Phil's Podium Of The Automotive Pure: Ten Trick Technologies That Changed the Automotive Maintenance & Repair Scene - Part Two

Phil Coconis
by Phil Coconis

This article is the second in a series wherein— after thrashing manufacturers for doing their worst—I do a quasi de facto “equal time” summary of ten automotive mechanical technologies I believe are their best efforts, to date.

To review the guidelines I’m holding to in assembling this list: these are technologies that are pretty well universally accepted and are currently being used by the majority of auto manufacturers. They also have been popularized and proliferated during my automotive repair career. I’m covering them more-or-less in the order that they have achieved that status.

IT’S NOW BIN TIME!

The One-Piece Rear Main Seal:

Although it seems the European and Japanese manufacturers picked up on the value of using this technology from as far back as the late ‘60’s, if not earlier, it took the U.S. manufacturers a little longer to get with it. It wasn’t until the cycle for their earlier engine designs—sporting their two-pieced “rope-type” Crankshaft Rear Main Seals—had run their course, and new designs made their debut, that it could be said that they had now bought in to this technology.

Initially, the Yanks updated most of their older engine block designs by tossing the two-piece rope in favor of the two-piece neoprene seal countermeasure. While being an improvement over the rope, this upgrade still had its drawbacks: there were still some leakage and longevity issues, but the big bogey was with servicing it.

More often than not, to completely replace both halves, not only did the oil pan and rear crankshaft main bearing cap have to be removed, but usually the whole crankshaft, too—in order to access the half remaining in the block. Usually VERY DIFFICULT to do if the engine was installed in the vehicle!

With the one-piece, not only was oil leakage now reduced to nil—and for an extended time and mileage period, no less—the seal could easily be serviced during clutch replacement (back when many vehicles HAD clutches), or whenever the transmission was removed for repair. Highways, byways, and DRIVEWAYS across the United States of America all rejoiced in unison at this advancement! I doubt Oil Companies did, though.

So, how about that? A “one-piece” becoming the paradigm, and most desirable under ALL circumstances…

The Asian Gear-Reduction Starter:

Developed as a bulletproof-reliable solution for industrial and fleet vehicles in Japan, this design saw a rapid rise to popularity in Japanese passenger cars as far back as the late ‘60’s.

While the demands imposed by the rather small-displacement, lower-compression engines found in those vehicles didn’t really tax the abilities of this starter, they did allow for some incredibly long-term reliability records as a result. Other manufacturers took note.

Chrysler was among the first to develop their own gear-reduction unit, which was standard equipment on many of their cars at around the same time as the J-Units were being impressed into service. No one can forget the characteristic sound these Detroit-edition starters made. They did do a good job of spinning the high-compression engines prevalent during that period in U.S. auto manufacturing history—all comments about the sound they made while doing so, aside.

They worked so well because the actual motor section of the starter was not directly driving the pinion gear (which contacts the Flywheel Ring Gear) at a one-to-one ratio, as had been done for so many years previously. It rather drove the pinion via an internal reduction gear, allowing the motor to spin at a higher, more efficient RPM. This effect also allowed engineers to use a dimensionally smaller motor to accomplish what the larger, power-hungry direct-drive units of the past were able to.

The advantage of the Asian unit, however–besides having a motor of superior quality—was really in its solenoid design. Since the rest of the starter already had the potential for an absolutely INCREDIBLE service life, the only area of wear-concern was the high-amp contact posts within the solenoid, which bridged power to the motor.

To solve this problem without necessitating a more expensive solenoid replacement (as other manufacturers had), the engineers of these units made it easily possible to replace just the contact posts by themselves. Think of it: at the point where a conventional starter would be considered “failed”, and in need of overhaul, these starters would just need the contact posts replaced, and they’d be ready for the “next life”!

Full-Flow Engine Oil Filtration:

Oiling system and oil filter technology has continued to advance in the forward direction for many years since the days of “splash-oiling”, internal roller and needle bearing crankshafts, and filterless systems using non-detergent motor oil.

Even when us automobile owners and techs were “blessed” with the advent of the “spin-on” oil filter, incorporated into engines from the early-mid ‘60’s, we still were not completely out of the “dark ages” yet. Oiling systems were generally not designed to filter all, or even MOST of the oil being pumped throughout the engine at a given time. As a result, engine life generally was maxxed at about 150,000 miles, under the best of circumstances.

On the plus side, at least THOSE engines were completely rebuildable, so they could do another 150K with no problem, if the build was done correctly.

When Full-Flow oiling systems debuted in some European and Japanese passenger cars, before long it became understood that engine life had effectively been doubled, in some cases, just from the implementation of this ONE technology.

Now, virtually all passenger car engines employ full-flow filtration systems, and many vehicles have the capability of going 300,000 miles on the same engine, without need for a “rebuild break”. I might add that modern oil technology itself has also contributed to this fact. This is all a very fortunate thing for car owners, as many of these same engines are now effectively unrebuildable!

Phil Coconis is the owner of a West Coast independent auto repair shop.

Phil Coconis
Phil Coconis

More by Phil Coconis

Comments
Join the conversation
4 of 17 comments
  • Beerboy12 Beerboy12 on Jul 08, 2012

    I would say the need for constant improvement in engine tech. Is driven by the motor industry need be competitive and by evolving lifestyle needs of the consumer. As a customer I want economy, reliability, longer service intervals, more power and... Yes, as a customer, I am right!

  • Ronnie Schreiber Ronnie Schreiber on Jul 08, 2012

    Phil, what are those factors that make modern engines unrebuildable? I know that rebuilding shops have had to upgrade their equipment to keep up with things.

    • See 1 previous
    • Tosh Tosh on Jul 14, 2012

      Is it the expense of the local mechanic's labor, or is there a technical reason that makes an engine 'unrebuildable'? (Use a Honda V6 for sake of argument.)

  • Dr.Nick What about Infiniti? Some of those cars might be interesting, whereas not much at Nissan interest me other than the Z which is probably big bucks.
  • Dave Holzman My '08 Civic (stick, 159k on the clock) is my favorite car that I've ever owned. If I had to choose between the current Civic and Corolla, I'd test drive 'em (with stick), and see how they felt. But I'd be approaching this choice partial to the Civic. I would not want any sort of automatic transmission, or the turbo engine.
  • Merc190 I would say Civic Si all the way if it still revved to 8300 rpm with no turbo. But nowadays I would pick the Corolla because I think they have a more clear idea on their respective models identity and mission. I also believe Toyota has a higher standard for quality.
  • Dave Holzman I think we're mixing up a few things here. I won't swear to it, but I'd be damned surprised if they were putting fire retardant in the seats of any cars from the '50s, or even the '60s. I can't quite conjure up the new car smell of the '57 Chevy my parents bought on October 17th of that year... but I could do so--vividly--until the last five years or so. I loved that scent, and when I smelled it, I could see the snow on Hollis Street in Cambridge Mass, as one or the other parent got ready to drive me to nursery school, and I could remember staring up at the sky on Christmas Eve, 1957, wondering if I might see Santa Claus flying overhead in his sleigh. No, I don't think the fire retardant on the foam in the seats of 21st (and maybe late 20th) century cars has anything to do with new car smell. (That doesn't mean new car small lacked toxicity--it probably had some.)
  • ToolGuy Is this a website or a podcast with homework? You want me to answer the QOTD before I listen to the podcast? Last time I worked on one of our vehicles (2010 RAV4 2.5L L4) was this past week -- replaced the right front passenger window regulator (only problem turned out to be two loose screws, but went ahead and installed the new part), replaced a bulb in the dash, finally ordered new upper dash finishers (non-OEM) because I cracked one of them ~2 years ago.Looked at the mileage (157K) and scratched my head and proactively ordered plugs, coils, PCV valve, air filter and a spare oil filter, plus a new oil filter housing (for the weirdo cartridge-type filter). Those might go in tomorrow. Is this interesting to you? It ain't that interesting to me. 😉The more intriguing part to me, is I have noticed some 'blowby' (but is it) when the oil filler cap is removed which I don't think was there before. But of course I'm old and forgetful. Is it worth doing a compression test? Leakdown test? Perhaps if a guy were already replacing the plugs...
Next