MB: we've been together 40 years. Why do you now want a German more than me?

[Craiglxviii]

It gets worse, you can't have cream seats on a CLS 400...but you can in smaller engined versions. You couldn't make this up.

You can just imagine the planning sessions where the tables that drive that car builder website were written. Some poor marketing controller will have been in a rush to complete his proposal, whizzed through it all quickly and left the cream option out, it got signed off as was and there you have it...

 

[turbopete]

By the way, parts complexity (how many different variants of a part, or assembly) at the plants is a MAJOR concern. To give you an idea, one top-selling UK built car has something like 170 variants of main harness. The supply chain for that alone boggles the mind. Being able to easily plan for different builds reduces complexity, reduces stores inventory and supply chain volume significantly and makes life much easier for the buyers and production planners.

so if theres so many variants of wiring loom, why not go back to the way it was done years ago? a low spec loom, and a high spec loom, or even just 1 standard loom, and just use the bits you want/need?

as for RHD/LHD numbers for parts, with the exception of a handful of parts (steering rack, dash in most cars, the pedal box (and that may only be an issue for manual cars) and, in some cases, the linkages to the brake master cylinder (like we used to have on things like mk3 Escorts) ALL the main components (engine, gearbox, suspension, interior, bodypanels etc) are all standard items, and the wiring is just flipped over.

 

[Craiglxviii]

so if theres so many variants of wiring loom, why not go back to the way it was done years ago? a low spec loom, and a high spec loom, or even just 1 standard loom, and just use the bits you want/need?

as for RHD/LHD numbers for parts, with the exception of a handful of parts (steering rack, dash in most cars, the pedal box (and that may only be an issue for manual cars) and, in some cases, the linkages to the brake master cylinder (like we used to have on things like mk3 Escorts) ALL the main components (engine, gearbox, suspension, interior, bodypanels etc) are all standard items, and the wiring is just flipped over.

Because CAN architecture is still cheaper.

The powertrain and body panels may be the same but enough components are different RHD to PhD to make an increase of 10-15% increase in cost.

 

[turbopete]

Because CAN architecture is still cheaper.

The powertrain and body panels may be the same but enough components are different RHD to PhD to make an increase of 10-15% increase in cost.

but surely even with can architecture, theres still a physical connection to the components, so surely simply a case of coding it correctly as opposed to being able to just plug the extras in?

take a 'base' S class. as it comes. not a single option added. then take the top spec AMG or Maybach or whatever it is nowadays, with every single box ticked. the can 'wiring' could be made the same for the entire range. then options could be plugged in (or not) as needed, nice and simple, and the appropriate options coded to the car. if its not fitted, dont apply the code.
it would also make it easier for dealers (and MB in supplying retro fits) to add on later should a successive owner decide they want to add something. the owner takes the car to the dealer, has the additional items 'plugged in' to the car, the item is mounted (if appropriate) and then coded. job done.
and the same could be applied to production. in fact factory specs could ptentially be changed mid way through build, simply by plugging in an extra item and adding a code. i think THAT could be more cost effective personally, but im well aware that i could be wrong.

 

[Rory]

..option packs generate a significantly better net profit per vehicle than specifying individual options do.

I'm surprised by that - for the customer it's usually a lot cheaper to get options in a pack than to specify them individually. Obviously some of it is money down the drain if you didn't really want some part of the pack, but the manufacturer still has to supply it.

Individual options generally seem a complete rip-off. Often hundreds or thousands of pounds for something that must the manufacturer buttons.

 

[Craiglxviii]

Stores inventory? Surely MB operate on a "just in time" basis like other car makers, therefore the correct parts arrive at the correct location just as they are needed.

It beggars belief that UK cars can't have cream leather seats due to any manufacturing logistics. And, as far as I know, all cars are made on the same line whether rhd or lhd.

Sorry for the delay. To elaborate, JIT is more of a NJIT where N = Nearly. What you tend to find is that inside the plant, the logistics flow constantly, at any cell or work station there is never more than 5-10 minutes worth of standard parts, where order-specific parts are needed they arrive on the line to match that particular bodyshell as it moves through.

However.....

All those parts (and let's focus on the order-specific bits, not the plant's bodyshop manufactured bits) come into the plant logistics distribution centre where they're stored. So, main harnesses- to take up my example of earlier- aren't built to order- volumes are too great for that- they're built to predicted % take ratio and delivered as such; the plant's logistics warehouse will then hold stock of each type, distribute according to orders and order as necessary to maintain safety stock levels.

Suppliers also have minimum order quantities and for some cars, you might be surprised how few deliveries of parts actually come in in one year. One particular model that I know of gets one delivery of wiper blades a year. All of these parts go into the logistics warehouse...

So, it's in that logistics warehouse that the cost of complexity creeps in. If you look at Nissan's Washington plant on Google Maps, you'll see a long white building directly south of it that runs along the A1231. That is the logistics warehouse. Any spare volume that can be made there by eliminating unnecessary or unneeded option parts is worth its weight in gold.

 

[Craiglxviii]

but surely even with can architecture, theres still a physical connection to the components, so surely simply a case of coding it correctly as opposed to being able to just plug the extras in?

take a 'base' S class. as it comes. not a single option added. then take the top spec AMG or Maybach or whatever it is nowadays, with every single box ticked. the can 'wiring' could be made the same for the entire range. then options could be plugged in (or not) as needed, nice and simple, and the appropriate options coded to the car. if its not fitted, dont apply the code.
it would also make it easier for dealers (and MB in supplying retro fits) to add on later should a successive owner decide they want to add something. the owner takes the car to the dealer, has the additional items 'plugged in' to the car, the item is mounted (if appropriate) and then coded. job done.
and the same could be applied to production. in fact factory specs could ptentially be changed mid way through build, simply by plugging in an extra item and adding a code. i think THAT could be more cost effective personally, but im well aware that i could be wrong.

This is something that I'm keen to study at work. I suspect that you may well be correct in your base assumption. Automotive connectors aren't cheap, some of them are multiples of tens of pence/ cents each. However I suspect that the equation will come down to a tossup between (cost of "giveaway content" (connectors, on the harness)) - ((complexity cost reduction in the plant logistics chain)+(cost reduction of harness through economies of scale)).

I see regularly cost reduction ideas worth less than €0.01 per car be pursued with vigour, as that 1p can be worth €50,000 a year to the plant. The fact that your suggestion hasn't been adopted tends to suggest that it is almost certainly because it doesn't pay back over the part lifetime. It's not often that such things haven't been studied in depth by the plant and design engineering teams.

 

[nicholas15]

I remember when a reversing light was an option on cheaper models and all you had to do was screw the connection in properly to make it work as it was cheaper to fit one to all cars rather than just some.

 

[Naraic]

I remember you could pay extra to have a turbo computer...you paid more for it, and all they did was push in a connector, the bits were already fitted. Con or what?

 

[SL63 Mark]

Our 90 has cloth seats as opposed to vinyl, as part of the "county" pack. That was quite a big deal, at the time. I suppose it meant a bloke had to pick up the "cloth" seats as opposed to the "vinyl" ones. High tech or what.

 

[malcolm E53 AMG]

Totally agree with the OP, post 2012 all options were categorised into packages so a retrograde step in my opinion but probably pleases the bean counters. I couldn't specify quite a few of the options on my 2012 car now especially individually.

 

[television]

but surely even with can architecture, theres still a physical connection to the components, so surely simply a case of coding it correctly as opposed to being able to just plug the extras in?

take a 'base' S class. as it comes. not a single option added. then take the top spec AMG or Maybach or whatever it is nowadays, with every single box ticked. the can 'wiring' could be made the same for the entire range. then options could be plugged in (or not) as needed, nice and simple, and the appropriate options coded to the car. if its not fitted, dont apply the code.
it would also make it easier for dealers (and MB in supplying retro fits) to add on later should a successive owner decide they want to add something. the owner takes the car to the dealer, has the additional items 'plugged in' to the car, the item is mounted (if appropriate) and then coded. job done.
and the same could be applied to production. in fact factory specs could ptentially be changed mid way through build, simply by plugging in an extra item and adding a code. i think THAT could be more cost effective personally, but im well aware that i could be wrong.

But that would make the basic car much more expensive to start with.

 

[television]

In every other European country they have always had packages, it is a much more economical way of doing things.

 

[turbopete]

But that would make the basic car much more expensive to start with.

im not so sure it would. thinking about it, the more you buy of something, the cheaper it becomes per unit. if like the manufacturers you buy, say, 10 wheels from a supplier, they may cost, just for demonstration purposes, £100 each. but place an order for 1000 wheels at once, the cost per unit might drop to £80 each. so if, instead of making, say, 20 different wiring looms for a c class, if this could be reduced down to 1 loom, but in greater quantity, then logically, wouldnt these looms then become much cheaper?

 

[television]

im not so sure it would. thinking about it, the more you buy of something, the cheaper it becomes per unit. if like the manufacturers you buy, say, 10 wheels from a supplier, they may cost, just for demonstration purposes, £100 each. but place an order for 1000 wheels at once, the cost per unit might drop to £80 each. so if, instead of making, say, 20 different wiring looms for a c class, if this could be reduced down to 1 loom, but in greater quantity, then logically, wouldnt these looms then become much cheaper?

I am well aware of the cost coming down through buying more, it would still make all the car very much more expensive, there is much more to it.

 

[turbopete]

I am well aware of the cost coming down through buying more, it would still make all the car very much more expensive, there is much more to it.

are can systems more expensive than the old fashioned wiring then? the reason i ask is that Ford and a good number of others, certainly in the 80s and 90s cars, had 2 wiring looms for each model. 1 for lower spec cars, the other for higher spec cars. so i could buy, say, a base model escort, and up spec it to pretty much mid range (at the time) LX spec and all the wires were there, it was a plug and play job (as they were back then) if i bought a GL spec, i could then go to Ghia (the 'all toys) spec or add the sporty bits from the XR3 or RS models. again, all with the same loom.
my current car has (somewhere) all the wiring etc for footwell lights, but they were only fitted to titanium and above trim spec. as standard so id guess that to an extent, manufacturers already do this. im just puzzled as to why it wouldnt work for MB when its already working for other manufacturers. im not sure what im missing, but im sure im missing something here somewhere.

 

[television]

There is one golden rule in manufacturing, £1 at cost equates to £10 or more retail.

 

[turbopete]

There is one golden rule in manufacturing, £1 at cost equates to £10 or more retail.

sadly very true, but i still cant help but wonder if there would be a similar sort of method available to reduce the number of looms needed, rather than having to have different looms for different option packs, then the options can be tailored to the customer more.

 

[television]

Car manufactures hardly ever get near the break point on bulk buying, there is no real break until 500.000 identical units in electronics.