The realities of tool ownership...

[Terry - Somerset]

Cars - how the short term dominates design and manufacturing decisions.

Car companies sell to the first owner. They select on the basis of initial cost balanced against performance, status and gizmos. The may pay some (but relatively little) attention to trade in values (especially for PCP deals).

The second owner usually after 2-4 years typically apes the first - price, performance, gizmos, status in slightly different proportions.

Providing the vehicle lasts for the first two owners, 4-7 years, up to 100k, why would a manufacturer add more cost to the original vehicle - they simply lose sales!.

Not green but pretty much inevitable. Similar issue for electric vehicles - the premium the first owner would pay over an ICE needed to be less than their fuel cost saving. This is now changing due to reduced EV costs, legislative pressure and environmental awareness.

 

[Spectric]

Providing the vehicle lasts for the first two owners, 4-7 years, up to 100k, why would a manufacturer add more cost to the original vehicle - they simply lose sales!.

Looks a similar concept is being applied to houses, why make them last for decades, I doubt we will see the modern lego house still standing in a 100 years unlike so many around today.

 

[Stevekane]

Interesting, I assume higher spin speed would be better built to cope, maybe not. That being said, my policy of buy cheap, buy multiple times had worked well for white goods, most last almost as long as their much more expensive counterparts and the cost per year is far far lower overall.

Im sure this is the right approach for oneself if not the enviroment, we have a very expensive Melie washing machine thats now over 10yrs old, no repairs and no serviceing, but for the past 5 or 6 yrs weve been tied to old technology, newer machines have shorter wash cycles, lower temp programs and perhaps lower energy costs,,so whats the best approach??

 

[Rorschach]

Im sure this is the right approach for oneself if not the enviroment, we have a very expensive Melie washing machine thats now over 10yrs old, no repairs and no serviceing, but for the past 5 or 6 yrs weve been tied to old technology, newer machines have shorter wash cycles, lower temp programs and perhaps lower energy costs,,so whats the best approach??

I don't have the luxury of thinking about the environment in most of my purchasing decisions.

 

[JobandKnock]

Take this concept to diesel engines, they used to be built using much heavier components and were lower reving, 0 to 60 in half an hour but would just keep going, I had several cars with the 2.1 Euro diesel that went twice round the clock without missing a beat. Now high reving, built from similar components as a petrol and with performance to match but do not last as always stressed.

Sounds like the old Peugeot diesels (pre-common rail). Went almost indefinitely providing you fed them oil, water and diesel - but didn't ever take the head off

 

[Terry - Somerset]

Looks a similar concept is being applied to houses, why make them last for decades, I doubt we will see the modern lego house still standing in a 100 years unlike so many around today.

In the 1980s I first went to Saudi Arabia. I was horrified that in the middle of town they were demolishing a building constructed only a few years previously at great expense.

The conclusion - why build to last when rebuilding is possibly cheaper and quicker than modifying to meet current needs.

This is why Ikea and Primark have been so successful. Rather than build furniture and clothes to last a generation, accept that needs change and build to an appropriate quality.

As a child of the 1950s and 60s I was bought up with "traditional" values - make do and mend, buy quality to lasts a lifetime, fix it when it goes wrong etc. But as our needs change so radically as we age I am not sure this really works - it was just the best solution at the time.

 

[Rorschach]

This is why Ikea and Primark have been so successful. Rather than build furniture and clothes to last a generation, accept that needs change and build to an appropriate quality.

I have Ikea furniture that is lasting very well, just need to take care of it, same goes for Primark clothes, I have some that are more than 10 years old, worn regularly, still good and several years left in them.

I think some of the bad rep that cheap stuff gets is because lots of people don't take care of the items they own, I see it in friends and family sadly, very rough with their stuff and it looks terrible almost as soon as they get it home. Children don't help there either.

 

[Jacob]

Sounds like the old Peugeot diesels (pre-common rail). Went almost indefinitely providing you fed them oil, water and diesel - but didn't ever take the head off

My Peugeot 305 van did about 250k - estimated as the odometer had packed in some years earlier, along with the oil gauge. Unfortunately missed an oil top up and the engine self destructed. 405 estate similar for mileage. My two favourite vehicles ever.

 

[Just4Fun]

I have Ikea furniture that is lasting very well, just need to take care of it

12 to 15 years ago Lidl had some barristers bookcases in. Adjustable shelves, "timber"-framed glass doors, and a drawer. Probably a similar quality to Ikea. I bought 12 of them and have been using them ever since.

My experience with those bookcases should be a good test. Not many people buy 12 identical items of furniture so that is testing on a larger scale than most home purchases, and, for flat pack furniture, I have now had them a reasonable time compared to many.

All have been fine except for 1 in which the drawer front came off. Do I conclude that the quality is poor because that drawer failed? Or did I make an error assembling that one, an error I did not make on the other 11? Do I conclude that one drawer failed because I treated it badly but treated the others well? Do I conclude that the quality is good because 11 have had no problems at all? Like most things I could argue the point in different ways to support whatever conclusion (opinion) I want to justify.

 

[Fergie 307]

Spin speeds on washing machines. Higher spin speeds are a big selling point. Of course any out of balance load (and there is plenty of that with washing) and the forces on the bearings go up as the square of the speed. Double the rpm and loads are four times higher. So obviously the higher spin speed machines have stronger bearings plus more powerful and stronger motors and that is what you are paying for.

So I looked at a manufacturer which sold similar machines but different spin speeds. Part numbers for replacement drums and motors were the same! I cannot remember which manufacturer it was. Then I tried to find out how much drier the higher spin speed got the clothes, how much longer they would take to dry outside and if tumbling, was the reduced time measurable and would it be reduced in practice and actually reduce costs. I gave up at that point.

I came to the conclusion that basically you were paying extra for a different connection to the motor, extra programmes that would never be used, dubious improvements to the ”dryness” of the clothes and a machine which would wear out quicker.

Our Samsung has a system that prevents it from spinning if the load is seriously out of balance, I think a lot of modern machines have this feature. It will rock the drum to and fro to redistribute the load, then try again. Eventually it will give up and the single bath mat, or whatever one of the kids put in there comes out sopping wet as it has refused to spin it.

 

[Fergie 307]

My Peugeot 305 van did about 250k - estimated as the odometer had packed in some years earlier, along with the oil gauge. Unfortunately missed an oil top up and the engine self destructed. 405 estate similar for mileage. My two favourite vehicles ever.

Sold a lot of 309 1.9 diesels to a taxi company many years ago. The owner reckoned to get at least 300k out of them. Had one myself for a long time as a run around then passed on to a relative. It was still going strong at 230k when it got written off in an accident. The interior and bodywork was still remarkably good too.

 

[Rorschach]

12 to 15 years ago Lidl had some barristers bookcases in. Adjustable shelves, "timber"-framed glass doors, and a drawer. Probably a similar quality to Ikea. I bought 12 of them and have been using them ever since.

My experience with those bookcases should be a good test. Not many people buy 12 identical items of furniture so that is testing on a larger scale than most home purchases, and, for flat pack furniture, I have now had them a reasonable time compared to many.

All have been fine except for 1 in which the drawer front came off. Do I conclude that the quality is poor because that drawer failed? Or did I make an error assembling that one, an error I did not make on the other 11? Do I conclude that one drawer failed because I treated it badly but treated the others well? Do I conclude that the quality is good because 11 have had no problems at all? Like most things I could argue the point in different ways to support whatever conclusion (opinion) I want to justify.

If you want something to fail you can be certain that it eventually will, if you are rough enough trying to prove that it was rubbish in the first place.

I have a good example that I think proves my point, well sort of anyway. My sister has some Ikea wardrobes in her bedroom, very pleased with them, very practical (modular system) and reasonable priced. A few years ago she moved house and they now had a spare bedroom that needed furniture. She wanted some more similar wardrobes as she was very happy with hers and even after moving they were still sturdy etc. By chance a friend of hers was moving soon after and was getting rid of some suitable wardrobes in the same type.
Since I built the first lot I was tasked with reassembling these "new" ones. These wardrobes were actually newer than the ones my sister had by a few years, the condition was really rather poor in comparison, some scratches, scuffs, chips etc. Assembly had been done very roughly, screws overtightened, holes blown out etc. Despite being assembled by someone who has a practical job and excellent tools, they clearly considered it a cheap bit of tat not worthy of care and attention.
As a result I had to make several repairs and adjustments to make everything sturdy and usable again, luckily this is an area I am good at and do often.
It does show though that the way something is treated in both assembly and life can have a big impact on how long it lasts and peoples perception.

 

[Bigegg]

A man who likes cars as rare as good steak. You've more chance of finding a tow bar for a Lamborghini.

I got one

£125 from a breaker who is a member of the sportcross FB group.
Just got a 600 mile round trip to collect it.

 

[jcassidy]

I got one

£125 from a breaker who is a member of the sportcross FB group.
Just got a 600 mile round trip to collect it.

Well I'm eating my hat.

 

[Bigegg]

Well I'm eating my hat.

I'm *at least* as amazed as you are - and certainly more chuffed.

 

[Stevekane]

12 to 15 years ago Lidl had some barristers bookcases in. Adjustable shelves, "timber"-framed glass doors, and a drawer. Probably a similar quality to Ikea. I bought 12 of them and have been using them ever since.

My experience with those bookcases should be a good test. Not many people buy 12 identical items of furniture so that is testing on a larger scale than most home purchases, and, for flat pack furniture, I have now had them a reasonable time compared to many.

All have been fine except for 1 in which the drawer front came off. Do I conclude that the quality is poor because that drawer failed? Or did I make an error assembling that one, an error I did not make on the other 11? Do I conclude that one drawer failed because I treated it badly but treated the others well? Do I conclude that the quality is good because 11 have had no problems at all? Like most things I could argue the point in different ways to support whatever conclusion (opinion) I want to justify.

And a side issue you may not have considered is that these Lidels “Barristers Bookcases” seem to have given you a legal air,,your “summing up” was very Rumpole I thought,,
Steve.

 

[Just4Fun]

your “summing up” was very Rumpole I thought

Well I have the figure for it