CYLINDER HEAD

[2cams70]

If you want a classic example of accountants running the show consider the MG F and MG TF from the 1990-2000's.
The accountants dictated that the engine build costs were too high and forced the fitting of less expensive parts particularly the head and manifold gaskets and water pumps which proved inferior and led to many warranty issues. Now in virtually any magazine article on buying such cars, one of the main recommendations is to ensure that these items have been changed and upgraded. A friend that worked at Rover in one of the test houses told me at the time that they were having heated discussions with the accountants over this but in the end lost out.

This I believe is and was typical of production in the last 20+ years and if as suggested this may now be changing then about time too. Why employ test engineers to build, test and develop engines(in this case), to discover faults and problems that will cause user issues, if you don't take notice of their findings or over rule them. It can only be to recover development costs in the shortest possible time. If in the process the public is the guinea pig, so be it and how many times over many years have we seen that scenario played out. I came from the centre of the British car industry and the stories behind many of these issues was well known and discussed, some even being behind strike actions, to which many of the bean counters were unaffected.
Tony

Personal opinion here. I don't have a problem with accountants. At the end of the day they are rational and logical in much the same way as engineers - just over a different subject matter. Sales would have set the selling price target and volumes and things would have just flowed down from there. Sales is important above all else. Doesn't matter if it's good or bad achieved through honest or dishonest means so long as the metal moves out the door. Always remember too - a sale today is much better than a sale tomorrow!!!