GM...How bad are they ?
With all the adverse publicity GM has been getting as of late...it got me to wondering. Are they really that bad....that unreliable...ridden with problems ? We have/had a number of GM's in our f...
Forum Discussion
Fordlover wrote:
What made the situation bad wasn't a defective switch detent, it's the fact that the Engineer didn't issue a Revision or new Part number for the new part. This is Design 101. A huge mistake.
Even GM's own internal investigation couldn't figure out why the newer switches were performing better than older units.
Good point. I once worked as an Expeditor for Bobcat. We sometimes substituted slightly different bolts (identical size) under the same part number, but seldom any other parts nor any with a dimension change. I don't remember whether we ever subbed a simple accessories switch, but it is possible since many are often considered generic.
If the pair of more complicated GM ignition switch parts required different GM blueprints, they should have had different (updated) part numbers. One would think that the prints would have to be different in order to purposely spec a different size detent pin and/or spring to a vendor, unless the vendor was responsible for the prints, as they might be in a simple generic accessory switch.
Our original proprietary Bobcat prints were archived, which caused a protocol to change to plan B. If the GM parts always used the same prints, but a minor vendor error, or short-coming, was corrected, I could understand why the GM number would not change. That might not excuse the engineering department from not having caught the vendor internal print error before any builds proceeded, though.
I don't know the whole story. Still, I feel as though the rest of us need to be financially protected from folks that spill hot coffee in their laps and sue.
Wes
...
