wow
#31
Rennlist Member
The altenator wasnt the problem. It was the cable connectors. They were breaking and shorting out the altenator. Unfortunalty they didnt figure this out untill about 30 minutes till the end. They had a thing on it when the commenters were talking about a .50$ piece losing them the race.
#32
Formula One Spin Doctor
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by ztnedman1
The altenator wasnt the problem. It was the cable connectors. They were breaking and shorting out the altenator. Unfortunalty they didnt figure this out untill about 30 minutes till the end. They had a thing on it when the commenters were talking about a .50$ piece losing them the race.
ahh, huh ,
#33
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: In the pasture.
Posts: 4,202
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I fear this has to do with the fact that Porsche has gotten away with building lower quality components and vehicles (and gotten rich doing it) since the introduction of the Boxster and 996. Now, its their mind set to build an OK part for .50 rather than a guaranteed reliable one for .75 or $1.00.
It's their corporate philosophy: extreme profit margins are top prioity, even with the Spider.
It's their corporate philosophy: extreme profit margins are top prioity, even with the Spider.
#34
I guess it's possible. But I think it's highly unlikely that they are skimping on parts quality to save money on a purpose built racecar. These are not mass produced vehicles where parts count and cost would be highly scrutinized. If it was a connector, it was probably something that only showed itself on the "Streets of Bagdhad" (Sebring). I wouldn't put a lot of credence in the Speed commentators off the cuff comment about a .50 cent part. They are generally good guys, but sometimes talk out of their ***. Like Dorsey's comment about the new 4-cylinder Mazda engine showing up in their street cars in a few years. Right...it's a frigging AER engine! Not even a Mazda design. Anyway, that's just an example.
The question then to ask is "Is this a different component than they used last year?". I have no way of knowing that. I'm sure if they have isolated the cause of failure, it most likely won't happen again.
The question then to ask is "Is this a different component than they used last year?". I have no way of knowing that. I'm sure if they have isolated the cause of failure, it most likely won't happen again.