Ducati.ms - The Ultimate Ducati Forum banner

41 - 51 of 51 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,805 Posts
It's been my experience that OEM parts have too frequently been made and designed with planned obsolescence built in to make sure it doesn't last forever and require a trip to their dealer for regular repairs. Very amusing that the check engine light in Range Rovers is actually a checkbook symbol, get it out and get it towed to the dealer, .... again.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,702 Posts
the thing you need to remember about the belts is that prior to 1998, no one gave a shit. replaced every 20,00km, that's it. i'm told the original pirelli ones on pantahs were crap, but i never saw any of them. but the gates ones we could buy genuine or external just lasted. then in late 98 we saw our first broken 916 belt, and we first got told by the importer "2 years" like we were dumbarses for not reading a service bulletin that, afaicmo, never got released. the 99 996 manual was the first with the 2 year thing, coinciding with the regular arrival of 2 to 3 year old 748 and 916 with between 10 and 15,000km on the dial wanting warranty for broken belts. all denied.

by 2000 every manual had it pretty much and all the whiny conspiracy shit started. but by then, the belt at fault - the gates t917 renault derived belt used on the 4v - was no longer the oem belt anyway and it was all a bit irrelevant.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
552 Posts
the thing you need to remember about the belts is that prior to 1998, no one gave a shit. replaced every 20,00km, that's it. i'm told the original pirelli ones on pantahs were crap, but i never saw any of them. but the gates ones we could buy genuine or external just lasted. then in late 98 we saw our first broken 916 belt, and we first got told by the importer "2 years" like we were dumbarses for not reading a service bulletin that, afaicmo, never got released. the 99 996 manual was the first with the 2 year thing, coinciding with the regular arrival of 2 to 3 year old 748 and 916 with between 10 and 15,000km on the dial wanting warranty for broken belts. all denied.

by 2000 every manual had it pretty much and all the whiny conspiracy shit started. but by then, the belt at fault - the gates t917 renault derived belt used on the 4v - was no longer the oem belt anyway and it was all a bit irrelevant.

Can i add that Ducati's big push to make their bikes more palatable as they work to expand and sell more was the guaranteed servicing cost and "extended" servicing schedule.....

No longer is it every 10k for a valve clearance check/adjust, or 2 years for belts, that was too expensive and buyers reacting to the "reputation" of them being expensive to maintain drove change, now, the same construction belt on my Diavel has a 5 year change interval, 24k valve clearance check i think? yet on others, like 1198's it's still 2 years?
Must come down to the Diavel being aimed at a new market and them trying to entice a rider onto the brand...

Sure, some of it may be advancement in technology, materials etc but the same engine more or less, released about the same time and the traditional sport bike bought by Ducati riders is 2 years, the "cruiser" aimed at a new rider to the brand is 5 years? faaark!
Smacks of hypocrisy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,702 Posts
reduced service cost is a big thing. but i think it's partly sucking and seeing too. the sports bike are allegedly the highest stressed, but realistically a lot of mts riders would have pushed the engines as hard use wise. don't subject yourself to a full range warranty mess when you can try it on 1/4 of the range first. if that goes ok, expand.

by the time the diavel came out the belt drive sport bike was dead, only dragging the 848 out in wait.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,990 Posts
It's been my experience that OEM parts have too frequently been made and designed with planned obsolescence built in to make sure it doesn't last forever and require a trip to their dealer for regular repairs...
I've never in all of my years of membership on this forum, contributed to any discussion with regards to the concept of "planned obsolescence"... today I break my silence. I have worked with a high end supercar manufacturer for 6 years now, the last 2 direct, and am responsible for the bulk of the mechanical engineering design of the Mono R:

980226


Not once, in all that time, have I ever been directed to design anything to make sure it needed to be replaced in "X" number of miles, or hours of use. Mechanical engineering and design is an iterative process. We do the best we can out of the gate, and then make revisions over time to address shortcomings that are typically the result of unforeseen environmental conditions which have led to a failure.

I'm sorry to disappoint the conspiracy theorists amongst you, but at least in the circles I run in, the concept of planned obsolescence is pure folly. It simply doesn't happen.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
What specific experience is that? Engineer here as well and I've never personally seen planned obsolescence enter into any design I've been a part of. Albeit I work in a completely different industry, but I have friends/colleagues in the automotive sector.

It's been my experience that OEM parts have too frequently been made and designed with planned obsolescence built in to make sure it doesn't last forever and require a trip to their dealer for regular repairs. Very amusing that the check engine light in Range Rovers is actually a checkbook symbol, get it out and get it towed to the dealer, .... again.
Also for reference I've used the ExactFit belts from CA cycleworks on both my 1198 and 999. Neither have grenaded as of yet.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,805 Posts
In various forms, from subtle to unsubtle, planned obsolescence still very much exists nowadays. From so-called contrived durability, where brittle parts give out, to having repairs cost more than replacement products, to aesthetic upgrades that frame older product versions as less stylish – goods makers have no shortage of ruses to keep opening customers’ wallets.

Plenty of parts and components have a certain usable life, at which point they'll need to be replaced. Maybe it's planned to some extent, but the reality is, metal and plastic and rubber simply don't last forever. If you take the worn widgets out and put fresh widgets in, it'll keep on chugging. It's the availability of the widgets that's eventually a problem when it comes to older items. People do it, though, so it's possible, and the manufacturers raise the price often to a considerable amount once they stop making the widget, like the Ducati belts that they outsourced to begin with.

Another part of planned obsolescence is when the products you buy are designed to fail after a certain amount of time. Quicken, for example, is a piece of software wherein some features like online connectivity are disabled after several years. The company thus encourages its users to upgrade at least every few years. For more concrete products, manufacturers have moved towards cheaper materials in order to reduce production costs, but the result can be products that fall apart sooner.As another example of seemingly blatant planned obsolescence, printer cartridges. Microchips, light sensors or batteries can disable a cartridge well before all its ink is actually used up, forcing owners to go buy entirely new, not-at-all-cheap units.

For a fully modern example, consider smartphones. These handsets often get discarded after a mere couple years’ use. Screens or buttons break, batteries die, or their operating systems, apps, and so on can suddenly no longer be upgraded. Yet a solution is always near at hand: brand new handset models, pumped out every year or so, and touted as “the best ever”.

It's great to hear from engineers who design with integrity, and there is at least one expert on China manufacturing here that has offered some interesting insights on building things right or cheap. My experience has been more with electronics and consumer goods along with a fair amount on wrenching on all sorts of transportation. I must say, the aircraft industry (until the Boeing 737 Max 8) had my upmost respect in their dedication to quality. Reading about the outright falsification of testing results BY ENGINEERS, corner cutting and rush to manufacture of components is terrifying - planned obsolescence or not, this is the crude caricature of greedy companies wantonly fleecing their customers resulting in death.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
I think the disconnect comes from the "planned" part of planned obsolescence. Everything gets old and fails over a long enough time period. That's just life.

Using engineering judgement to not overengineer things well past useful life is usually considered as part of the design otherwise everything would be prohibitively expensive. IE why engineer a phone screen to last 1,000 years when the phone will be discarded on average in 2? Because that phone would be far more expensive than your average phone. That's an extreme example, but you get the point.

Software is similar. An engineer/coder/software developer has to be paid to support legacy systems and code. If new languages begin to be used the same problem exists. How long do you pay legacy engineers to work on said code/software?

The "planned" piece implies that manufactures on purpose choose to make a part fail after 2 years which for the most part is simply untrue. All of your examples appear to be anecdotal.

In various forms, from subtle to unsubtle, planned obsolescence still very much exists nowadays. From so-called contrived durability, where brittle parts give out, to having repairs cost more than replacement products, to aesthetic upgrades that frame older product versions as less stylish – goods makers have no shortage of ruses to keep opening customers’ wallets.

Plenty of parts and components have a certain usable life, at which point they'll need to be replaced. Maybe it's planned to some extent, but the reality is, metal and plastic and rubber simply don't last forever. If you take the worn widgets out and put fresh widgets in, it'll keep on chugging. It's the availability of the widgets that's eventually a problem when it comes to older items. People do it, though, so it's possible.

Another part of planned obsolescence is when the products you buy are designed to fail after a certain amount of time. Quicken, for example, is a piece of software wherein some features like online connectivity are disabled after several years. The company thus encourages its users to upgrade at least every few years. For more concrete products, manufacturers have moved towards cheaper materials in order to reduce production costs, but the result can be products that fall apart sooner.As another example of seemingly blatant planned obsolescence, printer cartridges. Microchips, light sensors or batteries can disable a cartridge well before all its ink is actually used up, forcing owners to go buy entirely new, not-at-all-cheap units.

For a fully modern example, consider smartphones. These handsets often get discarded after a mere couple years’ use. Screens or buttons break, batteries die, or their operating systems, apps, and so on can suddenly no longer be upgraded. Yet a solution is always near at hand: brand new handset models, pumped out every year or so, and touted as “the best ever”.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,805 Posts
41 - 51 of 51 Posts
Top