Slashdot Mirror
Build-to-Order Cars?
MadMonk writes "Baseline has an article about a new car company that wants to be 'the Dell of the auto industry.' Build-To-Order, Inc. could turn the auto industry on its ear. At worst, BTO will be an interesting technology petri dish. I want a customized car to match my customized computer."
isn't calling a dell computer a "custom" computer a bit of a stretch? they're interchangable parts, its not like they are custom built.
it's henry fords interchangable parts manufacturing line, but with mcdonalds order panels telling the monkey what part to put in and where. I don't see the big innovation with so called "custom" pc's...
This is a great development for the auto industry. Considering the number of features that an automobile has, it is impossible to satisfy every customer. I'm only suprised this took so long in the coming.
I hope they are backed by a large political party, or organized crime. Else the big3 will have them summarily executed.
Havent we been here before? I think this is how all car companies start out. The world is too corrupt or im a big fat cynic.
I really don't see it work unless they have some kind of standard like computers do. What Dell and other companies have going for them is that a video card from one company will fit in their systems as long as Dell includes an AGP port. Therefore, it is really easy to "customize" a computer for their customers. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think such standards exists in the auto industry.
EvilCON - Made Famous by
"The preconceived notion is that the network will run Unix, but I came to the view that this is a unique opportunity, so why take something that's decades old?" says Lele.
By that logic, the concept of a internal combustion engine is over 100 years old, and seats are thousands of years old. Maybe he shouldn't use those either.
I purchased a new car about a year ago and was dismayed by the way the option packages worked at the dealers.
As a somewhat practical person, I had no interest in wings or crazy wheels or chrome door handles. However, when it came to features I did want, I couldn't understand why the big engine isn't available with a stick shift, or why ABS can't be obtained with a sun roof, or why fog lights can't be purchased with an upgraded stereo model, etc.
Above all else, desiring a manual transmission turned me into an instant showroom pariah, as if I had the plague. "I don't know if they even make that model with a stick shift," said one salesman. I understand that manual transmission cars are purchased with greatly reduced frequency compared to automatics, but why bother selling stick shift cars if you make no effort to allow customers to buy them?
Build-To-Order cars could be the next big thing for informed and frustrated car shoppers, but I have a great deal of apprehension towards the quality of the vehicle and the likelihood I could get it serviced at my local mechanic.
Eric
"The preconceived notion is that the network will run Unix, but I came to the view that this is a unique opportunity, so why take something that's decades old?"
.NET.
Saying that something that's "decades old" won't fit your new business model simply because of its age seems like a short-sighted way to base a decision. Building an IT infrastructure is not only about fitting your needs, but also about one that will serve you reliably. In the end it doesn't matter what the network runs on, but rather that it works, whether it's Unix, Linux, or
Just sounds to me like these cars won't have rubber tires simply because they've been in use on automobiles for a century.
Two words; labor union!
and since his plant is going to be unionized (one of the conditions for getting funding from the California pension fund), his plans for building a super flexible custom car with huge profit margins are going to be like an egg hitting a brick wall. GM is already doing this sort of crap, but in other countries like Germany because of the UAW work rules.
Sounds more like he will be selling a 'kit car' with all the aftermarket goodies that people like to use to dress up their cars. The article makes no mention of who will be making the powertrain. I'm sure the other carmakers will also try to lean on these suppliers (they are already their biggest customers) to jack up his prices or have that company pay for the R&D and then cherry pick from the successful products.
(I also found it odd/annoying that this story about the 'dell of carmakers' was plastered with ads for the real Dell. Is this a story about BTO or a fluff piece used to mention Dell as many times as possible.) The Linux/MS.Net aspect was interest. They won't consider Unix "because it's 20 year old technology", but the same proven methods and tools is what makes up linux. Maybe they hired a buzzword-only-CTO.
the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
The first thing that strikes me is that the choice in web services was depicted as a choice between Linux and .Net. Of course its really J2EE/Linux vrs. .Net (Mono excluded, but at this stage in its development I really doubt they're looking to use Mono).
Nitpicking from a java advocate aside, I see some tremendous complexity in the IT system and they can't do it with current technology. If they succeed they'll be doing something new and exciting.
The problem is with change management of data formats. If you've got all of these different formats of data (the article mentioned: Web services, EDI, email, and fax!). It's extremely difficult to even build a model thats going to allow communication between systems talking in such different ways. The real problem, though, is when you do design that extremely complex system, because of the way the proposed company is being set up, is that you have no way to maintain the consistency of all of the involved data formats.
Here is an example. Supplier A sends its information to the company with a flat file. Its product number is in a five digit field. Supplier A changes it to a six digit field. Hilarity ensues. (fark)
No control of the suppliers systems = a very complex system. The standard responses to managing this complexity (usually amounting to stick the data in a self referential data format like xml) does not work here because they can't demand that their suppliers adhere to any particular format (according to the article).
Anyway sounds like a cool idea, I'd like to see how they're going to pull off the system to make it a reality.
Karma to burn...
.02...
RTFA. He referred to the concept as an "open source car" and seeks to get the vendors to agree on standards. This isn't taking an engine from Daimler and interfacing it with a transmission from GM- which, incidentally, is how it already works in the car business. The Cadillac CTS uses the same Gertag 6-speed transmission as the BMW 5, mated to entirely different (though similar) platforms. By your logic, then the 5 must be a dog because of all they had to do to use GM's tranny.
In fact, the idea is fundamentally similar to the current custom car industry. Basically, several standards exist on the hotrod market- Chevy, Ford, or Mopar small or large blocks, Ford rear ends, GM Hydramatic trannys are basically interoperable in the custome market- and pick up a copy of Hot Rod magazine to see the hundreds of vendors making interiors, AC systems, pulley and belts, etc for these, mix and match as you choose.
How is this like Dell? When Dell got started in force, they were among the only ones using true standard "clone" components, while IBM, Apple, and even Compaq were building proprietary boards, when a custom component market had already started. Custom cars aren't new, but custom cars with all federal safety and emissions features for under $100,000 and within a year is a new concept.
And your platinum spark plugs? The ones in every Chevy Trailblazer I sell are compatible with the ones in my VW GTI. Components are standard by nature until "embrace and extend" (see: custom audio systems with proprietary connectors in OEM applications vs. aftermarket standards) changes that.
Just my
No, no such standard exists in the car industry. You can plug a Chevy engine into a Mazda, but it requires an awful lot of work, and even then, it's not going to be as reliable as the stock engine in the stock vehicle.
I don't see how it can work. What they are going to end up with is a car that's only slightly more customizible than a Ford. Maybe you can pick your color from a million different colors, or your interior material from thousands of materials, but even this requires a lot of logistics. Car manufacturers don't limit your choice of color because they only want you to have a few choices, they limit it because changing colors on the assembly line is a lot of time and work. You can have maybe a dozen or so colors ready to go, but mixing and readying a special paint for one car takes a lot of time.
It's a great idea, but I think it's way ahead of its time.
-------------------------------------------------
Even better, they'd have 6-person teams assigned to each car, and they found quality jumped without an increase in cost. Each team set its own vacation time and after a little kid-in-a-candyshop thing it settled towards 4 to 6 weeks (low for Europe). Team members worked better than assembly line because they didn't want to let down the team.
Don't know what happened after the Ford buyout.
I work in the auto biz, and the job I had before this one (less than 2 years ago) was working for the Manufacturing Technology Applications department in the North American Vehicle Operations division of the world's largest auto maker.
;)
Let me tell you. Minis are not BTO. First off, BTO implies that you can order anything -- different body styles, even custom panels. Mini doesn't do this. Minis may be built using JIT, but JIT is a lie. It's an accounting trick. There is no JIT, YHBT.
Secondly, cars of different colors, options, and different body styles, even different makes are already produced on the same line. GM does this every single day. In fact, in it's Lake Orion, MI, assembly plant, three different models and brands are produced in the same plant. At it's assembly plant in Hamtramck, cars and trucks even roll off the same line (or will if they haven't started already).
No what this guy is talking about is totally different. GM announced a similar technology last year. Mostly it involves creating modular vehicle, shifting production work from plants to Tier 1 suppliers. Entire doors, entire ends of the car, and in some cases, even entire bodies, completely assembled, would be shipped to the assembly plant, where the body would mostly simply be married to the engine and chassis, which roll down the line in one piece (this is actually already how most cars are built, just the rest isn't custom build-to-order).
My journal has hot
There are downsides to this business model however. Dell do not have sufficient production capacity to meet peak demand. Say you order a computer today and they tell you it will be shipped in two days. But then right after you place your order, a Fortune 500 customer puts in an order for 1000 new desktop machines. Guess who gets priority? That's right - you get bumped and end up waiting a couple of weeks or more, and get pissed off at them.
Cars don't have the depreciation problem. A new car will pretty much hold its value while it sits on the lot. The exception is the time around summer when the new model-years come out. That's predictable though, and the industry knows how to handle it.
Have you ever looked under the hood of your Chevy? Chances are that it is running a Mitsubishi engine!
Actually, it's more likely it would be a Saab, Opel, Holden, Vauxhall, Fiat, Subaru, Isuzu, or Suzuki power plant, since those are foreign companies in which GM owns a controlling share and commonly shares parts with. You'd likely find Mitsubishi power plants in Chrysler cars, and Mazda engines in Ford products, but I digress.
I'm not saying that certain engines can't be dropped into certain cars with little or no modification. I'm also not saying that you won't find domestic cars with foreign engines or foreign cars with domestic engines. What I am saying is that you can't just take any old engine and just drop it into any old car and expect it to work with little modification. You can't even always do that when you stick to cars in the same product line. You can't put the wonderful Mazda MX-6 (Ford Probe) V-6 powerplant into a Mazda Miata. Sure, it'll fit. You can even overcome the fact that the MX-6 is a front wheel drive car, and the Miata is rear wheel drive. What you can't overcome is the fact that the engine was tilted to the rear in the original application for hood clearance. When you stand it up straight for rear wheel drive, you have problems with oil flow through the engine, and the engine burns up.
You can also cram a Corvette V-8 into your RX-7 or your Miata, but no one's gotten the latter to actually run yet, and judging from past motor swaps I've seen, they are very rarely as trouble free as the original motor. Not that the motor itself is to blame, but modern engines have a lot of inputs provided to them by various electronic and mechanical bits inside the car, all of which you must find a way to interface (it's not a common interface, remember), and then you have to somehow match everything up to the driveline, fuel systems, etc. Very rarely is an engine conversion a 'bolt-on' operation, and even then, it's usually because the two engines share a common chassis somewhere in the original manufacturer's catalog.
The motorhome industry has been operating like this for years, you chose the interior, the engine, instrumentation, accessories, placement of the windows, type of chairs etc. At the end of the process you have D.O.T. approved vehicle on the road. Of course, you pay for the custom options.
Yes, they do, and have you checked into how much a motorhome costs? Granted, they are big, but they are very expensive because a lot of stuff is custom fabricated and custom ordered. They also don't deal in the bulk that most car manufacturers do, which enables them to take more time with each vehicle. You also don't get a huge range of choices, in the lower lines, you may only get one(!) floorplan and one engine choice. Even in the upper lines, you may only get five choices of floorplans and five engine choices, and your engine choices are usually those offered in whatever vehicle the original chassis came from. You don't just get to pick any engine. I've seen full sized pickups with more options.
A far better comparison would have been a Maybach or a Rolls-Royce. They do plenty of personalization, allowing you to pick any color your want and any wood and fabric you want -- even if they don't have it. They'll even modify the car within reason. They also cost a ton of money, and a big part of that is the custom service you're getting. However, it's a bit like comparing apples and oranges. These BTO cars are meant to compete at low prices. Maybach can charge pretty much whatever it wants.
You need to hang out at the local performance shop. Cars, trucks, and cycles were hacked long before the first Univac.
Do you mean the local rice boy shop, or do you mean a shop where they do serious work? I'm not going to claim I hang out with Jesse James or anything, but I know my way around a
-------------------------------------------------