If you could design your own Isuzu?

[johnsm]

If you could be the Isuzu designer or engineer what factory changes would you make to your ride?

I will eliminate the obvious first - better intake manifold gastkets and a proper way to fill your transmission fluid

My greatest change would be to replace the check engine and check trans light with a digital readout of the OBD codes. So now on instead of seeing CHECK TRANS you would see CHECK TRANS P1870. Taking it another step forward I would have a built in computer reader/programmer (Place bad jokes in this space) Maybe a digital screen for the dash and number and directional keyboard in the console.

John

[highlandlake]

Holy smokes John, where to start???

I'm 100% in agreement of a digital display of the codes - they could appear right on the radio display. GM has already used the radio display as the input for other electronic commands. The radio could then briefly interupt the music to show a code periodically.
But I'd stick with analog guages for the basic outputs. They are more reliable after 10 years, CHEAPER, and can look really cool if you try. Computerized controls only where it makes sense cost-wise. Built it reliable enough and you don't NEED trouble codes. The first 100 years of cars got along fine without them.
I'd keep the exterior design as simple as possible to reduce costs, including ripping off popular styles from past vehicles that were changed before consumers got tired of them. I'd use major components from known reliable manufacturers using existing tooling. Assembly would keep in mind the ease of cleaning to reduce the salt & rust traps.
Shoot me for this - but smaller engines bolted in too. Most of us aren't pulling boats every day the key is turned. These engines would be less than 3.0 liters. I'd recognize the foreign oil dependency as long term trouble. The engine would be the simplest design not seen since the slant-six Dodge dart. It'll be hailed as the new 'bulletproof' engine that any Joe/Angelina with a reasonable knowledge and box of tools can tune up, repair, modify himself/herself.
Keep the full frame design if possible.
Strive for 24c/29h mileage. Minimum.
Offer it in three or four colors maximum. Maybe two interior colors. If someone likes the vehicle but wants it in 'burgandy mist' or 'polynesian blue' print up a directory and directions to custom paint shops in their region.
Everything will be standard - no options except automatic or six-speed.
Let the customer add their own stuff aftermarket if they want.
Safety features would be just the bare minimum of what the laws require. People have to realize that they are on the road in a moving mass of steel and should drive at a reasonable speed given the conditions. By putting all the crash features in today's cars the price has gone way out of line and makes drivers feel overly secure and use less common sense. Not to mention the added weight's affect on mileage.
And last............offer it in a price that initially will be at cost, until the tooling is paid for and suppliers are able to ramp up production volumes at a reduced price. Entry price about $12,000 or so. With a five year basic warranty with no BS exceptions. Outdoor outfitters of gear and clothing have long ago learned that an unconditional warranty keeps people coming back, and gets new customers. Then wipe out the competitor's $25,000 - $30,000 sales when people realize that an SUV half the price is almost as good or better.
The theme of my engineering would be to learn a lesson from the past: The Model T and the Volkswagen Beetle could be purchased by just about anyone who had a basic job without being in debt for years. They had the right amount of utility without going overboard in design. And last, the components would be recyclable after the vehicle is worn out in about 20 years - 275,000 miles or so later.
Tom

[johnsm]

Hello Tom

I see the idea about "less electronics" The only thing manufactures or electronics supporters can site as electronics improving the automoble is lower fuel emissions. Unfortunately this is not true. What really reduces emissions is the better/cleaner refinement of crude oil. The oil companies say that cleaner refinement would increase the price of gas, well what doesn't increase the price of gas?Electronics do not increase fuel economy. A carburated engine can get 40 mpg

Which reliable components would you like to import for Isuzu? If you correct the oil burning and img issues the 3.2 is pretty good The Auto trans is a converted chevette tranny is pretty good if it wasn't sealed from underneath and I would also make the tran oil filter external. The fuel sending unit should be exported back to GM.

Going to a smaller engine may require using more lightweight alloys or more plastics in the truck. Going lighter weight would require a lot of engineering to avoid reducing safety

Since most people do not off road their SUV's maybe it would be safer to have Isuzu create a truck line with a wider wheel base. If you made one model, say the trooper 4 to 8 inches wider, this would reduce the possibility of rollovers also if you lifted your vehicle it would compensate for the increase in the center of balance. An 8 in. increase would not affect your ability to park in city parking. Hummers have problems but your not getting that wide. You could just widen the front end 4 inches and leave the rear end for better turning and less chance of rollover.

I think your right about making a barebones, affordable, reliable suv. Chrysler made its comeback with the K-car. Many people do not like automobiles and do not see the car as a status symbol. If it gets them to work and play, great. There is a big market out there for utility only vehicle.

John

[Ramblin Fever]

Agree with Highlandlake - with the exception of putting in a 3.0L engine in a >4K pound vehicle - irregardless whether you tow a load or not, when you hit 10-12k foot slopes in the rocky mountain region, one needs the power of a bigger engine when you're talking a base truck weighing in at that amount.

I no longer tow my boat with the Rodeo, want my tranny to last as long as possible and after 159k miles of towing at least 45% of that, it's done it's share. But even without the boat, there are a few mountain passes, i.e. Loveland Pass where the engine gets a pretty good workout.

If I could design my own Rodeo, obviously I'd want it to have the easiest engine to work on, but be as bulletproof as I believe the 3.2L [b]sohc[b] engine is. With more power while still pulling good gas mileage - though I really can't complain, but I drive easy too.

I would LOVE to have cupholders that actually work; more storage space; not have a full frame vehicle equipped with 16x6 wheels (make it unstable); a good forsaken transmission dipstick (can't actually complain about the GM transmission itself as mine's been worked hard, put away dry and it still shifts SMOOOOTH) and height adjusting seats.

Oh, and take off all of this stupid California emissions crap!!

[Gizmo42]

I see the idea about "less electronics" The only thing manufactures or electronics supporters can site as electronics improving the automoble is lower fuel emissions. Unfortunately this is not true. What really reduces emissions is the better/cleaner refinement of crude oil. The oil companies say that cleaner refinement would increase the price of gas, well what doesn't increase the price of gas?Electronics do not increase fuel economy. A carburated engine can get 40 mpg

Not entirely true. Electronic fuel injection is continuously adjusted depending on conditions. Carburators stay where they are set until you get out and adjust it. CV carbs will adjust but still arent that great.

If you drive from denver (5280 ft) to eisenhower tunnel (12000 ft) you are going to be running way rich because of the decrease in oxygen available in the air. This will be wasting fuel and putting out some bad emissions. The CV carbs on my m'cycle even have trouble adjusting to that change. Electronics will compensate for it as you drive. Yes you can get carb'd engines to get 40mpg but would do even better with less emissions if you fuel injected it.

I will never go back to carb'd engines. I have had alot fewer problems (read 0) with injection then I ever had with carbs.

Changes I would make to my rodeo?
1. shoot the genius that thought 3 oil drainback holes in the pistons was a good idea.
2. use anything other then the 4l30E auto tranny for a 4k lb truck. Glad I have a 5 speed.
3. make the door mounted spare standard instead of an option. then put the fuel tank in the back.
4. no rubber parts under the intake. Anything under there would be hard pipe with flanges and gaskets.
5. ALL service items easily accessable. There is no need to have commonly replaced parts where you have to remove 3 other things to get to it.
6. maybe a solid front axle from the factory.
7. alternator located where driving through a mud puddle wont kill it.
8. fewer gm parts such as fuel pump/sending unit.
9. something I think all auto makes should have done years ago, especially on trucks where it doesnt matter if the ride is stiffer. All poly bushings instead of rubber.