New Mustang v6 (no mods) suffers driveshaft failure, talk about cost cutting!

[j2k4]

Thing is, once the speed limiter was removed that car ceased to be "stock".

That's why I said "-ish", Tony.

[HilbillyHomeboy]

Both points are well received, IMO. Removing an important safety feature, well, you can't really bitch about what happens next. At the same time, it is peculiar that these driveshafts reach/exceed critical like this. V-6 or not, the common conception is that a Mustang is a hi-po car(which is why people are up in arms over this).

The best that comes out of this mess is a now known failure point that can easily be corrected if one wants to exceed the factory speed limiter.

Jeremy

[j2k4]

Both points are well received, IMO. Removing an important safety feature, well, you can't really bitch about what happens next. At the same time, it is peculiar that these driveshafts reach/exceed critical like this. V-6 or not, the common conception is that a Mustang is a hi-po car(which is why people are up in arms over this).

The best that comes out of this mess is a now known failure point that can easily be corrected if one wants to exceed the factory speed limiter.

Jeremy

Thus endeth this thread.

[mb3000]

If you designed a park bench, you would need to test how much weight it could support, right? Lets say a relatively small bench, so it is tested and safety rated at 600lbs. Would you engineer the bench to support 610lbs, or would you engineer it to hold 750, just in case?

In my eyes, this is a large aspect of quality.

[HilbillyHomeboy]

If you designed a park bench, you would need to test how much weight it could support, right? Lets say a relatively small bench, so it is tested and safety rated at 600lbs. Would you engineer the bench to support 610lbs, or would you engineer it to hold 750, just in case?

In my eyes, this is a large aspect of quality.

All things have specific limits for a reason. The idiot factor is not a liability to the engineer(s).

Jeremy

[AudibleSilence]

If you designed a park bench, you would need to test how much weight it could support, right? Lets say a relatively small bench, so it is tested and safety rated at 600lbs. Would you engineer the bench to support 610lbs, or would you engineer it to hold 750, just in case?

In my eyes, this is a large aspect of quality.

All things have specific limits for a reason. The idiot factor is not a liability to the engineer(s).

Jeremy

And the idiot that knows it is limited to 610lbs and tries to put 750 on it is...well an idiot. Kinda like an idiot that loads an elevator past its weight limit. This is why they began putting printed limits well below what the elevator can carry, because of special people that like to tempt fate and then bitch about it later.

[IPD]

And the idiot that knows it is limited to 610lbs and tries to put 750 on it is...well an idiot. Kinda like an idiot that loads an elevator past its weight limit. This is why they began putting printed limits well below what the elevator can carry, because of special people that like to tempt fate and then bitch about it later.

the REAL idiot is someone who believes that the tolerance limit should be 1% or less difference from the tested strength. such a person is an idiot because offering any product with such a thin margin of error gives no room for prolonged stress, fatigue, or momentary overstress (like the 250lbs man who PLOPS down on a sofa, rather than gingerly being seated). defend FROD all you want, there's still a reason why their name stands for:

Found
On
Roadside
Dead

[AudibleSilence]

I'm not defending anyone, I'm calling people retarded for complaining about parts failure after exceeding limits the engineers put a system in place to keep you behind. None of those failures were instant, they occurred after seconds of running on the wrong side of the redline for the driveshaft. Your example of the man plopping down is flawed.

[mb3000]

I'm not defending anyone, I'm calling people retarded for complaining about parts failure after exceeding limits the engineers put a system in place to keep you behind. None of those failures were instant, they occurred after seconds of running on the wrong side of the redline for the driveshaft. Your example of the man plopping down is flawed.

The new v6 mustang driveshaft is flawed.

[onebadmollafolla]

Pretty sure a 74 pinto driveshaft is safe at 135 mph. A car developed nearly 40 years later is engineered worse than that?
Ford fail.

This is all relative though. One drive shaft could easily take speeds of 135mph as could the other. However, if one had a lot more power going to it at the time it could very well break. Same thing, and much more commonly seen at lower speeds. Not defending Ford's inadequacy, just giving perspective.