> So I suppose you are trying to say that Britain made better cars than
> America?Better Technology? Lucas better than Delco?
Not in the slightest and I don't think I suggested any of those points and
I doubt you saw my 'smiley.' I just think John McEwen's observation
quote,"Given the British propensity to resist change in design" unquote, is
inaccurate and unjustified. I greatly enjoy reading these digests and take
them in the lighthearted manner that everyone contributes. However, there
are odd occasions when someone (myself included) makes an ill-considered
remark and I feel John's was one illustration.
I think I gave a few examples in my rather tedious list that the British as
a
nation are anything but resistant to changing designs. The Harrier Jump Jet
is one such example. Why bother with a runway when you can shoot vertically
and then fly horizontally? The Argies found out about that to their cost!
Every country made good cars for the day, depending on the purpose for
which they were designed - America and the UK were no different. This is
still the case and I don't doubt both countries are guilty of unnecessarily
preserving 'vested interests' rather than further invest in extra R&D.
On the technology front, ALL developed countries have and continue to make
important contributions to the world as a whole in the sciences and
disciplines. Engineering in all its facets is no exception.
Lucas better than Delco? This list, and those who inhabit the parallel MG's
and Spridgets to name but two, suggest tongue in cheek (?) or in all
seriousness that Lucas is inferior. Throughout my 36 years in the UK auto
industry of which 26 have been in the global parts business, Lucas is every
bit as good as anything Delco, Bosch, Magneti Marelli, Paris Rhone Poulenc,
Motorola and other OE Pacific rim suppliers put out. They all have
strengths and weaknesses, Lucas is no exception. Before someone else jumps
in, I'll add I have no experience of Lucas products in aviation. I'll just
say that if Lucas has been good enough for Rolls Royce (cars or aircraft
engines) since whenever, then I'm certainly not going to take a divergent
view.
But getting back to the original question of why lever shocks instead of
telescopic? One lister, put forward a highly relevant and meaningful point.
There was a time when you could buy repair kits to recondition lever arm
units and this was something very much in their favour. Also, because of
their relatively compressed size and limited arm movement, they lever arms
were perfectly viable for use in suspension systems where there was very
limited space - i.e. a telescopic would (in most cases) have needed more.
Personally, I greatly regret the passing of many of these repair kits and
service exchange items for a range of different applications. We have now
moved firmly into a throw-away society where products are engineered for a
set period of time. After that, there is no option but to junk the original
item and this is doing little for materials conservation, the UK
environment (and probably a good many others too) as a whole.
John Mac
|