- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Nissan recalls nearly 500K vehicles due to engine failures
Posted on 7/3/25 at 3:11 pm to Tr33fiddy
Posted on 7/3/25 at 3:11 pm to Tr33fiddy
quote:
Cafe is actually what killed the small trucks. Manufactures had to make compact trucks midsized to avoid the cafe fuel economy standards. Basically a compact pickup is subject to the same economy standards as a small car so they just made them bigger.
And this is why there is a hybrid Maverick - Ford found a way to exploit the rules. They originally made it the base option, thinking they would need to boost hybrid sales at some small loss to keep their CAFE in line. The Maverick hybrid proved so popular that they started charging extra for it.
0
Posted on 7/3/25 at 3:13 pm to Nitrogen
All manufacturers have issues.
You can buy a lambo and it still blow up and disintegrate you and your brother.
You can buy a lambo and it still blow up and disintegrate you and your brother.
Posted on 7/3/25 at 3:16 pm to Obtuse1
quote:
All that is irrelevant unless you have information that contradicts Nissan's assertion that it was a manufacturing issue.
I have 30+ years in the industry in powertrain. I know a thing or two about recall double-speak. The root cause is still in how narrow the targets were for either the bearing metallurgy, dimensions, or heat treat, or some combination. of them. A bearing that would have had plenty of margin in an older engine has no margin for the tiniest error in a newer engine. Same for metallurgy and heat treat of things like lifters and cams (GM says Hi).
Posted on 7/3/25 at 3:17 pm to SirWinston
quote:
What a legendary collapse
Bring back Datsun. Simple, cheap, reliable little cars.
Posted on 7/3/25 at 3:18 pm to DownshiftAndFloorIt
quote:
Thank your government and particularly California for all this shite.
I wish California would fall off in the ocean. Residents included.
Learn to swim, I'll see you down in Arizona Bay.
Posted on 7/3/25 at 3:25 pm to Arkapigdiesel
quote:
Learn to swim, I'll see you down in Arizona Bay.
Posted on 7/3/25 at 3:26 pm to dgnx6
quote:
All manufacturers have issues.
Yep, Ford has recalled about 200,000 vehicles for faulty backup equipment.
This post was edited on 7/3/25 at 3:28 pm
Posted on 7/3/25 at 3:32 pm to Pedro
quote:
From what I understand it’s a matter of when it goes not if it goes. I ended up just saying frick it and got a new car.
That's what we've heard. I had my mechanic check it out and he told her it was okay (at that time), but was likely to develop a problem eventually. They don't drive much, and kept it. I told them they should get rid of it then, but they didn't. If I had a 6cyl Hyundai that was approaching 100k, it would be for sale.
The dealership was awful and incompetent to top it off.
This post was edited on 7/3/25 at 3:33 pm
Posted on 7/3/25 at 4:13 pm to TigerHornII
That’s part of why they are making them bigger and making people think they want bigger. Because the bigger they go, the more they can get around the footprint formula. I don’t think I was clear in my first response. Because we aren’t disagreeing with each other. I agree with you, but that’s why they are going bigger to get around those restrictions.
Posted on 7/3/25 at 4:31 pm to Nitrogen
quote:
” engines that may have manufacturing defects in their bearings
You laughed, but Fletch was right!!!
This post was edited on 7/3/25 at 4:35 pm
Posted on 7/3/25 at 4:39 pm to TigerHornII
quote:
CAFE forces all four of those targets to be incredibly tight, with no margin whatsoever for error.
Bingo!
quote:
TigerHornII
You need to post a lot more. Especially in mechanical discussions.
Posted on 7/3/25 at 4:56 pm to TigerHornII
I have 30+ years in the industry in powertrain."
In what capacity-mechanic? Legit question.
In what capacity-mechanic? Legit question.
Posted on 7/3/25 at 4:59 pm to TigerHornII
quote:
The root cause is still in how narrow the targets were for either the bearing metallurgy, dimensions, or heat treat, or some combination. of them. A bearing that would have had plenty of margin in an older engine has no margin for the tiniest error in a newer engine.
You simply do not know that unless you have access to the failure analysis of the bearings in question. I have read numerous failure analysis reports and have never read "the engineering was hard" on the fault tree.
You are simply making assumptions based on feels. It may be an engineering flaw but without any evidence to the contrary and being listed as a manufacturing issue it is wasted time to argue about it. We might get some insight if the replaced engines have the same mode of failure. If not then it was likely indeed a manufacturing issue. Further, if it is an engineering error, the engines that check out OK are likely to continue to fail.
Posted on 7/3/25 at 5:07 pm to Nitrogen
If they had made the titan look like the frontier, they would still be selling them
Posted on 7/3/25 at 5:13 pm to Nitrogen
You'd think the internal combustion engine would be perfected by now.
Posted on 7/5/25 at 5:44 pm to Nitrogen
(no message)
This post was edited on 7/5/25 at 5:50 pm
Posted on 7/5/25 at 6:35 pm to aTmTexas Dillo
quote:
You'd think the internal combustion engine would be perfected by now.
It was.
Then the climate change fricktards started to dictate CAFE standards
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News