Quote:
Originally Posted by babymog
I'd like to address two points/authors:
I believe that there are other factors, and as much as I respect your opinion I have to call you and mention that there is no supporting data that proves the cetane and timing relationship conclusively. Also, if timing and cetane were the only causes, it seems that there would be many of the 601/2/3/5/6 .5l/cylinder engines around with the same basic design that could be timed a couple of degrees early, and thus suffer the same failure mode.
|
I have to agree with this. having seen a lot of failure mode effect analysis carried out both by computer and on dynos and road cars, I have to wonder if MB would actually run that close to the edge on rod strength, considering the economic and marketing risk.
Just to refresh your memory: The so-called "rod bender" car cost 55,000 in 1990!!!!!
so you're probably talking the equivalent of a six-figure car nowadays! Given the expense per unit produced (EPUP) and expense per unit sold (EPUS) and the warranty cost of ONE rod post production, PLUS the reputation for over-engineering, even with the absurd cost-cutting and greed by Juergen Schrempp in those days, it would astound me if MB consciously chose to risk so much on on a such a tiny cost savings.