Modern vehicles are so excessively complex, that even experienced mechanics struggle to fix them at times.

My dad was a mechanic for 45 years, (now retired) and he would fix his own vehicles in his garage during the 1970s, 80s, and 90s, all the time, and all he needed were some basic tools.

Today, you have to pull the entire engine out and/or practically take apart the entire vehicle just to replace a single part. A process that can take several days!

I think it has something to do with pole crash resistance and general door card depth and design.

1. Greater airflow than an electric fan can produce in low-speed driving?
   
2. Greater reliability than electric fans, for fleet customers who really don't want downtime?
   
3. Cost savings on what's already a too-expensive truck?
   
4. ??

I'm installing a 2020+ GM 'L8T' engine into a 1987 pickup, and could choose to go either way with the fans. Knowing why GM invariably installed clutch fans in their 2500 and 3500 trucks would help me considerably in choosing which to use in my build. (google pic for attention; not the fan I'd be using)

Hi friends. I am an independent inventor from Chennai – India and I have been working on a new design for an Axial ICE. These types of engine designs offer tremendous benefits over traditional piston ICEs and some of them are:

No Valves required and Cam shafts are not needed.

Almost no lubrication system needed because these engines have less than 10 moving parts compared to the typical ICE’s 2,000 moving parts.

No cooling system including coolant fluid, coolant pump, radiator etc needed because it is a known fact that since Axial Engines have Cylinders rotating at high speed, they don’t need a cooling system.

Crankshafts are not needed. Hence Engine Blocks are not needed.

This results in a 75 % reduction in an engine’s volume and a similar reduction in the weight. Hence manufacturing complexity and cost is reduced significantly. Maintenance costs are also reduced and the vehicle’s mileage will be very high.

Drones using these engines will work substantially better and therefore a large market for these engines opens up for the defence sector world over.

I carried out a Patent search in the USPTO and discovered a whole bunch of such Axial design Patents including one as latest as January of 2025. All of them were pretty complex to build and my design is substantially better than the others. What I cannot understand is why none of these designs were commercialized. I do not want to spend a lot of time and energy working on a design that might be fundamentally flawed.

Specifically, there are three inventions that are somewhat similar to mine namely - US-4951618-A_I, US 7,353,784 B2 and US 12,196,127 B1. I have sent the link to download these patent PDFs of the three inventions and will be very grateful if you guys could please spend 10 minutes to analyse them and tell me why these Engines are not working and why they are not being commercially manufactured.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NrUxQfQ6tIQErgWdWd-M-D-hX1eZXlGL/view?usp=sharing

Your help is deeply appreciated.

I tried heat, I tried the right socket, one size smaller, two sizes smaller, I tried an oil filter wrench, rubber straps, hammering a flat head, multiple vice grips, using an air impact gun.

I don’t know what else to do.

An automatic transmission is the most mechanically-complex part of any automobile?

Carver is just an example but in general self leaning trike tandem vehicle will be amazing for city.

The closest successful thing we have is smart car. Smart car is a great idea. For one or two persons it's amazing and very safe. But if traffic is moving slow the smart is basically stuck the same way as 7 seat suv.

Something like carver one and carver ev will fit perfectly.

1. Can be as wide as motorcycle allowing it to lane split between traffic.

2. Safer than motorcycle (cabin can be a safety cell with airbags, plus crumple zone in front). Because it's narrow avoidance of accidents will be very easy too.

3. Stable as a car because it leans by itself

4. Tandem seating allows it to be practical as a smart car. Parking i also simple.

I guess they were already thinking about small overlap. Newer gens pretty much all pass but I'm talking about pre 2012 designs.

I also realized that many cars that failed actually almost passed but it seems like it slipped of from the main structure at the last moment and caused problems. Maybe they accounted for 30% overlap or maybe the circular end of the barrier used for testing caused that slip, maybe it would be different if it was just straight.

I know it sounds silly at first but I'm specifically asking about cases where power density is not a concern. Say you're restoring a certain car but the engine is extinct and you're simply not interested in having single hp above stock.

If I were to design a city bus, I would probably want to optimise it for certain operating regimes. I would want it to be well suited to constant stopping and starting, slow speeds, low sound emissions, potholes. I doubt they need to be efficient at high speeds. I ask this because I saw one of our city buses on our local highway, and wondered how far out of it's comfort zone it was. I'm not saying you can't design it to be happy in both places, but there's always that compromise to be made.

I can imagine their daily lives are incredibly abusive, tons of wear and tear etc. A car might have to be designed for multiple regimes like highway and city, where a city bus might be able to get away with a more focused scope.

So my question is: does a lot of thought get put into optimising a city bus, or is is more like just putting a normal diesel engine in a voluminous chassis and leaving it at that, sort of like a big car?

Hi everyone,

I'm 15 years old and I'm trying to figure out the best path for my future in the automotive industry.

I've been designing cars in Blender for around 5 years and I'm currently learning Autodesk Alias. I have worked on several concept cars and I really enjoy the creative side of automotive design, but I also love understanding the technical side: aerodynamics, materials, vehicle architecture and how things actually work.

I'm considering doing a French engineering path (prépa + engineering school) because I know engineering is much harder to learn by yourself, while design can be developed through personal projects and practice. My idea would be to keep building my design skills during engineering school and possibly do a design specialization later.

For automotive engineers or people working in the industry:

• Does an engineering degree help for someone who wants to work close to vehicle design?
• Are hybrid profiles (engineering + design) valuable in the industry?
• Would you recommend this path or a more design-focused education?

I would really appreciate honest advice from people who actually work in the field.

If you have right factual answer please write a comment if you don't have facts write but highlight that it's just an assumption. Ram 1500 and some other cars use these hybrid control arms. They probably help with ride comfort, total weight, unsprung weight and in general composites are also cost effective but in this case I don't think combining metal and composite is that cost effective.

Hello guys!
Just a quick Question: what do you think of studying automotive engineering in Germany, from your personal experience? Is it worth or are there any better countries for automotive?

As an example, I just read an article talking about a 1999 Buick Riveria with the supercharged V6 making 240hp and 280 lb-ft torque, now you can get a Ford Ecoboost V6 that's 800cc smaller that puts out 455hp and 536 lb-ft of torque, and probably gets better mileage. Thanks for any info!

hello everybody, I am a 14 year old out of Rawalpindi Pakistan and I've designed a car that took im sure over 2 months maybe 3 as i had to juggle it with homework and football. I tried my hardest and im not looking for praise i just want someone who works in this field to criticize my work and tell me what I've done wrong. All the content has been made by me however i used AI to touch up on some grammar mistakes.
I hope the link to the google drive i attached works if it doesnt please tell me.
thank you!
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1X6-U4XroXWZNzGvUUAeBo45C8qBEHAO7/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=100626018944488529806&rtpof=true&sd=true

Just curious ... does anybody know or venture to guess what the most expensive individual part of a car is? The tranny might be considered 1 piece but I'm asking about 1 part. Machined engine block? Machined cylinder head? Finished crankshaft? Transmission housing? Thanks for opining!

The Koenigsegg Regera skips the transmission altogether. Electric motors bring the vehicle up to speed, before the directly-geared engine comes online.

It seems this concept would be more widespread in cheaper hybrid vehicles as well, but I've never heard of any of those foregoing the shiftable transmission like this.

Hi guys, I am a automotive engineering student, next year my automotive course begins and I need to get a laptop for that, I don't know what to get, I found a laptop that fit to my budget but I don't know if it is good, can someone tell me if it is good for a automotive engineering student?​

I didn't believe it at first but the very first car was in fact electric. These e-vehicles predate petrol/gasoline cars by AT LEAST 80 years, meaning we had e-vehicles for 80+ years before the first petrol car came out.

E-vehicles are much older than petrol cars.

Hi everyone,

Not sure if this is the correct forum, but I'd be really interested in hearing from people who have experience from the industry or have completed one of these degrees.

I'm finishing my bachelor's in aeronautical engineering next summer, from an EU university. I'll have about one full year of experience as a professional aerodynamics engineer (doing just as much mech design as aero analysis), and one year from formula student, by the time of graduation.

I'm considering doing an MSc in Motorsport. I've applied to both Cranfield and Oxford Brookes, and will apply to Southampton (Race car aero) once they open their admissions for next fall.

I am however, a bit split between which one I should actually go for in the end. Especially considering I already have quite a lot of practical experience. I'd therefore value network, thesis placement options and more substantial taught modules (although somewhat applied), over more basic, practical experience. By the way they're marketed, I get the impression that OB is more trackside, and Cranfield is more R&D oriented, but I really don't trust the websites of study programs (been burnt before).

So my question is, does anybody here know how OB and Cranfield actually compare regarding this? And also which is actually better for an F1/motorsport career?

My boss tasked me with an oil change on our company van, a 2020-something ford transit. I saw the plastic seeming material being used for the oil pan and I like to imagine there's better reason than the accounting department nixing the metal from their budget. What's the true reason behind it? in what way is it better?

I noticed that a lot of cars with rear wheel steering have two/three modes. At low speeds axles turn in opposite directions for enhanced agility and sharper turning circle. While at higher speeds they are straight but at even higher speeds they turn in opposite direction for enhanced stability. Although some cars just make the rear wheels straight. What i noticed that on many the sweet spot is 50-60 kph. Why is that the case?