GPS,-DVD-player,-bluetooh,-Ipod.html
M
my3needsaname
Skylar!!
Since the S40 is based on the same chassis as the 3 and European Focus and V50 and C30 and maybe some others then I'd hope they all look somewhat the same parked next to each other. But I'd much rather have an S40 T5 (them's fast lil buggers) over a 3 sedan...a V50 over a 3 hatch is a different story. Or just screw all and get me an S80 V8 AWD!!!!! (or a speed3 lol)
I just remembered, WHY THE F**K DON'T WE HAVE HOMELINK STANDARD?!?!?!??!?!?!? WTF Mazda?!?!??!?!?!??!
Since the S40 is based on the same chassis as the 3 and European Focus and V50 and C30 and maybe some others then I'd hope they all look somewhat the same parked next to each other. But I'd much rather have an S40 T5 (them's fast lil buggers) over a 3 sedan...a V50 over a 3 hatch is a different story. Or just screw all and get me an S80 V8 AWD!!!!! (or a speed3 lol)
I just remembered, WHY THE F**K DON'T WE HAVE HOMELINK STANDARD?!?!?!??!?!?!? WTF Mazda?!?!??!?!?!??!
skylar2ups
Member
- :
- 2011 Mazda3 iSport
Yeah I know they are sisters of each other but the euro focus doesn't look like my sedan and doesn't look like the S40, he is about to trade in his 40 for a new 40 T5 AWD R-Design just a hair under 40k. He is thinking about trading in my 3 for the C30 R which would come in just under 35k. He is a Marketing Director for a very big real estate company in Destin. I love my three but after driving the C30 it would be a hard sell for me to stay.
Last edited:
skylar2ups
Member
- :
- 2011 Mazda3 iSport
Hahahah!
How about the darn flip key everyone else and their mother/father/guardian gets.
M
my3needsaname
Keep the 3, trust me. You'll love the lower cost of maintenance and the lower maintenance on the 3. Every other Volvo has terrible maintenance problems, not reliability but it'll always be in the shop for one thing or another when you stay in the low-end of their segment. I'm not too sure on the C30's but the S40's, 60's, and V50's don't do so good in the not having every part breaking department. My father has a '99 V70 GLT and it was '97-'03 that they were really bad but I've heard from Volvo that you sould only go V70 and up or S80 and, well, that's the top so not too much farther to go up on that one. But hey, if you want speed upgrade to a speed.
I think we should all get the flip key that every freakin' other car in everywhere gets but we don't. I shake my fist at yee, Mazda. Megafail.(headshake
You're damn straight! I want to take my chances to see what might happen in my back seat as much as the next guy. Although, the one-legged part might be an issue.
skylar2ups
Member
- :
- 2011 Mazda3 iSport
Keep the 3, trust me. You'll love the lower cost of maintenance and the lower maintenance on the 3. Every other Volvo has terrible maintenance problems, not reliability but it'll always be in the shop for one thing or another when you stay in the low-end of their segment. I'm not too sure on the C30's but the S40's, 60's, and V50's don't do so good in the not having every part breaking department. My father has a '99 V70 GLT and it was '97-'03 that they were really bad but I've heard from Volvo that you sould only go V70 and up or S80 and, well, that's the top so not too much farther to go up on that one. But hey, if you want speed upgrade to a speed.
I think we should all get the flip key that every freakin' other car in everywhere gets but we don't. I shake my fist at yee, Mazda. Megafail.(headshake
Well I can't drive a stick, I'm always e-mails/texting safe I know. I love the SPEED but I have to have an automatic and the SPEED better never have a auto! Insurance would actually go down for both of us going to the new Volvo's and we (he) would pay both cars off so if there was any problems... the money wouldn't really be a problem, but I don't really think I'm ready for him to be buying me a car. I think he is trying to make up for not being married, but I'm 20 and he is 27... and I love my Mazda! lol
I think the tire pressure system could be better... even the Chevy Cobalt tells you the PSI for each tire! (Trying to stay on topic!)
Beware the man that tries to buy your love! (humpleg) j/k
Learning to drive stick is easy. Can't your BF teach you? I'd be glad to (my 3 sedan is a stick) but Destin is a bit too far to drive to give a chick driving lessons... especially if she's got a BF! lol
Why is everybody so hung up on the "flip key"? I don't really care about it. After all... it's a lot bulkier. That's a real concern living in Florida where you need to wear the lightest clothing possible in the summer. Pocket space is valuable!
Last edited:
skylar2ups
Member
- :
- 2011 Mazda3 iSport
Hahaha if you only knew.
And all I carry is the key to my car I keep my house keys and what not in my glove box so the flip key would actually service me better.
that's a very naive way to look at itokay...
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 vacationBut, 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).
automobiles are NOT computers/electronics
there are numerous logistics involved in R&D and manufacturing a vehicle
it is not the ultimate production costs that the bean counters are worried about... the japanese auto makers have taken cared of the problem of "making different cars in the same factory" years ago... they can build a mazda3 on one day, and a mazda2 on another with no retooling involved... which in otherwords, is in agreement with what you stated... a power window or manual window will get slapped on pretty much the same without affecting actual production costs... however, on the contrary, other components on an automobile such as wiring costs a LOT of money... copper costs a lot of money for the wiring, plus more model variations means more wiring harness variations... regardless of whether you install "harness A" (which as the wiring for nav/sunroof/heated seats, for example) and "harness B" (that is just the barebones) on all vehicles or on only the vehicles required, it still costs R&D and manufacturing costs
but when you look further, there's R&D costs of these feature variations, certification costs (EEC/ECE/NHTSA/ADR/Transport Canada/EPA/Environment Canada/etc) for certain components, and windows IS one of them.... significant changes in dashboard components, such as inclusion of a navi can also potentially change vehicle safety characteristics because the dashboard internals are now different... how well can it absorb energy and will it protrude into passengers into a crash? more R&D and certification time here! as for windows, believe it or not, how fast the window can move, and how much force is allowable is all regulated... further more, regulations such as UNECE r43 (and FMVSS/CMVSS 205) regulates allowable distortion, thickness, materials, visible light transmittence (VLT), breaking force, etc... this means, each piece of glass on any new car that's designed, HAS to be tested and certified... so also, you build a car that HAS tinted windows and a car that hasn't... you have to test both sets of windows... COSTS!
with that said and done, there's also getting a production run with the parts subcontractors to manufacture the parts needed for the car... the more options means more parts, even if you aren't going to build them all this way, manufacturers set minimum quotas to begin manufacturing as well as price levels... and also since you aren't putting all of those parts into cars, you are actually stocking them into your parts distribution centers for replacement parts... packing the parts, inventorying, and maintaining space for those parts ALSO costs money
and finally, because of different national/regional regulations, the manufacturer is burdened with building cars that meet those regulations... for example, the US has the strictest emission regulations in the world and require at least 50lbs of more bulls*** than the "same" car sold in europe... then the US also has the 5mph bumpers which typically requires the addition of steel reinforcement bars behind bumpers, which is lacking on most non-US/Canada market vehicles... lighting and signaling regulations are also different in north america than the rest of the world, further adding costs... seat belt regulations for the US are also unique to the US and therefore cannot use the same seat belts (and sometimes anchorage points) as non-US market cars.... there's more I can continue naming, but basically this is the one other major hidden cost no one realizes for a FOREIGN auto maker, hence the push for harmonized vehicle safety regulations (in recent years) by non-US auto makers in order to reduce costs... if at least having harmonized safety equipment (but not emissions), the overall costs for the auto maker is far less than having to build basically 3 different versions of the same car (North American spec, rest of world RHD, rest of world LHD)
bottom line is, building cars and maintaining the line isn't as simple as it seems... its true that things are lot better now with the "JIT" (just in time) method, but that only affects the manufacturing level not the other s*** which also costs money... the more s*** you try to do, the more overhead you have
why do you think that the big 3 are in trouble? its not just simply that their cars are bad and no one is buying them, nor is it simply the fact that outrageous worker benefits negotiated by the union sharks are draining them... its the stupid s***, which are the overhead costs because they build too many of the same cars... all of this accounting to gross mismanagement of the companies..... to put it in practical terms, why do you think your chevy dealer has a HUGE warehouse at the parts department? because they have too many variations of the same cars and too many different cars... they HAVE to maintain all of those parts for people who bought the cars
cars aren't electronics where you can get mostly off the shelf components and build them with some custom components... also because of basically lack of moving parts, you also don't have reliability issues which means you don't have to really maintain a large quantity of replacement parts because failure rates are relatively low... you also don't have lengthy and costly certifications processes
Last edited:
M
my3needsaname
Yea I would've gottena stick but some people needed to be able to drive my car in case of an emergency and they can't drive stick.
But hell, if he's paying them off right away then go and seriously consider trading up and out for a C30 T5 R-design. That would be sick!!! And you just can't beat the 5 star safety all around, my dad's '99 still runs with the best of the best in safety today and even is better than most cars out there now!!! (I'm pretty sure that's one of the reasons he hasn't dumped it off yet)
IDK, I'm fine with the tire pressure system. Its only gone off once on me and a simple look told me that they were 2PSI low on a cold morning.
