In reply to AngryCorvair (Forum Supporter) :
Wow, Berk my mother?!? Seriously? And no I wasn't a counter jockey, I was the regional outside sales rep for a NAPA franchise with 17 stores. We had friction companies tripping over each other to get in. You're wrong on this and you know it. GM screwed the pooch and GM only.
AngryCorvair (Forum Supporter) said:In reply to Javelin (Forum Supporter) :
Patently false? Go berkeley your mother. Where were you "in the industry" at the time? Counter jockey at AdvanPepZone? You know where I was? I was working at one of the largest friction material suppliers in the world, working on new formulations, crunching through mountains of data to determine what worked and what didn't, etc.
In reply to irish44j (Forum Supporter):
or maybe GM said "we are not going to compromise performance in 48 states to appease two, we'll sell them as long as we can and then we won't." Swapping pads is easy. Developing, validating, and manufacturing a pad is not. Not asking for a River of tears, simply stating that there were no low-hanging fruit that were simply missed because of a lack of due diligence.
FYI Mods
Javelin (Forum Supporter) said:In reply to AngryCorvair (Forum Supporter) :
Wow, Berk my mother?!? Seriously? And no I wasn't a counter jockey, I was the regional outside sales rep for a NAPA franchise with 17 stores. We had friction companies tripping over each other to get in. You're wrong on this and you know it. GM screwed the pooch and GM only.
1. I'm not wrong. 2. I don't know that I'm wrong, because I'm not wrong. Consider who was closer to the work being done. Me. Now consider which one of us knows for sure what led GM to the decisions they made. Neither of us.
3. You stated 75% were clean on first pass. I posted a link to the National Science Foundation's database of brake friction materials showing over fifteen thousand entries. For the sake of discussion I will allow that percentage although without data I highly doubt it's accuracy. That means we the brake friction material developers had to address over three thousand seven hundred fifty of those entries to:
identify their applications;
propose / validate substitutions from the list of clean candidates;
develop and validate revisions to those formulations;
or develop and validate new formulations for those applications.
Every manufacturer selling vehicles in the USA worked directly with the friction material suppliers to develop, validate, and approve compliant formulations for their applications. Deciding to forego a small part of a small sales volume is far from lack of due diligence and / or screwing the pooch.
if you'd care to link sources that prove otherwise, I'm sure we'd all like to read them.
CA and WA must haaaaate the SpaceX Starship then, for burning up all that copper before almost sticking the landing...
In reply to AngryCorvair (Forum Supporter) :
And they had 10 flipping years to do so. Porsche got it done. Bugatti, Lamborghini, Ferrari, Lotus, Tesla, Ford, Toyota, Mitsubishi, everyone but GM got it done. I'm sure it took a lot of work to get the whole lines into compliance over the last decade, but your attitude about it is crap. I hope your mother is well.
AngryCorvair (Forum Supporter) said:In reply to Javelin (Forum Supporter) :
Patently false? Go berkeley your mother.
That right there is why 90% of the time I think AngryCorvair is a berkeleying douchebag
Jay_W said:CA and WA must haaaaate the SpaceX Starship then, for burning up all that copper before almost sticking the landing...
I am assuming that it is a certain copper compound that is the issue, and that is how they traced its source to brake linings.
Peabody said:AngryCorvair (Forum Supporter) said:In reply to Javelin (Forum Supporter) :
Patently false? Go berkeley your mother.
That right there is why 90% of the time I think AngryCorvair is a berkeleying douchebag
Ah, revenge, thy taste is oh so sweet! I had superlulz at that!
AngryCorvair (Forum Supporter) said:
In reply to irish44j (Forum Supporter):
or maybe GM said "we are not going to compromise performance in 48 states to appease two, we'll sell them as long as we can and then we won't." Swapping pads is easy. Developing, validating, and manufacturing a pad is not. Not asking for a River of tears, simply stating that there were no low-hanging fruit that were simply missed because of a lack of due diligence.
Well considering GM is now scrambling to find a solution to this so they can sell the cars in the 2 states, it would seem that either Big-GM either didn't know about the law, didn't know their pads had copper in them, or simply thought they could get away with it. If their plan was "we are not going to compromise for the sake of 2 states," why are they now scrambling to do exactly that?
And lol about the "for the sake of 48 states" part. California probably buys more high-end cars than half of those 48 other state states combined. No auto maker would purposely make a product they could not sell in the state that is by far the largest consumer of cars in the country. SOmeone somewhere in the decision/design/engineering chain berkeleyed up. Who it was, don't know and don't care. But let's not act like this was GM's intent, to not sell its cars in Cali.
we wish you a Merry Christmas
we wish you a Merry Christmas
we wish you a Merry Christmas
we wish you a Merry Christmas
and a Happy New Year.........
In reply to irish44j (Forum Supporter) :
I can see a Pointy-Haired Boss somewhere along the way deciding to intervene and save $20 per car (manufacturer net) by switching to a noncompliant specification, figuring that nobody would notice. I wouldn't necessarily believe that it's a deliberate engineering decision. After all, they DO make cars specifically for the California market emissions-wise.
And, really, when you think of it, all consumables are emissions, since they don't simply evaporate into nothingness. They just stop being car parts and start being the environment. Even the plastics in the interior and paint on the sheetmetal are tallied up as evaporative emissions...
Do I need to turn this car around?
Yet they love ev vehicles which are full of copperhttps://www.copper.org/publications/pub_list/pdf/A6192_ElectricVehicles-Infographic.pdf
Copper is a major component in EVs used in electric motors, batteries, inverters, wiring and in charging stations. A pure electric vehicle can contain more than a mile of copper wiring in its stator windings. The increasing demand will significantly impact the copper market.
In reply to MotorsportsGordon :
That's... disingenuous. Copper wiring is not a consumable with the express purpose of being abraded to fine dust and left in the environment.
For that matter, a lot of aluminum alloys contain copper as part of the composition.
This post has received too many downvotes to be displayed.
Wow, California must really hate computers. And houses that have electricity. And pennies- what nerve they have to hate US currency! And... (thinking of more things that have copper in them)
BoxheadTim (Forum Supporter) said:Keith Tanner said:GCrites80s said:Keith Tanner said:That's a fun one. IIRC there's a Jeep model that can't be sold in Connecticut because it has too many forward-facing lights from the factory.
In Ohio, it used to be that a motorcycle couldn't have more that two headlights or it wasn't a motorcycle any more. I don't know if that's still true.
I would have concentrated more on counting the wheels, but that's just me...
That just seems a tad too, well, obvious?
I mean, it is Ohio so......
ShinnyGroove (Forum Supporter) said:Wow, California must really hate computers. And houses that have electricity. And pennies- what nerve they have to hate US currency! And... (thinking of more things that have copper in them)
As Pete just posted, if all of those wore down and then deposited in a way that it harmed stuff, yea, they would. But all of those products do not shed copper- they keep it. If they were shedding the copper, they would not be working. Including currency.
Everyone one of you who got riled up in this thread should really step away from the computer for a few days and go do something else.
Peabody said:AngryCorvair (Forum Supporter) said:In reply to Javelin (Forum Supporter) :
Patently false? Go berkeley your mother.
That right there is why 90% of the time I think AngryCorvair is a berkeleying douchebag
Man, that brings back some memories. Thanks for the lols 
David S. Wallens said:Do I need to turn this car around?
Well, I mean you guys made the click bait/sensationalist title. I knew exactly how this thread was going to go before I opened it.
"Man sticks fork in outlet, is shocked."
z31maniac said:Everyone one of you who got riled up in this thread should really head over here
fixed
z31maniac said:Everyone one of you who got riled up in this thread should really step away from the computer for a few days and go do something else.
everyone is stuck at home social distancing, and have already finished up 10x more car projects this year than expected :D
So, here's a thought.
GM knew they could keep using the copper pads until the end of 2020. So maybe the plan all along was to equip the cars with copper pads until partway through the 2021 model year, then switch.
End result: dealers with 2021s in stock at the end of December can continue to sell what they have, but the 2022 models will be fully compliant. It fits with the headline but comes across as fully planned with only a 6 month (ish) period where no new cars of this type can be shipped to CA. Or maybe the new pads were planned to come online next month.
It's not as much fun to get outraged about it, but it's possible. The OEs are as stupid as internet outsiders seem to think they are.
Javelin (Forum Supporter) said:Tyler H (Forum Supporter) said:Is this really the best way to make an environmental impact? How about they look at carbon credits...or maybe get cops to switch off their ignitions instead of letting their patrol cars idle 16 hours a day?
This is left coast political theater.
There's nothing political about it. Research found toxic levels of copper in San Francisco Bay and other bodies of water, ultimately concluding that runoff from brake dust was responsible for 60% of it. Copper is relatively "cheap" as an ingredient in brake pads and most high-end brakes have been copper-free for years. The law was from 2010 and every other supplier managed to get it figured out by now, including the aftermarket. Note that Ferrari, McLaren, Lamborghini, Shelby, etc can all still sell there cars as normal. GM got caught with their supplier's pants down (again) being cheap.
https://www.hella-pagid.com/hellapagid/assets/media/Copper-free_Brake_Pads_4.2017.pdf
never mind all the boats, ships, and navel vessels with copper bottom paint? Btw, full on copper bottom paint has been off the market for years, but the Navy still has access to it.
How odd. I literally noticed this thread within minutes of learning about the copper issue from a training video put out by Wagner. I had no idea about the issue (the laws are from 2010) and now have seen it twice in ~30 minutes.
In general it seems like this is pretty ideal. We got smart people solving problems, governments implementing solutions that the vast majority of everyone never even notice let alone dislike.. the fact that this is so mundanely scientific and bureaucratic is friggin excellent. If enough more of this stuff happened, we wouldn't be rapidly approaching the point where the main issue in national politics will be which candidate wants to wreck the world slower.
You'll need to log in to post.
