Mileage Hacks and upgrades.

[aceinc]

I am a new owner of a FFH.

 

How does Ford provide software updates to the various systems in the FFH? Is there a website? I am most interested in upgrades to the computer(s) that control the hybrid systems.

 

Are there any available hardware or software hacks to improve mileage?

 

Paul

[akirby]

I am a new owner of a FFH.

 

How does Ford provide software updates to the various systems in the FFH? Is there a website? I am most interested in upgrades to the computer(s) that control the hybrid systems.

 

Are there any available hardware or software hacks to improve mileage?

 

Paul

 

Ford updates are only available to the dealers and must be installed using a dealer tool. There are aftermarket tuners available but I don't know if they have software available for the FFH yet.

[VonoreTn]

I am a new owner of a FFH.

 

How does Ford provide software updates to the various systems in the FFH? Is there a website? I am most interested in upgrades to the computer(s) that control the hybrid systems.

 

Are there any available hardware or software hacks to improve mileage?

 

Paul

 

My impression is that Ford doesn't want you messing with the computer strategy, there are too many emissions, FE, warranty, and safety issues involved. Maybe the navigation maps will be updated eventually. The nav maps seem to be good on all the interstates, but not in all housing developments.

 

I would really enjoy reading magazines on hypermiling, with aftermarket advertisements, kind of like I like hot rodding magazines, but they are not available now/yet.

[aceinc]

Without going to the dealer, how can I know whether there are any firmware/software updates? A website?

 

Is there anyway to display the software/firmware version currently installed?

 

If folks are hacking I-phones, why not the Fusion computers. An open source approach would be great.

 

From a hardware point of view there are companies that purport to have after market PHEV kits for the Prius, is anyone working on the FFH?

 

Paul

[DaveM]

Without going to the dealer, how can I know whether there are any firmware/software updates? A website?

 

Is there anyway to display the software/firmware version currently installed?

 

If folks are hacking I-phones, why not the Fusion computers. An open source approach would be great.

 

From a hardware point of view there are companies that purport to have after market PHEV kits for the Prius, is anyone working on the FFH?

 

Paul

Just one question. If you owned a company that sold a product in this case Ford and it came with a 5 yr. 50K power train warranty would you want some idiot hacking the software and then blowing the engine in which case Ford would have to replace it? I don't think so.

[aceinc]

Just one question. If you owned a company that sold a product in this case Ford and it came with a 5 yr. 50K power train warranty would you want some idiot hacking the software and then blowing the engine in which case Ford would have to replace it? I don't think so.

If I buy an aftermarket piece of equipment, and Ford can prove that it caused a problem that I want them to fix under warranty, they can tell me to take a hike.

 

The same is true of software/firmware modifications.

 

Product warranty and liability law covers this sort of thing fairly clearly. The point is, that if I buy a product (not lease or rent) I have the right to modify it in anyway that suits my purpose. If the MFR says that my modification caused a problem that voids a portion of the warranty I suspect, that if the MFR's argument is reasonable, the burden would be on me to prove that my mod did not cause the problem. Two examples;

 

1) I put a spoiler on the back of the car similar to the old "Superbird" spoiler. Subsequently the engine blows up, if the MFR were to try and argue that the spoiler caused the engine to blow they may have a problem, because that isn't reasonable.

 

2) If I decide that feeding raw powdered carbon into the intake manifold will increase my mileage, and subsequently the engine blows The MFR should be able to claim easily that the problem was of my own making. It would then be incumbent on me to show where they are wrong.

 

So in answer to your question, Yes I would want everyone hacking the software. The more people (usually companies with developers that know what they are doing) modifying the code, the more I as a MFR can learn without investing my own resources. If a hacker comes up with a substantial improvement, as the MFR, all I need to pay for is the improvement. Otherwise I need to pay for lots of full time engineer employees that may or may not come up with the improvement.

 

I suspect that there are many occassions where MFRs such as Ford GM, etc. have found that an aftermarket mod to their vehicle improves the vehicle, and they either buy the mod (or the company), or reverse engineer it inhouse. What is different with software?

 

Paul

[rfruth]

I would really like to know what rev my ECM-PCM-BCM-SYNC is at - maybe I can get a printout from the dealership at oil change time ?

[Oman]

This has been pretty well established in the courts. If you "chip" your car and the engine blows then all Ford has to do is proved you used aftermarket control software and you void just about all the warranties - maybe other than sheet metal. Tweaking the software is commonplace for both "tuners" and haulers. Some amount of effort is spent trying to hide or easily remove the tweaks so that you don't have to tell the manufacturer. You would have to prove that there was no way your modification could have possibly caused a condition that the non-modified system would have avoided. That is nearly impossible when you are talking about the computer controlled systems in cars.

 

What Ford is most worried about is people tweaking the battery charging system. In order to get a decent lifetime out of the battery the charge characteristics are carefully controlled and they never use 100% of the total capacity. If you charged the battery to 100% and allowed it to go down to 0% you would get well less than 1000 cycles out of it and that would likely be less than 1 year of actual driving. You can bet if they suspect any modifications then they will not warrant any part of the hybrid system.

 

Jon

 

 

 

 

 

 

If I buy an aftermarket piece of equipment, and Ford can prove that it caused a problem that I want them to fix under warranty, they can tell me to take a hike.

 

The same is true of software/firmware modifications.

 

Product warranty and liability law covers this sort of thing fairly clearly. The point is, that if I buy a product (not lease or rent) I have the right to modify it in anyway that suits my purpose. If the MFR says that my modification caused a problem that voids a portion of the warranty I suspect, that if the MFR's argument is reasonable, the burden would be on me to prove that my mod did not cause the problem. Two examples;

 

1) I put a spoiler on the back of the car similar to the old "Superbird" spoiler. Subsequently the engine blows up, if the MFR were to try and argue that the spoiler caused the engine to blow they may have a problem, because that isn't reasonable.

 

2) If I decide that feeding raw powdered carbon into the intake manifold will increase my mileage, and subsequently the engine blows The MFR should be able to claim easily that the problem was of my own making. It would then be incumbent on me to show where they are wrong.

 

So in answer to your question, Yes I would want everyone hacking the software. The more people (usually companies with developers that know what they are doing) modifying the code, the more I as a MFR can learn without investing my own resources. If a hacker comes up with a substantial improvement, as the MFR, all I need to pay for is the improvement. Otherwise I need to pay for lots of full time engineer employees that may or may not come up with the improvement.

 

I suspect that there are many occassions where MFRs such as Ford GM, etc. have found that an aftermarket mod to their vehicle improves the vehicle, and they either buy the mod (or the company), or reverse engineer it inhouse. What is different with software?

 

Paul

[akirby]

If I buy an aftermarket piece of equipment, and Ford can prove that it caused a problem that I want them to fix under warranty, they can tell me to take a hike.

 

The same is true of software/firmware modifications.

 

Product warranty and liability law covers this sort of thing fairly clearly. The point is, that if I buy a product (not lease or rent) I have the right to modify it in anyway that suits my purpose. If the MFR says that my modification caused a problem that voids a portion of the warranty I suspect, that if the MFR's argument is reasonable, the burden would be on me to prove that my mod did not cause the problem. Two examples;

 

1) I put a spoiler on the back of the car similar to the old "Superbird" spoiler. Subsequently the engine blows up, if the MFR were to try and argue that the spoiler caused the engine to blow they may have a problem, because that isn't reasonable.

 

2) If I decide that feeding raw powdered carbon into the intake manifold will increase my mileage, and subsequently the engine blows The MFR should be able to claim easily that the problem was of my own making. It would then be incumbent on me to show where they are wrong.

 

So in answer to your question, Yes I would want everyone hacking the software. The more people (usually companies with developers that know what they are doing) modifying the code, the more I as a MFR can learn without investing my own resources. If a hacker comes up with a substantial improvement, as the MFR, all I need to pay for is the improvement. Otherwise I need to pay for lots of full time engineer employees that may or may not come up with the improvement.

 

I suspect that there are many occassions where MFRs such as Ford GM, etc. have found that an aftermarket mod to their vehicle improves the vehicle, and they either buy the mod (or the company), or reverse engineer it inhouse. What is different with software?

 

Paul

 

Spoken like a true hacker. There is no way Ford or any other mfr would benefit from having their computer software hacked or re-engineered. Quite the opposite. Not to mention the potential EPA issues related to fuel economy and emissions.

[DaveM]

If I buy an aftermarket piece of equipment, and Ford can prove that it caused a problem that I want them to fix under warranty, they can tell me to take a hike.

 

The same is true of software/firmware modifications.

 

Product warranty and liability law covers this sort of thing fairly clearly. The point is, that if I buy a product (not lease or rent) I have the right to modify it in anyway that suits my purpose. If the MFR says that my modification caused a problem that voids a portion of the warranty I suspect, that if the MFR's argument is reasonable, the burden would be on me to prove that my mod did not cause the problem. Two examples;

 

1) I put a spoiler on the back of the car similar to the old "Superbird" spoiler. Subsequently the engine blows up, if the MFR were to try and argue that the spoiler caused the engine to blow they may have a problem, because that isn't reasonable.

 

2) If I decide that feeding raw powdered carbon into the intake manifold will increase my mileage, and subsequently the engine blows The MFR should be able to claim easily that the problem was of my own making. It would then be incumbent on me to show where they are wrong.

 

So in answer to your question, Yes I would want everyone hacking the software. The more people (usually companies with developers that know what they are doing) modifying the code, the more I as a MFR can learn without investing my own resources. If a hacker comes up with a substantial improvement, as the MFR, all I need to pay for is the improvement. Otherwise I need to pay for lots of full time engineer employees that may or may not come up with the improvement.

 

I suspect that there are many occassions where MFRs such as Ford GM, etc. have found that an aftermarket mod to their vehicle improves the vehicle, and they either buy the mod (or the company), or reverse engineer it inhouse. What is different with software?

 

Paul

There is also federal smog laws and hacking the software can defeat that. And your great uncle would go after Ford for allowing this to happen whether right or wrong it could cost Ford millions/billions in defence of it.

[aceinc]

Spoken like a true hacker. There is no way Ford or any other mfr would benefit from having their computer software hacked or re-engineered. Quite the opposite. Not to mention the potential EPA issues related to fuel economy and emissions.

If you use the term "hacker" with its proper meaning I take that as a compliment. If on the other hand you confuse the term with "cracker" I am insulted.

 

A hacker is a person who is proficient with computers and/or programming to an elite level where they know all of the in's and out's of a system. There is NO illegality involved with being a hacker.

 

A cracker is a hacker who uses their proficiency for personal gains outside of the law. EX: stealing data, changing bank accounts, distributing viruses etc.

 

Hopefully folks will begin working on the Fusion as they already have the Prius;

 

http://news.cnet.com/2100-11389_3-6074671.html

 

Paul

[lolder]

As Onan said, you should not "Hack" any part of the drive train or hybrid components of this vehicle. If you want to do that, you've bought the wrong vehicle. The algorithms in the software of this vehicle are extremely sophisticated and if you think you can improve on something, you'll probably make something else worse. The hybrid manufacturers are ecstatic that they have gotten the nickel-metal hydride batteries to their current reliability and durability levels. They think the battery lifetime is now indefinitely long with the charging/discharging system that they are now using. NM-H Batteries have almost ceased to be an issue in hybrids. The manufacturers are very worried about the next generation L-ION batteries. Converting to a PHEV as has been done with Priuses is extremely expensive. When people start plugging in a five passenger, air-conditioned PHEV every night after going 40 miles, they are going to be astounded at their electric bill. The Chevy Volt is going to have the same characteristics. These vehicles are going to draw 15 amps at 120 VAC for 10 hours every night to get the energy to go 40 miles. A PHEV only changes where the power is generated, not so much the cost.

But I digress. Enjoy it the way it is.

 

Lee

[VonoreTn]

If you use the term "hacker" with its proper meaning I take that as a compliment. If on the other hand you confuse the term with "cracker" I am insulted.

 

..............

Paul

 

I concur with aKirby, Jon, DaveM, etc. Ford would not endorse modifying their computer strategy, these cars are not meant to be learning prototypes, they are specifically engineered to best satisfy government standards, customer needs, liability risks, and reliability targets. Meeting all of the above targets does not leave any room for modifications to core operational parameters.

 

Please limit your experiments to legal and safe hypermiling techniques. And remember, too much air in our tires will wear them out in the middle early, thus the price of tires should be factored into our fuel economy savings. ;)

[akirby]

If you use the term "hacker" with its proper meaning I take that as a compliment. If on the other hand you confuse the term with "cracker" I am insulted.

 

A hacker is a person who is proficient with computers and/or programming to an elite level where they know all of the in's and out's of a system. There is NO illegality involved with being a hacker.

 

A cracker is a hacker who uses their proficiency for personal gains outside of the law. EX: stealing data, changing bank accounts, distributing viruses etc.

 

Hopefully folks will begin working on the Fusion as they already have the Prius;

 

http://news.cnet.com/2100-11389_3-6074671.html

 

Paul

 

Hacker as in someone who hacks someone else's code for fun. I was writing computer code in 1979, have a degree in computer science and get paid a lot of money based on what I know about computer systems.

 

You don't improve something as complicated as a PCM for a hybrid vehicle by hacking it. This isn't a simple cell phone or wireless router. If you screw up the PCM you can kill someone. Seriously.

[aceinc]

In 1979, I was doing assembly level programming for process control systems using pdp 11/03s running RT11. Prior to that I worked on CAD, when it meant Computer Aided Dispatch, ie 911 systems. One of my latest projects is pattern matching/statistical analysis for epidemiologists at a chronic disease data collection center. This is actually an ongoing project. There have been many projects in between.

 

I have on a number of occasions had the opportunity to succeed at substantially improving algorithms that large companies had spent obscene sums to develop. I know other folks that have done the same. I do not pretend to know enough to improve the software in the FFH. However, with all of the layoffs, and the downsizing in the auto companies, I bet there are some bright folks that do know enough. Not only that but they have time on their hands. If some of them joined forces and put together different "Hacks" for different folks, there may be a market for them.

 

I am sure that Ford has a talented team that developed the software for the Fusion. Ford had many goals and restrictions that they placed on those developers. Not all of those goals are necessarily the same as my goals. It would be nice if I were able to pick and choose what weight I give to various operating parameters. By way of example I might choose to reduce the longevity of my batteries to gain extra MPG. Perhaps I believe that NiMH batteries will be replaced very shortly by other technologies, and I want to get the best mileage and replace them with new tech batteries as soon as they are available.

 

If we follow the argument that we "...should not "Hack" any part of the drive train ..." to its logical conclusion, then we should sit back and take whatever piece of automotive crap that is given to us not that the FFH is a POAC I wouldn't have bought one if I thought that. After all we might endanger someone, or void a warranty, lord knows what else we may do. It's a good thing that ol' Henry didn't think that way.

 

When I started this thread, I was interested in "alternative software from third parties" (hacks) I still am if anyone knows where I might find some.

 

I really didn't want to get into a philosophical discussion about the benefits of entrepenurial innovation as it relates to the automotive industry. After their poor performance in innovation, I didn't think it was needed.

 

Paul

[Oman]

My post was solely about warranties, not anything else. Once you are willing to forgo a warranty claim then I don't really think there is an issue. I was loosely involved in the aftermarket "chipping" industry when it was starting. Often you chipped because you wanted to push more performance from the engine. Sometimes it worked and sometimes it didn't. It takes a whole lot of reverse engineering just to work new timing tables out for the variable cam, injector, and spark ignition systems. Then a ton of trial and error. Some even had modes that you could select via a sequence of ignition keys turns to change from "fuel saver" to "max power" for instance.

 

The algorithms for the hybrid system are much more complex and I would venture to guess that Ford has the programming very locked down to keep their IP safe. The basics behind the functioning of the system is well known - the work is in the fine tuning and predictive algorithms.

 

The single biggest opportunity in my mind for any improvement in the vehicle is the battery. Ford did design the battery controller as a modular unit attached to the battery. It handles the charging logic. I would guess that it is possible to design an alternative pack with different weight and current characteristics and get it working with the vehicle without having to modify anything but the associated battery charge controller. The downside is that MG1 and MG2 are closely coupled to the exact characteristics of the original battery pack. So for instance if you changed to a chemistry that delivered more current you wouldn't be able to get more horsepower from the electrics.

 

The Prius has been out a lot longer than the FFH, and the target market is somewhat different. Ford is going for the "I just want a car that works like a car and that gets great mileage" and Toyota is going for the uber-green geek type. There is likely to be many more hackers of the Prius than the FFH and the aftermarket folks know it. Once the FFH starts to get a few years old I'm sure you will start seeing some aftermarket options coming out.

 

 

Speaking of which - has anyone seen the new Garmin ODBC wireless reader option for the GPS displays? It would be nice to see some of the really technical information specific to hybrids from there.

 

Jon

 

 

 

In 1979, I was doing assembly level programming for process control systems using pdp 11/03s running RT11. Prior to that I worked on CAD, when it meant Computer Aided Dispatch, ie 911 systems. One of my latest projects is pattern matching/statistical analysis for epidemiologists at a chronic disease data collection center. This is actually an ongoing project. There have been many projects in between.

 

I have on a number of occasions had the opportunity to succeed at substantially improving algorithms that large companies had spent obscene sums to develop. I know other folks that have done the same. I do not pretend to know enough to improve the software in the FFH. However, with all of the layoffs, and the downsizing in the auto companies, I bet there are some bright folks that do know enough. Not only that but they have time on their hands. If some of them joined forces and put together different "Hacks" for different folks, there may be a market for them.

 

I am sure that Ford has a talented team that developed the software for the Fusion. Ford had many goals and restrictions that they placed on those developers. Not all of those goals are necessarily the same as my goals. It would be nice if I were able to pick and choose what weight I give to various operating parameters. By way of example I might choose to reduce the longevity of my batteries to gain extra MPG. Perhaps I believe that NiMH batteries will be replaced very shortly by other technologies, and I want to get the best mileage and replace them with new tech batteries as soon as they are available.

 

If we follow the argument that we "...should not "Hack" any part of the drive train ..." to its logical conclusion, then we should sit back and take whatever piece of automotive crap that is given to us not that the FFH is a POAC I wouldn't have bought one if I thought that. After all we might endanger someone, or void a warranty, lord knows what else we may do. It's a good thing that ol' Henry didn't think that way.

 

When I started this thread, I was interested in "alternative software from third parties" (hacks) I still am if anyone knows where I might find some.

 

I really didn't want to get into a philosophical discussion about the benefits of entrepenurial innovation as it relates to the automotive industry. After their poor performance in innovation, I didn't think it was needed.

 

Paul

[lolder]

Very good posts! Good points well made. I would like to make just one analogy about computer controlled machines that are powerful, big and go fast; a commercial airliner like a Boeing or Airbus. They don't make as many of them but the stakes are still high in having them perform correctly. An operator of one of them may certainly feel that there are improvements that can be made in their performance. In fact this is done often. The improvements however are done in co-operation with the manufacturer and the regulatory bodies. Yes, Henry may not have functioned in a regulatory environment, (actually, he probably would have) but these are different times. The thread about the brake failures is an example. These are very different vehicles. They have many advantages and are going to fail in interesting ways. Read the Prius chats about the SKS and it's contributions to the fatal stuck accelerator accident in the Lexus. Who would have thought....

 

Lee

[Zacher]

I would really like to know what rev my ECM-PCM-BCM-SYNC is at - maybe I can get a printout from the dealership at oil change time ?

 

On my NAV I can go to Menu and System Settings, gives all revision codes. If you don't have a NAV I'm not sure how you'd do it.

[VonoreTn]

In 1979, I was doing assembly level programming for process control systems using pdp 11/03s running RT11. Prior to that I worked on CAD, when it meant Computer Aided Dispatch, ie 911 systems. One of my latest projects is pattern matching/statistical analysis for epidemiologists at a chronic disease data collection center. This is actually an ongoing project. There have been many projects in between.

 

Yeah you are really smart, you are successfully employed in the field that you chose and trained in, I get that.

 

It would be nice if I were able to pick and choose what weight I give to various operating parameters. By way of example I might choose to reduce the longevity of my batteries to gain extra MPG.

 

Yeah, that would be really smart for Ford to go after that large market of people who want to reduce their battery life to pick up a few short term mpg's. Wonder why they didn't think of that. I wonder if you thought about how much money it is going to cost you to upgrade the batteries to the new level you envision, because those lithiun ion batteries are not gonna be cheap, and you will want to upgrade your entire operational hardware which also will not be cheap. I suspect Ford was aware of all that and made some good common sense compromises to get a good product on the road with available technology for under $30K.

 

 

I'm just saying.....

[VonoreTn]

In the article you reference below, you might have missed a few sentences, like:

 

"For its part, Toyota recognizes that some Prius owners will want to hack their cars, but the company doesn't condone the behavior. "

 

"There are people out there who have hacked into the system," said Bill Kwong, a Toyota spokesman. "The tech is out there for technicians. But we don't encourage consumers to do that."

 

"Kwong said Toyota doesn't offer the switch to electric mode because of U.S. laws mandating that it offer a minimum eight-year warranty for the car's power system. Thus, he said, by disabling the switch, the company is able to ensure a longer battery life. "

 

The switch he is talking about is a switch on the Japan-only Prius that allows you to switch to battery power only. If you have ever driven in Tokyo as I have, you would be aware that walking is a faster mode of transportation than driving, and switching to battery mode might make some sense, as long as you switched on the engine now and then. But the Fusion does the same thing in heavy traffic, but brings in the ICE when needed automatically, so I'm not sure if the manual battery mode is a big deal.

 

 

If you use the term "hacker" with its proper meaning I take that as a compliment. If on the other hand you confuse the term with "cracker" I am insulted.

 

A hacker is a person who is proficient with computers and/or programming to an elite level where they know all of the in's and out's of a system. There is NO illegality involved with being a hacker.

 

A cracker is a hacker who uses their proficiency for personal gains outside of the law. EX: stealing data, changing bank accounts, distributing viruses etc.

 

Hopefully folks will begin working on the Fusion as they already have the Prius;

 

http://news.cnet.com/2100-11389_3-6074671.html

 

Paul

[aceinc]

Yeah you are really smart, you are successfully employed in the field that you chose and trained in, I get that.

 

 

 

Yeah, that would be really smart for Ford to go after that large market of people who want to reduce their battery life to pick up a few short term mpg's. Wonder why they didn't think of that. I wonder if you thought about how much money it is going to cost you to upgrade the batteries to the new level you envision, because those lithiun ion batteries are not gonna be cheap, and you will want to upgrade your entire operational hardware which also will not be cheap. I suspect Ford was aware of all that and made some good common sense compromises to get a good product on the road with available technology for under $30K.

 

 

I'm just saying.....

Sniping benefits the forum in what way?

 

I am not asking FoMoCo to develop anything for me.

 

I like this car, I spent my money on this car, what I want to do is in no way meant to disrespect FoMoCo, its employees, the designers of the FFH, or anyone.

 

Say I choose to take my brand new FFH to a body shop and ask them to add a "Boat Tail" to it which could potentially add 10% or more gas savings to the vehicle. Would you say I shouldn't do that? What if I took golf ball "dimple skin" and glued it to the entire body, am I allowed to do that? Can I inflate the tires to 40 psi? Just what am I allowed to do and not do with something that I just paid $30,000+ for?

 

The point I was trying to make is quite simple;

 

My goal for my car may not be the same as your's or Mary down the road, or FoMoCo.

 

When FoMoCo puts out a car it must perform well and last in Alaska, Arizona, Colorado and Florida. My car will probably never need to run in -40 degree weather. It will probably never need to run day in and day out in 100+ degree weather. Perhaps there are optimizations that can be made that will allow me to tune the car for my environment, my goals, my life. I live in one of the flatest areas of the country. My daily driving includes no more than 100 feet of elevation above sea level, and that includes bridges and parking garages. The software designed for the FFH must take into account people that live in Colorado.

 

You said it yourself, "...good common sense compromises to get a good product on the road..." I may not like some of the compromises that they made. I believe I have the right to change what I like to best suit my needs. Perhaps to just suit my whims.

 

Why hijack this thread?

 

I am looking for people that are interested in stretching the limits of this vehicle. Chipping is one alternative. Improving aerodynamics may be another. Replacing devices that use a lot of electricity with more efficient devices may be another. Replacing the oil with synthetics may be another. Inflating tires to 40 psi with nitrogen may be another. Heat reflecting film for the windows may be another.

 

I am not looking for arguments about why I should leave well enough alone. If you have some insight on things that can be done to improve the FFH, I'd love to hear them.

 

Paul

[aceinc]

I was just looking at the bread crumbs for this thread "Ford Fusion Forum > FUSION, MILAN & MKZ MODIFICATIONS | TECHNICAL FORUM > Fusion, Milan Hybrid."

 

Note "FUSION, MILAN & MKZ MODIFICATIONS | TECHNICAL FORUM ," it seems to me that modifications is what we should all be talking about.

 

Paul

[VonoreTn]

Sniping benefits the forum in what way?

 

.... what I want to do is in no way meant to disrespect FoMoCo, its employees, the designers of the FFH, or anyone.

 

Paul

 

Then maybe you should avoid comments like these:

 

"If we follow the argument that we "...should not "Hack" any part of the drive train ..." to its logical conclusion, then we should sit back and take whatever piece of automotive crap that is given to us..."

 

"I really didn't want to get into a philosophical discussion about the benefits of entrepenurial

innovation as it relates to the automotive industry. After their poor performance in innovation, I

didn't think it was needed...."

 

I worked at Ford as an engineer for 33 years, and I can tell you that you have no idea what hurdles the EPA, OSHA, NHTSA, the UAW, the IRS, unconstrained product lawyers, and the vicissitudes of the market put on a USA automotive company's ability to innovate. And it's getting worse, no additional USA drilling, no tort reform, no nuclear energy expansion, a plan to tax manufacturers based on carbon dioxide emissions, etc. I sometimes wonder why any USA auto manufacturers are left.

 

My last post was on topic, pointing out that Toyota does not support customer hacking of their Prius control systems. Thanks for posting that link.

[DaveM]

Then maybe you should avoid comments like these:

 

"If we follow the argument that we "...should not "Hack" any part of the drive train ..." to its logical conclusion, then we should sit back and take whatever piece of automotive crap that is given to us..."

 

"I really didn't want to get into a philosophical discussion about the benefits of entrepenurial

innovation as it relates to the automotive industry. After their poor performance in innovation, I

didn't think it was needed...."

 

I worked at Ford as an engineer for 33 years, and I can tell you that you have no idea what hurdles the EPA, OSHA, NHTSA, the UAW, the IRS, unconstrained product lawyers, and the vicissitudes of the market put on a USA automotive company's ability to innovate. And it's getting worse, no additional USA drilling, no tort reform, no nuclear energy expansion, a plan to tax manufacturers based on carbon dioxide emissions, etc. I sometimes wonder why any USA auto manufacturers are left.

 

My last post was on topic, pointing out that Toyota does not support customer hacking of their Prius control systems. Thanks for posting that link.

Explain to me what the UAW has to do with Fords ability to innovate. I doubt any UAW members work on future products, at least in their design faze. Also with the UAW getting smaller and smaller I also find it hard to believe they would do anything to cut their own throats.

[aceinc]

Then maybe you should avoid comments like these:

 

"If we follow the argument that we "...should not "Hack" any part of the drive train ..." to its logical conclusion, then we should sit back and take whatever piece of automotive crap that is given to us..."

 

"I really didn't want to get into a philosophical discussion about the benefits of entrepenurial

innovation as it relates to the automotive industry. After their poor performance in innovation, I

didn't think it was needed...."

 

I worked at Ford as an engineer for 33 years, and I can tell you that you have no idea what hurdles the EPA, OSHA, NHTSA, the UAW, the IRS, unconstrained product lawyers, and the vicissitudes of the market put on a USA automotive company's ability to innovate. And it's getting worse, no additional USA drilling, no tort reform, no nuclear energy expansion, a plan to tax manufacturers based on carbon dioxide emissions, etc. I sometimes wonder why any USA auto manufacturers are left.

 

My last post was on topic, pointing out that Toyota does not support customer hacking of their Prius control systems. Thanks for posting that link.

I believe that a lot of the vehicles from the 1970s and 1980s produced in the US were designed with profits as their first priority and all other concerns secondary. This contradicts management 101, which says "A business' primary goal is to produce a product or service, and profit is a residual." I believe that the US auto industry may be learning, but in my opinion many people in their management still believe that their purpose is to make money, not vehicles.

 

I am familiar with regulations having consulted in both the Medical and Insurance industries. I understand that engineer/employees are severely constrained by regulations. They are even more constrained by management/corporate culture that stifles creativity. I would think that after 33 years in that environment you would want to let your creative energy free.

 

By way of an example, in 1969 GM developed and built a prototype of a hybrid vehicle. Management decided not to produce the vehicle. I suspect the decision was based in large part on profit margins, focus groups, etc. Had they built that car, even if they lost money, where would the state of the art hybrid technology be today? Consider that they would have probably been in limited production in 1971/1972. When the 1973 oil embargo hit, they would have been selling those cars like hot cakes. The Volkswagens and Toyotas that began flooding the market would have gained less of a foothold. See this link; http://www.finkbuilt.com/blog/hybrid-car-ready-in-1969/

 

Engineers as a group of people are creative and innovative, the US auto industry, not so much. Blame it on regulations, corporate greed, corporate inertia, it doesn't matter, the cars that were produced over the last 35-40 years with a few exceptions have not been technological marvels.

 

Again you hijack this thread to talk about unrelated topics.

 

Since you are/were an engineer do you you have anything to say that might help anyone improve the FFH?

 

Paul