Auto parts that should be standardized by now

Will wrote: Yeah, good point on the modern cars with nav systems and whatnot abandoning the DIN standard. Here's a true example, and I use these cars only because I know them well. Let's look at Ford. In 1994, the Thunderbird and the Mustang used the same front wheel bearing. The hubs are the exact same size, but one is 5x4.5, and the other is 5x4.25. That means different part numbers. The rotors are identical except for the bolt circle--more part numbers. The wheel studs and lugnuts are also different thread pitches--more part numbers. How is it this is the one battle the bean counters lost? Yet the front calipers from a Focus RS will bolt to either car, as well as a Taurus.

the Thunderbird was built on a totally different chassis than the Mustang. they used some similar parts on some things, but for the most part they are totally different cars. but the stuff that is the same- like the wheel bearings- are the same because they are a standardized part within the wheel bearing industry. i don't know their methodology for picking wheel bolt patterns and wheel stud diameters- maybe they didn't want people sticking old Cragars on the sleek new Thunderbirds and Lincolns- but i'm sure they do have some logic behind it.

did you know that the inner (i think it's the inner, maybe it's the outer? i haven't looked it up for a while..) front wheel bearing for a later Fox Mustang is the same as a mid 80's Chevy 1/2 ton 2wd pickup?

peter wrote: Oh, and please standardize the windshield wiper stalks. Is up faster or slower? It's like the bridge of death, there's no correct answer!

Yes.

And please standardize the wiper attachment method while you're at it. (Says the owner of a late mode Audi with wiper clips that haven't made it into general circulation yet..)

All manufacturers should be forced to produce a $20,000 RWD car capable of 35mpg.

If wheel patterns can be then I say brakes for all non performance cars, hell even a performance car can just use the next size up.

Not in for stardizing lights. In for standardizing bulbs. The goddamned bug zapper lights are a hazard and should be illegal. Speaking of hazard, no more "hazard lights" as I've never seen anyone in a passenger car using them properly.

Standardize the method of operating high-beam on/off and the "ahhhhh my eyes" flash operation. I flash oncoming drivers in my car yet lock them on in my wife's car. Push forward in mine locks them on, in hers? Nothing!

Keith Tanner wrote: Jeep, of course, has managed to come up with rear lights that have all the charm of generic trailer lights but without the inexpensive cost. On a vehicle that takes out taillights with regularity.

Wow. See, I thought Wrangler taillights actually were cheap trailer lights (and thus interchangeable). That's a damned shame.

Note: OBD2 is REQUIRED by EPA for the U.S. market.

This is one of the reasons that 90's Skylines cannot come over.

Alan Cesar wrote:

Keith Tanner wrote: Wow. See, I thought Wrangler taillights actually were cheap trailer lights (and thus interchangeable). That's a damned shame.

Funny cuz it's true! Well done sir!

Ford Fiesta, the new one, has 4 bolt wheels,but depending on where it is built will have either 108 mm pattern or 100mm patern. confused

Oil filters.

Should be three types: small, medium and large.

They make fiestas with 4x100?? Ours is 4/108

It's the little things. How about windshield washers? Motors for the windows, mirrors, sunroofs, and even the seats? You can still have your perfect styling, but all the stuff that does not affect how the car feels is up for grabs to be universal.

stuart in mn wrote: I always wondered why there are so many different styles of oil filters - you'd think the industry could standardize on maybe a half dozen that would fit all cars.

This. I understand having a smaller filter on my 1.8L Corolla (that uses 3.9q of oil) than on my 5.0L Mustang (that uses 8q of oil), but why doesn't that Mustang use the same oil filter as other vehicles with similar oil capacities?

Brake and clutch parts. Pads, calipers, slave cylinders, etc. Coil spring and strut dimensions. Oil, air, and cabin filters. Wiring harness and ECU connectors. Power lock solenoids. Latches for storage armrests. Fuel injectors. Engine pulleys.

mr2peak wrote:

Keith Tanner wrote: Lights. I know, they'd look dorky....

No. NO NO NO. no. Lights give a car character. It's one of the first things you learn about in transportation design. I agree that round lights are a great thing, but where would Audi be without the space to experiment? The new McLaren is drop-dead gorgeous, and those front and rear lights are a HUGE part of the package. Lights are at the corners, and if you start to pre-determin what the corner angles are, you kill 90% of a design before it's been drawn.

There were so many bad looking cars in the 60's from Britain and Italy. It's a shame they weren't allowed to use nice lights. Imagine how good those ugly E-types, 250 GTOs, Ferrari Californias and other cars could have looked.

Funny, 75% of the parts on my Javelin are standardized with other cars and makes including the disc brakes (Kelsey-Hayes), the drum brakes (Bendix), the ignition system (Ford), the transmission (Chrysler), the shocks, the carburetor, the headlights, the light bulbs...

PHeller wrote: All manufacturers should be forced to produce a $20,000 RWD car capable of 35mpg.

like that retro Datsun 510 I keep squawking about?

slefain wrote: Oil filters. Should be three types: small, medium and large.

AND in accessable locations!

Jarod wrote: If wheel patterns can be then I say brakes for all non performance cars, hell even a performance car can just use the next size up.

I'd settle for the largest/best brake package on any given car; i.e., three different sizes on a Neon of the same year?

As well as rear discs on most later Jettas except the Jetta S. It cost less to put rear drums on a car than discs? Puh-leeze...

Any and all electrical connectors.

In reply to ransom:

True, it is annoying, especially as my main car is a Toyota with the filler on the right side. Smart gas stations have figured this out and have marked lane directions to make traffic flow better for everyone, but there is always some idiot who ignores the one-way arrows and clogs up the works. Somehow it is always the same idiot that leaves their full-size truck/SUV at the pump while they go into the gas station to buy and eat a hotdog, try on some new sunglasses, pull cash out of the ATM, stop in the restroom, and then thumbing through an atlas or magazine before settling up and leaving.

novaderrik wrote: the Thunderbird was built on a totally different chassis than the Mustang. they used some similar parts on some things, but for the most part they are totally different cars. but the stuff that is the same- like the wheel bearings- are the same because they are a standardized part within the wheel bearing industry. i don't know their methodology for picking wheel bolt patterns and wheel stud diameters- maybe they didn't want people sticking old Cragars on the sleek new Thunderbirds and Lincolns- but i'm sure they do have some logic behind it.

I know the MN12 and SN95 platforms are totally different. I have SN95 hubs and wheels on my Supercoupe. The conversion is easy, and gave me a ton of new wheel choices. But why make it necessary?

I've heard the same rumor you mention about Ford not wanting people to put those old 5x4.5 wheels on the T-Bird. But if that were the case, I have to believe they would have done the same thing with the SN95, since they were changing from 4-lug Fox bodies to 5-lug anyway.

irish44j wrote: lug patterns, at least for typical passenger cars. There is no reason why cars all more or less the same size need to have 9 different bolt patterns in metric and SAE, depending on brand, continent of origin, etc. At most, there should be two: a standardized 4-bolt for subcompacts and other stuff that use tiny wheels, and a standardized 5-bolt for everything else.

how about that i had 2 caravans, same body style 1 year apart, different bolt patterns.

Chrysler learned that from AMC, just to use whatever was available at the time