<VV> Terminal block, Not a: HRPT

[Ron]

This trivia may go on forever, but, keep in mind that any idiot can design a 
more expensive item that might be better but it takes a real expert to 
design an economical, functional and reliable item that can outlive it's 
design goal by a factor of eight.  GM has those experts.
RonH

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mark Corbin" <airvair at earthlink.net>
To: "Craig Nicol" <nicolcs at aol.com>; <virtualvairs at corvair.org>
Cc: <JVHRoberts at aol.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 9:01 AM
Subject: <VV> Terminal block, Not a: HRPT


> All,
>
> I never indicated that there wasn't a better design out there. After all,
> everything that has ever been designed by humans is not perfect and can
> thus certainly be improved by redesigning. That is the nature of human
> engineeering. But on the other hand, NOTHING ever designed by humans is
> ever beyond needing maintainence on occasion either.
>
> My contention is that just because there may be a better way of doing a
> terminal block doesn't mean that the original design is defective. If you
> believe it does, then you are of the Ralph Nader school of design thought.
> That was his contention with the early model Corvairs. Think about that
> point for a while, Roberts.
>
> With the existing GM design terminal block that is on the LM Corvairs, it
> served its purpose. And given the "cheap, economy, 10-year life span,
> throwaway car" mentality of its designers, it's served admirably, I think.
> Can it be improved? Yes. Is it prone to failure? Occasionally, but usually
> because it's been abused or is past its intended life cycle. As I contend,
> LACK OF MAINTAINENCE, many times brought on by abuse, is its biggest
> failure point. But does that make it a faulty design? Absolutely not. And
> THAT is my point.
>
> -Mark
>
>
>> [Original Message]
>> From: Craig Nicol <nicolcs at aol.com>
>> Subject: Re: <VV> HRPT
>>
>> This discussion reminds me of the nameless VV luminary who entered a
>> discussion with me on the merits of the Corvair direct air heater.  My
>> contention was that having 18-20 potential exhaust leaks directly into 
>> the
>> heater airstream was a poor design. His contention was that the design 
>> was
>> proven and any issues were due to poor maintenance and thus the owner's
>> fault. I remember reading something in Hemmings (?) once about the 
>> various
>> contingents in car clubs, one of which was "They made this car perfect 
>> and
>> anyone who wants to change anything is an idiot".  I wish I could find
> that
>> reference and relearn the other definitions.
>> Craig Nicol
>>
>>
>>
>
> OF COURSE it's the design! My fix ends the problem, FOREVER. This is NOT a
> part that should EVER require maintenance. The only reason I've ever had 
> to
> touch this connection is because it failed.
>
> In a message dated 3/6/2008 9:55:01 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> airvair at earthlink.net writes:
> Face it, Roberts. It's YOU and not the design. If Ron and I (and no doubt
> others) haven't had a problem, then why would you be any different? It's
> not the part that's different. Face up to it. You just don't like to admit
> that you're either Mr. Brutewrench or Mr. "lack of maintainence".
>
> -Mark
>
>
> A LOT of them don't last that long. Of all 10 LMs I've owned, this horrid
> plastic thing has been problematic. It's the surt of part that should 
> NEVER
> need this sort of attention.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> This message was sent by the VirtualVairs mailing list, all copyrights are 
> the property
> of the writer, please attribute properly. For help, 
> mailto:vv-help at corvair.org
> This list sponsored by the Corvair Society of America, 
> http://www.corvair.org/
> Post messages to: VirtualVairs at corvair.org
> Change your options: 
> http://www.vv.corvair.org/mailman/options/virtualvairs
> _______________________________________________
>
>