Seriously, couldn’t they just extend the tube a bit so it overhangs the exhaust pipe???

  • TweetyDaBird@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    Well the problem with that is when you lay the bike down, the oil port gets shaved off and you lose all your oil. Don’t ask me how I know.

    So yeah, it’s a PITA to use a funnel, but it’s still the preferable option.

  • madcaesar@lemmy.world
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    The entire comment section seems to be missing this is assholedesign and offering the same shitty solutions without addressing the asshole design…

    • whatisallthis@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      The operating procedure of the internet

      1. Scan feed
      2. Find post where I can ridicule OP in some way
      3. Engage
    • TweetyDaBird@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      No, this is not asshole design. If the oil port was sticking further out, it’s gets knocked off if you lay the bike down. And then you have no oil at all, and a blown up motor.

      It’s by good design the oil port is recessed. Yes it’s annoying to use a funnel, but it’s the preferable option.

      • Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        ?? Oil port would only need to be extended by like 0.5" to clear that exhaust pipe, the casing to the left extends probably 1-2" from that. If you lay the bike down it that casing would stop the oil port from being touched. Shouldn’t be an issue.

  • CADmonkey@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    The engineering team that designed the engine never communicated with the engineering team that designed the motorcycle.

  • intensely_human@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    Shouldn’t the process be like:

    • Build five
    • Drive them around as your own bikes for a while
    • Keep replacing the ones you’re using with the latest iteration

    I mean, a lawyer’s gonna disallow that I’m pretty sure but that’s how we’d be designing new bikes at DaVinci Crater if I were over there. I’ll stay on the low sec roads, I know it needs major design certification before anyone can take it on the nice roads

    • ∟⊔⊤∦∣≶@lemmy.nzOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Should be, but prototyping and making one offs is expensive, maybe even 100x the cost of mass production per unit, so they will of course be looking to do the minimal amount possible

  • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 months ago

    All this mess could have been prevented with a little bit of cardboard between the drain and the exhaust, you realise that I hope.

  • BilboBargains@lemmy.world
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Problems such as these are usually a management failure. The design of individual components are often owned by a particular person or small group. They take responsibility for the design and testing. If one person owns the sump and another person owns the exhaust pipe, their work needs to be coordinated in such a way that the finished product meets all its goals. It wouldn’t be a surprise to find out that the exhaust engineer had to re-route the pipe in order to resolve some other clash and they ran out of time to fix the new problem before mass production had to start. Making complex machinery is difficult.