oil level logic question
 

ok, after that mind-blowingly retarded thread on oil level checking,
here's a simple logic exercise for those whose neural networks haven't
collapsed:

imagine you're a large vehicle manufacturer. and as a large
manufacturer, you sell your vehicles to all the global markets you can,
including high volume segments like taxis. imagine that those taxis are
a fleet operation in service 24/7. now, as a fleet operator needing to
maintain those vehicles in a regular basis, what makes the most sense to
you...

1. take a vehicle out of service for 12 hours, let it cool down, and
then check the oil level?

2. take the vehicle out of service for 2 hours, "let the oil run down",
and then check the oil level?

3. check the oil level after the vehicle has been standing for 2 minutes
while it's being refueled?

now, back to the manufacturer, and you want to get it right, only one of
the above scenarios is logical and consistent for every vehicle you ever
sell, anywhere on the planet, and most importantly, doesn't cost your
customers money. which one makes the most sense to calibrate for?

Re: oil level logic question
 

"jim beam" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:leednfGIDbzCZTHXnZ2dnUVZ_qCdnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
> ok, after that mind-blowingly retarded thread on oil level checking,
> here's a simple logic exercise for those whose neural networks haven't
> collapsed:
>
> imagine you're a large vehicle manufacturer. and as a large manufacturer,
> you sell your vehicles to all the global markets you can, including high
> volume segments like taxis. imagine that those taxis are a fleet
> operation in service 24/7. now, as a fleet operator needing to maintain
> those vehicles in a regular basis, what makes the most sense to you...
>
> 1. take a vehicle out of service for 12 hours, let it cool down, and then
> check the oil level?
>
> 2. take the vehicle out of service for 2 hours, "let the oil run down",
> and then check the oil level?
>
> 3. check the oil level after the vehicle has been standing for 2 minutes
> while it's being refueled?
>
> now, back to the manufacturer, and you want to get it right, only one of
> the above scenarios is logical and consistent for every vehicle you ever
> sell, anywhere on the planet, and most importantly, doesn't cost your
> customers money. which one makes the most sense to calibrate for?

Option 4. Whatever the then current CEO's grand-daddy was doing for 40
years.

Re: oil level logic question
 

"jim beam" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:leednfGIDbzCZTHXnZ2dnUVZ_qCdnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
> ok, after that mind-blowingly retarded thread on oil level checking,
> here's a simple logic exercise for those whose neural networks haven't
> collapsed:
>
> imagine you're a large vehicle manufacturer. and as a large manufacturer,
> you sell your vehicles to all the global markets you can, including high
> volume segments like taxis. imagine that those taxis are a fleet
> operation in service 24/7. now, as a fleet operator needing to maintain
> those vehicles in a regular basis, what makes the most sense to you...
>
> 1. take a vehicle out of service for 12 hours, let it cool down, and then
> check the oil level?
>
> 2. take the vehicle out of service for 2 hours, "let the oil run down",
> and then check the oil level?
>
> 3. check the oil level after the vehicle has been standing for 2 minutes
> while it's being refueled?
>
> now, back to the manufacturer, and you want to get it right, only one of
> the above scenarios is logical and consistent for every vehicle you ever
> sell, anywhere on the planet, and most importantly, doesn't cost your
> customers money. which one makes the most sense to calibrate for?
>
>

I am going to say all of the above are good, because the dipstick has a
"range" that the oil level should be in.


where's my prize?
;-)