Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Global Cost of Corrosion

impact.nace.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 251 posts

Re: The Global Cost of Corrosion

#71

Post by jacquesm »

intrasight wrote: post #70
jacquesm wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Volvo led the way in this long before Japan got even close to figuring this out. That's why you still see ancient Volvo's drive around in numbers that are just way higher than any other brand.

Funny that you mention Volvo and I'm reading this today, since this weekend I was commenting to a friend that my 2004 XC70 had not a bit of rust even though it has spent all its time in the NE. I see so many much newer cars driving around that are very rusty.

Galvanized sheetmetal with a good quality coating will last you a lifetime.

But beware of accidents, make sure all the seams are checked near the point of impact and some way back from there.

Re: The Global Cost of Corrosion

#72

Post by evan_ »

mattkrause wrote: post #50
jwilk wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FYI, you used an incorrect character for the degree sign. Should be ° U+00B0 DEGREE SIGN, not ˚ U+02DA RING ABOVE.

Hmmmm...it's whatever Option+k does on macOS. I thought it was the degree sign because it doesn't actually combine, but apparently degree is option+shift+8 instead.

An acquaintance just about had a nervous breakdown recently because they somehow used ˆ (option+i, used for e.g. î) in a regex instead of ^ and couldn't figure out why such a basic thing was failing.

Re: The Global Cost of Corrosion

#73

Post by hinkley »

hadlock wrote: post #67
hristov wrote: post #8

This is an important issue. People keep talking about recycling, but much more important than recycling is just being able to use a thing for longer before you are even thinking about recycling it. Japanese automakers did the world a great favor when in the 80s and 90s they made much longer lasting cars and made longevity and resale value an important consideration in the purchasing decision. They did this mostly by…

Porsche started galvanizing their bodies in the 1970s, VW started in the 1980s, Japan only started galvanizing their bodies in export markets, in response to the germans, and only recently (last 15 years) have been galvanizing all their bodies domestic and import.

Famously, 1990's Mitsubishi and Subaru vehicles can basically rust down to the frame before the drivetrain stops functioning. And they don't wait long to start on the former.

Re: The Global Cost of Corrosion

#74

Post by jacquesm »

wbsss4412 wrote: post #62
jacquesm wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Volvo is not owned by a Chinese parent company, but their operations are still based in the same places as before. You are welcome to use your own definition of the word 'owned' but I'll just stick to the dictionary one. > Using the definition implied by your comment, they were previously and “American” car manufacturer as they were sold to geeley by ford. https://www.industryweek.com/finance/software-systems/artic…

Apologies, that was a typo. The risks of posting on a phone…

Someone else caught it and pointed that out. I totally missed it.

Re: The Global Cost of Corrosion

#76

Post by mlyle »

wizee wrote: post #64
mlyle wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The European carmakers lead the way with various degrees of zinc plating and dipped coatings being widely implemented on their products in the 70s and 80s. Ford developed e-coat in the 50's. Everyone took up this to varying extents during the mid-to-late 70's. > whereas the Europeans tend to put quite a bit more effort in. I'm sorry, this just doesn't match my experience looking at mid-80's Japanese, American, and…

Porsche 944s and 928s are far more rust resistant than most American or Japanese cars of the 80s or even 90s. Likewise with Volvos. The classic 911 was an old design that went through iterative improvements, and the 964 is better rust-proofed than most American or Japanese cars of the late 80s or 90s. Old Audis tend to have minimal rust, and old Mercedes-Benzes like the W126, W124, and W201, while they certainly can…

It is my impression that older Mercedes are pretty good in this department.

I still see so many mid-80's Accords in the US. Yes, there's probably a somewhat smaller share of them that survived than mid-80's BMWs, but there's a lot of factors that go into survival (Honda == cheaper to keep going as a beater; BMW == higher initial value / treated nicer for the earlier parts of its lifespan).

Re: The Global Cost of Corrosion

#77

Post by wbsss4412 »

jacquesm wrote: post #57
Gracana wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I highly suspect, based on facts about Volvo and the structure of that sentence, that they didn't mean to write "not owned", but rather "now owned."

Ah, that could be, thank you for pointing that out. That would make a lot more sense. But then I still don't understand the comment. Volvo is now Chinese, whether you like it or not is another matter.

I never meant to say that Volvo isn’t Chinese. It’s just odd that people really feel the need to bring it up, despite the fact that operationally little is different.

It’s Chinese in the same way that Jeep/ram/dodge/Chrysler are Dutch now. No one ever seems to bring that up when they are mentioned, though.

Re: The Global Cost of Corrosion

#78

Post by petre »

Forgeties79 wrote: post #69
petre wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mazdas are still rustbuckets today.

Isn't the Mazda 3 a really, really popular and pretty well-regarded car?

Yeah, it's a good car. Until it rusts. Supposedly they've fixed the rust problems in the new Skyactiv models, but I'd be weary of any Mazda before 2018.

Re: The Global Cost of Corrosion

#79

Post by kreeben »

hadlock wrote: post #67
hristov wrote: post #8

This is an important issue. People keep talking about recycling, but much more important than recycling is just being able to use a thing for longer before you are even thinking about recycling it. Japanese automakers did the world a great favor when in the 80s and 90s they made much longer lasting cars and made longevity and resale value an important consideration in the purchasing decision. They did this mostly by…

Porsche started galvanizing their bodies in the 1970s, VW started in the 1980s, Japan only started galvanizing their bodies in export markets, in response to the germans, and only recently (last 15 years) have been galvanizing all their bodies domestic and import.

Toyotas cost nothing compared to Porches, so 1-0 Japan vs rest of the world.

Re: The Global Cost of Corrosion

#80

Post by Forgeties79 »

petre wrote: post #78
Forgeties79 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't the Mazda 3 a really, really popular and pretty well-regarded car?

Yeah, it's a good car. Until it rusts. Supposedly they've fixed the rust problems in the new Skyactiv models, but I'd be weary of any Mazda before 2018.

Oh so you mean it quite literally - that's it's very rust prone.
Post reply on HN